Would a 100% average game be a 5/10?

Viewing as a guest Viewing as Guest Last visit: 19.03.2024
Search this topic Search Topic

Welcome to the Cubed3 forums! Join us today - it takes just 20 seconds to start posting! Sign Up for Free Account Login

I know what you're thinking and how you're instantly going to jump to a 'yes', but hear me out first. I was thinking a short while ago about some of the games I've played that have been... less than stellar. Games that weren't 'bad' of necessity, but also weren't really 'good' either. They were just... meh. Games where there is pretty much nothing to define them and they're 'by the numbers' through and through. Which is to say you can know everything about the game without even having played it. A stock story, stock gameplay, stock graphics... nothing actually BAD, but nothing actually GOOD either.

So is it a 5/10 or something else? After all, a 5/10 game tends to leave at least some sort of impression, be it because of its potential and things it did right despite its handicaps, or how it shot itself in the foot despite its potential to be great. But is that actually better than a game that's simply 100% predictable and uninteresting? Is a perfectly 'average' game a game you would rate 4/10 if you actually reviewed it simply because there is no substance to it? Or is the ideal of 'average' being a 5/10 strong enough that you would be able to tell and put it there despite its lack of... well... anything?

Our member of the week

For me average is, well just what you said : Average. It's neither to be judged as good or bad. Below 5 is where there starts to be elements that make the balance tilt towards inherently bad overall. Anything 5 neither tilts towards good or bad, and anything above 5 tilts towards good. An impression to me is either good or bad. If you are left with a poker face when you're done and put the controller down, that's a 5, know what I mean? Recently having had to review Fullblast for the eShop, that's how I felt, for me the game felt like the epitome of average. Average in everything, down to the enjoyment had from it, leaving a feeling of utter blandness.

I guess it depends what you call average. For me average is not something that is still considered a success. Average is just on the border between good and bad. anything that is either of the two aforementioned is either above or below 5. And everything that leaves you with a puzzled feeling that is neither good or bad, well that's a 5 for me.If you can't tell whether it's good or bad, then it's average. That's it for me Smilie.

Cubed3 Limited Staff :: Review and Feature Writer

But, then again, such a thing would lack both effort and inspiration. It's just another dime-a-dozen game whose only 'edge' is that the devs were smart enough to just be generic as opposed to outright bad.

Logically speaking, yes

But in terms of perception I think most would consider 5.0 to be bad and something around 7.0 to be average. Perhaps it extends from school where 59 or below is a failing grade and C range (70's) is average.

Our member of the week

I appreciate that here at Cubed3 we put an adjective associated to the score, right next to the digit, so as to make it clear what those numbers mean to us, cause at least that way people know what we mean by that. But then again not everyone pays attention to this and go by how most major sites give their scores, unfortunately all too often giving high scores far too liberally.

Cubed3 Limited Staff :: Review and Feature Writer

The problem with an 'objective' score, IMO, is that such a thing isn't actually possible without robbing a review of its entire point. After all, it's not just the base components but how they come together. You do not judge the quality of a cake by the grade of the egg but, rather, the skill of the baker. That... isn't the most relevant though; at least to this question.

As I see it, the problem with a 'perfectly average' game is that, well, there is little reason to play it. After all, it is uninspired, holds no originality, and is just... Nothing. To achieve such a state requires total apathy towards the product being generated. Now, obviously, this doesn't mean a game should have its score inflated for having a good or original idea and failing to carry through on it; we are objective after all and applause can be given via comment or even stated in the review without affecting the score as being able to do so is key to being able to review... but... well...

I guess what I'm trying to say is that a game of such... lazy... construction as to neither stand out or fail is often uninspired and dull resulting in a game that's simply a chore to play through. As such, despite being average, it robs all desire to actually play it and, thusly, ends up BELOW average. I my eyes its a conundrum. Would an absolutely average game get an actually average score? On the one hand its parts say yes, on the other it is so bland and uninspired that it would be a no.

Our member of the week

To me yeah, an absolutely average game as you just described it would get an actually average score. because if it makes you feel like playing it is work and not entertainment, you can't deny the things that make it up and which aren't inherently bad in themselves. You judge the experience and comment on it, but also examine how the ingredients all come together, as that is what makes up the experience.

Your description up above is exactly how I felt about Fullblast, to which I gave a 5. I sat on one of my playthroughs for review purposes for two hours, just pushing through against my own will to just stop playing, because I had to. I wasn't compelled to play the game for other purposes than reviewing, trying to figure out where the feeling originates from or what causes it. In my opinion an average game gets an average score simply because it's not bad. I mean this in accordance to our scoring policy as described here

5/10 : There's a reason why a game rated 5/10 didn't score highly - plagued with problems or just simply doesn't do enough to justify the package as a whole. Certain elements of the game might be passable, but a game of this score is teetering onto a must have only for those who truly can't be without it.

Using the case of Fullblast as an example, some people really indeed can't be without it because it's a shmup. Some people would still want it because of what it is, how it looks like, some licensed property being depicted in it, etc etc... There are such reasons. And I have indeed seen people still getting their enjoyment out of it. But I simply didn't.

Cubed3 Limited Staff :: Review and Feature Writer

Average as in neighter good nor bad, yes. Average as in the average game released, no.

A released game (and product by overall standard) should be an enjoyable experience. The average basement project that never sees the light of the day should not be taken into account when it comes to setting the average bar for released games as those should not even be released. Then that there are some exceptions of games that should never have been released to the market but still got there somehow (I look at you Angry Bunnies and Frenchy Bird).

In a healthy market the standard of a released product should be in between 70-75% on a 100% scale. Sure, some sour apples will be released, but overall fine products should be released. And this is mostly the case in the AAA industry, hence why people buy those blockbuster titles, as they are guaranteed the safety of an established media form. Of course, not all games can be masterpieces, but I am a firm believer of that most concepts can be turned into at least good games that will be enjoyed by at least a niche following if only polished enough.

I know my opinion on this subject can be seen as controversial as it sets the standard far higher than middle of the road, but we talk about finished products people are expected to pay for here. Not basement flash f2p shenanigans. xD

The difference between illusion and reality is vague to the one who suffers from the former and questionable for the one suffering form the later.

I think the contradiction a bit is that "average" has a few meanings.
Average can mean "most common" (in maths that's 'mode')
11134   (1 is the mode)
It can also mean "add everything up and divide by the number" (in math's that's "mean")
11134   (2 is the mean)

When we review we tend to mean...aha..."mean". But in conversation when somethings described as average it tends to be "modal" aka....boring.
So when something is 5/10 it might be (one use of) "average" but it doesn't mean its necessarily "run of the mill"

To me  though Id add the extra subtly here, while a game can score very highly, I don't think it can ever be 100% without some degree of originality. Because fresh experiences themselves raise the bar for games that follow. And maybe thats unfair, but its sort of how scores have to work.  (unless, that is, we keep raising the scale :p)
 

( Edited 15.09.2015 02:01 by Darkflame )

http://www.fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
Last update; Mice,Plumbers,Animatronics and Airbenders. We also have the socials; Facebook & G+

Reply to this topic

To post in the forums please login or sign up to join the Cubed3 community! Sign Up for Free Account Login

Subscribe to this topic Subscribe to this topic

If you are a registered member and logged in, you can also subscribe to topics by email.
Sign up today for blogs, games collections, reader reviews and much more
Site Feed
Who's Online?
Azuardo, GamingLillyCat, mikem52

There are 3 members online at the moment.