Adam Sessler versus Review Scores

[Saltyk]

Wow. He was really upset. He was also very right. I loved how he pointed out a comment that stated that a 9.5 was better than a 9.4 and implied that FPS games are better, and then stated that it was an idiotic statement from start to finish. He seemed to go out of his way to prove that they don't have a bias for PS3 or 360 (we all know it's the Wii they love) [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm] and seemed genuinely upset that people were impugning their integrity.

Honestly, I really like XPlay's rating system of 1-5 and no tenths of a point. Especially considering that most reviewers don't give below a 5 (it's pretty rare) and the fractions of a point doesn't really make much sense in the long run. How much better is a 9.5 than a 9.0 or even a 8.7?

Did anyone else laugh at some of his reactions and statements?

 

[drummond13]

A lot of the problem is that a 4/5 from X-Play is not the equivalent of an 80% on a lot of other reviewer's sites and shows. 4/5 is the score they give games that are good, but not "unbelievably amazing game of the year material". Just like how they give 2/5 to bad games, but 1/5 to Unbelievably terrible games. I would consider a 4/5 from X-play to be the same as any other reviewer giving a game 87-94%. Alas, Metacritic can't really see it this way.

 

[TheCowman]

Like Yatzhee does, "everybody" knows he doesn't like games except Portal and Painkiller.

And Saints Row 2.


Can't forget Saints Row 2.

 

[lacktheknack]

Reviewers should make their interests and values pretty clear and afterwards they can give a rating. Like Yatzhee does, "everybody" knows he doesn't like games except Portal and Painkiller.

But that's just the problem... They come out with their opinions from the start, and people glean dumb things like this.

He dislikes fighting games, JRPGs, strategy games and most driving games. He's a fan of adventure games, FPSs, psychological horror games and stealth games. He likes games in general, he's even sat down and MADE some.

But no, "he hates all games". This is why most reviewers don't make their biases known.

 

[Warlord211]

I vist G4tv.com a lot and I read their reviews all the time. I tend to agree with Adam Sessler almost 100% of the time. I love him on Feedback and Sessler's Soap Box is also great. I actually commented on that review after I read all the stupid fucking fanboy comments. All I said was that pretty much every person on that website is a bitchy little girl. A perfect score and they still aren't fucking happy. Are you fucking kidding me? That is why I come to the escapist for the forums. At least most of us aren't completely retarded.

 

[Titan Buttons]

I definitly Agree with what he says but I am not sure what the rating system should be replaced with because otherwise how will one be able to judge what they like. I think that games should more be judged on generes such as FPS and JRTS having different means behind there scores because the games themselves are so different

 

[Harbinger_]

Am I the only one who can't get the video player to load on the G4 site?

 

[DustyDrB]

I definitly Agree with what he says but I am not sure what the rating system should be replaced with because otherwise how will one be able to judge what they like.

With words. Reviewers tend to be pretty clear on their opinions on games through their writing.

 

[SidingWithTheEnemy]

Like Yatzhee does, "everybody" knows he doesn't like games except Portal and Painkiller.

And Saints Row 2.


Can't forget Saints Row 2.

Yes, you are right, I'm simplifing things a bit.

Reviewers should make their interests and values pretty clear and afterwards they can give a rating. Like Yatzhee does, "everybody" knows he doesn't like games except Portal and Painkiller.

But that's just the problem... They come out with their opinions from the start, and people glean dumb things like this.

He dislikes fighting games, JRPGs, strategy games and most driving games. He's a fan of adventure games, FPSs, psychological horror games and stealth games. He likes games in general, he's even sat down and MADE some.

But no, "he hates all games". This is why most reviewers don't make their biases known.

Yes, you are right, I'm simplifing things a bit.
Why do you have a problem with that? We are in the Escapist's Forum. We all are able to take a look at Yatzhee's reviews. We all know what he likes and what he dislikes. I'm not going to make list. But the thing (you probably missed) is that we know what we can expect from Yatzhee and his crtique.
And - guess what - this works perfectly well for him, he is quite popular and most of us (I simply pressume here) are quite happy with his reviews.

