The cows have been owned.

@jozzy said:

I feel like I am going to say something stupid, but how are 5/5 and 10/10 mathematically the same?

You feel that way for good reason. 10/10 = 5/5 = 1. They are mathematically the same.

I still don't think they should be able to say Jeff gave it 10/10, though. It just seems like someone made a mistake, I'm sure they're happy to boast about a GB 5/5.

@jozzy said:

I feel like I am going to say something stupid, but how are 5/5 and 10/10 mathematically the same? I would translate these to:

5/5 I have 5 apples out of the 5 available apples

10/10 I have 10 apples out of the 10 available apples

In both cases you have 100% of the apples, but that doesn't make it mathematically identical. In one case I have 5 apples in the other I have 10.

I might be missing some essential component, but this is why I feel the metacritic percentage scale is fairer, as 5/5 translates to 100%. I don't see how they can translate it to 10/10 though, that just seems wrong to me.

Mathematically speaking 5/5 and 10/10 are just fractions and they both are equal to 1. So they are mathematically equivalent.

I don't see the problem with this 10/10 and 5 stars both denote a really good game, anyone who thinks a 10/10 game is perfect in every conceivable way will soon learn that no games are perfect.

It looks as though they just wanted to provide the same basis for each score given so they are easy to compare. I'm not trying to defend this, I really don't care that much. It's just, as always, the internet is blowing an inconsequential issue WAY out of proportion.

10/10

23/23

57391837/57391837

5/5

They all mean the same thing

Scores are needed for game reviews as it is the best way to show someone who needs a quick judgement on a game with a quick glance at a review score. For people that want more out of a review than read it and see if the things that the review liked and disliked mattered to you. Review scores are vital to the game review process and will never be gone from Giantbomb. Jeff has stated several times that Giant Bomb reviews will always have a score. So don't argue that Giant Bomb reviews need no score as it is a futile effort. Go read Kotaku's reviews if you don't want a score.

@Sackmanjones said:

10/10 23/23 57391837/57391837 5/5 They all mean the same thing

Let's keep going, even after I admitted I said a stupid thing. Keep em coming!

Metacritic has been doing this for years.

Basic math. 5/5 = 100%. 10/10 = 100%. It's ROUGHLY the same thing. Nobody with a rational mind should get worked up about this, and i find it depressing that anybody cared enough about this "issue" to make a topic out of it.

@pandorasbox said:

Basic math. 5/5 = 100%. 10/10 = 100%. It's ROUGHLY the same thing. Nobody with a rational mind should get worked up about this, and i find it depressing that anybody cared enough about this "issue" to make a topic out of it.

This is Giant Bomb. It isn't the first time people have made a big stink over nothing, and it certainly won't be the last.

@TheVideoHustler said:

I dislike the 10 number rating system because at 6 you know the game is shit. So why beat it into the ground by calling it a super failure. What's you've failed, that's pretty much the end of it.

Shouldn't 6 in the proper 10 scale be above average? 5 being a really average game? ... people might hate him but Angry Joe seems to be the only one who uses the scale properly.

@pandorasbox said:

Basic math. 5/5 = 100%. 10/10 = 100%. It's ROUGHLY the same thing. Nobody with a rational mind should get worked up about this, and i find it depressing that anybody cared enough about this "issue" to make a topic out of it.

Well, it IS an issue because there is a difference. Certain scales are chosen for a reason. And ask yourself why sites that use a 100 scale, never give 100/100. It's a different message than a 5/5.

@Inkerman said:

When did Giantbomb scores start to get put on the advertising of major games? That's pretty neat.

Although probably far from the first time it's happened, the first time I noticed it was on the Steam page for Mark of the Ninja, which features a quote from Brad.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/214560/

@AngelN7 said:

@TheVideoHustler said:

I dislike the 10 number rating system because at 6 you know the game is shit. So why beat it into the ground by calling it a super failure. What's you've failed, that's pretty much the end of it.

Shouldn't 6 in the proper 10 scale be above average? 5 being a really average game? ... people might hate him but Angry Joe seems to be the only one who uses the scale properly.

I look at it as a school grading system.

@CptBedlam said:

@pandorasbox said:

Basic math. 5/5 = 100%. 10/10 = 100%. It's ROUGHLY the same thing. Nobody with a rational mind should get worked up about this, and i find it depressing that anybody cared enough about this "issue" to make a topic out of it.

Well, it IS an issue because there is a difference. Certain scales are chosen for a reason. And ask yourself why sites that use a 100 scale, never give 100/100. It's a different message than a 5/5.

Is it really though? Aren't both giving the message "buy this game its awesome"?

Technically legitimate, but yes, a little shady.

