A question of scores.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Wetall_basic
Wetall_basic

4086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Wetall_basic
Member since 2003 • 4086 Posts
Let me start by saying I'm not trying to belittle Gamespot,or it's review system. Also I'm asking this question here because I want to hear other users points of view,rather than in the Ask Gamespot section. If it's still the wrong topic area,please direct me.

Alright,so heres the thing, Gamespot has a total of a score system from 0 to 10 right? Than why,do games no longer get the coveted "Perfect"? Well,thats simple,no games are perfect,and the games that were rated as such where from the system of old. So,that leaves a score that is impossible to obtain,simply because of the title it donates,"Perfect" I realize the actual title is "Prime" but still users simply look at it as a perfect score,therefore a perfect game.

Unfortunately this leaves a large gap,as a game pretty much never receives this score and is always left with the second best of 9.5. Not in anyway a bad score,infact its become the new perfect,without all those pesky numeral connotations of the number 10 being top dog.

So,what am I trying to say? I think its time games started getting their "Prime" title and letting the users know its not a game that perfect or even the best game ever,its just really,really,good. Now,I'm not saying give games the title 'just because' but rather stopping this stigma of a game getting the top score being a once in a decade thing,it happens that there are great games that might just be good enough for the title.

I don't base this on any particular game,though the recent influx of games has brought it to my attention including Crysis a game that,why not perfect might just has been rightful to the new age of scoring here at Gamespot. I don't hold any particular affection for the game,maybe if I had the system to support it perhaps,but its still a game wildly regarded as a really great game,and even revolutionary,as stated in Gamespot's own review. I mean the negatives are simply emphasizing the game's strengths,and if that dosen't denote a 10 I can't see what does.

So,in summary,for those who don't wish to read the entire section; I believe game should be able to obtain the "Perfect" 10 here at Gamespot,that they deserve the CHANCE to get the score,not because they are the best games ever,but because the 10 score is a symbol of what a really good game is,and should at least get some use.

Anyway,these are my opinions,and I'm not trying to tell Gamespot what to do or how to do it. As for the rest of gamespot,what are your opinions on the perfect 10? I hope I'm not the only one that thinks this way. Thanks for reading!
Avatar image for ebbderelict
ebbderelict

3992

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 173

User Lists: 0

#2 ebbderelict
Member since 2005 • 3992 Posts
Myself, I think 10 is too high a score to have, let alone allowing .5's in the mix. Because really if you can award half scores you're essentially looking at 20 possible numbers to rate a game. I think each score should have a more defined role to them, with less room for interpretation. Your actual review should provide the explanation for the score, and details of your experience.
Avatar image for Wetall_basic
Wetall_basic

4086

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Wetall_basic
Member since 2003 • 4086 Posts
I like the 10.5 system,as It does exactly that,gives a more defined score,rather than say a five star system which leaves you wondering what exactly a 3 represents. As for the reviews they tend to give adaquit explanation towards the score given. At least here.
In anycase the written review is the best part,and the scores are more of a quick look into what the reviewer's thought of the game.
Avatar image for LordAndrew
LordAndrew

7355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#4 LordAndrew
Member since 2005 • 7355 Posts

It has previous been stated by GameSpot staff members, that the "perfect" 10 score is still attainable, and that there just hasn't been one deserving of the score in a long time.

With all the amazing games coming out this year and next, we could see another 10 very soon.

Avatar image for nopalversion
nopalversion

4757

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 nopalversion
Member since 2005 • 4757 Posts

Myself, I think 10 is too high a score to have, let alone allowing .5's in the mix. Because really if you can award half scores you're essentially looking at 20 possible numbers to rate a game. I think each score should have a more defined role to them, with less room for interpretation. Your actual review should provide the explanation for the score, and details of your experience.ebbderelict

I agree with the above. Games are not really graded, they are rated. Detailed ratings just invite comparisons. I mean, I rememberforumites that weresupporting their arguments basedonwhether a gamegot 9.5 or 9.6. As long as it is a "class 9" game, who cares, really.

Avatar image for Archangel3371
Archangel3371

44140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#6 Archangel3371
Member since 2004 • 44140 Posts

It has previous been stated by GameSpot staff members, that the "perfect" 10 score is still attainable, and that there just hasn't been one deserving of the score in a long time.

With all the amazing games coming out this year and next, we could see another 10 very soon.

LordAndrew

Yeah I think there will be one eventually as well. Honestly though for me a 9.5 here is practically a 10 anyway so personally I find that the .5 gap makes very little difference.