DS Daily: That's just low
There seems to be a lot of disparity amongst reviewers who write about games, as well as the readers who read them. For example, while some consider a 5.0 to be a middle-of-the-road score, others take that as a sign that a game is trash.When it comes to review scores, what do you consider "low?" Will you ignore games if most reviews fall in that range? What kind of score ratings, if any, do you prefer most?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Waffala @ Jun 29th 2008 10:40AM
Anything lower than 7.5 makes me question a game's value; it has a lot to do with the school system, 7.4 and below isn't even a passing grade in my mind.
Sakura3210 @ Jun 29th 2008 10:45AM
I have to agree with Waffala, that's my general cutoff point as well. I've actually not bought games, even if I was interested in them, because their score was too low (e.g. touch detective, jake hunter, etc).
Lord Bowser @ Jun 29th 2008 10:55AM
If it's a game with a glorious background (Hot Shots Golf) I'll buy the game, regardless. There isn't a specific number that would dissuade me from a game, I just pick up the vibe from other players via internet forums/blogs or my friends and work off from there. A succession of damming reviews will shape my opinion.
Also: lol, Gamespot. What an amazing fall!
Mr Khan @ Jun 29th 2008 12:30PM
I'm with you, i generally disregard review scores completely, and have only been disappointed with my purchase twice: FF Crystal Chronicles (because it was never stressed how boring that game was single-player), and the Pokemon TCG Game Boy game (the TCG had some dumb rules), and make my purchases based on gut instinct if it's a new IP or just a franchise that i'm new to, or judge based on my previous experiences with said franchise
ArmiMaan @ Jun 29th 2008 11:03AM
I've played tons of poorly rated games and loved them, so I tend to ignore the scores. I usually just rely on my instinct in terms of what interests me, my past experiences with other games from the same developer, and what the buzz is on the blogs/message boards.
A high score can pique my curiosity for games I'm not interested in (Metal Gear Solid 4, for example -- I wouldn't have played it if it weren't for the incredibly high scores it was receiving), but a low score won't deter me from picking a game otherwise.
Metal_Link @ Jun 29th 2008 11:11AM
I frown upon reviewers who have their written review sound like they are taking middle-of-the-road for the game, yet their actual score is slightly-to-the-right-of-the-road. Its weird... I never really know whose word to take for a game.
Puddles @ Jun 29th 2008 11:12AM
It's best not to focus too much on review scores, but to look at what people actually said about the game. That's the best way to distinguish the intelligent reviews from the poorly thought out ones, which should be disregarded. Obviously the best way to judge a game is to play it yourself, but the second best is to read a lot of different reviews and get a sense of what the game's strengths and weaknesses are. I don't take any single review too seriously. I go to Metacritic and skim through a bunch of reviews.
Hamster @ Jun 29th 2008 11:15AM
I probably wouldn't get a game that scored below a 7/10.
What I've never understood about games' review scores is their tendency to favour percentages. To me this has always been a bit baffling. To give a game a score out of 5 or 10 is easy and understandable, but how can you pluck a number out of 100 to score a game? How can you quantify one game getting 83% and one game getting 84%. What exactly does this 1% difference represent? What does a game that scores 99% mean? Unless there are 100 different specific criteria that each game is being marked on, then the percentage has got be a pretty random and pointless number, which would probably be slightly different on any given day that the reviewer reviewed the game.
Cheezus @ Jun 29th 2008 11:17AM
Most ten point review scales are really four star scales.
6 - *
7 - **
8 - ***
9 - ****
Alisha Karabinus @ Jun 29th 2008 12:06PM
That seems very apt to me, and it's a shame that we keep wasting the rest of those numbers.
Jacksons @ Jun 29th 2008 2:55PM
The only downside is that 4 stars on a silly meta site doesn't translate well. You're either at 100% or 75%.
That being said, I still like the star system, especially 5 stars. Average at 3, then two scores above and below. It's simple, it works.
[.sm0ke.] @ Jun 29th 2008 11:27AM
I've noticed that Game Informer's reviews are pretty black-and-white. 8 and above is good, and 7.75 and below is absolute garbage.
