Jimquisition: Dragon's Frown

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

Earthfield:
People defending DC: Ignore boobs,talk about gameplay.
People who hated it: Ignore gameplay, talk about boobs.

I feel in the eye of the hurricane now, but I'm still getting this, my only question now is if I should get this on PS3 or Vita.

Maybe I should do a comic about this...

...Except the review in question actually praised the gameplay, saying there was good enemy variety and the boss battles were awesome and did a good job breaking up the regular combat. The reviewer had a problem with the objectification of many of the women in the game, yes, but also criticized the art style (which, as Jim mentions, is a perfectly valid criticism) and the repetitive nature of the game as it makes you go through the same levels multiple times.

*sighs*

well, least I get to feel like the smart one and not give a fuck what any reviewer says about a game, nont gonna say ever cause sometimes a good review has gotten me to buy a game, your review of the new Devil May Cry ended up with me buying it (mostly to play it and find flaws to use against it, how dare they make the game good, bastards)

It doesn't bother me as much when a game gets under-rated, It's just not my place to get upset about it. It's the over-rated games that bother me. Before I started renting I would sometimes buy a game that seemed interesting and got good scores only to find that it bored me to tears.
No More Heroes is the game that got me into Gamefly. Everybody (even Yhatzee) said it was so great but I found it to be one of the most tedious games of this generation.

Video kinda ignores 2 of the main reasons why people took issue with the Polygon review. And I feel like it's a much larger issue that the usual fans being mad at a random low score.

The two low scores are both from women offended by the art style and depiction of woman.

One of the scores is from a site funded by MS.

Both issues are worthy of a mention but instead we rag on fans of the game who want to see talented developers get the credit they deserve, and not lowballed for hits or politics...

Lunar Templar:
*sighs*

well, least I get to feel like the smart one and not give a fuck what any reviewer says about a game, nont gonna say ever cause sometimes a good review has gotten me to buy a game, your review of the new Devil May Cry ended up with me buying it (mostly to play it and find flaws to use against it, how dare they make the game good, bastards)

I'll be honest and say I haven't seen said review, nor I condemn it, but I recall reading a review that said that the gameplay was held down by the depiction of women in this game, says more about the person reviewing it than the game itself IMO.

Don't recall where I read it though.

I can not give a shit about review scores and enjoy the damn game, that's what.

...Yeah, I paused the video right after the question at the start to post this. I would say it seems silly to need an episode that says something so obvious, but I know better than that. People on the internet are fucking stupid and think that any negative review score needs to be "fixed" to match their own opinion because only their opinion matters and anyone who disagrees is wrong. So yeah, they need to be told otherwise, but sadly these people will ignore it because once again, their opinion of what they should do is right and anyone else's is wrong.

Love how the Vita turned into a facehugger (is that what it's called?), though. Good gag! It's certainly the most entertainment I've gotten out of a Vita all year as well.

Mr_Terrific:
Video kinda ignores 2 of the main reasons why people took issue with the Polygon review. And I feel like it's a much larger issue that the usual fans being mad at a random low score.

The two low scores are both from women offended by the art style and depiction of woman.

One of the scores is from a site funded by MS.

Both issues are worthy of a mention but instead we rag on fans of the game who want to see talented developers get the credit they deserve, and not lowballed for hits or politics...

And why does this change what I should do? Them giving the game a low score because they're feminists means just as little to me as them giving it a low score because they didn't like the game. It still doesn't change MY enjoyment of a game, so why should I care? I still see no reason to. At most, this just lets me know not to take these two particular reviewers seriously.

i only care about 3 things when it comes to reviews:

1. that they haven't been "paid for".

2. that the reviewer has actually played the game.

3. that it's "honest" on a personal level to that reviewer.

ive bought plenty games after reading low reviews...
...we used to do "metacritic" in our head dontcha know *puffs pipe*

ps i don't actually have a pipe :'(

Mulberry:
So... the game scored 6.5/10, or 65%, in one review. It scored more than half marks. And this is a *bad* thing?

This is why numerical quantification of a subjective opinion is useless.

although I don't mind if a game gets a 6.5 I don't agree with people saying it's "average". A studio should be ashamed of themselfs if they release a game that gets mostly 5's. Thats an insuficient grade, unlike professors gamers are paying for a product so a 6 is the absolute bottom line grade wise that you can expect from a game. In that perspective an 8 is average. Mechanically sound, little or no bugs and other big problems with attention to the details but nothing really special. a 4 or 5 should never have been released.

