Eurogamer replaces x/10 review score system

  • 61 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for rebel_scum
Rebel_Scum

1608

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

Sauce

Well they did have a x/10 system which isn't as good as a x/5 system imo. Now they have some sort of recommendation system where they'll have a summary followed by a recommendation of: Essential, Recommended, Avoid or not provide a recommendation at all.

What's your thoughts on this duders? I know Jeff has hated the review system for years. Do you think GB will follow or not bother changing at the moment. Is a pro and con system better? Do you think this will even last at Eurogamer?

Avatar image for splodge
splodge

3038

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

GB's system works great. No need to fix what aint broken!

Avatar image for evilsbane
Evilsbane

5623

Forum Posts

315

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

The five star system is literally perfect.

1. Sucks.

2. Gotta love it to try it.

3. Its ok maybe worth your time if you like the genre.

4. Above average even if you don't like genre give it a look.

5. Buy it now.

Avatar image for chaser324
chaser324

9249

Forum Posts

14897

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 14

#4 chaser324  Moderator

I think a five star system is just about the perfect amount of granularity if you're going to have a numerical rating system of some kind. It's really not all that different from the system Eurogamer has now adopted which is essentially a four star system (Essential = 4/4, Recommended = 3/4, N/A = 2/4, Avoid = 1/5), the primary difference just being that their system has no explicit numerical component and Giant Bomb's does.

Avatar image for vierastalo
VierasTalo

1443

Forum Posts

1030

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

That's good. Would be better if it was just the summary. Ratings are dumb and subtract from writing a big-ass essay about the game. Suppose it's about what you're going for. If it's informing customers about what to spend their money on, the recommendation thing makes a lot more sense than a score. If it's actually writing about video games then it might as well not be there because then people might not read what you wrote. I've ran a film website for two years now. We never used ratings in our reviews. Yet we have lots of readers. Ergo I certainly don't think ratings are essential to cultivate a readership.

Avatar image for babychoochoo
BabyChooChoo

7106

Forum Posts

2094

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 2

#7  Edited By BabyChooChoo

Meh, I think it's fine. Whatever. I honestly don't think this shift away from review scores is gonna change much of anything though other giving sites a chance to show off how progressive they think they are. I agree much more with Jeff's sentiment that reviews in general are arguably becoming less relevant as a whole.

Avatar image for chumley_marchbanks
chumley_marchbanks

228

Forum Posts

252

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 8

The five star system works fine; it provides enough granularity to distinguish games without being ambiguous. A four star system would be even better, but it's probably not worth the hassle at this point.

Avatar image for babychoochoo
BabyChooChoo

7106

Forum Posts

2094

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 2

@dudeglove: I've seen that video probably a hundred times and the "i've never played this game before, but I know you're full of shit" line still gets me every time haha

Avatar image for humanity
Humanity

21801

Forum Posts

5738

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 16

I do t know why people harp on the 10 scale system so much. I think it affords a bit more clarity through scoring that the 5 point scale simply lacks. There is a difference between a 6 and a 7 just as there is between a 7 and an 8.

Avatar image for drbroel
DrBroel

265

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 14

This is definitely a step in the right direction.

Avatar image for cale
CaLe

4568

Forum Posts

516

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

#12  Edited By CaLe

I honestly just need a number and could do without any of the written text in the review. It'd save a lot of time for the reviewer. A 20 point system works best, but some people's loins are weak and unable to perceive subtle differences in quality between games, which is a shame.

Avatar image for tearhead
Tearhead

2485

Forum Posts

17920

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 48

I think "Essential" is a pretentious word to use in the review of an entertainment product...

Avatar image for ghostiet
Ghostiet

5832

Forum Posts

160

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

I'm a firm believer that video game journalism should be done solely through motherfuckin' rap beef between video game reviewers. That's how you get a fair score. Hell, you might even not written a review for this game, everybody's gonna get BLAT BLAT BLAT

Avatar image for mister_v
Mister_V

2506

Forum Posts

53

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#15 Mister_V  Online

So they are going to have to come up with a new way to rate everything 8/10

Avatar image for cocoonmoon
cocoonmoon

254

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I can't say I ever really visit Eurogamer. Maybe I should change that?

Avatar image for mosespippy
mosespippy

4751

Forum Posts

2163

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 8

Sauce

Well they did have a x/10 system which isn't as good as a x/5 system imo. Now they have some sort of recommendation system where they'll have a summary followed by a recommendation of: Essential, Recommended, Avoid or not provide a recommendation at all.

What's your thoughts on this duders? I know Jeff has hated the review system for years. Do you think GB will follow or not bother changing at the moment. Is a pro and con system better? Do you think this will even last at Eurogamer?