Keith @ Jun 29th 2008 11:28AM
Reviews in general have become so skewed that when a reviewer claims to use a 10.0 point scale, you really may as well only consider it as 5.0-10.0. So, a 7.5 rated game really is nothing more than a 50%. Personally, I think it's an inherent problem in the gaming industry, at least for "professional critics"; don't piss off a game company or you and your company risk being reprimanded and losing access to those "sneak peaks" and "world exclusive insider previews," for instance.
I agree a lot with what Lord Bowser says above me. For me, a decent source to start judging a game's potential purchase is metacritic.com which as most of us know, converts reviews to percentages and takes a weighted average from many sources. It may have it's own flaws, but it's a good starting point.
Keith @ Jun 29th 2008 11:32AM
Wow, I had to leave for a few minutes in the middle of typing my comment and in that time a lot of people have already said what I was trying to.
Eleniel @ Jun 29th 2008 11:38AM
I generally won't play anything that gets less than a 7, and anything less than an 8 has to be something really unique and in a genre I really enjoy (for example, Folklore or Phoenix Wright). I'm more willing to go out on a limb and try something if it gets higher than an 8.
I don't have a lot of time to devote to games, so when I do play I want to make sure I'm getting a good experience.
Kimiko @ Jun 29th 2008 11:42AM
5.5 and up are passing grades in schools here (NL), so I'd consider anything below that as not worth buying, and between 6 and 7 as 'maybe, if it has something redeeming'.
That said though, in my experience some (semi-)professional reviewers are either quite harsh or jaded, and tend to be very critical even regarding games I find enjoyable. Some sites have reader ratings, and those are more accurate.
Lord Bowser @ Jun 29th 2008 11:45AM
They're jaded. Very, very jaded.
nil @ Jun 29th 2008 11:47AM
Review scores are mostly misleading. Too many people approach it like it's a school grade. On a 10 point scale, 5 should be average. Anything above should be good to great and below should be mediocre to failing.
Regardless, I mostly ignore review scores. If a game looks interesting in design and concept, I'll give it a try. If it's an older game, I'll check the GameFAQs boards to get some user impressions. The average user probably has a very different view on games than reviewers do. If I played almost every game that came out, I'd be pickier as well, but I don't.
p@ @ Jun 29th 2008 11:56AM
i'll usually watch a trailer of the game instead of relying on ratings
Jhongerkong @ Jun 29th 2008 12:02PM
I stopped caring about game reviews when everyone gave Kirby Air Ride bad scores. Needless to say, I bought it and it became one of my favorite Kirby games.
Roto13 @ Jun 29th 2008 12:43PM
Yes. Kirby's Air Ride is fantastic. If Smash Bros. was a racing game, it'd be Air Ride.
c_judicator @ Jun 29th 2008 12:32PM
Meh, a number doesn't do it for a summary of a game. Saying "yay" or "nay" for any game isn't enough to give anyone a good idea of the game at all. A worded review is all I need.
Roto13 @ Jun 29th 2008 12:39PM
Ha ha, game review scores! They're twisted and weird and you need a Rosetta stone to actually find any meaning in the numbers. Here's the best I can do:
If a game get's a perfect score, it gets it because of hype. Even if a game actually deserves a perfect score and gets it, it's because of the hype and not the game itself. Case and point: Grand Theft Auto 4. Perfect scores were raining from the sky on top of it. What did it do to improve on GTA: San Andreas? It cut actual content and made everything brown. It's a good game, but it's not at all deserving of a perfect score. Basically, reviews for over hyped games are almost meaningless. Of course, that doesn't mean that games with a lot of hype behind them are automatically bad. It just means you can't trust reviews to tell you whether they're good or bad.
Games with scores below 9 are more worth looking at. At that point, anything between 8 and 9 is probably worth checking into. Look at Final Fantasy Tactics A2 for an example. The game is great. It took all of the problems with Final Fantasy Tactics Advance and fixed them. There's loads of content (I have just over 10% of the missions completed and I've been playing for 16 hours), the music and graphics are great, there are tons of new jobs and races, etc.. As of right now, it has an average of 8.1 on Metacritic and it's probably going to end up being the DS game of the year, at least for me.
