What does this score mean? Is this the most meaningless score a reviewer can give a game?

What does this score mean? Is this the most meaningless score a reviewer can give a game?

Other urls found in this thread:

its-not-its.info/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

It means "I didn't get a bribe but it's not hopeless to expect one in the future, so let's not break all ties".

>score is 10
>"THATS TOO HIGH"
>score is 9.9
>"THATS TOO LOW"

Kek

>9.9328
perfect

This

it's very similar to these

What do you mean by that?

"It's probably not worth your time, but I'm not going to give it too bad a score in case other people give it a better score since I have no talent in discerning good games from bad ones anyway"

doesnt matter what it "means"


the score system was flawed to begin with, got fucked by people giving out minimums of 8 to games that werent bad, and the people that give them can be bought and sold. and on top of that they have fucking shit taste.

How do they decide that a game deserves a 7.3 instead of a 7.2 or a 7.4?

I never understood why you'd use a 10 grade system.

5 grade works perfect.
1 = Awful
2 = Either lacking or too buggy
3 = ok game, if you're interested in this genre, try it
4 = a good game, recommended
5 = best of it's genre.

...

>elegant menu system
>9.5 gameplay (swinging sword like its oblivian and spells are useless or unintresting)

its a good casual game, but its not a 9.5 if 5 is an average score

>subtract 1 everytime I had to ask someone to solve it for me

Why did people meme this review so much?

u wot faggot? Magic is the best part of Skyrim even thought spellcrafting was removed.

It becomes incredibly OP just like in Oblivion once you get to high tier spells.

Exactly. How do you justify 1/10 of a point when there's so much subjectivity involved? And the sites that give decimal points are full retard

I just use a four star system. Every thing I like or find neat about it earns half a star. No real criteria.

I hate to be a grammar nazi since there's nothing wrong with your post except for its-not-its.info/ but you might wanna know this.

It's not even a 10 grade system, there's .1 increments as well. Because it's very important to determine the difference between 9.2 and 9.1.

I never thought I'd shill for Kotaku but they used to have an old review system back in ~2010 that was pretty good. They wouldn't post scores, instead putting 3 categories at the end of reviews:
>What we liked
>What we didn't like
>Should you buy this?

It was surprisingly good, no wonder they got rid of it.

8.8
7.4

the holy trifecta of meme scores

>if our scores are nuanced, then maybe people won't realize that our written reviews aren't

I'm pretty sure that's how they justify it. They just want really dumb, exacting scores to make it seem as though they're putting thought into it.

don't forget

>5.8

>half-a-star

A stat is a star. You can't say it's only a half.

These breakdowns are so weird when you realize how vague and general all the positives are and how specific the negatives are. Then if you think about it further, too much water is also very vague and general but just less so, so it's really not a helpful thing to say in any sense.

This reminds me of Meltzer, who does wrestling match grades.

Starts at 0-5 stars.

Then he added halves.

Now we are on quarter stars.

So the five point system is now a twenty point system.

This happened with Uncharted 4 and it was hilarious to watch desu

>wow i can DUAL WIELD magic like i can my katanas now!

I used to work on a four star rating

1 star for graphics
1 star for gameplay
1 star for sound/audio/music altogether
1 star for it's uniqueness/how is differentiates from similar games.
I don't usually use halves, but sometimes it is necessary.

it means that Mirror's Edge, Dark Void, Shadows of the Damned, and now the Technomancer are not horrid games, but not really the best of the best.

What did the scores allude to? I'm sure 8.8 was skyward sword, but what were the others? I assume starfox and final fantasy?

On a scale of 1-10 with 7.5 being average, I give this thread a 7.3

>I'm sure 8.8 was skyward sword

you know i've never actually looked at this pic in detail past the meme it spawned, but
>+ Post-game content

I've always preferred a 5 grade system to a 10 or 100 point system too.

Things become meaningless when you're trying to determine the difference between a 96 and a 97 in entertainment. Just give me a general estimate on if something is worth my time or not, and the attitude I should go in with.

It also makes rating games more numbers centric the more specific you get. I still remember the fallout from Twilight Princess getting an 8.8, which probably wouldn't have been nearly as bad had the reviews just gave it four stars or a solid 9.

>6.8

Here's how a game rating system should really work.

>~Presentation~
Critiquing a game's graphics and sound individually is fucking shallow and while people are often understanding enough to not say a 3DS game has shit graphics because it's on a fucking 3DS with limited graphics capabilities, it shouldn't be implied that a game could be bad because it doesn't have AAA-quality realistic PC game graphics. Presentation is a far better way to go about reviewing a game's visuals and sounds, that's where you really pick it apart and decide if it's aesthetically pleasing and meshes into a good experience on the eyes and ears.

Then after that, it's just
>~Gameplay~
This isn't to say story is unimportant. In fact, sometimes a good story is necessary to keep you playing. You can look past repetition and gameplay flaws if you're really curious to see what happens next in the story. Is the game actually fun? Are you just playing it for the story? If gameplay is good enough, story doesn't matter.

Those are the only two factors you need in reviewing a game.

me, to expound upon a "presentation" score. I could review certain NES games in 2016 and give them 10/10 presentation scores because their visuals and sounds are perfect for what they were. Though you can't possibly give them a 10/10 "graphics score" in 2016.

Cuz Hoenn, a tropical fucking island, has TOO MUCH WATER. And desu it's not that much.

Wait why did it autochange tee bee eitch to desu?

Get a load of this newfag

That is an issue

Anything under 80 translates to"it's shit."

One, "too much water" is a weird thing to complain about. Two, it makes no sense to complain about too much water in a remake of a game that had a lot of water.

Especially considering they were playing the water version

4.0

Do you work in PR user?

These ones says "Thanks for your patronage"