Are scoring systems past the old 'Out of Ten' one complete and utter bollocks? I'm talking once mags/sites start doing 'Out of Ten, then a meaningless decimal', and stuff. They're just disguised percentage ratings.

Yes. a 5 point rating plus a distinction mark is the best method. Like on G7.

I dont mind, I go by the content of the review and not the score alone.

I agree that the decimal thing is pointless while they could just use percentages instead, but I don't agree that percentages are stupid

Seriously though, are you guys like Goku & Vegeta in DragonBall Z? You're like rivals whos goals are always the same...... It's quite odd

Unless of course you're just siamese twins, that would explain my whole life. Maybe...

By the way, just thought you outta know that my body weight in KG is the meaning of life, which means I'm automatically better than you.

I would just stick to out of 100 scores as this is the most in depth scoreing system

Thats just percentages without the %.

I like the out of 10 but yeah i'll read the review aswell if i'm interested in picking up the game.

My gut instinct has never failed me. I just know if I'll like it.

I think those of you saying its impossible to "score" a game with that much accuracy are kind of missing the point. Its not that a game that recieves a 9.8 is a "98% perfect" game. However, if a reviewer has a few games, they're all around the same level, but you need to distinguish between a few of them to accurately communicate your preferences in numerical form, then by being able to give one a 9.3, one a 9.5 etc you are able to show that. It's kind of like diving competitions etc- someone who gets a "10" (or an "8" or whatever the highest mark is), is not necessarily perfect, however, as a general standard, they merit that score. The person who gets a 9.9 is slightly worse than that, hence the extra measure.

The problem is that obviously not all reviewers have the same opinion, even within the same publication, so it gets a bit confusing. An out of 5 system would still be far worse- it would screw up the ability of reviewers to indicate their preference by a significant margin. All I know is that I don't buy most games that score 70%ish for a good reason, and I do buy a lot of games that score 80%-90%.

Anyway, if you don't like the current system, just do a lil' simple maths.

It shouldn't be about condensing a review into one, final, number, anyway.

(..and for the record, grumbler's right about the G7 scoring system. )

I wish it was the same with me! I wouldn't have touched ChibiRobo with a long pole stick thing if I hadn't have read the ONM review!

You like the 3D Sonic games but you don't like Chibi Robo? You must have the worst taste ever.

( Edited on 19.11.2006 18:17 by Cleetus )

Add pokemon into the mix and you have cheesey japtacular fun!

Do they, though? Thinking that assumes that one needs a score which is the exact measure of a game's worth. Which is obviously rubbish. A score is for that particular game, it's sole purpose isn't to distinguish between that game, and another game of the same score. That's up to the person. "Two 4/5 games, but I'd like that one better, based upon the actual review, and my personal preferances". It's not like it'd be hard. Sometimes, I think sites/mags underestimate people's cognitive abilities...



Why should I do maths? I don't see games as percentages. You obviously do. You say that it's do differentiate one game from another. But how can that really be so? Please give a satisfactory reason why a game