Roto13 @ Jun 29th 2008 12:40PM
Holy shit, that looked a lot shorter when I was typing it.
Konstantino @ Jun 29th 2008 1:03PM
I base it on school grade equivalents. 8 - 10 is an A (excellent), 7 is average (good), 6 is below average (bad), and 5 is a complete fail (terrible).
bryan @ Jun 29th 2008 2:21PM
I tend to disregard the number scores and instead I just read the reviews. Most reviewers will have completely different scores, but the points they make within the review are usually similar.
I think the most accurate way to score would be to avoid a 10 point scale and just use a five star system, like X-play does. 1- god awful, 2- pretty bad, 3- average (passable), 4- very good, 5- excellent. It keeps it simple and doesn't allow for confusion.
Kimiko @ Jun 29th 2008 3:00PM
Yes, but even then you need to balance it with your own interests/strengths.
For example, most reviews said Etrian Odyssey was very difficult, hardcore, retro, lacked depth, etc. Because of those reviews I hesitated about buying it for a long time and eventually gave in because it did look like fun, and it was Atlus. I've been playing it for nearly two weeks now and it is great actually. Not as easy as some RPGs, but really not that hard if you take your time. Retro, yes, but deeper than it looks at first.
Kristi @ Jun 29th 2008 3:59PM
I don't take review scores seriously, and I take what they say in the reviews with a grain of salt as well. It seems to me that a lot of critics are rushing to get their review online, how much time do they spend playing the game?
I rely more on what other gamers say, and I also watch gameplay videos online if I'm on the fence.
aj @ Jun 29th 2008 4:04PM
I don't know what to do with review scores, really.
Final Fantasy XII got glowing reviews across the board. I hated that game. A lot, actually. Shadow of the Colossus got a pretty high scores too. I hated that game. I've also really, really loved some poorly reviewed games (Shogun Empires was thrashed pretty bad, but I really enjoy that game).
Generally, I don't think that "professional" criticism can be taken seriously. Game magazines run ads for games. Websites run ads for games. Do you think they're going to be honest and risk that ad revenue? Of course not.
I compare reviews to the general buzz about the game, and ask some friends about them as well. But there is no good way to know if something is good or not until you play it. But at least most rental places do DS games these days, thankfully.
Covarr @ Jun 29th 2008 4:29PM
It pisses me off when an exact port of a game or a remake which far surpasses the original gets a LOWER score. It means they've changed their standards, making ALL their scores essentially arbitrary.
I mostly ignore the actual score, unless I'm at 1up; since they DO use the American school grades system, it means there's no room for misunderstanding or inconsistency.
Red @ Jun 29th 2008 4:33PM
What I usually do is wait around a little bit and let the reviews build up. Then I take one or two of the top ranked reviews, one or two of the lowest ones, and read them both. Get an idea of what the lovers and the haters thought of the game, yanno? I distrust a wall of 10s...too much hype.
But as a general rule, I go with my gut instinct and grab games which just...grab my attention. I grabbed Etrian Odyssey despite knowing next-to-nil about the details. (I mean, I knew what the game was, but I hadn't read any elaborate articles about it or what-have-you.) I picked up the Front Mission DS port because I like TRPGs. So far, it's been working for me.
TheTimelyHoward @ Jun 29th 2008 6:04PM
If there's a game I'm interested in, review scores are usually the further thing from my mind. They never influence my decision, but I do sometimes like to observe them and see how it is the media is reacting to the game in question. In my eyes, if a game gets, like, a 2 or something, then there might actually be something -wrong- with the game that extends beyond subjectivity. Nothing can top hands-on experience for me. I can't think of any reviewers in particular that I trust at all.
Sometimes I do look to reviews for advice, but they -always- do me wrong. Like that one time that every review on the internet was telling me to stay the hell away from Baroque (a game that I thought was pretty great).
