I enjoying gaming but I also like many aspects associated with the hobby as well. Part of that is critics and reviews of games from friends and strangers alike. Not only can it be a useful tool for making informed purchases on games but in general I like to see the various viewpoints of games I've played as well as games I might get into as well. I do like to write my own reviews from time to time as I find it challenging but also fun to form all of my opinions and thoughts on a particular game into a readable state. That said the scores you often see attributed to a game as a mark of it's quality are something I personally don't like and don't use myself.
There are definitely some positives from having a set scale to judge games against, especially for more casual users who just want a quick overview on whether the new triple A game is worth getting on day one or not. However if you try to look too deep into scores of games you can for sure find some oddities in there. A score on it's own can be misinterpreted by quite a margin depending on the game. A classic example I think most people here might know was the IGN review of Imagine Party Babyz which received a 7.5 out of 10 which in the context of that game is for all I know a fair reflection on how good that game is for the people that will buy it but people were quick to point out other games such as God Hand and The Last Guardian having lower scores. In no way should we really be comparing a party game on the Wii to something like The Last Guardian. It's a bit of a paradox since the scoring systems people use are universal for all games (ie a 1/10 is bad and a 10/10 is good) but each score is actually unique to that game.
I feel some people hold the grade a critic gives a game out of a certain scale a lot higher that what that person actually said about the game. This is made even more of an issue with what people perceive to be a "bad" score with 6-7/10 often seen as not good enough even if the reviewer has praised certain elements of the game in the review but overall felt the game deserved that score. I don't include a score when I've reviewed games because I don't want people to take two scores from seperate games that don't have much if anything in common and then ask me why one is better than the other.
I would be interested to hear what the GB community thinks on this subject if they share some of my remarks or have other reasons for or against scoring in reviews. I'm not suggesting they need to stop altogether, rather they just aren't relevant to me.