http://games.ign.com/halloffame/

I would say all of these games deserve a 10. They are not all perfect, but they are all hugely influential and important.

Rob Sharona:
http://games.ign.com/halloffame/

I would say all of these games deserve a 10. They are not all perfect, but they are all hugely influential and important.

SO if they get 10s we should use OXM's rating system (1-11) because a full score is perfect (you get 100% on a test you got EVERYTHING right unless you got one with some bullshit extra questions)

I'm going to pose this question: if you get 100%, 10/10 or full marks in a test, does that mean that you are perfect in the subject? Does it mean you know everything about the subject? Does it mean that you cannot learn more about the subject? Frankly, the realistic answer would be no.

In the same way, perfect scores do not state that a game is perfect. IGN calls a 10 'masterful' actually. In the video review of GTA4, the reviewer actually explains why he gave a 10 to the game, stating that while it does have its cons, what it does right heavily outnumbers the cons to the point that you don't really realise them because you're having too much fun. This is pretty much the reasoning behind every reviewer when they give a perfect score: the game is not perfect, but it is so fun that you forget that it has issues and still enjoy it.

Actually, I should say he believes GTA4 deserves a 10. Another thing you have to remember is that reviews are subjective. One man's perfect game is another man's flop, so no game can get a 10 from everyone.

stompy:
I'm going to pose this question: if you get 100%, 10/10 or full marks in a test, does that mean that you are perfect in the subject?

No but you did perfect on the questions in the test.(I guess stuff with essays is subjective but Science isn't)

shatnershaman:

Rob Sharona:
http://games.ign.com/halloffame/

I would say all of these games deserve a 10. They are not all perfect, but they are all hugely influential and important.

SO if they get 10s we should use OXM's rating system (1-11) because a full score is perfect (you get 100% on a test you got EVERYTHING right unless you got one with some bullshit extra questions)

I appreciate the games as art line, and in my opinion the games on this list deserve 10s, both in terms of their quality and their importance, keeping in mind the when these games were released. I know your head might explode if a game isn't marked like a bloody test, but I thought the point of this medium was to connect, entertain and inspire, just like all art forms.

Incidentally no-one makes me want to start a flame war more than you shatnershaman. You seem to bust my chops over every single thing I say recently. I wouldn't mind so much but you always hit me with something totally wrong.

shatnershaman:

stompy:
I'm going to pose this question: if you get 100%, 10/10 or full marks in a test, does that mean that you are perfect in the subject?

No but you did perfect on the questions in the test.(I guess stuff with essays is subjective but Science isn't)

Yes, but then, your knowledge still might not be perfect about the subject. For example, if I don't know the formula V=IR while writing my physics test, but luckily they don't ask me, and thus I get 100%, do I know everything about Physics? Even though this is Yr10 work and there is a lot more to learn in Yr11, Yr12, university, ect.

Video game ratings are simply to assist you in making the decision. A 10 is not automatically the rebirth of Jesus; it just means that the reviewer (it could just be them though) thought that the game was so awesome that its flaws didn't subtract from its fun. Perhaps instead of slagging the perfect score, read the review and understand what the reviewer is saying about the game.

stompy:

Yes, but then, your knowledge still might not be perfect about the subject. For example, if I don't know the formula V=IR while writing my physics test, but luckily they don't ask me, and thus I get 100%, do I know everything about Physics? Even though this is Yr10 work and there is a lot more to learn in Yr11, Yr12, university, ect.

Did you miss the no? You knew everything that was on the Test at that time. Simple as that.

Rob Sharona:

I appreciate the games as art line, and in my opinion the games on this list deserve 10s, both in terms of their quality and their importance, keeping in mind the when these games were released. I know your head might explode if a game isn't marked like a bloody test, but I thought the point of this medium was to connect, entertain and inspire, just like all art forms.

My head might explode although the helmet would shield everyone from the shrapnel./joking

I'm terrible for making decisions, so rating are a god send to me. Except trusting ZP is suicide.

shatnershaman:
Did you miss the no? You knew everything that was on the Test at that time. Simple as that.