MidnightScott @ Jun 29th 2008 8:34PM
My cutoff point is usually if it scores lower than a 6. But I can try games before I buy them with my special equipment :P
~Scott
Haplo @ Jun 29th 2008 11:07PM
I tend to be able to only afford to buy maybe two games a year. I first find previews of of games months before the game is reviewed. I research the game as to what it offers until months before its release. When the review comes out, I read what the reviewer had to say. The actual score means little unless it is under 5/10. If it goes that low, I try to see the specific reasons as to why the reviewer gave that score. So basically, scores make a slight difference in my purchasing.
Narcosynthesis @ Jun 30th 2008 6:33AM
I try to disregard the actual numbers, but do look at how the game is ranked compared to others I know and like, so more how the numbers compares than what they are. Generally going on the site I have seen a 'good' game seems to be somewhere 7+
What is much more important is reading the reviews and finding out specific good and bad points of a game, and figuring out how those fit with what I like personally. To choose a few at random, Guitar hero, Picross and Space Invaders all got great reviews, but don't really interest me for a variety of reasons. On the other hand, something like bomberman got a lower score for a lack of wifi and pretty uninteresting single player, yet get a couple of friends and you have one of the most fun multi player games you can find...
Icepulse @ Jun 30th 2008 8:48AM
I look at the average score by reviewers (as calculated by Metacritic), and if it's anywhere in the 70's or below, I'll dig deeper to see if there is a genre-rift scoring trend.... That is to say, some genres simply confound a lot of younger or less-than-hardcore old-school gamers, and tend to get wildly varying scores. For example, Shirin, or Rebelstar.
So, if I see a game gets a 70's average, further investigation yields whether it arrived at that average due to all-around lukewarm reviews, or if some gave it high-80's-90's, and some hater tossed is a 30 that tanked the entire average. So, even if a game averages 70's or even 60's, theres a good chance that its got that niche-game goodness that a few of us just jones for!
"RebelStar: Tactical Command" for the GBA averages 78%..... It is, hands down, the BEST GBA game for my money.
TheCoats @ Jun 30th 2008 10:26AM
I dont really go by the number - i [refer reading the review - its pros and cons then watch some gameplay footage then take it on - the number is good but i dont pay to much mind to it....
Szczylu @ Jun 30th 2008 11:43AM
For me game is worth playing when scores are over or equal 8
but i occasionally try games scored lower, for expample when friend recommends a game.
Morning Toast @ Jun 30th 2008 12:35PM
It seems I'm in line with some others, but a score of 7 seems to be my cut-off for the suck/nonsuck game. But that also depends on the price too. If a game gets a rating of 5 or 6 and the game is also $20, then I take that into consideration. It's the games that are prime releases (on any platform) that cost $50+ and get less than an 8...if you expect me to pay $50 for a game, it better be good.
But one thing I notice on some sites (like GameSpot) is the often great difference between the "pro" rating and the reader's rating. I've gotten many a game based on the reader's ratings than the pro ratings. The pros may rate a game at 6.5, but if the reader's average rating is 8, then I usually believe the readers.
turtle360 @ Jul 1st 2008 1:20AM
I agree. 7.5 should be the average because is in between 5.0, which pretty much sucks, and 10.0, which is perfect.
Cruciarius @ Jul 1st 2008 1:20PM
A score of a 5.0 to me is a decent score, but means the game doesn't "suck", but it's also not amazing. However, I'd prefer to try games out myself, to form my own opinion. The reason I do this is due to many horrible games I got, due to their high ratings. For example, Baiten Katos for the Gamecube got high ratings, but in my opinion was a horrible game.
So I do look at game ratings, but the main things I look for, when thinking of a game are actual player reviews (not paid reviews), which I read several reviews, before making a decision.
OtakuReborn @ Jul 9th 2008 8:03AM
I don't look at scores anymore. Not after the original Etrian Odyssey got low scores and became one of my favorite games of all time. If a game had my interest, it'll probably make it into my collection. The only way it wouldn't is if it REALLY didn't go over well with reviewers universally. And for a game I've been looking forward to, the score has to be 3 or lower out of 10, and they have to really justify that 3 in the review.