Review scores are pointless, gamers are idiots, the planet keeps spinning.

Did you not see the first 10 seconds of the quicklook? How could it not be a 10/10????

Was this really worth a thread? There's no fucking difference between a 5 versus 10 scale rating system. 5/5=10/10=1000/1000

I would have been slightly annoyed if they translated a 4/5 to a 9/10, however.

I want a 10000 point scale for my game reviews.

@CptBedlam said:

@pandorasbox said:

Basic math. 5/5 = 100%. 10/10 = 100%. It's ROUGHLY the same thing. Nobody with a rational mind should get worked up about this, and i find it depressing that anybody cared enough about this "issue" to make a topic out of it.

Well, it IS an issue because there is a difference. Certain scales are chosen for a reason. And ask yourself why sites that use a 100 scale, never give 100/100. It's a different message than a 5/5.

100 point systems never give 100's out, because when you have that many points, you start to try and associate every niggling flaw or nuisance in the game with a point value. This is part of the reason why Giant Bomb went with arguably the smallest numerical scale possible - because what is the qualitative difference between a 65 and a 68? Or a 94 and a 97? Or an 84 and a 97, for that matter? You can't boil a game experience down to such a hilariously exact number.

In that sense, I think it would be disingenuous to say, as Metacritic does, that Giant Bomb gave a 5/5 game a "100/100" - because every actual point they award gets inflated to 20 with Metacritic. When you've got a five point scale, something like the game's shitty microtransactions might not be enough to sink it to a 4/5, but on a 100 point scale, who is to say it might not be worth a point or two (or five, or 10)?

And all of this just highlights how insane it is that some publishers actually award bonuses that are contingent on Metacritic scores, when they are taking wildly disparate rating systems and trying to shoehorn them into a number out of 100.

They could have said 5/5. That's how Xcom did it.

I thought they gave it an 8/8. Or was it 7/7?

Are people so dumb as to think 5/5 is worse than a 10/10?

lol that is classic

This got me thinking about this cover-art, there's three different ratings systems on it.

@Scotto said:

@CptBedlam said:

@pandorasbox said:

Basic math. 5/5 = 100%. 10/10 = 100%. It's ROUGHLY the same thing. Nobody with a rational mind should get worked up about this, and i find it depressing that anybody cared enough about this "issue" to make a topic out of it.

Well, it IS an issue because there is a difference. Certain scales are chosen for a reason. And ask yourself why sites that use a 100 scale, never give 100/100. It's a different message than a 5/5.

100 point systems never give 100's out, because when you have that many points, you start to try and associate every niggling flaw or nuisance in the game with a point value. This is part of the reason why Giant Bomb went with arguably the smallest numerical scale possible - because what is the qualitative difference between a 65 and a 68? Or a 94 and a 97? Or an 84 and a 97, for that matter? You can't boil a game experience down to such a hilariously exact number.

In that sense, I think it would be disingenuous to say, as Metacritic does, that Giant Bomb gave a 5/5 game a "100/100" - because every actual point they award gets inflated to 20 with Metacritic. When you've got a five point scale, something like the game's shitty microtransactions might not be enough to sink it to a 4/5, but on a 100 point scale, who is to say it might not be worth a point or two (or five, or 10)?

And all of this just highlights how insane it is that some publishers actually award bonuses that are contingent on Metacritic scores, when they are taking wildly disparate rating systems and trying to shoehorn them into a number out of 100.

Exactly.

I don't know about you but I don't consider 5/5 to be 10/10 even though math says it is.

I dunno why a 10 point scale is the norm in video games, almost any other medium typically uses the 5-star scale as a standard.

This happens quite a lot. I'm more suprised to see a Giant Bomb score on a game, haven't seen one yet

@MikkaQ said:

I dunno why a 10 point scale is the norm in video games, almost any other medium typically uses the 5-star scale as a standard.

Honestly I think it's because games have so many more moving parts. Not only are there visuals, audio, etc but gameplay as well. And bugs. So yeah there is more going on and more to break down. Some think this means you need more possible ratings. Not saying I agree but I believe that was the thinking. You can really see it in say how IGN breaks down their ratings in different categories and all.

I like the 5 star system here. Sometimes it feels a bit arbitrary in its difference between 4's and 5's but at the end of the day all ratings systems have this issue in different ways.

the difference between a 4 and 5 is a lot easier to quantify than the difference between, say, a 9 and a 9.1.

it amuses me to see how amazed some people are by GB's decision to use a 5 star rating scale instead of a 10 point one like everyone else.

Joystiq and Kotaku convert Giant Bomb scores to a percentage for their review compilation thingy. Don't really think it's a big deal. Curious to hear what the actual staff think of this.

1275/1275

be afraid...be very afraid