 

[NerfedFalcon]

Reviewers should make their interests and values pretty clear and afterwards they can give a rating. Like Yatzhee does, "everybody" knows he doesn't like games except Portal and Painkiller.

But that's just the problem... They come out with their opinions from the start, and people glean dumb things like this.

He dislikes fighting games, JRPGs, strategy games and most driving games. He's a fan of adventure games, FPSs, psychological horror games and stealth games. He likes games in general, he's even sat down and MADE some.

But no, "he hates all games". This is why most reviewers don't make their biases known.

As far as I know, he also likes games that try and do things differently to everyone else. He even mentioned that as a point in favour of Mirror's Edge, despite slamming it on absolutely everything else...

OT: I never actually watched the video, but as soon as I saw the title I almost immediately thought of Yahtzee saying why he didn't do scores. "You want a number? Okay, how about four? As in, four-k you!" (That's from Mailbag Showdown, if anyone's interested.)

 

[JaceArveduin]

Haven't really messed with G4 in years (no access) but I've forgotten how much I actually liked Adam. Good man with good ideas in a less than good environment.

 

[Still Life]

Adam has been railing against numbered reviews pretty much since he started working. Honestly, I love Adam. I know a lot of people hate him and G4 and X-Play and what-have-you, but the Soapbox is always awesome and while I don't always agree with his reviews, he's always open with his prejudices, which is more than most can say. The hatred of numbered reviews is just another feather in his cap.

I'm not all that familiar with X-Play myself, but Adam's voice was thick with frustration and I can understand why.

IGN's comment sections never fail to amaze me with the sheer amount illegitimate conversation from asshole 'fans'. Even the Escapist has a bit of that going on, though, not nearly as bad. I think a big part of the problem is the way that games are competitively marketed. A good case study of marketing dividing up the loudest and most vocal of morons would be the perceived battle between BF3 and MW3.

 

[Zeh Don]

There's nothing wrong with review scores: the problem is inflated review scores.

When using a 5 Star System, you're breaking down all games into five general categories. Anything below Three stars, and no one is going to bother. Three stars can be fine if the price is right. Four stars are worh your money, and Five stars are the instant classics.
In twenty years time, the 5 Star category will be a treasure trove of the best games of all time. Four will the flawed gems that are still worth playing, three stars will be the cheap fun games, and below that will be forgotten.
It's simple, well defined and works perfectly.

Metacritic uses a 100 point ranking system. You're no longer breaking down games into categories of quality; you're now ranking games. It's essentially a list of games arranged by their quality, with the game on top being the absolute best. Everything beneath that isn't 'the best' and so it creatres problems. Terrible systems like IGNs, which is a 10 point ranking system that allows for decimal points, meaning it's still a 100 point ranking system, will create problems.
Whats the difference between an 89 and a 90? Where do the "good games" stop showing up? 80? 75? 50? It's bloated, inflated and messy. In twenty years time, GTAIV will still have a 98, and possibly best the best games from future generations by sheer math.

And so, problems arise when Publisher-funded reviews give games like Starcraft II a score of 95 and GTAIV scores of unbeatable 100, while games such as Deus Ex and Morrowind scores less than 90.

As for Uncharted 3, I think it's telling when Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 can score a 5 Star review, whiile Uncharted 3 gets docked for 'more of the same'. I guess the cheque didn't clear in time?

 

[UnmotivatedSlacker]

I gotta agree with Sessler, number reviews are pretty lame. I prefer the rating system the spill crew does for movies; Full Price, Matinee, Rental, and Some 'Ol Bullshit. Game reviewers should do something similar.