But like you said it's a problem with grading to begin with. In this case I think a game should at least be graded on different things seperatly.

Earthfield:

Lunar Templar:
*sighs*

well, least I get to feel like the smart one and not give a fuck what any reviewer says about a game, nont gonna say ever cause sometimes a good review has gotten me to buy a game, your review of the new Devil May Cry ended up with me buying it (mostly to play it and find flaws to use against it, how dare they make the game good, bastards)

I'll be honest and say I haven't seen said review, nor I condemn it, but I recall reading a review that said that the gameplay was held down by the depiction of women in this game, says more about the person reviewing it than the game itself IMO.

Don't recall where I read it though.

I made up my mind about DC awhile ago, If I had a PS3(still) or Vita, I'd get it

I think you missed the point a tad, Jim, but just a tad.

Yeah, people are definitely overreacting, especially if they are being stupid enough to request the review be taken down or changed. However the majority of people upset over the review really are just upset, and they have every right to be... just like the person who reviewed it had every right to give it an average score.

The reason why it's such a large focus of attention is because that review was part of a continuing drama that existed before the game's release; drama even you tapped around in one of your videos. If the negative review didn't mention breasts at all, it wouldn't have gotten quite the level of attention it did. But someone was once again content to opened a healing wound and rub salt in it, which is kind of sad because so many were just happy to finally get to play the game by this point, even if the game wasn't that good. They also set a precedent that not a lot of people want:

"Mario games are functional and fun, but Mario portrays Italians in an insensitive 'cartoonish' manner, -2 points."

As interesting as it would be to see game reviews get so "creative", a lot of people don't want that. Sadly, I am one of them, because I just want to play fun games and I think a lot of people are in that mindset. Such political bias almost made me avoid getting Metroid: Other M... Seeing Morgan Web scream "FUCK YOU" at the game screen during her review was pretty jarring. While M wasn't the most spectacular game in the franchise, it certainly wasn't the travesty many reviewers were calling it. I enjoyed it quite a bit more then say, Metroid Prime 3. It was a solid Team Ninja game full of fun action and a little bit of metroidness here and there. A lot of people missed out on that because of the reviews, most of which were quite biased like Morgan Web's were. I think that's very sad, even if I don't agree with the portrayal of Samus in that game.

But yeah, in short this had to do with a whole lot more then just one negative review.

I feel you Jim, I absolutely love The Secret World and it has an average score of 73 on Metacritic, IMHO, the game deserves a lot more than that, but that's just the biased being in me talking. One of the reviews was written at the time the game launched and the reviewer said he ran into a couple of broken quests (as I said, he wrote it at launch) and he massively lowered the score, arguing that he "lost his trust" in the devs for thinking it's either a broken quest or not.

He's right to some degree, but the thing with any MMO, is that the game is constantly changing and most if not all of his complaints were already fixed in subsequent patches, but that score still lingers and stains the overall score. I was slightly dissapointed back then and I quickly ignored it, because I was (and still am) pretty busy enjoying the game itselfa lot, instead of worrying about some sad bloke who didn't liked it because of a problem that's already fixed.

zhang he does have some of the funniest if not thee funniest cut scenes in dynasty warriors.

I can only put up with him for so long lol. I liked him better when he was yuan shao's crownie

Mulberry:
So... the game scored 6.5/10, or 65%, in one review. It scored more than half marks. And this is a *bad* thing?

This is why numerical quantification of a subjective opinion is useless.

Because you have high tolerance for mediocrity? I see little distinction between mediocre and bad, neither is worth playing or watching if you have alternatives.

I wasn't really looking forward to Dragons Crown, since I was put off by how uncomfortable the female character designs in it were way before it was cool (when the very very very very very first teaser trailer came out showing off the Amazon I went 'eww no thanks' a half a year before Kotaku ever did a pointless idiotic story on it) and Muramasa was re-released on the Vita to gimme my Vanilla ware fix, so I was quite content! More companies should do that, me thinks.

But yeah, you see this sorta thing happening all the time, and even as someone who doesn't care much for the game, it's disappointing. This is why I have such derision towards the term "fan", because it's really just short for fanatic, and, well, that's exactly how you see "fans" acting when it comes to something like this. Like fanatics. You saw the same thing happen when Pacific Rim came out, and if there was a single review of it that wasn't calling the movie absolutely perfect, even if it was an over all positive review, if they mentioned it had even a single flaw the fantards came out in droves to spew their hate everywhere.

