• 74 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Nawabi (48 posts) -

Well current rating system is ok but stars and grades don't give you that clear picture as opposed to numerical points IMO. Anyone agree?

#2 Posted by SarazinRuin (157 posts) -

Yes it does.

#3 Posted by 10MP (311 posts) -

something like gametrailers would be great.

#4 Posted by Jax (461 posts) -

lol damn 10mp you love gametrailers dont you:? :P

#5 Posted by Axersia (1615 posts) -

No, 5 stars is just fine.

#6 Posted by Funkyhamster (93 posts) -

I like stars more... you can give games perfect scores without feeling silly, and when you give them the equivalent of a 7.0 it still looks fairly positive (as it should).

#7 Edited by Abunai (147 posts) -

Edit : totally misread the topic ._."

I think the 5 stars is perfect.

#8 Posted by AttackedCamo (817 posts) -
Axersia said:
"No, 5 stars is just fine.
"

Agreed.
#9 Posted by Alfredfolds (7 posts) -

I believe numeric systems of any kind don't work particularly well, but it's not like it'll get on my nerves or anything.

#10 Posted by stAtic (1638 posts) -

I like the 5 stars-rating system.

#11 Posted by Johanz (248 posts) -

Stars are fine, but I'd rather have no ratings at all. People are too score inflated, if something doesn't score over 8.0, it's a bad game in their eyes. A review should be enough and help you decide or atleast get a sense of what the reviewer thought. A score should just be a guide-line along with the review. Scores are ruining the industry, just look at Metacritic. It's just statistics and it doesn't mean much, but look at how companies look into that! It's all about the metacritic scores and all that, it prevents good games from being made it they don't score this and that on metacritic, and the fact that metacritic just translates odd scores that don't fit into say 100 points, they just mash 'em into their own 100 point scale.
 
It's just dumb. What happened to common sense anyway? So yeah, less scores! More emphasis on reviews and reading the reviews. Not scrolling by and looking at the score!

#12 Posted by Bladefire (214 posts) -

Ya I think most sites put too much emphasis on the actual number, and in the end a large part of a review is the reviewer's personal preference, leading to vastly different number scores.

#13 Posted by Galiant (2193 posts) -

I prefer the stars, because it gives you a general idea. An impression, rather. When you get into decimals and stuff I start questioning why one game was worth 0.5 points more than the other...

Think of it like this: There will never be a perfect game. But plenty of games with a 5-star rating! If you want details, you should look for them in the text and make your own evaluation, rather than measuring numbers on a decimal scale and basing your own impressions of that.

#14 Posted by TheBeast (1931 posts) -

The review is the most important part of a err... review. Surprisingly enough.
The 'rating' is only indicative of the quality of the game in comparison to other games of similar type, on the same site, by the same reviewer, in the same timeframe. So something as detailed as a points scale system can sometimes be very unfair.
By creating an emphasis on the review and a small rating scale, there's less room for confusion and differences in opinions.

#15 Edited by Nawabi (48 posts) -
Johanz said:
"Stars are fine, but I'd rather have no ratings at all. People are too score inflated, if something doesn't score over 8.0, it's a bad game in their eyes. A review should be enough and help you decide or atleast get a sense of what the reviewer thought. A score should just be a guide-line along with the review. Scores are ruining the industry, just look at Metacritic. It's just statistics and it doesn't mean much, but look at how companies look into that! It's all about the metacritic scores and all that, it prevents good games from being made it they don't score this and that on metacritic, and the fact that metacritic just translates odd scores that don't fit into say 100 points, they just mash 'em into their own 100 point scale.
 
It's just dumb. What happened to common sense anyway? So yeah, less scores! More emphasis on reviews and reading the reviews. Not scrolling by and looking at the score!
"
but the thing is that most people don't have time or patience to read a review to its entirety, they just want to see the score and base their decision on that
#16 Posted by Runk3N (51 posts) -

starts is just fine.. we don't need numbers.

#17 Posted by 10MP (311 posts) -
Jax said:
"lol damn 10mp you love gametrailers dont you:? :P
"
wow im alittle tired i think, forget my last post i made a mistake and thought this was another user rank thread :|

but stars are fine the actual written review is whats important.
#18 Posted by Funkyhamster (93 posts) -

Oh, and stars basically give you all the advantages of a .5 ratings scale (like GS) without looking silly.

#19 Posted by DaveDog (57 posts) -

its fine how it is now

#20 Posted by GumbieuK (120 posts) -

I like the 5 stars rating system, i personally can't see any benefits in them changing it.

#21 Posted by xplodedd (1316 posts) -
Funkyhamster said:
"I like stars more... you can give games perfect scores without feeling silly, and when you give them the equivalent of a 7.0 it still looks fairly positive (as it should).
"
I agree, i think 5 stars is something that shouldn't be misheard from a game because some games are really pretty good.
#22 Posted by MattyFTM (14370 posts) -

5 stars is good. Numerical systems rely too much on personal opinion. Even if a game is not your type of game, most people will agree where on a 5 point scale it would go. A 100 point scale, or even a 10 or 20 point scale leaves too much up to personal opinion.

Moderator Online
#23 Posted by Caddy (308 posts) -
Nawabi said:
"Well current rating system is ok but stars and grades don't give you that clear picture as opposed to numerical points IMO. Anyone agree?
"

No scores give you a clear picture. The review text itself is what gives the clear picture.
#24 Posted by Tridgen (120 posts) -

i prefer stars alot more, at least with stars there will be less people saying "uuuh why dis gaem got a 10!!?!?!!"

