• 92 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Pleasureizmine (2136 posts) -

with the 5 starts? I do not it seems kinda casual, I would like to see something like IGN/GS old review system 1 - 10 with .1 incrimetns.

#2 Posted by sdodd02 (722 posts) -

It's okay, it works.

#3 Posted by Guiltyspark (554 posts) -

eww , its casey wegner , how fucking disgusting

#4 Posted by Pleasureizmine (2136 posts) -

sad face

#5 Posted by tec3297 (1170 posts) -

I personally like the review system. I think that it gives a good sense of If I will like a game or not.

#6 Posted by Dairyman (74 posts) -

I like it.  And absolutely not to the .1 increments.  It's pointless; what's the significant difference between 8.5 and 8.6?  And anything below a 5 is basically not worth playing, so half the review scale is useless.  The smaller the better, I say.

#7 Posted by AnTiPRO (93 posts) -

I don't see anything wrong with it at all...It's pretty straight forward and to the point.

#8 Posted by InnerBlueAbyss (125 posts) -

I think 5 is better because you need to seriously need to think about how significant a single point or star really effects the final outcome of the review.

#9 Posted by Kevin (369 posts) -

I can see advantages and disadvantages on both sides, but Jeff's explanation works for me. He doesn't need 10 different ways to says this game rocks or this game sucks. It works for what it provides, plus the actual written review definitely helps more than the .1 system other places have.

#10 Posted by SamuraiBudgerigar (129 posts) -

The actual text review suits me better. I know more about the game and it's problems by reading it than I would by being told how many stars it got.

#11 Posted by BlackWaterCO (1574 posts) -

I love it

#12 Posted by Guiltyspark (554 posts) -
CaseyWegner said:
"sad face
"

how many people did you ban at GS

Give us an honest number

And just for giggles tell us how many you banned out of boredom
#13 Posted by RustyScrew (72 posts) -

Yeah, it's really easy to understand which games are good and which are not.

#14 Posted by DogManStar (7 posts) -
Guiltyspark said:
"eww , its casey wegner , how fucking disgusting "
Come now, be nice. The mods over at GS have rubbed most of us the wrong way at one time or another, but we're all equal here. So please stay respectful.
I agree, I don't like the scoring system. I don't think it should go to .1 increments, but a score out of 5 with half-star increments would be welcome.
#15 Posted by Pleasureizmine (2136 posts) -

I am not allowed to talk a about that... you must be one of them please consult on ask the mods forum.....

#16 Posted by Alex_V (615 posts) -

I like it. Actually I'm less keen on half-stars. I think once you get away from very simple rating systems, the whole thing gets ludicrous. You get people arguing over 1% or .1 of a mark, which is just silly. With 5 stars I know exactly where I am, and the whole thing doesn't get bogged down in debate. For example I'm pretty sure everybody would agree that GTA4 is a 5-star game - why worry about whether it's a 4.8 or a 4.9 or a 5.0? What would it mean if it was a 4.8?

#17 Posted by niall077 (104 posts) -

it gets the job done

and the 5 point scale should stop syatem fanboys fighting over scores..... for now

#18 Posted by Bilawal (109 posts) -

I would like it to have 10 because some people want to know what game is better than what, but jeff's explanation brought me so yeah.

#19 Posted by AndrewGaspar (2419 posts) -

I prefer the new system. Fighting over fractions of points is silly. With this five point system, it's easy to tell where each game falls, as opposed to Gamespot's twenty point system and IGN's one hundred point system.

Guiltyspark said:

"CaseyWegner said:
"sad face
"

how many people did you ban at GS

Give us an honest number

And just for giggles tell us how many you banned out of boredom "

and lol
#20 Posted by Tovan (633 posts) -

I like it, it's simple and easy to tell which games are good or not. There really isn't a need for fancy review scores, the point of a review is really just to tell if it is worth the time and money, and pretty much any system can do that.

Online
#21 Posted by WorldsFastestShrimpPeeler (458 posts) -

i like it alittle more than number scoring system.

#22 Posted by Kenzo287 (722 posts) -

I don't think it should matter since scores suck anyways. Just read the reviews.

#23 Posted by Otacon (2209 posts) -

I really love the new review system, theres no nitpicking with scores and it puts more focus on the actual review.

