Jimquisition: Hate Out Of Ten

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

Feylynn:

Qitz:
Yeah, number scores are pretty stupid. Boiling down an entire experience and opinion to a number is insane but most people don't want to sit and read the whole review.

Though the real pain in the ass is the decimal systems. Just what the hell is the difference between a 8.5 and a 9? What's the .5 of a difference?

5%?
That's a very downward spiraling train of logic there, the next step is criticizing 10%, then 15%, ultimately culminating at the advocation of binary scoring systems.

And yet, you still don't answer the question of just WHAT a game that got a 9 and one that got an 8.5 did 50% better?

It makes no sense whats so ever and just further complicates the scoring system by bloating it with pointless, unquantifiable, dribble. Same thing goes with giving something a 9.75, it's 75% towards a perfect 10? Well then whats the 25% holding it back? Why not just a 9? Whats next? A 9.77777777755591928310957759012313? It adds nothing of value to the review.

Sure you can say it's a minor annoyance, like a camera freaking out, but if it's minor, why make it hold any sway over the score? Just mention it and move on.

8 out of 10.

For that awesome ending!

Don't normally like these videos as I could imagine in the real world I wouldn't get on with someone so opinionated. Probably because I am too I suppose... But this was actually a good watch. I think that scores are taken too seriously. That being said there have been a number of games this season that haven't deserved the scores they have got.

The grading is done in context of current trends, technologies and possibilities. So a game that is way better than it's predecessor but gets a lower score does not mean it's seen as being 'worse'. It's just seen as "not innovative enough for the current generation".

Though the opening words to his episodes have sometimes made me cringe I have always watched and enjoyed the Jimquisition; yet this is my favourite episode by far. An 8 is a great score, so I am happy he has at least given some the chance to see how silly it is to think otherwise. I have always shook my head at 'gamers' who think a 6 or 7 is unplayable - if you like the genre it's a good game for you.

Though I believe the text of a review should not substitute a score, I have always thought a review should consider a 5 as average. With 6 good, 7 very good, 8 great, 9 unmissable if you like the genre and 10 - buy the bloody system.

Jim, although I don't ALWAYS agree with you - you've made a damn good point. No game is perfect and no game is worth 100% (10/10). There are great games, phenomenal titles that have been released and they do not score 10/10 because if you were to have a 10/10 game, you wouldn't need to BUY another one, would you? If there is room for improvement or room for addition without being the jack of all trades and master of nothing (GTA4) - then there wouldn't be room for sequels, re-releases or any other competition. I mean, what would be the point of releasing a game after releasing the PERFECT game? How do you follow up with that? You can't. And its not like developers aren't pushing as hard as they can to make good quality products, but the industry still has room for improvement and can therefore indefinitely be defined as a "Work in progress".

Anyone feels like saying that I'm wrong here, then just post the date when games stop being developed. We'll have a winner then ;P My money is on Halo 88.8/10 - History of Chief's Helmet

Qitz:

And yet, you still don't answer the question of just WHAT a game that got a 9 and one that got an 8.5 did 50% better?

It makes no sense whats so ever and just further complicates the scoring system by bloating it with pointless, unquantifiable, dribble. Same thing goes with giving something a 9.75, it's 75% towards a perfect 10? Well then whats the 25% holding it back? Why not just a 9? Whats next? A 9.77777777755591928310957759012313? It adds nothing of value to the review.

Sure you can say it's a minor annoyance, like a camera freaking out, but if it's minor, why make it hold any sway over the score? Just mention it and move on.

In fact, why even have ten? Why not just have a score of one or zero? Anything else complicates things too much and leads to unquantifiable dribble. I mean, WHAT does a 10 game have that a 9 game does not?

John the Gamer:
The grading is done in context of current trends, technologies and possibilities. So a game that is way better than it's predecessor but gets a lower score does not mean it's seen as being 'worse'. It's just seen as "not innovative enough for the current generation".

Unfortunately, the grading context is also done in the context of the current grading context A9nd redundancy would be redundant). Which means dealing with the notion that an improved sequel HAS to have a better score, because publications have played that game. once you start making concessions like this and score inflation, it's kind of hard to undo. People will always look back and say "but you have X a Y, so Z should be >Y.

I love it. Laughed at that last bit about the 9. Literal tears.

Only fanboys bitch if their game they love gets lets than a million out of ten.

mjc0961:

veloper:
If a reviewer can consistenly rank a bunch of above average games (but not great) belonging to the same genre, in order of preference, he'll need those percentiles, if he wants to accurately summarize his opinion in a single score.