This isn't a new topic, so I'm glad Jim is talking about it with something relevant to the gaming scene to use as an example point.

Mr_Terrific:
Video kinda ignores 2 of the main reasons why people took issue with the Polygon review. And I feel like it's a much larger issue that the usual fans being mad at a random low score.

The two low scores are both from women offended by the art style and depiction of woman.

One of the scores is from a site funded by MS.

Both issues are worthy of a mention but instead we rag on fans of the game who want to see talented developers get the credit they deserve, and not lowballed for hits or politics...

So your first "reason" for taking issue with the review is that it was from a woman's perspective, and that her perspective happened to be offended by the game that has every female character being reduced to hypersexualized fanservice. So, if it was a man who was offended by the art style and hypersexualized depiction of every women in the game, would it be more valid to you, or is it just that being offended by sexist depictions of women shouldn't count?

As for the other one, really? You think they're going to give it a low score because they're funded by MS? Since I'm not familiar with the site, do they make a habit of giving PS exclusives noticeably lower scores than what's to be expected? Because a fictitious conspiracy against Sony isn't a valid reason if the only evidence you have is that one PS game got a low score.

And we "rag on fans" because we have differing views on what the developers deserves for their game and because they are constantly whining about even the slightest criticism or mention of sexism.

I don't dislike Dragon's Crown because I'm a woman, or because I've been paid off by someone, or because I want extra attention; I dislike it because it's depictions of women make me feel uncomfortable that someone out there thinks that this is what I want to look at, and it makes me irritated to see an entire gender reduced to being tits, asses, and sexy poses.

Monxeroth:

Sylocat:
I love Jim's talent for shifting the debate back to put the bigoted assholes on the defensive.

Monxeroth:
Also Jim, the argument that somehow "hardcore gamers" defend homogenization of video games and video game mechanics/type of games, correlates with the same people or other people bashing down on low review scores by todays standards, is a really flawed argument.

correlation does not imply causation, Jim.

The fact that some people like to defend generic homogenized video game series and titles has NOTHING to do with review scores and the homogenization of "Its either a 10 or its shit".

Um, you missed the point of what he was saying. He's saying, demanding homogenization of the game press is the same PROCESS as demanding homogenization of games, regardless of any cause-and-effect correlation.

Well, too bad that argument is also invalid and also holds no merit because it really isnt the same principle. One relies simply on what scale we categorize things on and how big or small that scale is. The other on how we judge things put on that scale, ie, two completely different ideas and principles. Thanks for trying though

That really isn't the point either. It was simply an aside to point out the homogenization of anything is bad using an example most people can agree with. It wasn't supposed to say the two are comparable just that the impulse to demand homogenization is generally a bad. I don't really think it was supposed to be that big of a point anyways certainly not worth getting mad over.

A game with universally high-positive reviews ought to be either the Second Coming (and occur with near-equal rarity) or a cause for suspicion. It's a pity some of us seem to have gotten into this weird headspace where games we like- and especially franchises we like- become somehow sacrosanct. Rare is the game that doesn't have room for improvement, and if we lose any ground between "flawless" and "grab the torches and pitchforks and prepare to boycott" where we can honestly discuss ways to make games better, we all lose.

It was perhaps inevitable that DC would become a flashpoint for something like this, in as much as a negative review- and especially one focused as Polygon's apparently was- seems to many to be less of a judgment of the game's merits as a game or even its aesthetics as its morals. I can get why some might be upset, but I also think we do a certain disservice not just to Atlas and Vanillaware but to gaming as a whole by implying that we're unwilling to have games judged on such factors. Even as we demand that games and gamers be viewed as mature works played by mature players, there's an element of "they're trying to take away our toys" to some of the sentiments that seems a little disturbing to me.

I don't have a PS3 or Vita; barring Atlas bringing it to PC, I'm not likely to get a chance to play Dragon's Crown. It's a pity, I think I would enjoy it- over-the-top artistic choices and all. For all that we talk- not incorrectly- about the excessive amount of female characters in video games who are rounded in every way except personality- I really don't feel like I've seen something like DC in the mainstream. It made a firm choice to stylize in a way that's over-the-top, and in a medium full of sepia-brown-grey men walking away from explosions, I honestly have to applaud that.

