Poll: Is "average" a five or a seven?

[Floppertje]

depends on who's doing the reviewing. the stars system they use here works pretty well as far as I can tell. the primary gaming mag here though... not so much. they claim to give honest marks based on how much fun they had with it, but... well I can't be arsed to look it up again but they gave marks that made quite a few eyes roll out of their sockets when I posted it here.
for me, average is 7, (you know, it looks okay and it plays okay but doesn't do anything really special.)
6 is sufficient, if only barely, 8 is good, 9 is great, 10 is jesus.

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

I'd say game review scores are inflated.
For games its a disaster if a game gets under 7/10, and for AAA games even 8/10 is pretty poor.

Whereas films rarely receive scores higher than 8/10, if you look at imdb (not perfect but nothing is) on the top 250 films list, there are only 3 films with 9/10 or higher... THREE, compare that to games, i can count at least 40 games sitting on a shelf a few feet away from me that are all 10/10 or 9/10.

Yes they're all good games but when there are 40 ALL with 9/10 or 10/10, you can immediatly see that the games system is almost completely arbitrary and doesnt really do anything other than give the marketing teams something to put in trailers.

Also the fact that its even possible for a game to get 10/10 is pretty ridiculous. There has never been a game that is perfect, EVER, yet there are hundreds of perfect scores for games, even my all time favourite games i couldnt give a 10/10.

 

[Neonit]

back where i live average = 5.5 ((10+1)/2)
and i agree with that

and... well... i think it is not good that most reviewers just put a 7 when "it works". then again, reviews are subjective, and thus trying to make some kind of "central grading system" would be pointless. i for one would fight the system and use letters to grade. or some kind of progressive smiley face. or fruit.

 

[WayOutThere]

>5: Crap
6: Bad
7: Decent or Average
8: Good
9: Excellent
10: AWESOME

It makes no sense that a 5/10 is crap with a 6/10 being bad and a 7/10 being merely decent yet many people believe this. These assertions are incorrect by definition using any sensible interpretation of the ten-point scale. That said, I believe I understand the underlying thinking and it amounts to this "I work/study, my free time is precious". People don't have the time to play a merely alright game so they dismiss anything below a 7. This is understandable and perfectly acceptable. What bothers me is that people believe games below a 7 to be not merely unworthy of their time but to be actually bad games. To properly judge a game's quality the amount of time you personally have to play it can't be taken into consideration because that has nothing to do with how well the game is made. The proper response then to a 6/10 is "It's seems alright but I just don't have the time" not "it's bad" which is untrue by definition.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

5 is average.

Why would you want to waste more than half of the scale on bad games? Wouldn't you rather use half of the scale for the good games so you can better differentiate decent from good, good from great, and great from brilliant? The difference between a 7.5 and an 8.0 isn't that great whereas the difference between a 6.0 and an 8.0 is much more telling.

 

[feeback06]

I'd say 5 is average for me, and a 7 would be more like a small recommendation.

 

[vivster]

in my own scale of rating it's only from 5-9,5 so a 7 is average there
while a 5 is crap but will still be enjoyed by some
so far have nothing encountered that's lower than 5

 

[WolfThomas]

Also was I the only one who thought this was going to be another thread about penis lengths?

 

[WickedSkin]

Also was I the only one who thought this was going to be another thread about penis lengths?

No. We need one of those.

 

[WayOutThere]

Also the fact that its even possible for a game to get 10/10 is pretty ridiculous. There has never been a game that is perfect, EVER, yet there are hundreds of perfect scores for games, even my all time favourite games i couldnt give a 10/10.

An irksomely common belief. By that reasoning it's ridiculous for a game to score two points on a two point scale (essentially a thumbs up or thumbs down) because a 2/2 is a perfect score. In reality, a 2/2 could be a lackluster game simply because a game that, on a ten-point scale, scores a 6/10 would receive a 2/2 on a two-point scale. After all, it's good on the whole which amounts to a thumbs up. Similarly, a game that scores ten on a ten-point scale may score a 96 on a hundred-point scale which is not a perfect score.

 

[Lukeje]

Also the fact that its even possible for a game to get 10/10 is pretty ridiculous. There has never been a game that is perfect, EVER, yet there are hundreds of perfect scores for games, even my all time favourite games i couldnt give a 10/10.

An irksomely common belief. By that reasoning it's ridiculous for a game to score two points on a two point scale (essentially a thumbs up or thumbs down) because a 2/2 is a perfect score. In reality, a 2/2 could be a lackluster game simply because a game that, on a ten-point scale, scores a 6/10 would receive a 2/2 on a two-point scale. After all, it's good on the whole which amounts to a thumbs up. Similarly, a game that scores ten on a ten-point scale may score a 96 on a hundred-point scale which is not a perfect score.

This is why metacritic is misleading; it promotes every score to a percentage thus implying that 10/10 == 100 %, not the truth which is that 10/10 == (95,100] %.

 

[k-ossuburb]

I think they should just dispense with the ratings system entirely. I mean, honestly, do you really pay attention to those? Most of the ones that get amazing scores are usually just pandering to the status quo, like Call Of Duty or something similar. Plus if a game gets a high score on a site, take a look at the banners or pre-review video advertisements, you may notice that the very same game is plastered throughout the site.

I guess my point is make your own decisions and don't treat game reviewers like some kind of authority, they're mostly there to give you consumer advise and let you know the pros and cons of a game before you consider buying it, but the decision to buy it is entirely up to you and if you like a game and you can forgive the flaws then don't skip it just because some reviewer told you not to.

 

[Vykrel]

not really... at least not in the way that games tend to be rated. typically, an "average" game is about a 7. people tend to avoid the games that are rated 5 or lower, even though 5 is technically an average score.

 

[Hamish Durie]

7

now you will notice it everywhere

 

[Prince Regent]

it's a 6 you dummy

Edit: just to be clear I ment dummy in a friendly way. ^^

 

[MasterOfWorlds]

While 5 should be average, considering that almost no one actually seems to give a score below five on even a semi-regular basis, to consider 5 an average is...well, kind of stupid. I've never seen a game get a 1. Then again, my philosophy towards game review scores is essentially, "Screw you, you don't know my taste in videogames." Much the same as movie reviewers, actually. I tend to go by word of mouth, and whether I've seen the gameplay.

As far as movie reviews go, I tend to listen to MovieBob though. Our taste is movies is very similar, although I'm not a fan of comics, so the superhero stuff is only as cool or disappointing as it can be for someone who doesn't know the canon.

 

[Daveman]

Well I'd say five is where the game is equally bad and good, but I'd say games tend on average to be mostly good. So yeah, anything under five is bad and not worth buying.

 

[Timmons]

thats is such a good point, i've been thinking that myself recently, and average score should be 5. i suppose these days, anything less than 50% could be considered bad, or a fail, in that case a 7 would be average for a pass. if you get me