What Our Review Scores Mean
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
3.5 stars equalsTeoes said:
7 out of 10
Half a star equals 1 point
There are 7 half stars in 3.5
7 out of 10
equals
70%
Also 3.5 stars / 5 stars equals 0.7 which is 70%
Please, Please, Please consult your Algebra Teacher, or College Professor is you don't understand.
I'll say it, I'm not a big fan of Sterling. Pundits (i.e. people with opinions about everything) don't impress me, let alone smug pundits (not an insult - he's smugly acknowledged his smugness). Then again I'm not a big fan of centralized power. I've been noticing lately the staff is getting reduced while a chosen few remain in charge of an increasing percentage of the place. Sterling and Chipman have how many shows again? All I'm saying is it doesn't do a lot of good for diversity of opinion. They could use some new blood. But whatever, it's just my opinion. Congratulations.
I understand it just fine, but you should realize that 70% means exactly the same thing to every student as it does to Jim. Though I suspect Jim was a little more accepting of D grade 3/5. They may be passing, but they aren't really acceptable to most.Teoes said:
After a few disconnect from the reviewers I don't really come here for the reviews anymore, but good to know anyway.
I dont think setting a star system with a description for each result being set in stone is that great of an idea. You can have a 2 star rating game (by following those descriptions) that shines in a particular area but is terrible at some others, if you dont care for the parts the game is terrible at then all you have is an opinion for a great game (basicly all niche games fall into this).
And you should know this as you love some rather niche games (the quirky kind).
I made a topic not long ago about the way people interpreted reviews and how it was key to know if the tastes of the reviewer matched the tastes of the consumer.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.832634-Knowing-your-reviewer#20345190
I guess it was well received and to be honest I think its something that people dont take much into account (even though its important as hell).
In the end I think a clear summary on how the reviewer felt about the game making clear where his perspective is coming from is a lot more important then a score.
For example, if a review for Battlefield 4 is made by a guy that doesnt care for multiplayer he really needs to make that clear because you know that a lot of readers do care for the multiplayer and that review wont be aimed at them, its still a valid review for people that only care for singleplayer but for the rest it needs to be clear as water where that perspective is coming from, otherwise they will think the game (multiplayer included) sucks for the wrong reasons.
And you should know this as you love some rather niche games (the quirky kind).
I made a topic not long ago about the way people interpreted reviews and how it was key to know if the tastes of the reviewer matched the tastes of the consumer.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.832634-Knowing-your-reviewer#20345190
I guess it was well received and to be honest I think its something that people dont take much into account (even though its important as hell).
In the end I think a clear summary on how the reviewer felt about the game making clear where his perspective is coming from is a lot more important then a score.
For example, if a review for Battlefield 4 is made by a guy that doesnt care for multiplayer he really needs to make that clear because you know that a lot of readers do care for the multiplayer and that review wont be aimed at them, its still a valid review for people that only care for singleplayer but for the rest it needs to be clear as water where that perspective is coming from, otherwise they will think the game (multiplayer included) sucks for the wrong reasons.
Dear Jim,
Let me get to it right away: Just don't get carried away by one aspect of the game that particularly irks you in a way that makes you overlook all the human effort and other overarching achievements of the program. After all a game is a computer program that is trying to convey emotion, and while both seem to be on different lobbies in the human brain and popular opinion, both are incredibly hard work.
I've seen some of your reviews where you get fixated upon a particularly jarring aspect that jumps at you, that while valid, eloquently expressed and cleverly mocked, it eclipses the rest of the experience (and review) and polarizes the final score. It makes for good, quality comedy and fanboy-ism fuel for the comment section's witch burning, but not so much for a compelling review in terms of garme jurnalizm.
I'm a big fan of your Jimquisition video-column, your opinions are well versed and intelligently presented. I've always liked the way you side with consumers over corporations, even with low income consumers rather than rich gamers that can have it all. You've always stuck with the people, and that's the main reason I'm a fan of your editorial. You seem to be morally righteous and unfaltering, and that is admirable. My small caveat with some reviews is that sometimes they feel a bit too passionate and not as fair as they could be. That is something to consider for a review editor.
Let me get to it right away: Just don't get carried away by one aspect of the game that particularly irks you in a way that makes you overlook all the human effort and other overarching achievements of the program. After all a game is a computer program that is trying to convey emotion, and while both seem to be on different lobbies in the human brain and popular opinion, both are incredibly hard work.
I've seen some of your reviews where you get fixated upon a particularly jarring aspect that jumps at you, that while valid, eloquently expressed and cleverly mocked, it eclipses the rest of the experience (and review) and polarizes the final score. It makes for good, quality comedy and fanboy-ism fuel for the comment section's witch burning, but not so much for a compelling review in terms of garme jurnalizm.
I'm a big fan of your Jimquisition video-column, your opinions are well versed and intelligently presented. I've always liked the way you side with consumers over corporations, even with low income consumers rather than rich gamers that can have it all. You've always stuck with the people, and that's the main reason I'm a fan of your editorial. You seem to be morally righteous and unfaltering, and that is admirable. My small caveat with some reviews is that sometimes they feel a bit too passionate and not as fair as they could be. That is something to consider for a review editor.
I'm really looking forward to this, the Escapist reviewing always did a pretty decent job, but mainly in the more 'If it functional? Is it fun?' style of things (indie games being the big exception). I'm hoping you'll be the perfect guy to bring in that touch of personality/insight that might make them more unique
Wonderful first article on the escapist. I always loved your reviews on Destructoid, and this will continue onto the Escapist. Will it be slightly weird for you going from the 20 point scale that Dtoid had with the .5s to the 10 point scale that Escapist has? Anyways, excellent news that you are here!
I don't have a HUGE amount of time to address everything right now, sorry. The week has been hectic, as I am sure you can understand. To briefly answer a couple things:
1. The scale is not up for debate at this time. I know this system works.
2. Yes, I will be writing reviews. My first review for the site will be Ratchet & Clank: Into the Nexus.
3. The Jimquisition persona is a exaggerated portrayal of myself. Those of you worried based on only seeing my videos will learn that game critic Jim is a lot less about the smugness and much more about the games. Game reviewing is what I do. I don't fuck around with it.
Thank you for the warm welcome, most of you! <3
1. The scale is not up for debate at this time. I know this system works.
2. Yes, I will be writing reviews. My first review for the site will be Ratchet & Clank: Into the Nexus.
3. The Jimquisition persona is a exaggerated portrayal of myself. Those of you worried based on only seeing my videos will learn that game critic Jim is a lot less about the smugness and much more about the games. Game reviewing is what I do. I don't fuck around with it.
Thank you for the warm welcome, most of you! <3
It is not a need for me. It is a want.hentropy said:
I use scores because I like them, not because I have to use them.
good luck Jimothy. Hope your stint on the Escapist is long and fruitful.Jimothy Sterling said:
Edit. Any chance you could convince the powers that be to create a mobile Escapist website with SD video that doesn't require Flash?
Congrats, my good man. Super happy that I'll still be able to read your reviews, although it'll take me a little while to get used to seeing them here, rather than on Destructoid.