Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Rating standards?
BadSpock
Member UncommonPosts: 7,979
So everyone and their mother has been doing TOR previews, op-eds, and reviews (even me!)
Everyone uses a different scale, a different metric, and because of that the numbers people assign don't really have any meaning do they?
Perhaps before another review/op-ed/preview is written on this site, we as a community establish a set of standards of which we use to assign numerical value to different aspects of a game.
Numerical or alphabetical?
5 point or 10 point scale?
I feel a 5 point scale, either numerical or alphabetical (ABCDF) is too limiting.
10 point scale is more appropriate.
Thoughts?
Comments
none, no one is impartial enough to rate fairly
and one persons experience and previous experience (which does become a vital factor) will be different to the next
I agree a 10 point scale is more appropriate. But, when it comes to logic nowadays, when you do this scale 7 becomes the average or middle ground score. And if your gonna do that then it seems easier for some to understand a 5 point system.
5:A Great
4:B Good
3:C Average/Okay
2:D Bad
1:F Forget it
With so many 10 point scales being skewed, this seems more logical, even though I'm still completely in favor of the 10 point scale!
My guess is that no will bother to read what we come up with and those that do won't bother to follow it.
Still, it's a valiant effort. 10 point systems end up having the bottom 3-4 ranks completely ignored, so 5 point system is better imo. Especially given that those that are LIKE REALLY REALLY REALLY torn, can always go with a 3.5 instead of 4
More important is what the numbers mean. I haven't really bothered to rank the game numerically myself, but regardless of the system, i would ask myself for every feature:
1. CAN it realistically be done better? If the answer is yes, then it can't have the highest possible mark.
2. HAS it actually been done better by competition? If the answer is yes, again it can'thave the highest possible mark.
There are a lot more questions that I ask myself when i assign these types of rankings.
We're in the day and age where "new" MMOs aren't coming out. What we're getting is slightly adjusted copies of existing MMOs. As such, i except each of those copies - at the very least - to be better than the original.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
I know it's most likely an exercise in futility, but I for one see all these reviews and all these random numbers and none of it carries any weight without standards by which to compare to.
I didn't even use numbers in my preview and op-ed piece for this very reason.
Perhaps with a sticky from the mods and a clearly defined rating system at the top of this board people would pay attention?
I wouldn't mind it but for a certain mass on these forums, if we did something like that then we would be forcing everyone down a linear / cookie cutter / themepark path on how to rate games. And then we would have rage quits and DIAF messages and babies being punched and yada, yada, yada.
In all honesty I like what your doing, cause it would be nice to get it on an even playing field. I just think that negativity and someone is always getting the short end of the stick far out weigh logic and common sense around here at times.
People ignore the dumbass rules here anyway, so what makes you think that? I've seen you around this forum for years so I figure you'd know that by now lol
I don't like scores because of that.
They draw the attention, often making it so the rest of a pre- or review goes down the drain and there is no real standard by which a game gets a score, only a subjective placement relative to other games that particular person played and did or did not enjoy.
Some review sites, like eurogamer, do have a scale, but it's still up to the state of mind of the individual reviewer.
I know that big sites need to offer scores because people want to know something by just taking a quick glance, but using taglines to describe the game would be much more effective imo.
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
Maybe it's me... but I prefer a scale that's similar to CAG's scale which is basically a 1-5. What I like underneath it though is a MSRP v. actual valued price.
Basically, is this game worth my $60 bucks? Or is this game something I should catch on sale? (like 10 bucks off) Or is this game something I wait for for like a Steam sale (75%)?
My issue is on a 1-10 scale... the average developer will NOT score below a 5. It just never happens. Just like I feel like a 10 should be nigh unattainable. So what that means is that EVERY game scores somewhere roughly 5-9. Well that is just as limiting as the 1-5 scale. You find that games often get 7-8's. That doesn't mean their BAD games, but it also doesn't mean that they have the ZOMG MUST BUY factor.
wont matter really, give it a 5 or a 10 this is still going to be the biggest launch ever, after waiting for 3 years cant believe there is only 2-3 weeks to start playing
I'd say due to the fact that the 1-10 scale has been skewed the 1-5 scale will likely work better.
My theme song.
Reviews professional or not will always be subjective to personal taste, as well as a personal threshold for issues experienced. Look at any review for any game and you'll see the same feedback you see toward the player reviews here. Some will agree, some will pick apart every score, some will rage because it's not scored good or bad enough.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Since we are dealing with people's opinions here, a scale is mostly useless. I'm more interested in the reasons why people have the opinions they do than some arbitrary number assigned to it.
A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.
share my oppinion with the OP here
The only things that can actually be assigned a value that has meaning are graphics and performance. The rest is just opinion.
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe. - Carl Sagan
5 point scales seem to work better, you can always ad decimals if you want to basically use the 10 scale system ( like giving it a 4.5 would be a 9 on a 10 scale.)
The problem with most reviews is that they: 1. don't go deep enough to give a accurate review, 2. only played 1 weekend. 3. either only played 1 class far, or played a bunch of classes very little. 3. people writing reviews don't have the training or skills to write an indepth review even if they have been playing for a long time and played multiple classes since beginning.
Heck, even most critics suck because they are simply out of touch with the population that would want watch or play these games. I would be a terrible critic for fighting games for instance because I only like a rare few of them.
A good critic is like Zero Punctuation; he breaks down all of the games flaws and then states if he over all liked or hated the game, and will even admit that their are certain parts of games he is biased against (multiplayer/online games mostly.)
I prefer the old fashioned out of 100%