TheProfessor234:
Might just be me, but I always feel better if there is negative criticism about something, or rather, two or multiple sides to something.

I don't know how to explain it but I always get a weird feeling if something is highly loved by every single person.

Couldn't agree more. After there being cases of reviews being bought out, and even a reviewer losing his job because he gave a mediocre review to a game (I think it was kane and lynch? Been a while, so I can't remember), that the fact that there are negative reviews which the developer doesn't seem to mind means that the other reviews are most likely going to be genuine.

LifeCharacter:

I don't dislike Dragon's Crown because I'm a woman, or because I've been paid off by someone, or because I want extra attention; I dislike it because it's depictions of women make me feel uncomfortable that someone out there thinks that this is what I want to look at, and it makes me irritated to see an entire gender reduced to being tits, asses, and sexy poses.

Exactly. Dudes can feel uncomfortable by creepy overt sexualization of this nature as well. Apparently being put off by the content of a game isn't a valid reason to not like it or something. Imagine if this topic was instead talking about the Saw movies and people were saying the opinions of those who don't like the movies cuz they're not a fan of gore aren't valid as well? It's almost kinda creepy when you scratch out "sexism" and replace it with something else of that nature where you'd have much much less people saying that it's a bad reason to not like a thing.

Earthfield:
People defending DC: Ignore boobs,talk about gameplay.
People who hated it: Ignore gameplay, talk about boobs.

I feel in the eye of the hurricane now, but I'm still getting this, my only question now is if I should get this on PS3 or Vita.

Maybe I should do a comic about this...

This. Times a billion. The concerns of sexism and female portrayal in games are warranted, but for the love of Chainsaw Buddha, do I ever want to smash watercolor foes to death with magic. Methinks PS3.

Sometimes I buy games with low scores to see what was wrong with it. Sonic 06 and Dynasty warriors gundam for example. Low scores don't influence my decision to buy a game. Also I found the Amazon more offensive then the magic user. The amazon does mid-air twerking for god sake. How did that not get attention?!

To be fair, i have seen many reviews that differ from overall opinions in what i suspect was an attempt to get more hits for the site.

But generally, i agree. Gamers need to learn how to keep their traps shut because our opinions are rather stupid most of the time and therefore worthless.
Which is to be expected about anything that's typed in a few seconds.

StormShaun:
The facehugger attacks once again. Jim, I fear that you never may escape Aliens: Colonial Marines.
... ever.

Much like the titular critters of the franchise, ACM is a force of nature.

Now onto the topic at hand. It does feel that the gaming community is spoiled (In my opinion), games as you said that people complain and demand a '10/10' (Whatever 10/10 is these days. It feels like 10/10 should be impossible to achieve). It is annoying that the single bad review is gaining all of the press now instead of the praise.

In fact, the Escapist gave it a lower score, so you'd think that'd be the focus.

More to the point, I dislike the notion that you can't enjoy a game if someone else doesn't. Then again, I'm like Jim. Not only does that mean I am magnificent, it also means I really enjoy Dynasty Warriors games (though I prefer Samurai Warriors). But even among my friends, I'm puzzled by their desire for me to enjoy the same media. I mean, yeah, we share common interests. It's why we're friends. But we don't need to share every interest. A couple of my friends loved the Deadpool game, but I'm not going to disown them for a differing opinion.

...Unless they like Twilight. >.>

Now in my opinion, the character design is the thing that turns me off this game. Call it satire, parody of how we portray gaming/RPG characters but ...

I find most of the art displeasing. Not just sorceress or whoever Busty St. Claire is, but just in general. It's a turnoff in a game where one primary point is supposed to be the overall aesthetics.

And while I'm on the subject, Polygon had some other criticisms that seem fair, at least from the point of view of someone who hasn't played the game. Maybe they're outright lying, but I doubt it. In any event, it's not just about teh bewbs.

Maybe a 6.5 was unfair, I don't know, but the review argued for a game that doesn't seem worthy of the other scores. That doesn't make them invalid, but it does justify its stance.

In any event, if people like it, awesome. I thought a lot of the 80s/90s art was ugly back then and I often hate homages to it now. Polygon called it unapologetic adolescent fantasy, and for a lot of people, that seems to be a good thing, so rock on. If that's your thing.

It does amaze me, though, the nerve of people demanding a review be changed.