I like the idea of a reviewer having a very clear insight into what he perosnally likes.

That doesn't answer the question. What's the difference between an 82 or an 83, or an 86 and an 87?

The difference is the 87 is significantly better than the 86. It could mean the difference between Bad company 2 and crysis 2 (and I happen to agree with user score that Bad company 2 is the better game).
If you can buy only one, go with BC2.

On the 4 point scale we effectively have nowadays there is alot of contrast between 8 and 9.

I reckon that if you can point out the better game of 2 games, you should always be able to reflect this in the score.
That's why decimals are a good thing.

By the way, there is no way to accurately summarize his opinion with a number. To paraphrase Yahtzee in his Mailbag Showdown video, complex opinions cannot be accurately expressed via a single number.

And I reckon that if you can discern what you personally like and have similar products to compare, then you can always rank them and if you can rank them, you can can also justify as many score gradations as you have items, until you get to the point where you can nolonger tell the difference yourself.
I don't think all above average shooters ever made, need to share only 3 positions between them. I see alot more contrast in quality and fun than that.

Thank goodness someone is standing up for a bit of common damn sense.

I use movie reviews because most film critics still have the gumption to get raked over the coals by angry fan boys because the critic did not proclaim the film to be the greatest film ever made. When a film comes along that gets over 95% on Rotten Tomatoes I know it really has something going for it. A 70% film I know will have some flaws but it's still enjoyable even with the little flaws.

I'm not always looking for the perfect game so I'd like to know if a game has a few small flaws instead of everything getting a 10 out 10 to make fans happy. I agree that 10 out 10 needs to be for the games that really go beyond what we are used to.

I'm not usually one to like Jim Sterling's point of view, but he's bang on with this one; if Skyrim got 8 out of 10 from somewhere (which I doubt few reviewers would have the balls to do so after all the hype), they would be lynched, even though they might have valid reservations about the game (note I've not actually played it yet, but will soonish).

PCGamer, whose reviewing I've enjoyed for a while now has a nice system where bad is only 45% or less; I've played quite a few games they rated as 60% or lower and enjoyed them; they make it clear the game isn't great, but you can have fun with it. They only hand out 90+ to a handful of games; I like the fact that they do that because it makes 90% or more feel special; you get the impression they loved the game and will likely be playing it in the office on and off for months, maybe even years to come.

Not to say I think they're always right; Portal 2 got 94% and I disagree its worth that, but my criteria for whether a game is good or not will be different to theirs; when fanboys realise that, we'll all be better for it. At the same time I think reviewers really need to get more critical, else how can we hope for improvement?

I haven't played Batman AC so I won't comment on that. But 8/10 for Uncharted 3 is a fair score. The shooting controls feels stiff, and the lack of adjustment for sensitivity are also reasons for lowering the score.

I give this review an 8/10. :P

mjc0961:

Abandon4093:
And there's a difference between giving a game an 89 rather than a 90.

Bullshit.

Abandon4093:
an 89 acknowledges the game is extremely good, but at the same time tells the audience the reviewer wasn't comfortable giving it a 90. You don't get that with a straight 1-10 system.

Again, it's one point. What's the difference between an 89 and a 90? NOTHING. You say the reviewer is not comfortable giving it a 90? I say explain this clear difference between 89 and 90 that you see in real terms. And no, just saying "he gives it an 89 because he doesn't want to give it a 90" is not a clear difference. See these?

http://www.destructoid.com/the-official-destructoid-review-guide-2011-203909.phtml
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/7149-What-Our-Review-Scores-Mean

Write something like that for 80 through 90 showing a clear, reasonable difference between each increment so everyone can see the difference between an 82 and an 83, or a 89 and a 90, without confusion. If you can't tell me the difference between an 89 and a 90, there's no point in having an 89 and a 90.

Of course, the true solution is to not have review scores at all or to just stop paying so much attention to them and actually read the review itself, not to further complicate a system that most people are already too dumb to understand by throwing more numbers into it.

Again, complete bullshit.

There is an inherent difference between 89 and 90. I'm not going to go and give each number in a 100 scale a designed name and purpose. It doesn't need it. The differentiation comes from the fact that it's a scale. You don't need to be able to give each number a detailed meaning.

an 89 is better than an 88 and worse than a 90. You don't need a more detailed answer than that.

And review scores give a good indication of how much a reviewer liked the game. Don't really see the issue with that.

