Why do most games never get below a 7? EDIT: And how to we fix it?

[Who Dares Wins]

We fix it by having a four star rating system which also include half stars (eg. 3 and a half stars)

P.S. I haven't thought this through, I just wrote the first thing that came to my mind.

 

[veloper]

If I had my way, I suppose all reviews would work off a Zero Punctuation style that completely abandons numbers. However, I realize that practicality demands that sometimes we just be able to look at a number and make a decision.

Anyone have any thoughts on this? How do we solve this problem?

For any major release reviewed on the big gaming sites and for the aggregate score metacrit, convert the range 7 to 10 range to a 5 to 9 range.
Triple A titles rarely get less than an 8, maybe a 7.5, but such titles are also rarely worse than mediocre.
Now if mediocre is a 5 and games can only come close to perfection (9), you have a reasonable score system again. So you can do this stuff yourself.

That or read the reviews themselves. Often the descriptions within are less positive than the score.
With publishers paying for having their adds on review pages and with mags requiring early review copies, the only place where a game journalist can maintain some integrity, is deep within the review and not at the bottom line.

It depends on the reviewer; find people you can agree with based on their reviews of games you already played yourself.
It also depends on the mag. Destructoid is still critical on occasion (but not always), even with the scoring.

 

[random_bars]

That's why I like this site: http://www.split-screen.net/

They actually use the /10 rating system properly, with 5/10 meaning 'average'. I'm sure there's other sites out there that do the same.

 

[MrGalactus]

Because people throw 10's around like they're expected, rather than enjoyed.
Bulletstorm got a 10 from GR
Undead Nightmare got a 10 from IGN
GTA4 got a 10 from Xplay.
Standards are too low, really, and we let hype skew too much of what we experience.

 

[Auxiliary]

There is one very big problem with this scoring system and that is that there is no detailed system which explains the points given. If you get a 3.0 on a test your teacher will most likely show you a sheet of paper as to how you got to that score. 5/5 for spelling, 10/10 for proper answer and so on.

With games this is obviously a bit harder, because you would have to argue which aspects of the game are more important and if in example a great story makes up for mediocre visuals. So just saying you can earn 1/10 if you have perfect visuals and 2/10 if you have perfect visuals and a great story is quite hard to defend.

This is why I prefer sites which have a simple list which rates a game on several points. Scoring the visuals, sound, gameplay, story and other gameaspects seperately and then giving a total score based on the sums of those. If the total sum seems low at least I can see which aspect of the game caused it to be low.

 

[TehCookie]

I think they take it from the grading scale where 70 = C = average. And just like most parents gamers want their games to get As or Bs because Cs aren't good enough for them. Any game that's 5 or below would simple be unplayable/failing.

What kind of parents do you have? I was always told that a C was a pass.

Think of the average American and how smart they are. My parents wanted me to be better than that. Even if you think grades don't represent intelligence, they also represents work ethic and responsibility.

 

[7amurai]

Of course qualitative assessments are the best if you're deciding whether you'd like a game you haven't played yet, but in terms of an at-a-glance number I find the rotten tomatoes system to be best. Simply take a pool of reviews (to smooth out personal preference and bribery) and assign each a pass/fail based on that review sites average score (based on past scores, not the average of the scale). If the game gets over 60% you can generally assume it does what it attempts to do well.

 

[Atmos Duality]

"Why do most games never get below a 7?"

1) Stagnation and lowered standards, really. Games haven't been improving, but rather, they have become less distinct as time goes on. Besides, these scores aren't all that important in the grand scheme of things. Think about how ludicrous it is where the difference between a smash hit title and a generic knockoff is only 2 bloody points.

"How do we fix it?"

2) We don't. Instead, the best course of action is to ignore a scoring system entirely.
Explaining qualitative statuses with quantitative methods is meaningless marketing tripe. Scores are generally only used as marketing points stamped on the ass of the box, usually if it reaches "best seller" status. Addressing the specific strengths, weaknesses, or other features of a game is a much better way to gauge whether one should purchase it or not than an arbitrary numeric score.
No matter how you argue it, plain numbers cannot account for personal taste or the specific nuances of a particular title within its genre; details can.

 

[TehCookie]

I think they take it from the grading scale where 70 = C = average. And just like most parents gamers want their games to get As or Bs because Cs aren't good enough for them. Any game that's 5 or below would simple be unplayable/failing.

What kind of parents do you have? I was always told that a C was a pass.

Think of the average American and how smart they are. My parents wanted me to be better than that. Even if you think grades don't represent intelligence, they also represents work ethic and responsibility.

To who? No university will care if you get a C because at the end of the day you receive a testamur when you graduate and five years from graduation, that will be the only piece of paper that will matter. Nobody will ask about what grades you got.

Where do you live? Where I'm from universities won't let you in if you have bad grades, and employers are more likely to hire you if you're from a better university.

 

[Sn1P3r M98]

I think they take it from the grading scale where 70 = C = average. And just like most parents gamers want their games to get As or Bs because Cs aren't good enough for them. Any game that's 5 or below would simple be unplayable/failing.

This is honestly the best answer I've read here so far, though I do still agree that many games these days are being rated higher than they should get credit for.