I hate to be "that guy" but this is the first mention I've heard of Polygon's review. Now I'm going to have to read it to find out what all the noise is about.
All I knew is that the game has been getting generally positive score (yay, another one worth keeping on the shelf) and if one or two scores were bad, I'm totally fine with that.

Hell, the Escapist OWN review rated the game 3/5 stars, marking it down for the female character design (the reviewer was female so that was expected), and I'm totally fine with that score too.

Where did this massive explosion about Polygon's review happen exactly? On just Polygon's site? Or everywhere else too?

Earthfield:
People defending DC: Ignore boobs,talk about gameplay.
People who hated it: Ignore gameplay, talk about boobs.

That isn't strictly true however. Many proponents have praised the art and many opponents have criticised the gameplay.

Honestly, I just think that it's silly that so many sites including small sites gave it high scores, but the only ones that give them poor reviews have been 2 of the biggest sites. One of those sites did the same thing to other games recently. I've just decided that I should focus on the smaller sites anyway since they seem to match my opinions more and are less tainted by the desire to generate controversy.

Thus, I dropped Polygon from my RSS reader. The occasional good article was getting overshadowed by their intentionally controversy-generating reviews, so they're out. They're entitled to their silliness, but I'm not going to contribute to it anymore.

And to the people on the facebook comments section, no, 6.5 is not Average when it comes to a 1 to 10 scale, because in general publications use them like the US letter grade system and only use half the scale in general. 1.0 to 5.0 is abysmal, while 6 to 6.5 is below average, 7 to 7.5 is average. (C rating, essentially.) If something gets below an 85 on metacritic, there's a subset of people who won't even look at it. It's at 83 right now, and the reviews from Escapist and Polygon are the two that are pulling it beneath an 85 given that they're giving below average marks to a game that is getting above average reviews everywhere else. Escapist is understandable because they're using a 1-5 scale, so 60% is an "average" game to them.

(RPGamer's pulling it down too, even though a 4/5 is well above average on their scale, but translated to metacritic scale becomes a slightly above average score instead. Metacritic really needs to recognize that some sites use the entire scale, while other sites don't.)

Yuuki:
I hate to be "that guy" but this is the first mention I've heard of Polygon's review. Now I'm going to have to read it to find out what all the noise is about.
All I knew is that the game has been getting generally positive score (yay, another one worth keeping on the shelf) and if one or two scores were bad, I'm totally fine with that.

I heard about it on Playstation Lifestyle, and from the review itself. When I saw it at first, I rolled my eyes and went to the next, being happy about all the positive ones.

Yuuki:

Hell, the Escapist OWN review rated the game 3/5 stars, marking it down for the female character design (the reviewer was female so that was expected), and I'm totally fine with that score too.

But that's a 3/5, whereas on a 1-10 scale, normally 6-10 is the equivalent to 1-5. A 6.5 is closer to a 1.5/5 stars.

Here's an example of a 1-10 or 1-100 grading scale. http://www.rpgfan.com/graphics/gradingscale_lg.jpg Polygon's policy is similar, stated at the bottom of this, but a bit more technical. http://www.polygon.com/pages/about-reviews You can see that 6.0-6.9 matches up with the "subpar" rating on RPGFan pretty well, which means it's probably in the 1 to 1.5 star rating on a site that uses a smaller scale like that.

Yuuki:

Where did this massive explosion about Polygon's review happen exactly? On just Polygon's site? Or everywhere else too?

Neogaf, mostly.

Breasts are breasts. All woman have them. An yes some people use them to sexualise woman and others dont. In a world of porn and mags i just dont seem the point in moaning about one game. Men are sexualised with big muscles, unfortunately thats the way it is. Big breasts or big pecs....its the same thing. But in a world where female singers dress like whores, i think games are the least of your worries.

But as for this game. Is it good or bad? Is it fun or shit? The characters dont matter. Ok, she has big breasts and i understand that people take offense to that. But she isnt a whore, isnt stripping, isnt naked and isnt whipping them out to beat the enemy with them. Seems its just she is a woman with big breasts in a game.

Ehh, ME3 is on my top 10 list of all time favourite games and i've sunk hours of Dynasty Warriors years back. This is a good video.

SonOfVoorhees:
Breasts are breasts. All woman have them. An yes some people use them to sexualise woman and others dont. In a world of porn and mags i just dont seem the point in moaning about one game. Men are sexualised with big muscles, unfortunately thats the way it is. Big breasts or big pecs....its the same thing. But in a world where female singers dress like whores, i think games are the least of your worries.