No he hasn't. He has issue with the 10 point, 19 point and 100 point scales, as well as component scores such as graphics, sound, etc, but he thinks the 5 point system is perfect for their needs and their audience's needs. He's not one of those championing for no review scores like Schreier. If he was he would have changed the system years ago. They won't be changing.

Avatar image for zombie2011
zombie2011

5628

Forum Posts

8742

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@rebel_scum said:

Sauce

Well they did have a x/10 system which isn't as good as a x/5 system imo. Now they have some sort of recommendation system where they'll have a summary followed by a recommendation of: Essential, Recommended, Avoid or not provide a recommendation at all.

What's your thoughts on this duders? I know Jeff has hated the review system for years. Do you think GB will follow or not bother changing at the moment. Is a pro and con system better? Do you think this will even last at Eurogamer?

No he hasn't. He has issue with the 10 point, 19 point and 100 point scales, as well as component scores such as graphics, sound, etc, but he thinks the 5 point system is perfect for their needs and their audience's needs. He's not one of those championing for no review scores like Schreier. If he was he would have changed the system years ago. They won't be changing.

Actually Jeff recently said that no reviews would be something he would do.

Avatar image for ramone
Ramone

3199

Forum Posts

364

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

Cool, scoring systems are restrictive and suffocate nuanced critiques.

Avatar image for kevin_cogneto
Kevin_Cogneto

1886

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I miss review scores with decimal places. Watching people complain that 9.6 out of 10 was too low a score for their favorite game was never not funny to me.

Avatar image for beachthunder
BeachThunder

15252

Forum Posts

312391

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 25

@tearhead said:

I think "Essential" is a pretentious word to use in the review of an entertainment product...

Essential is pretty bold word - I find it hard to think of any game I'd really consider 'essential'.

Avatar image for gruebacca
Gruebacca

813

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

So they have a 4-point scale now. I still think a 5-point is best, but hey. Everyone does it differently. It's still an improvement over a 10-point number scale where games in the 7-9 range dominate. (If you're going to have a point system, use all the points, dammit!)

Their use of the word "Essential" is funny to me, though. I think Gamespot uses the term better for games that go beyond the top tier.

Avatar image for madman356647
madman356647

827

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

People spend too much time freaking out over a number versus a review's content anyway.

As long as there's an explanation as to why the score, they can rate things puppies/kitten farts for all I care.

Avatar image for cirdain
Cirdain

3796

Forum Posts

1645

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

No Caption Provided

This is fine.

Avatar image for meatball
MEATBALL

4235

Forum Posts

790

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

#25  Edited By MEATBALL

A bold step and a pretty cool one. That said; I really do like Giant Bomb's 5 star scale, and wouldn't want to see them follow suit.

Avatar image for rebel_scum
Rebel_Scum

1608

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

@mosespippy:
I should've worded that to 'I think Jeff mentioned in a bombcast' rather than put words in his mouth but meh it was late and sleep was needed so I didn't proof read.

@dudeglove: That's the greatest thing I've seen since the Star Wars teaser.

I like the 5 star system. I'd be kinda bummed to see it go. Not that I rely on it but its like a cherry on the top much like those staff pics they used to add back in the day.

Avatar image for oldirtybearon
Oldirtybearon

5626

Forum Posts

86

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Someone should ask Jeff Green what happened to his magazine when they got away from review scores.

Avatar image for privodotmenit
PrivodOtmenit

553

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I don't want any website telling me that Dragon Age Inquisition is 'essential'. Essential if you like being bored perhaps.

Avatar image for twisted
Twisted

312

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29  Edited By Twisted

Okay. That works, as long as reviewers don't end up feeling hamstrung by it, it's fine. But I honestly don't have a problem with a 10 point scale. I think that works just fine, same as a 5 point scale. Sometimes you want to be that bit more specific, more specific than what the 5 point scale offers. All depends on the preferences of the reviewers though.

Avatar image for zella
Zella

1275

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Always hated number based reviews, whether it be out of 10 or 5. I even think reviews shouldn't even exist anymore with the rise of Quick Looks and Let's Plays. If there are reviews though I would much prefer for them to be more abstract and just have the reviewer discussing what they liked and didn't like about the game, and of course pointing out technical issues and stuff. Feel like that style of review reinforces the fact that a review is simply an opinion.

Avatar image for geraltitude
GERALTITUDE

5991

Forum Posts

8980

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 2

I hate all systems! sooo nyeah! Sup now? F all the stars, n'ah mean?

Anyways I barely ever visit Eurogamer, much less for reviews.

Interesting though. Feel "review systems" have been coming up more and more as a "thing to improve" on many websites these last few years.

