Jim & Yahtzee's Rhymedown Spectacular: Whine Out Of Ten

[Yopaz]

Personally, I find Yahtzee's method of reviewing to be the most informative: Avoid numbers and ranks and stick to summarizing the central gameplay elements, the mood, the difficulty curve, and the writing (if applicable).

Not having score is the optimal solution, but is that realistic? There is no way everyone would drop the score, and as humans, we like to organize things.

Yeah, scores see to matter more than the review itself. A good deal of us will look at the score before reading the review itself, maybe read the summary and the recommendation and just skim through the review (if that). I also agree with your later post that the system needs an overhaul.

OT: I must say I loved Jim's poem today, mainly because I agree so much with his point. We really show off our worst side when it comes to these things and while we're not all guilty here a good deal of us are part of the argument in one way or another.

Yahtzee's dissonance was also quite hilarious. Great episode this week.

 

[Goliath100]

...Now, it's something that too many institutions depend on. For now, at least.

... [gamers]... react like this when something they like is not praised, in their view, as it should be.

Most gamers know that the scoring system is flawed, if a better system is shown (and sticked to), the comparison over time will force the less one to change (as long it remains an issue). You know, natural selection.

People may still whine, but they will whine for 6.0s and 7.0s, not 10/10, and that is an improvement.

 

[Something Amyss]

Man, I hope that GAV doesn't turn into a thin veneer sort of deal to be scraped off in several months.

Yahtzee gets goofy; Jim gets straight to the point. Love it!

Am I the only one who wants to see them do this live at the Expo?

I want to see them do an EPIC RAP BATTLE instead.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

Wonderful! Just wonderful.

Yahtzee really found a fun way to show what Lundonarrative Dissonance is.

Jim. Thank you! I was trying to think of a good name for the 9/10 complaints. Whine out of ten! XD Ha!
It would be more funny, :/ it the situation it was born from wasn't so sad...

Yahtzee, that was brilliant and hilarious.

Jim, if it's any consolation, there are those among us who don't care about number ratings. We decide what games we like based on gameplay elements and don't get our nuts in a knot over new releases. And we're sickened by those entitled brats just as much as you are.

Don't worry. Jim knows we all care for him.

As for the score stuff. I think the issue is that people are taking the scores as a measure from the reviewer of how "perfect the game is".
For me the message was rather how confident the reviewer was in recommending the game to people.
What I mean is that when they say a game is a 5/5 they don't mean the game is perfect, no game is. Rather, they are saying that they fully recommend people reading the review to buy the game if they are interested.

Then again, MovieBod doesn't use scores, and his reviews for movies are pretty much just him telling you about the movie, and saying if he recommends it. And he still gets people complaining.
Perhaps the issue is more then just the review/review scores, and like Jim says, more an issue with the expectations of some in the audience.

"All scores must be the same, all must be perfect, and we will complain later that you lied to us about how good the game was!"

 

[BrownGaijin]

I'm at a loss with some of these GTA fans - specifically the ones obcessed over GTA V not getting a perfect score on every site. Thankfully I don't have to interact with them.

 

[saxman234]

Personally, I find Yahtzee's method of reviewing to be the most informative: Avoid numbers and ranks and stick to summarizing the central gameplay elements, the mood, the difficulty curve, and the writing (if applicable).

Not having score is the optimal solution, but is that realistic? There is no way everyone would drop the score, and as humans, we like to organize things.

Yeah, scores see to matter more than the review itself. A good deal of us will look at the score before reading the review itself, maybe read the summary and the recommendation and just skim through the review (if that). I also agree with your later post that the system needs an overhaul.

There is no "system", every reviewer does not use the same rating system when reviewing a game. I only dislike scores because people do not use them correctly. Obnoxious people just see the score than go to the forums and complain instead of reading the review. Also, the problem is people not understanding that this is not a grade in school, it is a review score and each website has their own system for what each score means. Some reviewers (such as Jim) like scores, there is no reason he should not be able to give a score to a game. If anything, metacritic is the only problem since it just combines each websites different scoring system. A rotten tomato type website for videogame reviews with just a thumbs up/ thumbs down on a game would be interesting.

Also, another round of excellent poems this week! What a clever way to explain Lugoscababib Discobiscuits and watching Jim curse everyone is great.