But as for this game. Is it good or bad? Is it fun or shit? The characters dont matter. Ok, she has big breasts and i understand that people take offense to that. But she isnt a whore, isnt stripping, isnt naked and isnt whipping them out to beat the enemy with them. Seems its just she is a woman with big breasts in a game.

I was with you right up until the whores bit.

I think it's important to realize that developers exaggerate the elements of people which are found to be culturally desireable. Men are usually desired to be strong though as of late it's the desire to capture a rugged look while the individual is more toned muscle-wise. Women have hips/legs/butts/breasts that are incredibly easy to exaggerate. If men had some such attribute that was socially desireable then you can bet it'd be exaggerated. But it's not that appropriate to have a huge bulging trunk running down the inside of the character's pants so they stick with muscles.

But as to this video. Kudos to Jim for pressing this point. There being dissenting opinions is a sign of a healthy society and we just need to learn what reviewers like the kinds of games we enjoy and to pay attention to them more than the people who dissent with our likes. At the end of the day we are talking about subjective tastes unless the mechanics are particularly bad and so subjectivity will be highly relative.

Yuuki:

Hell, the Escapist OWN review rated the game 3/5 stars, marking it down for the female character design (the reviewer was female so that was expected), and I'm totally fine with that score too.

Oh, just... what is wrong with you? "the reviewer was female so that was expected"? Did you THINK about how stupid and horrible that would make you said before you said it, or are you just firing from the hip here? As if not male worth his balls would dare knock this game for the creepy uncomfortable disgusting overly sexualized character designs or something, it is JUST the women folk we should expect that from? More then the game itself, it's people like you making it so easy to be put off by this damn game.

Oh dragons crown. People try so hard, and in vain, to defend you, when it is ever so easy to poke fun at how horrifically sexist you are.

http://fucknovideogames.tumblr.com/post/57454571665/coelasquid-hokuto-ju-no-ken

Sometimes I love the internet.

Personally, I blame heightened expectations for games raised by marketing buzz at it's announcement, especially by trailers. Those things make games look "cinematic" without showing any proper gameplay. Even worse if they don't tell you who's who, what they're doing, or why they're doing it and you should give a damn about it (which is what put me off the Last of Us).

internet dwellers and gamers in particular are extremaphiles. things are either the very best thing thats ever happened or the very worst thing thats occured to the human race and its murdered your cute kitten.

there is however another group that looks at things like that. but they get a pass because they are 4 year olds

sometimes people just need a smack upside the head and a "grow the fuck up"

Mulberry:
So... the game scored 6.5/10, or 65%, in one review. It scored more than half marks. And this is a *bad* thing?

This is why numerical quantification of a subjective opinion is useless.

Due to how skewered reviewer scores have become over the years (With 7.5 being "average" to many people), a 6.5 would be seen as below average or borderline shit. So when a game gets something THAT low, people get up in arms about it. Gaming Journalists deserve part of the blame for this, as they have conditioned these "gamers" (more like whiny cunts) that a 6.5 is a bad game, when in all reality it isn't.

Why can't we all just move to a 5 star review system?
1 - Shit/Avoid
2 - Below Average/bad
3 - Average
4 - Good
5 - Great

Seems so much easier to understand for some of these simpletons who bitch about the scores to begin with.

kazriko:
But that's a 3/5, whereas on a 1-10 scale, normally 6-10 is the equivalent to 1-5. A 6.5 is closer to a 1.5/5 stars.

Here's an example of a 1-10 or 1-100 grading scale. http://www.rpgfan.com/graphics/gradingscale_lg.jpg Polygon's policy is similar, stated at the bottom of this, but a bit more technical. http://www.polygon.com/pages/about-reviews You can see that 6.0-6.9 matches up with the "subpar" rating on RPGFan pretty well, which means it's probably in the 1 to 1.5 star rating on a site that uses a smaller scale like that.

Umm, what? A 3/5 is the exact same thing as a 6/10 or a 60/100 (though less exact since they can only go down to half stars really). If the system is from 0-5, you don't decide that it's really from 5-10, because, not only is that a really crappy system for rating things, it's also your weird interpretation of it, unless it's actually explained somewhere that that is the case, in which case I apologize.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 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