The Scoring Game
Gaming reviews, what would people do without game reviews? Reviews serve to aid gamers in what is good and what is bad. But over the recent years, gamers are tending to rely solely on a reviews score, and in a lot of cases if it falls below 8, it is automatically written off as a terrible game.
Why do a lot of gamers see 7 as an average or below average game? Shouldnt 5 be the pinnacle of average? What would happen if game reviews didnt come with a number representing their worth? Would some of those games that received a sub 8 score be seen in better light? I think that its definitely a possibility.
Now heres an example of how scores may influence someone's decision to buy a good game. Sonic Advance 2 on the GBA is easily the best Sonic game on the system, the levels were well designed and the game featured some new gameplay additions such as tricks, which helped you to gain access to other areas of the levels. It was also a pretty tough game and a great platformer in general.
Heres someone elses take on the game, this is a portion from a PlanetGameCube review.
Overall, Sonic Advance 2 is a good game, but incredibly difficult. You certainly won't be breezing through this one, and there are plenty of unlockables to keep you occupied, should you ever manage to do so. Beginners should definitely start out by playing as Cream, and even if you're an expert you should consider it. There's both a single- and multi-cart multiplayer game to give you some added replay value if you're having trouble unlocking everything.
Having read that conclusion on the game, one would assume its a feature packed game which would definitely be worth your money. Now what if your the kind of gamer that thinks anything below 8, is either average or below average? Well you wouldnt be buying this game, the reviewer gave it a 7.
Most gamers do read reviews, or at least the conclusions. But sadly there are people out there who seem to discount a game, just because someone rated it on a slightly different scale. One persons 9 is another persons 7, and people should never discount a game just because of a score.
Another example I have, is a review from a local gaming mag called Hyper (fairly well respected). They gave the first Kingdom Hearts a 70 or so score. Many people would argue that this is not a satisfactory score for this game. But what if that was the first score someone saw for the game? They may never give it a go simply because it fell below 80.
I think its time we started seeing 7 as an above average score, and start seeing 5 as the definite average game.
So when I review upcoming Wii games in about a months time. Nintendo Gamer's review scores will be out of 10 with no .5 .6 .8 attached to them. 5 will be the middle, so anything over 5 is either slightly above average or above average. And anything below 5, is either slightly below average etc. I'll post a proper breakdown as we get closer to Wii reviews.
Now have any of you discounted a game based off a review score?
Why do a lot of gamers see 7 as an average or below average game? Shouldnt 5 be the pinnacle of average? What would happen if game reviews didnt come with a number representing their worth? Would some of those games that received a sub 8 score be seen in better light? I think that its definitely a possibility.
Now heres an example of how scores may influence someone's decision to buy a good game. Sonic Advance 2 on the GBA is easily the best Sonic game on the system, the levels were well designed and the game featured some new gameplay additions such as tricks, which helped you to gain access to other areas of the levels. It was also a pretty tough game and a great platformer in general.
Heres someone elses take on the game, this is a portion from a PlanetGameCube review.
Overall, Sonic Advance 2 is a good game, but incredibly difficult. You certainly won't be breezing through this one, and there are plenty of unlockables to keep you occupied, should you ever manage to do so. Beginners should definitely start out by playing as Cream, and even if you're an expert you should consider it. There's both a single- and multi-cart multiplayer game to give you some added replay value if you're having trouble unlocking everything.
Having read that conclusion on the game, one would assume its a feature packed game which would definitely be worth your money. Now what if your the kind of gamer that thinks anything below 8, is either average or below average? Well you wouldnt be buying this game, the reviewer gave it a 7.
Most gamers do read reviews, or at least the conclusions. But sadly there are people out there who seem to discount a game, just because someone rated it on a slightly different scale. One persons 9 is another persons 7, and people should never discount a game just because of a score.
Another example I have, is a review from a local gaming mag called Hyper (fairly well respected). They gave the first Kingdom Hearts a 70 or so score. Many people would argue that this is not a satisfactory score for this game. But what if that was the first score someone saw for the game? They may never give it a go simply because it fell below 80.
I think its time we started seeing 7 as an above average score, and start seeing 5 as the definite average game.
So when I review upcoming Wii games in about a months time. Nintendo Gamer's review scores will be out of 10 with no .5 .6 .8 attached to them. 5 will be the middle, so anything over 5 is either slightly above average or above average. And anything below 5, is either slightly below average etc. I'll post a proper breakdown as we get closer to Wii reviews.
Now have any of you discounted a game based off a review score?
posted by Traveller at 1:07 PM
81 comments