 

[Leoofmoon]

Its really true but people shouldnt freak out because of a score of a game

 

[Aeonknight]

This is the same idiot who lumps every jrpg as garbage and thinks every fps is a godsend.

His point is moot.

EDIT: Thats Tommy Tallarico I was reffering to, not Sessler, my bad(although I could've sworn hes done that as well, just going "This game sucks because it's a jrpg.). He still reeks douche in my POV for saying anyone who likes Megaman is an idiot.

Oh you're not mistaken. Sessler has a deep loathing of JRPG's, and it's referenced many times in the show (from what I remember.) And you know... it'd be one thing if he just kind of sat quietly in the background and just let that be his stance. I would be ok with him if he did that.

But nope. He's motherfuckin Adam Sessler. He will never pass up an opportunity to slam something he hates, and even fans of something he hates. I can't recall how many times he takes pop shots at the final fantasy fanbase, and then takes his smug little attitude towards the backlash. The guy's a fuckin troll. And I for one got tired of nibbling on his flamebait.

 

[Plinglebob]

Snip

While I agree with everything you say, I think there is one other problem with reviewers and thats of concious & unconcious bias. I'm going to use films as a comparison as thats what I have the most knowledge in. With films, the trusted and respected reviewers have been doing it for a long time and over that time, have come to learn what makes a good film not just in terms of story, but also regarding direccting, cinematography etc. This means its easier for them to have a more objective view regarding a film that while they may not enjoy the story, they still score it highly because its a great example of the genre (for example, 2001: A Space Odyssey).

For game reviewers, they let their personal bias get in the way of a score letting them ignore things about one game while flagging them up as flaws in another. It also means they are less likely to give a big game a bad score. While other reviewers arn't above this (sorry MovieBob, but X-men: 1st Class wasn't that good) its definitely worse in the gaming industry. Hopefully, given another 5-10 years, reviewers will calm down a bit and we'll get a more balanced systems, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

This is the same idiot who lumps every jrpg as garbage and thinks every fps is a godsend.

His point is moot.

EDIT: Thats Tommy Tallarico I was reffering to, not Sessler, my bad(although I could've sworn hes done that as well, just going "This game sucks because it's a jrpg.). He still reeks douche in my POV for saying anyone who likes Megaman is an idiot.

Still, he has expressed his dislike of JRPGs in the past. However, would a bias against something you might like make his points invalid?

Also, I put up a new link for the second video in case the first one didn't work.

 

[Strife2GFAQs]

There are three issues with numbered scoring: objectively quantifying a subjective experience, interjudge relability (bias between reviewers), and clarifying minute differences in scores.

What is stopping people from understanding what is in a written review? You cannot possibly quantify graphics, sound design, or gameplay. They are standalone concepts that defy objective comparison. You can say one game looks better, but HOW does it look, compared to how much BETTER it looks. Humans have this need to name everything, define everything, and put it in a box. When you put a numbered score, you're attempting to define an "experience," not the technical achievement. What's worse is the idea that you can place something on a pedestal for being a "incrementally" better experience. I like Persona 4 more than Persona 3. What would claiming "P4 - 9.8 v. P3 - 9.6" really mean? What makes up that difference? That's what the words in the review are for. It renders the numbers themselves meaningless.
That also doesn't account for the bias either. There's no way to say you're always going to grade everything objectively. It's a balancing act between fandom and experience.

What the discussion amounts to is how much information you can gleam from that shiny number. The reviews thesmelves will tell you "buy, rent, ignore." This insatiable need to rank movies, music, art, and videogames by a ridiculous number is a human condition. People can't seem to accept things at face value. We have to say "Ocarina of Time is better than Link to the Past." by some popular vote or number, rather than say "they are both legendary games that cannot be missed." What if we hated them? We can explain why, but not by numbering them. It would be much easier to go by the basic eating instinct: eat it, or spit it out.

 

[McMarbles]

He speaks the truth.

Maybe once we dump scores, people'll actually listen to REVIEWS.