I don't support people paying attention to reviews at all if we're talking about them influencing a purchase. But reviews are a nice way to get a bead on what to expect, and review scores condense that into a single glance business.

Xanadu84:
Lots of good points, but I do need to point something out. In the frame of reference of most people reading reviews, 8 out of 10 is a B-. That's slightly better then an average, phone it in slackers grade. And I'm not totally aware of where grade inflation is these days.Demanding perfect scores is ridiculous, but using a standardized metric, review scores arn't THAT bad.

Damn good point, I've always thought that 5 outta 10 shouldn't actually be average, but never really could explain why.

If you take 5 outta 10 as 'does half of what it should do right', then sure, most stuff should do better than that.

Someone who gets half an exam right, isn't average, they're pretty bad.

In short tho, 7 out of 10 is considered average, right or wrong, and we're gonna have to accept that.

Of course EVERYONE wants the thing they've worked hard for years to create to get perfect, 10/10 reviews across the board, but that's not going to happen for most people.

as is, I consider 8/10 to be something that's pretty good for its genre, and I'd not rule out buying a 6/10 game if it interested me.

Last of all, everyone should remember, it's a single reviewer's opinion. Someone could give the next big RTS 11/10 across the board in every category, and I'd not go buy it, as RTS just doesn't do it for me. (I admit I might try the demo if there was one however, in case I really was missing out - more reasons to release a demo, folks!)

I'd suggest I've probably got some 3 and 4/10 games in my collection that I love, but I'd not rate em as 9/10s because they're only great to me.

Fucking epic ending...

I have noticed people getting rialed at scores that are not perfect, but honestly some of these big budget games merit only a 5/10. I'm no gears fan, nor God of War, so I would be the ass who would give those games only average scores. I guess people would crucify me for that... huh? All for an opinion which is supposedly protected by law.

Qitz:

And yet, you still don't answer the question of just WHAT a game that got a 9 and one that got an 8.5 did 50% better?

Not 50%, 5%.
9/10 is 90% - 8.5/10 is 85%.
This is very simple math and it is the answer to your question: "Just what the hell is the difference between a 8.5 and a 9?"
The answer is 5 %, that is the difference(From Dictionary.com
Difference: 7a. the result of the subtraction of one number, quantity, etc, from another)
90-85=5.

A game that got 9.75 isn't 75% closer to perfect then a 9.0 because you can't discount the initial 9.
But my real point is that you are in favor of using more simplistic numbers to avoid using 'meaningless' decimals to represent percentages in between 10 point intervals, I was joking that following that logic we might as well just jump to the logical simplest scoring system.

1 or 0.
Good or Bad.
2-10 doesn't more adequately express the end game of "Whether or not the consumer should buy it" Right?

Decimals are an easy way to represent the basics of a full 100 point scale without inflating the numbers and getting into even more silly things like 83.4% or something truly unnecessarily technical.

Good job Jim! You've talked me back with this clever, well thought out speech.

You're right. Given the metrics provided in your review guide it's good to be a 8.5
But, the bigger issues is with inferior games getting equivalent or even superior scores. That's an issue with major gaming sites having multiple reviewers labeled as a site rather than a person. As for 6/5s, those are evil and should be abolished.

RedEyesBlackGamer:

Scrumpmonkey:

I Shall make my post in Poster Form;

I was going to write a very long post, but that picture nails every point. Good Show.

Actually if you notice one of my arrows is pointing the wrong way, ahh well.

Smaller version if anyone else is interested;

image

Agreed.

This user from the g4tv boards said exactly what I was thinking:

Avaj

It is validation. People want to be validated in what they think of something. Someone buys a game and they want to be validated that they made the right choice. Similarly if they don't like something about something else they want to feel validated by hearing that other people have had the same response.

What simpler way is there then to boil something down to a number?

Everyone wants to hear that everyone else was scared while playing Amnesia. Everyone wants to know that everyone else teared up near the start of the movie UP.

Read more: http://www.g4tv.com/videos/55954/sesslers-soapbox-i-hate-numbers/#ixzz1dojAtJzG

zeldadungeon.net comment criticizing 9/10 wow stupid fanboy/girl
i go on the that site every day
it is good for zelda news but the forums i avoid because fanboys/girls exist

edit found the link to the page
http://www.zeldadungeon.net/2011/11/gamesradar-skyward-sword-review-910/

SenseOfTumour:

Xanadu84:
Lots of good points, but I do need to point something out. In the frame of reference of most people reading reviews, 8 out of 10 is a B-. That's slightly better then an average, phone it in slackers grade. And I'm not totally aware of where grade inflation is these days.Demanding perfect scores is ridiculous, but using a standardized metric, review scores arn't THAT bad.

