With the reviews they are nice and descriptive but aren't very definite. There really needs to be a score on the to have some proper evaluation on the game as every conclusion seems to be "People who enjoy this genre will really enjoy it" or "Recommended by fans of the genre". It's pretty general and I feel things need to be tightened up and more definite to help the reader also evaluate it.
^ Completely agree with this. We need some kind of definite answer to whether a game is worth purchasing or not. Some of the reviews tend to be rather ambiguous. 10/10 system would be great.
yeah. Blake and I went back and forth on this early on. We decided against early on because most rating systems are crap. I find game reviews systems are too granular. Does a game with a 1/10 graphics (papijump) but a 10/10 gameplay deserve a 5? (simplistic example). And can you really compare something as being a 7/10 vs 8/10? Since the results are generally pretty subjective, I think there is some interpretation to from the reader too. I think a broad recommendation might be the best way - like bad, good, great, must have. arn
I agree, but I think they could change how the stars work. Instead of just having one set of stars 1-5, they should have like 2-4 sets of stars up to 10. example: fun: x/10 graphics: x/10 quality (sound/game): x/10 replayability: x/10 Anyone think that sounds like a good idea? I like it
Yes Maybe you can try the "thumbs up" system or put "wait for price drop" label on the reviews. And yes, I can tell the difference between a 7/10 and 8/10 game...
Simple: Bugdom2 = 8, Nanosaur = 7. They are both quite long and look pretty good but one has a "save" feature. You might disagree but then again, I'm just a regular everyday normal guy so what I say has less power than someone like you thinks of a game...
The game ratings are just fine because I don't think that a personal, subjective opinion can be expressed in numbers.
Lets think of one (And you do not have to combine the scores, just give a scoring for the elements) Marble Worlds 2 Gameplay 9/10 - The puzzle based gameplay works well with the control system and the huge and varied levels keeps the gameplay fresh and intriguing. Graphics 8/10 - Clearly a lot of work has gone into the design with a wide variety of themes and objects throughout the game. Shamefully not all the styles are as striking as others and the Apple UI lets down the overall theme. Sound - 5/10 - No music and there are sound effects but with the constant trickling of water and random sounds it would be best to mute your iPhone/ Lasting Appeal - 10/10 - For £1.79 you would find it very difficult to find another game for the same price with the same length of gameplay this has to offer. The 11 huge levels have their own unique gameplay elements and take on average 20 minutes to complete with a leaderboard and cheats (although as of now it appears that no cheats have been released). Overall - 8/10 - Marble Worlds 2 is a unique game with a unique Pixel Art style and plenty of game to keep you entertained for at least hours, if not days. This game is certainly worth a look for anyone who has an interest in puzzlers and platformers. Could of said more but just thought I would do this to give an idea of the system that could be used to evaluate a review.
I don't agree with this at all, and like the current system just the way it is. The guys at TouchArcade give us a general but detailed overview of the game, and from there I think we're all sensible enough to make up our own minds whether the game's any good or not from their descriptions, and more importantly, from their gameplay videos. Do you really need a mark out of 10 to help you decide whether to buy a game or not? Sheesh, what next? You want your hand held when you cross the street? If you want ratings, then go to the App Store. If you want un-biased opinions, then read the reviews on TouchArcade. Besides which anyway, one man's 8 is another man's 7. For example, I don't like first-person shooter games, and I'm not gonna buy one just because someone gives it a score of 10 out of 10. Or a more real-world example that we can perhaps all relate to: Take the Papi games... Some people here have said they'd rather throw their iPhones in the trash than put a Papi game on it (or something along those lines), whilst others have said they're great fun little games with lots of "replayability". So what score do you give that? Or rather, WHOSE score do you give that? Exactly, you can't. All you can do is to describe the game in detail, how it's played, show off a video, etc. then let the reader make up their own mind. Different readers give different scores. Take the ratings on the App Store: One game will have ratings ranging from 1 star up to 5 stars. Whose rating is the "correct" one? Answer: none of them. Why? Because ratings are subjective, based on opinions, not on facts. We're not marking mathematics exam papers here. There's no right or wrong. Make up your own minds, people...
You seem to think that people take any rating system too seriously. Of course there needs to be an element of opinion as we are all different. The rating is for the game itself, not its genre and how many people are going to like it and everyone has their own thoughts; just because a game is rated highly doesn't mean everyone will buy it because of course that opinion comes into the decision.
I am pretty sure you both aren't understanding the whole point of critics. GOOD critics are usually described as people who excel in the field that they are reviewing or plain and simply have seen enough of it to show off the good and explain the bad. I consider any video game website, a collection of critics who explains their detailed opinion of what a certain game brings to the table.
Dude, you serious? I mean have you actually read some of the reviews on the so called "big gamesites"? Take a look at hmmm lets say Gamespot for example and tell me if you really can take their reviews seriously. Wait I'll answer it for you: No you can't. They're craptastic.
Gamespot are owned by Cnet and Cnets reviews are based on advertising, of course they are craptastic.
I am with Arn, Blakespot, ChillerOne etc on this one. I really don't care if a review site gives one game a five and another 10. I just want to know if they recommend it or not. I gave a score out of 5 for my reviews, but that was based on what the game was trying to achieve and if it does so or needs improvement. But a scoring sytem imo isn't needed at all. Just tell us if the games worth getting- that's the most important thing. It makes me laugh when you have sites/mags that rate out of 100. One game is better than another because it scored 96% compared to the others score of 95%
One of the most respected movie critics in history, Roger Ebert, HATES number ratings, but recognizes them as something necessary in his profession. Personally, for games, I'm finding the reviews here just right. They aren't too long, and they give you the information you need to make a decision. What else do you want? I know in my experience I've really enjoyed low rated games. Back in the days of the Sega Genisis, Herzog Zwei was rated 3s and 4s out of 10 in a well respected game mag of the time and Target Earth was very low as well. Those are two of my favorite games. There's nothing "definitive" about a number rating except it is definitely the view of a SINGLE person. Unless you know that person very VERY well, it's not very useful. The crucial info can only come in an explanation that takes into account subjectivity and the taste of others. That's why I also enjoy the relatively short reviews on this site. It's something I can evaluate quickly.
STP has a four-bucket scoring system for this reason; it's not for comparative purposes, but to tell you at a glance whether (and how much) we recommend a game. To compare two games we've reviewed that have the same score, you're gonna have to read some text... and that's by design