#24 Posted by Jechtshot78 (42 posts) -

I think it is a correct way to parody the laughable 1-10 system. Tell me, what is the difference between a 8.3 and an 8.4? What makes the latter any better than the former? And how can you tell?

1up is the only one who seems to be doing it right IMO.

#25 Edited by SmAsH (234 posts) -

Man, Casey you are going to receive a lot of flak here. And come on guys/gals, no need to be rude, what happened at GS is in the past and stays at GS, this is a new site, and we all need to just...show some love for one another :D

 On another note, yeah I really like the review system, easy to use, and you can even give .5 increments to the 5 star system which is a plus (+) I've done two reviews already, and can't wait to get cracking at more!

#26 Posted by Guiltyspark (554 posts) -
CaseyWegner said:
"I am not allowed to talk a about that... you must be one of them please consult on ask the mods forum.....
"

why dont you post at SW.com anymore :-*
#27 Posted by JayJay (29 posts) -

I like it. Much better than a numerical figure. I feel that 100% or 10/10 imply that a certain game is perfect. And no game is perfect. (No, not even GTA4/MGS4 :P)

Its hard to explain but the star method is more like a recommendation: i.e. 5 stars = You have to own this game, 4 stars = Still very good, you might not want to miss this, 3 stars = Maybe worth a rent first?, 2 stars = Maybe if you have nothing better to spend your money on and 1 star = Avoid. A bit simpler than the numerical method.
#28 Posted by Pleasureizmine (2136 posts) -

including ban dodgers which get caught in the queue probably about 15 a day with 2 being regular leveled posters.

#29 Posted by kratos (208 posts) -

I love this system much more it not such an exact process it's closer to movie reviews which makes more sense.

#30 Posted by Gary_Jinfield (84 posts) -

I prefer the use of .1 increments as well, thanks to the ability to provide a more exact and unique score for each product.

#31 Posted by piecat (384 posts) -

I think the system works just fine. Its stressing that the score isn't the important part, but the actual text is.

#32 Posted by Guiltyspark (554 posts) -
CaseyWegner said:
"including ban dodgers which get caught in the queue probably about 15 a day with 2 being regular leveled posters.
"

holy shit i love you
go post at SW.com , everyone misses you
#33 Posted by logson (521 posts) -

A five point system gets us away from fanboys arguing "MY GAME GOT A 9.7, AND YOU'RE GAME GOT A 9.6. SUCK IT FOOLS!" Also, their explanation for the 5 star system on the "help" page almost makes it seem silly to have more than a 5 point scale. If you want to see a 100 point scale attached to a game, check out metacritic.

#34 Posted by BoldFusion (34 posts) -

They won't do scores with .1 increments. That's what Jeff and the other staff members did away with on Gamespot. But it would make me happy if they did.

#35 Posted by Nightkiller93 (174 posts) -

I like it,it's a lot easier to understand than a numerical rating system.

#36 Posted by roofy (1005 posts) -

i totally understand the reason they went with the 5 star rating but im still stuck in the 1 to 10 scale. i think something like the OXM scale where it goes in increments of 0.5 would be welcome. but to be totally honest... i dont think they care what we think. A couple of people disliking the rating system wont change their minds

#37 Posted by Pleasureizmine (2136 posts) -

to much salt was being thrown in my game.... It was getting was then GS i rarely post anywhere fore I always get accused of being a rabid fanboy...

#38 Posted by Guiltyspark (554 posts) -

CaseyWegner said:

"to much salt was being thrown in my game.... It was getting was then GS i rarely post anywhere fore I always get accused of being a rabid fanboy...
"

who cares what other people think , anybody that can ban that many people is a fucking god in my books

you should post at SW.com ,  everyone is welcome there , even the most epic retarded fanbots

#39 Posted by MrTea (33 posts) -

I think six stars would be perfect, the sixth star would be for the most exceptional games like Ocarina of Time, or maybe GTA IV for some people (like this: Perfect, very good, good, mediocre, bad, very bad), and I would like to know what the other editors think about the game, for example Brad really likes The Force Unleashed, but Ryan seems to think otherwise, so if Brad reviews the game it might get a good score and review, but I still want to know why Ryan doesnt like it.

