Jimquisition: Hate Out Of Ten

[s0p0g]

Shouldn't the average be like... 5 or something that?

WHAAAAAT?! are you *censored* *censored* a *censored*?! 5/10 = average omg n00b lol 5/10 = 1/10 = toal bullcrap srsly d00d go *censored* your *censored* *censored* and *censored*!!

that being said, thank god for Jim and the truths he speaks. ^^

 

[yellowhead]

Woah, Jim copied the video I made about the same subject a few days ago! =O

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9VolF8ttII&feature=share

I'm glad that i'm not the only one who thinks that fans are incredibly stupid when it comes to good gaming scores.

 

[btenkink]

For a laugh, go watch the pilot episode of Jimquisition, and compare to this one. Master Sterling has hit his stride!

 

[drosalion]

Completely agree.

Over time we've become conditioned to see a 5/10 as terrible, 6/10 as bad, 7/10 as reasonable, 8/10 good, 9/10 great, 10/10 amazing, with anything under a 5 as just not even existing and all being the same level of crap, when really it should be at ~5 that it starts going from reasonble->good.

5 should be the average score really, but nowdays its ~7-8, and it has nothing to do with a higher level of quality amongst the games. Most people wont even consider getting a game that scores less than 7-8 as its seen as bad, maybe even 8.5-9 would be their lower limit.

Really putting a number on a game's rating is pretty nonsensical, but i can understand the need for such a simplistic system. You're definitely right that its us, the gamers, that need to change our perceptions though as its only going to get worse over time, with anything below a 9-9.5 being considered attrocious.

 

[punipunipyo]

As far as I am concern, Batman is right now... a 0/10, simply because I have not played it, and so is GoW3, because I only have a PC, and PS3, but wasn't greedy enough to purchase 360...

It's not about what game gets a 10, or an 8, people need to understand... our standard had gone up for the reviewers... every time a game earns a "10/10", that game had set a new standard, and all games that came after it will have to top that previous "10'/10" to receive that score... as far as I am concern... shooters (1st,3rd) should have their standard hella high, simply because there are so many of them that break our expectation, it's not giving a game a 8/10 that would get me angry... it's simply the other way around... I think a 10/10 is too easily earned these days... I think when an awesome game comes out now days, it SHOULD be compared to past titles that had set standards higher (not necessary the 10/10s) like telling GoW3 people that "hey! when a character takes a cover, there are different variations of animations, poses in Uncharted(I think U1 already have that, THAT should be the new standard for ALL cover based shooters), but Gears 3 simply uses only ONE so as we play, GoW3 feels robotic when we takes cover, and Uncharted simply feels more organic..." things like that is good enough to put GoW3 down for "less than perfect", and the list goes on and on, think, if FF7 comes out today, Would it still receive a 10/10 today? noway! Xenogears totally have better story/battle system, and Kingdom Hearts have better CGs, and FF10 have the summon creatures as playable characters! (I KNOW, these are ALL square RPG/ARPG titles, but that's the point, the standard had gone up over the years!)

 

[Xman490]

All said from the same person who gave Skyrim a 10/10 despite dull-looking characters and what seems to be gameplay very similar to Oblivion gameplay.

I guess I'm making the foolish mistake of comparing game scores with school grades, with 60% being a failure. For example, your 7/10 score for SR3 made me cringe; however, it was not only because of the score, but also because I haven't expected it to have "repetitive" gameplay with "not a lot there", especially in the main campaign. I'll play it with a different mindset, focusing on the sandbox respect-grinding mayhem and not the cliches and disorganization.

 

[beetrain]

For a laugh, go watch the pilot episode of Jimquisition, and compare to this one. Master Sterling has hit his stride!

I can't even bring myself to watch the first couple again...
But the recent ones, particularly since "The Beautiful Irony of PC Gaming", I'm happy to have them on repeat.

 

[veloper]

I have no problem understanding the 8=hate from the crowd.

8 is the new 65%. Very average/mediocre games get a 7 nowadays. 9 is good.

It's just the way the gamemags have inflated scores and the readers have adapted.
It's just that Jim Sterling hasn't inflated his own review scores much, so the misunderstanding is bound to happen.

