"5 stars is fine, generally speaking all you need to know is if a game is good, average, or bad. Buy it, rent it, or neither; thats all. And the 5 star system works great with that. "
But that's exactly my point. You just need to know whether a game is good or bad, etc... NOT whether it is 5 or 3 stars.
"I really like the direction they've taken with the five star system. I mean, it is more loose compared to most sites. Five stars just means it is very much worth your while. At the same time the fact that MGS4 received five stars doesn't mean it can directly be compared to professor layton. It just means that both are excellent games. Brilliant."
I know, but why not just directly say it instead of converting it into stars ?
"My favourite system is still the old Daily Radar scoring - Direct Hit, Hit, Miss, and Dud. It was simple and elegant, although the site was everything but. Still, that's beside the point. "
Sounds like a good idea too. Why did they change it ?
"I think it is fine. No rating system is perfect, and they will always be wrong in some ways because everyone feels different about games. For example I don't like MGS4 and everyone gives it a perfect score. I think you just have to read the review and see if whats in it gets you excited and then check the game out from there. "
Which is exactly why I'm proposing a new rating system that does not have that flaw.
"They 5 stars with no half stars works well the way it is It allows the text to matter for those who take the time to read it. I find the only other system that works well is the lettering A-F system "
You could say the same thing for every rating system, though. They all "allow the text to matter for those who take the time to read them", but that's the problem, most people don't.
Log in to comment