 

[Yopaz]

Personally, I find Yahtzee's method of reviewing to be the most informative: Avoid numbers and ranks and stick to summarizing the central gameplay elements, the mood, the difficulty curve, and the writing (if applicable).

Not having score is the optimal solution, but is that realistic? There is no way everyone would drop the score, and as humans, we like to organize things.

Yeah, scores see to matter more than the review itself. A good deal of us will look at the score before reading the review itself, maybe read the summary and the recommendation and just skim through the review (if that). I also agree with your later post that the system needs an overhaul.

There is no "system", every reviewer does not use the same rating system when reviewing a game. I only dislike scores because people do not use them correctly. Obnoxious people just see the score than go to the forums and complain instead of reading the review. Also, the problem is people not understanding that this is not a grade in school, it is a review score and each website has their own system for what each score means. Some reviewers (such as Jim) like scores, there is no reason he should not be able to give a score to a game. If anything, metacritic is the only problem since it just combines each websites different scoring system. A rotten tomato type website for videogame reviews with just a thumbs up/ thumbs down on a game would be interesting.

Except that ratings are used as if there is a system which kinda makes it a system. Take Metacritic, it gathers reviews from sites all over and make an estimate. Metacritic have defined games as great when they've got 90+, good if they got 75-89 and so on.

It generally forces those who review games to conform to this system that you claim don't exist. A game isn't "great" if it doesn't get 90+. This system that DOES exist is the reason why there were no bonuses paid for making Fallout New Vegas. It scored below 90. Sure, there are different standards, there are different scores, there's 0-5, there's 0-6, there's 0-100 and 0-40. It's all shoehorned to fit a system that is broken. If you want to deny the existence of Metacritic or GameRankings take that to the thread about conspiracy theories and give people something to laugh about.

Edit: I realize that I came across as rude here. However the point I am trying to make is that scores have been inflated. 7 should be a good score, but it's not. 9 and 10 have lost meaning because they are being thrown out so often that there's really no surprise if a game scores 10. It puts pressure on game reviewers when anything below 8 is utter crap. The review itself is more important, I agree. We should not treat scores as we do, but we do. It's become a mess and there's really no denying that.

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

Both where excellent this week.

Kudos to Jim. No sugar coating and straight to the point, I salute you.

 

[Evonisia]

All the GTA fans and their crazy demands for perfect scores, unfortunately you got the bile Jim but at least you could make that poem as a result. Luckily for Yahtzee he can avoid this because Zero Punctuation has only given out a score rating once, and it was a joke.

 

[Jandau]

One of the best Rhymedowns to date. Yahtzee's explanation of LND is spot on. That's why I always liked Saint's Row more than other similar games - the main character is in the goofy psycho mode even during the story segments, to the point where others start pointing out that he's a sociopath at best and a monster at worst.

 

[Sheo_Dagana]

Brilliantly done, gentlemen! Both of your sections were equally laugh-inducing this time around.

Yahtzee's poem comes out just in time for GTA V, although I feel like it's poking fun more at GTA IV, which makes more sense considering how a lot of reviewers really tried to hype up Nico Bellic as some sort of sad, sympathetic character. GTA V's characters are incredibly terrible people, but at least they're honest about who they are.

Seriously though, it's not just GTA fans... it's fans of almost every AAA game. Uncharted fans got mad when someone gave Uncharted 3 an 8 out of 10 (extremely generous, I think), Last of Us fans directed their anger at anyone that DARED to give that game less than a 10, and lots of people jumped up Adam Sessler's ass for giving God of War: Ascension a 3 out of 5. Did you give any Call of Duty game a score less than a 10? Well then you're just a CoD-hater

I'll never understand these people.

 

[-Dragmire-]

Bookmarked for repeated viewing.

Great job this week, both were very enjoyable to listen to!

EDIT: I recall Yahtzee writing that, despite his online persona, he's an introvert. His poem must have been very difficult for him to act to. I appreciate the effort put into that performance, it really suited the poem and it's theme.

 

[The Great JT]

Both were quite good. I think I prefer Jim's this week, though, because giving idiots a reality check is something not enough people indulge in often enough. But it's close! Really close, by like a one hundredth of a point.