#25 Posted by dirtyd100 (19 posts) -

I don't even know how the point system works here. Anyone care to explain?

#26 Edited by Grim (13 posts) -

I think the stars are good, numerical values are too definite - the stars make it harder to make a decision about a game solely based on a "score", which is a good thing.

#27 Posted by brndedhero (41 posts) -

I do like the point based system over stars, stars seem a little bit vague

#28 Posted by blizzvalve (128 posts) -

I like the star system. It's easier to point oiut which games are good and which games are bad

#29 Posted by RabbitKarrot (362 posts) -

As the help page says, other genres of publications use the 5 star rating, such as Rolling Stone, and it works just fine. I think it works just as well for video game related reviews.

#30 Posted by WhySoSerious (646 posts) -

Stars are fine with me, easy enough to read :)

#31 Posted by _Horde (839 posts) -

I think the five star rating looks cool, and does not need to be changed.

#32 Posted by blizzvalve (128 posts) -

RabbitKarrot said:

"As the help page says, other genres of publications use the 5 star rating, such as Rolling Stone, and it works just fine. I think it works just as well for video game related reviews.
"

Exactly. There are some decent (or used to be decent) reviewers that use the 5-point system, and it works just fine. I say 9 and 10's should reprersent the 5th star

#33 Posted by Callik (138 posts) -

I hope for the sanity of forum goers that they stick to the 5 star rating system.

At least when it's a score out of 5 the vast majority of people could agree that it's the right score, give or take 1 for personal opinion. As soon as that metric becomes out of 10 then people start whining that it should be 0.5 higher or 3.0 lower etc. Don't get me started on 'perfect scores'. Why people have this inane idea that as soon as a game hits 10/10 it suddenly has to be God's gift to gaming and any minor infraction means it "should have been 9.5". And anyone who says "the most any game should get is 9.5 cause 10 means it's perfect ololol" is a fool and should be shot. It's a  numerical rating out of 10 damn it, meaning the maximum achievable score is, shocking enough, 10! It doesn't mean the game is perfect, it means it's warrents to be placed above the rest of the 9s and 9.5s. That's how the system works. A game could be worth 11/10 but the highest is 10, and so that's what it got.

/rant

Seems I did get started on perfect scores, nevermind.

#34 Posted by Ehden (214 posts) -

As long as there are good write ups about the game I could care less about the score.

#35 Posted by Oni (2098 posts) -

Stars are better, if only to prevent "OMG an 8.8??!?!" debates. It's just dumb to place so much emphasis and importance on a number. A simple 5-star system makes it easy to see if a game is bad, decent, good or very good and places more emphasis on the actual text. If you need a number to tell you whether to buy something or not, well... I don't know what to tell you.

#36 Posted by ieatlions (708 posts) -

i think they should leave it at 5 stars because i dont think an opinion of a game can be turned into a number. and 5 star just tells you wat you need 2 know

#37 Posted by MasterChief4134 (7 posts) -

i like it so far

#38 Posted by Termite (2398 posts) -

5 stars is perfectly fine, I like it more than the gamespot system

#39 Posted by Termite (2398 posts) -

5 stars is perfectly fine, I like it more than the gamespot system

#40 Posted by Toseph (370 posts) -

The star system is fine all I really care about is whats in the actual review not the score

#41 Posted by Sonofabiscuit (13 posts) -

Five stars is a great way to do scores.

Lets keep it.

#42 Posted by iunder (3 posts) -

Very happy with the 5 stars system. Never change it.

#43 Edited by Isomac (55 posts) -

Stars is great system for rating games. I think it makes people read more reviews than points system because stars aren't as accurate.

#44 Posted by nezze00 (144 posts) -

Stars are great. The game either:

No stars: Sucks so hard that you are looked down upon after purchase.
1Star: Craptastic and should not be played for more than a minute.
2Star: Bad and should not be played unless you are a huge fan of the series, or bad games.
3Star: Average and basically a rental, or again buy if you are a huge fan.
4Star: Good and should be tried at least once.
5Star: A must buy AAA title that rox your sox off in the bedtime!!!!!11

Of course this is my take, but I believe it works quite well. There are also half points if they are just a wee bit less of what you'd expect from the solid stars.

The problems with numbers is that there is too much room that is not used. What exactly is a 5? Is it horrible? Then what is a 1? Compared to 1.2? It really doesn't tell people how great or OMFGSUCKYWTF a game is. It is just a number. I mean, think of it this way, even grades in college are A,B,C,D,F. 5 Letters with '-' and '+' if needed. Coincidence? I think not!

#45 Posted by RowdyRob (206 posts) -

I personally like the stars system. But they should use bombs instead of stars =O

#46 Posted by oNsJUGGERNAUT (15 posts) -

IDk, i think that if you use a 10 point review scale then it allows for more discrepancy between scores for games, but then again people these day do take scores to seriously and they need to reed the review instead of just looking at the score. 

#47 Posted by OGCartman (4354 posts) -

I dont think you guys are getting it
Theyre not trying to tell us how good the game is, theyre telling us how likely we are to enjoy the game and about it, from what i read on wiki lol. I sure prefer the GS, GT or IGN rating scale but since this site uber pwns, il learn to cope with the 5 stars scale

#48 Posted by BladeOfHeaven (35 posts) -

i like 5 star rating, and its there option does it really matter how they do it?

#49 Posted by mercury_may2112 (30 posts) -

Nah. Stars are good enough.

#50 Edited by Vecta (167 posts) -

I love the start system, dont change it.