Your login information returned multiple users. Please select the user you would like to log in as and re-type in your password.
Review scores are something very important for gamers. Most of us don't have the time or money to rush out and buy every major release on day 1, so we look to gaming websites for reviews and scores to determine if a game is worth spending our money on. The problem with review scores is that they are not entirely faithful to the scale they use. Let's take a score, 75/100 for example. See, you would expect someone to look at that score and think, "Well, this sounds above average, but I'll wait until the price drops before I buy it" or something along those lines, but, more often than not, gamers seem to look at a 75/100 as a bad score. In fact, it seems most gamers view anything under an 80 or a 4 out of 5 as a bad game. Even reviewers seem to have this attitude as many skew their scales to the point where a 70/100 is considered average; even though the average should actually be 50/100. So, what caused so many of us to think in this manner whenever we see a number tied to a game?
My theory, is the school system. Yes, I'm being serious; think about it. When you go through school how often are you congratulated for getting a 75 on a test? You got 3/4 of the answers correct, but your teachers and peers will tell you "that's not good enough". They tell you to strive for perfection, to work your ass off for A's and B's. Now, I don't feel there is anything inherently wrong with pushing students to the best of their abilities, but the way that schools go about it leaves an impression on their students. Because they go nearly a quarter of their lives dealing with that, they will then look at anything, not just video games, with a score and apply that same mindset.
Realistically, a game that gets a 75% should not be bad; its above average. But, again, this is where that mindset comes in. Gamers will look at that 75% and think, "These developers didn't try nearly hard enough. Their game is bad and I'm not going to waste my time". In my opinion, that is an unfair assumption to make. Those developers very well could have worked their asses off and made something that has potential; Deadly Premonition coming to mind. You could argue doing away with this idea will result in half-assed games because "75% is good enough", but most developers take pride in the games they work on. They helped create the game and they all want it to succeed. I really do not feel the developers themselves are to be worried over, but the continued application of this attitude is. Because people think in this manner, review sites will either share this mentality or skew their scales to be in line with it. All this really does is perpetuate this idea that any "good" game has to be at least an 85%. This also baffles me as to why these sites would even use a scale to begin with. I mean, if you never plan to use half of the damn thing, why bother to begin with? At that point you may as well just put down whether or not you recommend the game.
So what can be done about this? This is in no way trying to make the argument to do away with review scores altogether, but to rather get away from this school-like mentality. The first thing is to accept that 75% is not a bad score; not by a long shot. Gamers weeding out that kind of mentality will, hopefully, result in reviewers doing so as well. Don't skew your scales so drastically that you never use half of it and add recommendations to the end of your review instead of just relying on some number to get the point across. Aside from just expelling this attitude, gamers should also look to multiple reviews for a game and actually, you know, read the article instead of just scrolling down to see that magical number. The key here is getting yourself informed on upcoming games that interest you by using multiple sources and relying more on the written word instead of the numerical value.
So, what do you guys think? I'm really looking for feedback on these observations I've made so any comments would be very welcome.
Comments
12 years ago
I never thought about comparing review scores to the school system, but you're damn right! Many games that I love got average scores, some of them even lower. It's sometimes sad, that sales depend so much on those scores.
Very good article!
12 years ago
The young me would probably think that way, and by young, I mean 2 years ago before I ever knew 4PP existed. But now, ever since I played Nier, I will play a game instead of judging only by its score by (sometimes biased) reviewers. Good analogy and great article. Keep up the good work!
12 years ago
I totally agree with the school grade mentality of most people. I don't use review scores and just get games that interest me, mainly because rarely do two games I am interested in come out at the same time. But I do think review scores are important, since higher ups in the industry thing they are important, which could affect the developer getting more money or a sequel.
12 years ago
''The key here is getting yourself informed on upcoming games that interest you by using multiple sources and relying more on the written word instead of the numerical value.'' Agreed and my two cents to the topic is that scores may be harder on not well known games. Gamers will just look at the score of said game and if not "good" the game losses it's chance and who knows if the article could have convinced the gamer otherwise.
12 years ago
I agree that the perception of school grades is a big factor going into how people perceive these grade, but I'd also say that the (now somewhat prohibitive) cost of games is also driving this trend. If I'm going to plop down my $60 for a new game, I want to make sure I'm getting my full money's worth. Why would I gamble and risk my money on a game that got a 75-80% when I could get a 90%+ game for the same price. As you said, a 75% game is one that would imply you should wait until the price drops to pick it up, implying it's an inferior game to the many "A grade" scores. I think most people who are trying to get the most out of their money are the ones that are likely to skip the numerical score and go straight into the review. The ones who make a big deal about the score are typically fanboys or people who have already decided to buy the game and frankly, those people's opinions are not likely to be changed any time soon.
12 years ago
I have to agree with this article. I for one rarely ever pay attention to video game reviews since IMO a majority of them are simply unreliable and even if the few reviewers I listen to do not recommend a game I will at least try a demo of said game as I believe ones own personal opinion is the most important in deciding whether a game is good or not.
12 years ago
I think another problem is there is a lot of high scores out there which just raises the bar. IIRC games getting 90+ wasn't as common as it is now so a game getting a 70 wasn't perceived as a "bad" game. Getting a high score isn't as special as it once was.
12 years ago
Great article. Over the past couple of years I noticed this trend as well. I've also noticed that many games that score over the 80% mark tend to be franchises that play it safe and don't bring anything new to the industry in terms of gameplay. As long as the game has a certain level of polish and familiarity it usually will score higher than something fresh and innovative. Keeping that in mind, people could really expand their gaming horizons if they looked past reviewer bias and did a bit of research on their own.
12 years ago
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks it's crazy that a 75 is considered 'average'. I agree that the school-like grade mentality plays a part in the score inflation problem. There's also an issue with paid-off hacks and over-enthusiastic reviewers dousing any above-decent game with reams of perfect scores, making it impossible to tell what is a polished, competent product and what is a genuinely landscape-changing work of art or entertainment.
If we want this to change then critics and reviewers will have to approach their task with a more thorough critical and analytic eye, and go beyond the usual 'the graphics are great and the sound is good and the gameplay is OK and it has lots of replay value so 90%' sort of thing.
11 years, 12 months ago
Great article, I'm in total agreement. I've never really been fond of the number system and have always hated the fact that anything under 80% would most likely be considered sub-par. I do like it when reviews have a sort of sub category rating system where each aspect of the game is given it's own rating (graphics, game mechanics, story... etc).
Game reviews that give a game a 75% rating don't really stop me from renting it out first and giving it a go before I decide to buy it or not. It's sad that games under the 80% mark are thought to be a bit 'meh' :|
11 years, 12 months ago
I've always thought the five star system was a better option because you don't automatically equate it to school grades. But, you're right, in that it seems like most gamers perceive 3/5 or below as a bad game.
Maybe the lower end of that scale is rarely used because so many bad games nowadays are actually serviceable and are thought to deserve at least a few stars for being a thing that's not broken.