10/10 - Expression of perfection or indictment of the competition?

[fyrh56]

Unfortunately if you were to knock down points for flaws, there wouldn't be games that actually get a... 10/10...

Exactly! For example, I may think Starcraft was a game inspired by the Gods themselves, but it still is by no means perfect. For a reviewer to use the entire scale it would have to use a lot of ifs. GTA4 could've been a 10/10 if you like sandbox games, if you were OK with the gritty realism, if you didn't find the excessive violence offensive, if you are a fan of the series, etc etc.

I don't like GTA4. Personally, I'd give it a 4/10 but if pressed to be neutral as much as possible, I would give it a 7/10 maximum.

Thus backing up what everyone else already said here. Numerical scores are just developer/publisher wank to keep the monies rolling in. Only reading the actual review you can get a good picture of what the game is like, but even then you might want to check more than one site since reviews can be extremely subjective.

 

[qbert4ever]

Maybe because 10/10 is fucking awesome not perfect and 11/10 is perfect (The unicorn Mecha Godzilla's choice)

Another OXM reader eh? But yes, there is no such thing as a perfect game, and countless game reviewers have said time and again that 10/10 does not mean perfect. If you don't like the system, don't read the reviews, and don't cry because you can't be bothered to read the explainations of how the system works.

I like the number system because it's always been fairly accurate with what I feel a game deserves. Like I have said before in past threads, you don't agree with a reviewer, don't read his (or her) reviews.

 

[Man_In_Gauze]

I like Yahtzee's idea on the Orange Box where he points out a slew of problems with the games, but admits that they're freaking awesome anyway, and you should play them regardless.

Kotaku's review system is the closest to perfect IMO, except that it doesn't really weigh the pros and cons, so you sometimes can't tell if, say, camera angles are a game-breaking flaw, or a minor annoyance. Well, that's not a very good example, but I think you get the gist of it.

 

[JaguarWong]

...it could also be a score to sum up the entire series, because the mgs series and gta series are so good

Like Return of the King getting the Oscar even though it was clearly the shittiest film in the series?

I doubt that.

 

[JakubK666]

I believe that a world would be a far better place if a new system would be introduced.It'd basically consist of 4 categories adding up to a 100/100.

Graphics - 20
Audio - 10
Fun/Gameplay - 50
Replayability - 10 for SP and 10 MP

I'm pretty sure that with that system,there is no way any game could score a perfect no matter how hyped it was.

 

[UpInSmoke]

I believe that a world would be a far better place if a new system would be introduced.It'd basically consist of 4 categories adding up to a 100/100.

Graphics - 20
Audio - 10
Fun/Gameplay - 50
Replayability - 10 for SP and 10 MP

I'm pretty sure that with that system,there is no way any game could score a perfect no matter how hyped it was.

So replacing an arbitrary number system with a more complicated arbitrary number system will clear everything right up...

 

[Strafe Mcgee]

Thing is with the numerical rating system is that good magazines (e.g. PC Gamer UK, Eurogamer website) will give guidelines for what each score actually means in real terms. The scores are a rough approximation of how good a game is when compared to the criteria. 10/10 doesn't mean perfect to me, it only means exceptionally good. If you start using the Edge system of marking where 10 IS a perfect score then it all falls apart.

And I'd just like to say OXM = Eurgh.

 

[JaguarWong]

And I'd just like to say OXM = Eurgh.

OXM as in Official Xbox Magazine?

The one that got caught out reviewing Headhunter: Redemption without actually - y'know - playing it...

Need I say more?

 

[Strafe Mcgee]

OXM as in Official Xbox Magazine?

The one that got caught out reviewing Headhunter: Redemption without actually - y'know - playing it...

Need I say more?

Ha, I didn't know that. I just hate them in general for overhyping everything. I mean they also tried to claim that PGR4 was the greatest racing game ever made. Tis nonsense I say!

 

[Aernir]

Personally, if i'm actually interested in the game, i don't really look much at the numbers. Anyways, since the topic of this thead is the scores, i'll get on with it.

I don't view a 10/10 as much as perfect, as i view it as the best to date. Basically, a 10/10 reaches new heights, and in order for another product to gain such a score, it has to surpass it's predecessor. To make an easy example, let's talk graphics. Crysis had the best graphics to date at the time of it's release, and as such, gets a top score in the graphics department. For another game to get that score, they have to do better. As for overall scores, i'd say top score would equal best in it's genre.

 

[TheMadDoctorsCat]

It's because the gaming industry, like the film industry, is largely bouyed only by a few yearly "blockbusters". Effectively, if those blockbusters tank, the industry as a whole suffers, and the reviewers are affected directly because of this. There's no proportion involved.

This is why the "Lord of the Rings" films were heralded as the second coming when they first came out, and then as the dawn of a new age of idiocy later on. When they were released on a wave of hype, the journos couldn't get enough of them. Later the flamers and superfans suddenly realised that their worship might be misplaced and the backlash began. In reality IMO the films have good points and bad points just like most other things. The same applies to videogames.

 

[Leorex]

the problem im seeing is that if every game from now to forever gets a 10/10 that means that a 10/10 = average.

so every game that receives a 10/10 just reduces the actual meaning of the 10/10

 

[haruvister]

No one ever accused Empire magazine of saying a movie was perfect just because it gave it five out of five stars. Likewise, a ten out of ten game isn't perfect - but deconstructed through critical analysis, and taking into account the socio-technological environment in which it's released, every element can conceivably satisfy to the point of excellence over its peers. Thus Syndicate, Ocarina of Time, and BioShock are worth 10/10 because they're as good as games can be at that time.

 

[shatnershaman]

Maybe because 10/10 is fucking awesome not perfect and 11/10 is perfect (The unicorn Mecha Godzilla's choice)

Another OXM reader eh?

Took a while for some one to point that out.

 

[Ultrajoe]

10/10 IS a perfect score - whether or it not it represents a perfect product is another argument entirely.

thread over, the argument is solved, we can all go home now (we wont, well keep saying the same points over and over)

He's summed it up perfectly, i can play the 'perfect game' even if it has a few flaws.

 

[qbert4ever]

..."Lord of the Rings" films were heralded as the second coming when they first came out, and then as the dawn of a new age of idiocy later on.

When and where did this happen? The only common complaints I've seen are the length and the cutting of what happened to Saruman. I know I still like them, and I'm curious to know who's complaining about them on a large scale.

 

[DominantGiraffe]

10/10 is a perfect score, not a perfect product, since a perfect product can not be made. you see judges in the olympics handing out perfect scores once in a blue moon; there's certainly someone who could have done the dive / ran the marathon / hurled the pole better, but they feel justified that the flaws were completely overshadowed by the success.

 

[Joeshie]

Game reviewers throw out perfect scores so often nowadays that 10's have lost any significance. Scores are WAY too top heavy.

"IGN gave *insert hyped game here* a 10? I would be more surprised if they didn't."

 

[haruvister]

..."Lord of the Rings" films were heralded as the second coming when they first came out, and then as the dawn of a new age of idiocy later on.

When and where did this happen? The only common complaints I've seen are the length and the cutting of what happened to Saruman. I know I still like them, and I'm curious to know who's complaining about them on a large scale.

LOL, this was news to me too. If anything, the intelligence and breadth of Jackson's LotR raised the bar for future blockbusters.