 

[Matthi205]

Personally, I find Yahtzee's method of reviewing to be the most informative: Avoid numbers and ranks and stick to summarizing the central gameplay elements, the mood, the difficulty curve, and the writing (if applicable).

Not having score is the optimal solution, but is that realistic? There is no way everyone would drop the score, and as humans, we like to organize things.

There is a way around that:
There are parts of a game you can not quantify and asses objectively - such as story and writing, or characters. What one can do, however, is quantify and score parts of a game that can be assessed in such a way - those being graphics, how structurally sound the game is (how little bugs it has), how big the variety of weapons and enemies is, how well it performs on low-end hardware, how many options there are in the options menu and if the FoV is adjustable.
These could easily be calculated down to 1/10 to 10/10 scores each (don't do an average score at the end of the review, it makes no actual sense).

How do we quantify the more subjectively judged parts of the game? Simple, we don't. We write down, with the help of others, what biases we have (At the start of the review of course), and then proceed by writing down exactly what we think about those parts of the game. Then, continuing along and writing down how well we think the individual elements of the game fit together and what emotions they evoked in us. After all of this, we analyse how we think about the overall game aesthetic the game produces through all of its elements in combination, and how this aesthetic differs from similar games in the genre. And in the end, we write the summary, summarising in a few brief sentences what we think of the game and who we feel this game will be most enjoyed by.

 

[EXos]

Absolutly loved both.

 

[saxman234]

snip

Except that ratings are used as if there is a system which kinda makes it a system. Take Metacritic, it gathers reviews from sites all over and make an estimate. Metacritic have defined games as great when they've got 90+, good if they got 75-89 and so on.

It generally forces those who review games to conform to this system that you claim don't exist. A game isn't "great" if it doesn't get 90+. This system that DOES exist is the reason why there were no bonuses paid for making Fallout New Vegas. It scored below 90. Sure, there are different standards, there are different scores, there's 0-5, there's 0-6, there's 0-100 and 0-40. It's all shoehorned to fit a system that is broken. If you want to deny the existence of Metacritic or GameRankings take that to the thread about conspiracy theories and give people something to laugh about.

Edit: I realize that I came across as rude here. However the point I am trying to make is that scores have been inflated. 7 should be a good score, but it's not. 9 and 10 have lost meaning because they are being thrown out so often that there's really no surprise if a game scores 10. It puts pressure on game reviewers when anything below 8 is utter crap. The review itself is more important, I agree. We should not treat scores as we do, but we do. It's become a mess and there's really no denying that.

The New Vegas score issue is a problem with Bethesda. If they will only give bonuses based on Metacritic, then there is something wrong with Bethesda in this situation.

Looking at destructoid review policies http://www.destructoid.com/the-official-destructoid-review-guide-2011-203909.phtml, and gamespots http://www.gamespot.com/misc/reviewguidelines.html, 7 is still good. We are just misinterpreting the scores thinking that 7 is bad. I agree Metacritic is bad, but at the same time it is our fault for putting so much value on Metacritic (I don't care about 85% of the reviewers, so why should this number matter!)

Some of my favorite games, and I am sure some of your favorite games did not get 9/10 from every outlet. I loved Deadly Premonition, and IGN gave that game a 2. I do think 10 has lost meaning, but I don't think anything is deserving of a perfect score. Maybe we are just spoiled with great games right now and we have to decide what to spend our time on!

 

[AuronFtw]

Oh god. This was the single best Rhymedown yet. Two brilliant performances, excellent topic choices.

Keep it up you two!

 

[Formica Archonis]

The jarring contrast of Yahtzee's was clever and funny, but the bluntness of Jim's really spoke to me. Every word was steeped in his frustration and I felt it.

I too work with the public (though in a completely different context) and I know what it's like to be faced with a wall of unpleasable, mercurial idiots who don't even know enough to form their own opinion on something and instead parrot someone else's words like drunks singing doggerel. I empathize completely. If you need an Internet hug, I'm here. (If you need a beer I'm a thousand miles away, so go to the fridge and get it yerself.)

 

[RJ Dalton]

Yahtzee, you made me laugh.

You seem a little angry, Jim. Not that I blame you.

 

[Weaver]

Jim, change it to a 6 just to piss everyone off.