Polygon just said the other day they are going to tag reviews as Provisional until they are certain of the "real world" performance of a game and that Provisional reviews won't go on Metacritic. Frankly - and coming from a dude who does not especially enjoy polygon.com - I think that's probably the best change anyone has introduced to review systems, within the existing, appreciated framework.

Avatar image for cornbredx
cornbredx

7479

Forum Posts

2689

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 15

2015, the year of experimenting with removing review scores.

I'm fine with it. I don't think review scores are true anyway- since whether or not you'll like a game (whether it is technically good or bad) is subjective, and most reviewers (most noticeably even more now than ever) have no technical proficient knowledge of how games really work/are made and have no basis of merit on whether a game is technically good or bad beyond whether or not they enjoyed playing them.

Avatar image for docgroove
DocGroove

26

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

I don't mind. I rather read the actual review. That said, the five star system on Giant Bomb is perfectly fine and doesn't need to be replaced. It's granular enough to distinguish an average game from a good game.

Avatar image for justin258
Justin258

16498

Forum Posts

26

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 8

Man, a lot of people seem to like the five point scale a whole lot and I can't disagree more. If you're going to sum up an opinion with a number representing how much you liked the game, it needs a little more subtlety than just five stars. I've played quite a few games that don't deserve a five, but four just winds up feeling like I'm underselling the game.

Having no score probably is ideal, but it's impractical, as a whole lot of people skim the review and look at the score to find out what the reviewer thinks. If there's no score, there goes all your attention-deficit "readers".

Avatar image for deactivated-5a0917a2494ce
deactivated-5a0917a2494ce

1349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 4

Review scores are stupid so this makes sense.

Avatar image for theht
TheHT

15992

Forum Posts

1562

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 9

I find the 5 point scale or a bullet point summary is most effective for getting a quick idea of, or just nicely capping, a review.

This seems fine.

Avatar image for rejizzle
Rejizzle

1487

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Call me crazy but I think x/6 would be the best review scale.

Avatar image for rahf
Rahf

652

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

A review score tells me nothing about a game, other than the reviewer's final opinion. The essay fleshes out why they enjoyed it, or not; this is highly informative for my own choices, as it breaks down gameplay, story, positives contra negatives, etc. A quick look tells me if they are enjoying the first few hours of a game, as that is usually the point where us, the audience, get to see the GB crew play through a chunk of gameplay, along with commentary. That still is not a final, nuanced opinion that has been mulled over for more than a few hours.

A thoughtful review is still essential, in my mind.

Avatar image for dagas
dagas

3684

Forum Posts

851

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 8

I find reviews by going to Metacritic and looking at what sites I know have reviewed the game. Now Eurogamer won't even show up there. I don't see what people have against putting a score, it is a good indicator. Just as long as you don't get too crazy about just looking at that. Most games I buy have Metacritic scores in the yellow range rather than the green. I just avoid red. Score or not I wish they would show up there because the way I find out about reviews is through Metacritic.

Avatar image for hollitz
hollitz

2398

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 12

Reviews only matter if you care what the critic has to say about games. You have to know their tastes and how they line up with yours. Like with GB's score, only 1 and 5 even mean anything to me. 2, 3, and 4 are still just degrees of personal taste.

Avatar image for deactivated-6109c8479bb3d
deactivated-6109c8479bb3d

345

Forum Posts

15

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 1

When reading a review, I want answers to the "what", "why", and "for whom."

What is this game?

What is it trying to do, successfully or otherwise?

Why is it good? Why is it bad?

For whom is this game?

That's the reason why I value text reviews. I want the review to articulate the game.

A binary thumbs up/down is too nebulous, but a high gradient (i.e. out of 10, decimals) leads to so much grey area to pin a definitive overall quality. But, something like a five star scale (no half stars, don't be crazy), will definitively indicate a game's overall quality and value.

Then, if you want to get to the minutae, I find that the quick text bullet points of positives and negatives quickly encompasses all major points. This is probably the only thing I would recommend that Giantbomb should add. The small flavor synopsis does the job, but doesn't necessarily highlight exactly the good and the bad.

All that combined would give you: a general feel of the review, some general points, then the actual finer details. You can get the gist in a few seconds, then you can dig for details if you so prefer. THAT, to me, is the complete review package.

So, I am all for this change by Eurogamer. I already love Giantbomb's (with that one possible improvement).

A lot of internet kids just want validation for the games they'll already love and defend, and there's not much you can do about that. The best kind of review any editor can write, I think, is to craft one for those of us discerning enough.

Avatar image for tebbit
tebbit

4656

Forum Posts

861

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 6

It's interesting, and different. I like it!