I unfortunately missed the no, so sorry for that. Meh, if you and I don't agree, then fine. Ah well.

Geez, does no-one study mathematics here?

A rating of 9 does not mean that the game is *exactly* on 9/10, but exists within a range of 8.5-9.5/10 (those that sub divide their units like gamespot aren't really rating it out of 10 but 20 or 100 instead).

Using this logic, it's perfectly reasonable for a game to be given 10/10, since it only means that the worst the game could score is 9.5/10 (or 19/20). Likewise, a rating of 100/100 is still possible, but rarer as the it implies that the game is probably closer to perfection than 10/10.

Simple, no?

stompy:

shatnershaman:
Did you miss the no? You knew everything that was on the Test at that time. Simple as that.

I unfortunately missed the no, so sorry for that. Meh, if you and I don't agree, then fine. Ah well.

Well, what's life without differences? (C&P)

metagaia:

Simple, no?

As long as you assume they round.

shatnershaman:

metagaia:

Simple, no?

As long as you assume they round.

It's maths and numbers. It's not a matter of assumption, that's just the way it is!

Rob Sharona:

shatnershaman:

metagaia:

Simple, no?

As long as you assume they round.

It's maths and numbers. It's not a matter of assumption, that's just the way it is!

Whos to say a 9 isn't a 9.0000...?or a 90.000...or so on and so on.

shatnershaman:
As long as you assume they round.

There is no assumption about it. If the review gives a score of 8.7, then it's not really a rating out of 10, but of 100. Even then, you have a range of 8.65-8.75, and the same applies to 100 out of 100.

If it was 9.0000000... then they would have to *say* that it is exactly 9. Ratings are continuous by nature. You are allowed to give 2 games 8 and prefer one of them, and the range reflects that.

metagaia:

There is no assumption about it. If the review gives a score of 8.7, then it's not really a rating out of 10, but of 100. Even then, you have a range of 8.65-8.75, and the same applies to 100 out of 100.

If it was 9.0000000... then they would have to *say* that it is exactly 9. Ratings are continuous by nature. You are allowed to give 2 games 8 and prefer one of them, and the range reflects that.

Thats why I don't like reviews much I like exact black and whites.

shatnershaman:
Thats why I don't like reviews much I like exact black and whites.

Well trying to impose black and white onto a wonderful varied masterpiece will only spoil the experiance. You would probably prefer checklists to reviews, but I don't know many sites that deal in just those.

We should go with much broader scores, or pretty much what some one would say if you asked them what they thought of a game "FEAR was pretty cool. The graphics rock, the AI is decent, the sound is creepy, and you blow people in half with a shotgun, in slowmo. And the plot's ok too. If it's down to 35, 40 bucks, buy it."
"FEAR was terrible. It was so cliche, and the AI wasn't nearly as good as advertised. If Your really into horror games, I guess you can rent it"

I think that the game scoring system should be scrapped. I dont believe that numerical scores can give a true representation of the quality of a game. There also seems to be an issue with the rating of the more popular franchises, for example GTA 4. With the rating being so high I bought it and was disappointed with the game itself. The only games I would say deserve 10/10 are Final Fantasy 7, Portal, Call of Duty 4 and the original Resident Evil. Games with a 10 score need to be gripping right up until the end and there seem to be very few games that actually manage to do that.

metagaia:

Well trying to impose black and white onto a wonderful varied masterpiece will only spoil the experiance. You would probably prefer checklists to reviews, but I don't know many sites that deal in just those.

I would but no site does one that is long (you get a short one from gamersradar).

shatnershaman:

metagaia:

There is no assumption about it. If the review gives a score of 8.7, then it's not really a rating out of 10, but of 100. Even then, you have a range of 8.65-8.75, and the same applies to 100 out of 100.

If it was 9.0000000... then they would have to *say* that it is exactly 9. Ratings are continuous by nature. You are allowed to give 2 games 8 and prefer one of them, and the range reflects that.