Damn good point, I've always thought that 5 outta 10 shouldn't actually be average, but never really could explain why.

If you take 5 outta 10 as 'does half of what it should do right', then sure, most stuff should do better than that.

Someone who gets half an exam right, isn't average, they're pretty bad.

In short tho, 7 out of 10 is considered average, right or wrong, and we're gonna have to accept that.

Of course EVERYONE wants the thing they've worked hard for years to create to get perfect, 10/10 reviews across the board, but that's not going to happen for most people.

as is, I consider 8/10 to be something that's pretty good for its genre, and I'd not rule out buying a 6/10 game if it interested me.

Last of all, everyone should remember, it's a single reviewer's opinion. Someone could give the next big RTS 11/10 across the board in every category, and I'd not go buy it, as RTS just doesn't do it for me. (I admit I might try the demo if there was one however, in case I really was missing out - more reasons to release a demo, folks!)

I'd suggest I've probably got some 3 and 4/10 games in my collection that I love, but I'd not rate em as 9/10s because they're only great to me.

I think its important to remember that a review score is a single data point. You need to look across the board, see what the average is, what the deviation is, and generally the picture of the whole bell curve for that particular game. Even Portal got a few 8's, and that doesn't mean the reviewers were unreasonable, it means that your always going to get a few people on the high and low end of the bell curve.

Also, I think I need to point out the counterpoint to this little problem. For every 1 person lamenting actual score creep who feels that a hyped game needs a 10 out of 10, you have 10 Whiners who hate Call of Duty or Starcraft or whatever, and scream at how unfair a perfect score is, and decide that they need to be the paladins of the internet and bomb Metacritic in order to get a, "Fair" score. In reality, if a game sells millions and millions of copies and gets a hugely devoted fan base, and a sequel is made by those same developers, theres a really good chance that the sequel will be pretty good.

Mister Sterling... I completely agree. Your show is getting better and better. Originally it felt baseless because it was used as a platform just to get pissed and rant. Now, the rants have structure, context, reasoning behind the anger, and while your opinion is your own, it's a lot more serviceable in this style. Keep it up and I'll keep listening.

I'm still surprised that people actually try to grade creative work as if developers are nothing but a bunch of adolescent kids back in school which, judging from the behaviour of some, isn't that far fetched. Turning it into a numerical scale doesn't change anything. Whether you grade from 1-5 oder from A-F, same shit, different name.

Games (and movies and books and music and art in general) aren't maths tests where you can check off every correct answer and give a score at the end of it. Which is why I've come to enjoy and prefer critics like Yahtzee and MovieBob because there aren't fucking scores at the end but honest-to-god opinions that give me insight to the subject matter when I eventually form one of my own.

But there's anothing thing that puzzles me:
If we ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO stick to the whole x out of 10 business: why do sequels EVER get a high score AT ALL?
Let's go back to the school simile: If you had to write two essays for class and the first one was decent enough to earn a B+, would you expect an A if you just handed in a copy of the previous one if you changed some names or copy-pasted one paragraph about a dozen times?

OF COURSE NOT! That would be batshit bonkers.
So why are we so readily squirting out (AND ACCEPTING) high scores for sequels?
Neither Modern Warfare 3 nor Battlefield 3 nor fucking Uncharted 3 deserve more than 5/10
They're adequate at best. A sequel that adds something to a series or changes enough to make the sequel able to stand on its own might earn a higher score which is why I would give Arkham City and Skyward Sword a 6/10 (and even there only begrudgingly)

Will that stop enjoy any of these game (except them shooters of course, because shooters are stupid)?
Hell no, I'll enjoy them because I'm darn sure that I'll like these games because I liked their predecessors and I really do not need any validation from random internet passersby throwing random numbers at my head.

I'm a teacher and the same logic applies to grading students.

bahumat42:

Worgen:
I can only remember one review that really pissed me off and it wasn't the number that it got, it was one of the things the review mentioned, it said that the game had bad graphics, specifically it said this game had bad graphics
image image
That is a shot from kings bounty: the armored princess, the only way you can say that is bad graphics is if your so shallow you need every little fucken thing to be bump mapped out the ass.

looks like warcraft 3
i kind of want to play it.
hmmmmmm

True that. I played the game, and it does look a lot like WC3. Just got a little too tedious and repetitive for me, looking for all the right fights to level up, too much travelling, micro management, building the perfect army for each encounter. Should be somewhat quicker once you've discovered everything. Anyways not to go into a review of the game myself, but I'll agree the graphics aren't bad at all, it's a case of the graphics vs. aesthetics thing really, the game and the different environments look fantastic, it just happens to be playable on a non-gaming laptop. Same as Torchlight, which looks superb in my books.