There can be a valid complaint against a sequel getting an 8 (decent game) instead of a 9 (good game), IF a good case can be made for this sequel being better than it's predecessor which got a higher score.
That's consistency and this should be expected from a good reviewer.

 

[mjc0961]

This is why more sites need to start using 2-5 more often. They'll give out a 1 if it's completely and totally bad (Big Rigs), but other than that I rarely see anything get below a 6 unless someone links to Destructoid or it's a review of Duke Nukem Forever.

Called this years ago.

Plus, the 1-10 scoring system is silly. At the least it should be marked out of 100. There's too much variation between say 80 and 89 for it to be averaged into an 8.

There's too little variation between 80 and 89 to make it worth it. What's the difference between a game that gets an 84 and a game that gets an 85? Nothing? That's what I thought.

 

[Lunar Templar]

people actually pay attention to number scores still? really?

wow ... can we get these people help?

 

[ProtoChimp]

Yeah, it's getting pretty sad. I saw someone complaining about Skyrim not getting higher than a 9 on Gamespot. They said that Gamespot received more "compensation" from Dark Souls and thus a higher score (9.5). WTF?!

Good points. And on the Uncharted front, allow me to mention once more the insanity of the G4 review by Adam Sessler. A 4/5 and the comment board went nuts.

Here's his response to the comments, if you haven't already watched it.

http://www.g4tv.com/videos/55954/sesslers-soapbox-i-hate-numbers/

Why isn't the video working?

 

[999realthings]

It's so true that how much we been spoiled.

 

[Mahha]

This video made me realize something.

It's really depressing.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

This is a thoroughly valid point. But pointing out to idiots that they are being idiotic has the effectiveness of yelling at your scarecrow because it's not keeping the birds out of the field it's not even standing in. The best thing to do is ignore them, and hope for reason. But good luck with that.

 

[chiefohara]

excellent video,

the only point i felt that was left out is the fact that most rabid fanboys are merely petulant 8 year olds and thanks to the anonyminity of the internet we don't always see them for what they are, so their fanboy tempertantrums are given more credence than deserved.

Jim mentioned that most publishers take the reviews seriously and like for any other profession or craft, genuine constructive criticism is worth its weight in gold.

Harsh, well writen reviews will do nothing but good for the hobby we all love.

 

[veloper]

This is why more sites need to start using 2-5 more often. They'll give out a 1 if it's completely and totally bad (Big Rigs), but other than that I rarely see anything get below a 6 unless someone links to Destructoid or it's a review of Duke Nukem Forever.

Called this years ago.

Plus, the 1-10 scoring system is silly. At the least it should be marked out of 100. There's too much variation between say 80 and 89 for it to be averaged into an 8.

There's too little variation between 80 and 89 to make it worth it. What's the difference between a game that gets an 84 and a game that gets an 85? Nothing? That's what I thought.

If a reviewer can consistenly rank a bunch of above average games (but not great) belonging to the same genre, in order of preference, he'll need those percentiles, if he wants to accurately summarize his opinion in a single score.

I like the idea of a reviewer having a very clear insight into what he perosnally likes.

 

[Rumpsteak]

Scores are either too high or too low argh my brain. I wish we could just dump the whole x out of y system and switch to entirely text based reviews.

 

[Comando96]

Shouldn't the average be like... 5 or something that?

Thats the theory... sadly people have forgotten how to count...

(awww @ avatar)

 

[GonzoGamer]

Maybe we need to crank the top review score up to 11.

This vid gets an 8/10...and yes that's a compliment.

I think most every game is overrated so most every game that has gotten a 10 didn't deserve it.

If I were to score the games of this gen, I don't think there is one that would get a 10/10.

Even Fallout 3 (which is arguably my favorite from this gen) wouldn't get one...maybe if it hadn't crashed so much it might have. But that's irrelevant to everyone but me and people with my tastes and pickyness.
I don't see how a number score is relevant to anyone who doesn't personally know the reviewer or their prefrences/tolerances.

I think the backlash just comes from kids who can only afford to get a couple of games every year and don't like being told (even though an 8 is good) that they wasted their money. It's probably the same kids who raved about the game console that had a tendency to spontaneously combust or the reason that so many are such big fans of crap like online pass and gamestop.