Thats why I don't like reviews much I like exact black and whites.

But you can't have a black and white reveiw for an OPINION. An opinion isn't fact, it can't be proven. What If Say: GTA 4 has a 10 out of 10, GTA VC has a 9.4. Wait, you like GTAVC more? But GTA4 is better. I told you so. Play GTA4. YOUR NOT HAVING FUN! PLAY GTA4!

Mathew952:

But you can't have a black and white reveiw for an OPINION. An opinion isn't fact, it can't be proven. What If Say: GTA 4 has a 10 out of 10, GTA VC has a 9.4. Wait, you like GTAVC more? But GTA4 is better. I told you so. Play GTA4. YOUR NOT HAVING FUN! PLAY GTA4!

Why I don't like reviews that much I didn't say blakc and white reviews are possible (unless you look at certain graphic aspects.)

Read the beginning of the review section in a gaming magazine. They generally say that a 10/10 isn't perfect, mearly as close to it as is (believed) possible at the time of the review.

Mr. Bubbles:
Read the beginning of the review section in a gaming magazine. They generally say that a 10/10 isn't perfect, mearly as close to it as is (believed) possible at the time of the review.

Except OXM they have the Mecha Godzilla's choice,the unicorn 11.

10/10 yes, 100% no. 100% would literally mean "perfect game". 10/10 just means "Right there among the very best".

10/10 yes, 100% no. 100% would literally mean "perfect game". 10/10 just means "Right there among the very best".

Not...really. 100% does imply a better game than 10/10, since 100% is essentially 100/100; but still not the perfect game. Besides, no company would want their game to be called the perfect game since that would mean there would be no need for sequels.

That's why Gametrailers.com is so great. I don't think they have ever given a game 10/10, not even Metal Gear Solid 4 or GTA IV.

Absolutely, no game is ever prefect,
But, relatively speaking, you can make a game that executes perfectly what it was meant to do, so to me it's up to the reviewer's choice. Like saying, Mass Multitude Army Killer lives up to the name and has flawless controls and execution, so you could give it a ten, but fails to do anything new, it's just a really really polished version of what's come before, so it gets a 9. Reviewer's choice.

Oh, and Tetris is a perfect game.

A ten out of ten should be perfect. A five out of five however, can be perfect or have some MINOR flaws. This is becuase a 4/5 is good, but a five out of five is great. GTA 4 deserved it's 5/5, and should also get a 9.7/10

If you have a 1-10 scale then some games have got to get 10 otherwise there's no point. The best movies get 5 stars, that doesn't mean it's a perfect film just a very very good one. There is no perfect game, but for those games that are of the very best in their genre and influence games for years to come a 10 is deserved.

i agree in that no game deserves a 10/10 except for COD4,i love it so much i've played it literally over 10 times

Insanity55:
i agree in that no game deserves a 10/10 except for COD4,i love it so much i've played it literally over 10 times

That should be the new system. If a games worth completing 10 times it's probably worth a ten.

Well there is no such thing as a perfect game so why shouldn't reviewers give 10/10 for a game? You can always assume that they've rounded up from 9.99999.

I don't believe numbers can represent what a game has to offer.

That being said, a 10/10 doesn't necessarily denote a perfect game, whatever that is. It's a critic's opinion that said game is cream of the crop. When critics were handing a 10/10 to Half-Life, they weren't saying it was the best game ever,(well, some of them weren't) but that it had more to offer, qualitatively, compared to other games of the generation.

A Stone Age cave painting isn't as sophisticated as the Sistine Chapel ceiling, but that cave painting was a pinnacle of art at the time. It was a 10/10 that seems primitive now, like comparing Super Mario Bros 3 to Bioshock.

When Halo:C/E was given 10/10, was it because it redefined the FPS genre? No, it just did it better than everyone else. The game wasn't perfect and I believe no game is. A 10/10 does not mean perfection, merely a high standard of gaming.