#40 Posted by Pleasureizmine (2136 posts) -
Guiltyspark said:
"

CaseyWegner said:

"to much salt was being thrown in my game.... It was getting was then GS i rarely post anywhere fore I always get accused of being a rabid fanboy...
"

who cares what other people think , anybody that can ban that many people is a fucking god in my books

you should post at SW.com ,  everyone is welcome there , even the most epic retarded fanbots


we will see >_>
#41 Posted by Sentry (4197 posts) -

It's better with 5 stars. Do you really need to know EXACTLY how much the games review is? Seriously? 83.59? Come on...

You either want to buy the game, rent the game, or neither. 5 stars is great.

#42 Edited by JamesM (209 posts) -

My feeling is that increased precision merely exaggerates the illusion that quality can be measured numerically. The five-point scale gives enough precision to express broad sentiments ("this is great", "this is good", "this is OK", etc.), but doesn't have any pretence of sorting everything into a hierarchy. The more granulated you make the scale, the fewer people each score will be right for. You could argue that reviews should describe the editor's views rather than attempt to predict the audience's, of course. But that's a different discussion.

God, I'm really talking like a ponce today.

EDIT: An interesting side-effect is that people are more reasonable with smaller scales. Sixty per cent is generally considered to be pretty bad, unless you've got some special reason to be interested (a fan of the franchise, etc.), but three stars could be worth a look, even though it occupies the middle spot. I guess we have a tendency to count down from the top of the scale in what we consider to be appropriate increments. On a 100-point scale, we tend to go for ten-point sets: 100%-90% is excellent, 89%-80% is great, 79%-70% is good, 69%-60% is so-so, 59% and below is pretty bad. Smaller scales force people to spread the top end over a greater portion of the whole thing, which makes sense, because how much does it matter whether a game gets 40% or 20%? Is anyone likely to buy either? Reviews obviously aren't purely buying guides, but the top end seems much more important to me.

I'm sure we've all been over all this stuff countless times already.

#43 Posted by AthleticShark (1224 posts) -

I prefer 1-10 system without the points. 5 stars really is not enough to tell whether the game is really worth it or not. i mean 2 stars could be like a 6 or something. i really dis like .1 incriminates though, makes it to complicated.

#44 Edited by brew (47 posts) -

I wish they would use half stars too. Something doesn't sit right with me when they give Codemned 2 and BF BC 5 out of 5 stars.

#45 Edited by chulomex3_basic (16 posts) -
Let's use the Casey system instead.

It's based on a scale of 1 to 10 Ramzas.
#46 Posted by Pleasureizmine (2136 posts) -

exactly anything 8-10 is the same with the 5 starts >_>

#47 Posted by HipHopHitler (59 posts) -
brew said:
"I wish they would use half stars too. Something deosn't sit right with me when they give Codemned 2 and BF BC 5 out of 5 stars. "
It just means that you should really check this game out, not that it is perfect in any way: they have it all laid out in their "Help" page. 
#48 Posted by matthewk (2 posts) -

The star system works fine. It's clean and simple, there is no need to have 1-10, what does 6.5/10 really mean, the exta .5 makes a lot of difference?, it ridiculous. The star system is more straight to the point.

#49 Posted by Guiltyspark (554 posts) -
brew said:
"I wish they would use half stars too. Something doesn't sit right with me when they give Codemned 2 and BF BC 5 out of 5 stars.
"

those games are both amazing and fully deserving of those stars
No game is ever perfect , gerstmann has stated this
the 5 stars is based on the worth to the player

5 = you must buy this game

4 = Awesome game people should check out

3= Give it a rent

2 = rent it if you are really interested

1 = Roflmgdao
#50 Posted by Guiltyspark (554 posts) -
brew said:
"I wish they would use half stars too. Something doesn't sit right with me when they give Codemned 2 and BF BC 5 out of 5 stars.
"

those games are both amazing and fully deserving of those stars
No game is ever perfect , gerstmann has stated this
the 5 stars is based on the worth to the player

5 = you must buy this game

4 = Awesome game people should check out

3= Give it a rent

2 = rent it if you are really interested

1 = Roflmgdao