It covers my basic thought process when buying a game:

Essential: Buy it even if I don't like the genre or concept.

Recommended: Buy it if I do like the genre or concept.

Avoid: Avoid:

No Recommendation: Actually read the review to find out if I can deal with the flaws. Which is what I would do anyway if I heard that a game was a mixed bag.

This seems A-OK to me.

Avatar image for fisk0
fisk0

7311

Forum Posts

73331

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 75

#43 fisk0  Moderator

@tearhead said:

I think "Essential" is a pretentious word to use in the review of an entertainment product...

Essential is pretty bold word - I find it hard to think of any game I'd really consider 'essential'.

I'd be interested if an "Essential" score could only be given out 10-15 years after the games release.

Avatar image for beachthunder
BeachThunder

15252

Forum Posts

312391

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 25

@fisk0 said:

@beachthunder said:

@tearhead said:

I think "Essential" is a pretentious word to use in the review of an entertainment product...

Essential is pretty bold word - I find it hard to think of any game I'd really consider 'essential'.

I'd be interested if an "Essential" score could only be given out 10-15 years after the games release.

And certified 'essential' by both people that played it recently and by people that played it within a year of release.

Avatar image for fearbeard
Fearbeard

885

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

#45  Edited By Fearbeard

Seems designed to be anti-metacritic rather then designed to help their readers. While 10 point scales are pretty useless a good 5 star scale lets them use every number on it and have each one mean something. Oh well, I don't read many reviews anymore anyways. Usually I only read the 2 or 3 star reviews for games I'm interested in to see what problems the reviewer had with the game and see if they are things that would bother me or not. Quick looks and let's plays usually let me know all I need to decide if a game is designed for me or not.

Avatar image for slaps2
Slaps2

638

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 2

I really don't love review scores, but I find the the smaller the range of scores the better. The standard 100 point scale (1-10 with decimal points) is like splitting hairs. One tenth of a point doesn't give the reader a lot more information, and 1-10 scales seem to be more like 6-10 scales these days. Review content is much more important to me than the number that comes at the end... not that I base my purchases on reviews anymore anyway. I think a lot of us are pretty informed on a game well before it comes out and we read reviews either to agree or disagree with them.

I don't read Eurogamer, but that decision seems pretty bold. The more interesting part of this, to me, is that they've chosen only to review games from full retail versions and that online games won't get a full review after they're released. Seems kind of like acknowledging that their audience isn't actually basing purchases off of reviews anymore and that no one cares too much for day 1 editorializing. Maybe now they see their reviews more as an intellectual endeavor and less as a means of informing an already well-informed consumer.

Either way, they're putting the quality of their editorials ahead of posting first and ahead of popular but not very informative review scores. I hope it works out well for them.

Avatar image for l4wd0g
l4wd0g

2394

Forum Posts

353

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

#47  Edited By l4wd0g

Not to be snarky, but isn't that what Joystiq did right before they were shuttered. I'm not saying they're related but there is a reason scores exist.

Avatar image for shindig
Shindig

6399

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Jeff having issue with /10 scores is kinda daft given that the five star rating is effectively that. Although it could be argued a five star rating is weighted differently. You also have to wonder about a game site's readership and just how many turn up for scores compared to editorials.

Avatar image for joshwent
joshwent

2897

Forum Posts

2987

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#49  Edited By joshwent

As most games reviewers embrace their subjectivity, reviews that replace numbers with these qualitative words seems pretty misguided. Saying that a game is difinitively "recommended" carries a weird context that something like "4 out of 5" is never burdened with.

Maybe they're bucking the writerly trend and going with hardcore consumer advice?

@shindig: The glaring problem with x/10 systems is that scores are inevitably skewed to be on the higher end. I think it has a lot to do with the insidiously stupid ways that exams are graded in the US as letter grade signifying a certain x/100%. 100-91 = A, 90-81 = B , 80-71 = C, 70-60= D... and there's the problem. Any percent below that is generally regarded as failing. It doesn't matter if you get a 32 on a test rather than a 22. And we see this lack of clarity in how review scores are interpreted. A 5 out of 10, when you have 4 possible layers on top of that. seems like a "bad" score, not just in the middle. What's the difference between a game getting a 2 or a 3? Or more stupidly "controversial" a 5 vs a 6?

The beauty of the 5 point scale is that it is inherently simple, with no room for confusing granularity.

5 - Amazing

4 - Pretty Good

3 - Average

2 - Pretty Bad

1 - Horrible

Perfect.

Avatar image for shindig
Shindig

6399

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Is that interpretation not up to the reader, though? Especially if they're viewing an outlet that whacks a number on a review with little or no summarising?