Criticizing a game like that on graphics seems to be nitpicking that it's just not pushing the boundaries of technology or Direct X features, which is not the point IMHO. The characters, pieces and animations are great, and the colors breathe so much life and personality into the game. Btw. This is *totally* related, graphics is but one point in which reviews can be severely skewed.

Yan007:
I'm a teacher and the same logic applies to grading students.

Hah, you must be kidding I'm also grading papers and writing report cards right now, and the exact same thing just popped into my head =P

We have a head teacher in our school, who has been here for 20+ years, her way of going about it is to "always leave room for improvement", it keeps yourself and the students in check. Basically, a perfect student doesn't exist at the start of the year, and if by the end he/she has ALL perfect marks, well then they shouldn't be in that grade level (which does happen). Likewise, you don't want to set a bar too high that an average student suddenly becomes a genius on paper, and then goes to another school and struggles - reflects badly on you too.

I think the first time I saw this happen was the Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess review on Gamespot. Got an 8.8 or 8.9 / 10 review and my god the fan response was atrocious for the fact that it wasn't at least a 9/10. Especially considering that no one played the game yet and if you actually read the review it perfectly justified the score, the reviewer gave it tons of credit but dropped the review score a little because the game still used N64 quality midi music and sound. It wasn't long after that Gamespot dropped the 1/10 decimal marks from their reviews and a made them all .0 or .5.

I for one have always appreciated review scores for what they should be and have hated what it's become. The way I see it a 7/10 (and that's under the current system of overinflated ratings) should be a perfectly solid purchase if it's a specific genre that you like. The problem is the AAA games that cross genre boundaries aiming for wide spread appeal and earning a reputation among the gaming community as "must have!" games, which has basically turned the main chunk of the gaming community into a bunch of sheep.

Yet again basing the foolish minority to be the general opinion. Stop alienating idiots get your facts straight and present information that is meaningful. Also it's Zelda the only one posting is going to be some little kid anyway. That, or a grown person who still can't get over his childhood and thinks anything Nintendo makes is going to be good.

mysecondlife:

brainslurper:

Bara_no_Hime:
So fucking true.

I sincerely hope that the various review sites, internet wide, can be inspired by this video, grow some balls, and go back to giving games proper scores.

Nothing is perfect. Not the best game ever made. Nothing - ever - deserves a 10/10.

Especially not uncharted 3. Can anyone in their right mind rate an 8 hour standard shooter over a 300 hour multi play style open ended epic like skyrim?

You're no different than those people complaining about the review score because something got 8/10. Quite sad.

I don't care what our review scores are, but they will always be judged against eachother, so they need to hold up there.

brainslurper:

mysecondlife:

brainslurper:

Especially not uncharted 3. Can anyone in their right mind rate an 8 hour standard shooter over a 300 hour multi play style open ended epic like skyrim?

You're no different than those people complaining about the review score because something got 8/10. Quite sad.

I don't care what our review scores are, but they will always be judged against eachother, so they need to hold up there.

Then it seems like you care more than you think.

I did not think the issue was that bad, and then I did research... Jeez people are so dumb. It's a fucking review, if they don't think it's perfect THEY DON'T THINK IT IS PERFECT! IT'S THEIR OPINION!

Sorry, saw a reviewer get several really nasty comments for giving Arkham city a 8.5/10

Wait just a second, wait just a second, I usually agree with you, but a 7.5 is NOT a good score.

It's an okay score. When you get a 75 on a test, that's a C. At least on the school grading system it is, and I'm sure I'm not the only guy who bases game review scores on the A-F grading scale.

Games that are only okay get 7.5's, because they're average experiences, but not something you'd want to play for long amounts of time. It never fails, I play a game that I buy spontaneously at gamestop off of the used games rack and feel that it's kind of boring after about 30 minutes of play and nothing special, then go online and its review score is around a 70-75.

Your outrage is righteous.
First I though it was your British delivery and wording that was hypnotic and made me agree with you in almost all your episodes, but now I discover (to my free-will's relief) that you make good points. There is, after all, sense sepulted under the mesmerizing British syntax and passionate abuse you deal every week.
I take much enjoyment as well as enlightenment from your inquisitorial editorial.
:-D

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here