|
Manuel Magalhães
|
 |
« on: February 13, 2012, 12:07:01 PM » |
|
I was on my Twitter when I saw a link to a Dear Escher review from IGN. http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/121/1218568p1.htmlI clicked and went to see the final score which, not surprising, it was an 8*. I kinda said lol to that score, but that's an another story. But I was really intrigued with the scoring distribution:  Is it fair that every category counts the same for the overall score? The game does have some splendid graphics, but it's boring as heck, so who wants to play that? So what I ask is: -Do you think that any aspect of a game such as graphics, mechanics, etc should count the same for the game's overall quality? If not what are the aspects that you find more important and does that you find less important? *I did the math and it gave me an 7.6, so I don't know where they got the 8. Either way I'd say that even a 7.6 is too high for a game with little to no mechanics. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tumetsu
|
|
« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2012, 12:17:09 PM » |
|
Is it fair that every category counts the same for the overall score? No. IMO it should vary with game. Some games doesn't need that good graphics, or sound if they are irrelevant for game in question. Since you got 7.6, I think they perhaps emphasized some points which they thought to be important for this style of game. The game does have some splendid graphics, but it's boring as heck, so who wants to play that? -- Either way I'd say that even a 7.6 is too high for a game with little to no mechanics. I don't want to bring this into endless debate of art games again but I think I disagree with you with these kind of statements. IMO review can emphasize other points than those you mentioned. That is, game doesn't need to be "fun" in a way most games are to earn good review (or indeed be good) if they manage to offer me something else. This goes with mechanics too. Of course one could argue that they aren't "games" then but so far I haven't found better working term. Oh and I haven't played this game, just answering on general basis. But in this case the reviewer seemed to appreciate the atmosphere and graphics which gave him perhaps a meaningful experience to warrant 8. I don't see anything wrong with that. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
C.A. Sinner
|
|
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2012, 12:18:25 PM » |
|
*I did the math and it gave me an 7.6, so I don't know where they got the 8. ign scores are not averages afaik also wikipedia says they changed their scoring system to .5 increments in 2010 |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 13, 2012, 12:32:23 PM by C.A. Sinclair »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
thatshelby
|
|
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2012, 12:27:29 PM » |
|
Maybe they rounded it?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
shig
Guest
|
|
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2012, 12:31:21 PM » |
|
The problem is you really just can't separate those categories at all. The overal score is the only important score in the end. The other categories might be interesting as curiosities, but forcing Gameplay and Lasting Appeal, for example, into different categories obviously fucks everything up.
I'm surprised this doesn't happen more often.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DavidCaruso
YEEEAAAHHHHHH
Level 10
|
|
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2012, 12:42:42 PM » |
|
Depends on the game and what's important to the reviewer. There are some games with relatively rudimentary mechanics that I can still enjoy a lot due mainly to "atmosphere" stuff like audiovisuals and story, even if they're only really playable at most once or twice. Dear Esther doesn't look like one of them to me (I liked the concept better when it was in Myst/ Riven and had puzzles.) The reviewer's justification for why he thinks this game should be evaluated on 90% aesthetics ("there's not much else there" and "well, for the price...") isn't very good though, and the commenters pegging any opposition as CoD fanboys aren't helping either. *I did the math and it gave me an 7.6, so I don't know where they got the 8. ign scores are not averages afaik no but their actual reviews sure are (drums) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Manuel Magalhães
|
|
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2012, 12:51:12 PM » |
|
also wikipedia says they changed their scoring system to .5 increments in 2010
Ah, now that makes sense. I thought before that was a rounding thingy, but I had forgotten to write that on the OP. The review from IGN was just an example of the issue, anyway. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
The Monster King
|
|
« Reply #7 on: February 13, 2012, 02:49:27 PM » |
|
scores are stupid anyway
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SirNiko
|
|
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2012, 04:51:20 PM » |
|
Scoring the attributes differently from the overall score does give you the opportunity to make your own judgment. You're free to weight things as you please to come to your own conclusions. The overall score is helpful if you like that reviewer in particular and tend to share his opinions on games.
It's impossible to be objective with game reviews without spoiling the entirety of the thing because there are too many interwoven features and metrics to consider. Your best bet is to pick a few reviewers who share your tastes and get game recommendations from them.
You know what would be handy? If you had a gizmo where you could personally rate your top 20 games and it searched a bunch of reviewers and tried to pair you up with a bunch who seem to score games similarly to you.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
phubans
Indier Than Thou
Level 10
TIG Mascot
|
|
« Reply #9 on: February 13, 2012, 05:23:58 PM » |
|
I wasn't aware of this game, and I was wondering how a game could get 4/10 in gameplay and such high marks in the other areas and still finish with such a high overall... I thought this was a case of style winning over substance again, but that doesn't seem to be the case. This looks more like an interactive film/narrative where you move the camera and decide the pace and what the camera gazes at. I think that sounds interesting, and maybe worth the price of $10... Though I think I'll pass and wait for it to drop to $5 since I'm cheap like that.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
baconman
|
|
« Reply #10 on: February 14, 2012, 12:42:50 AM » |
|
Presentation = Writing
Graphics = Art
Sound = self-explanatory
Gameplay = Technical
Lasting Appeal = Design
*looks at Developer section of forums*
Yup. Looks pretty spot on to me. Although again, many releases are highly subjective to individual taste - that's why major releases often offer a "second opinion" spot. At least in good mags/reviews.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Manuel Magalhães
|
|
« Reply #11 on: February 14, 2012, 09:48:59 AM » |
|
It's impossible to be objective with game reviews without spoiling the entirety of the thing because there are too many interwoven features and metrics to consider. Your best bet is to pick a few reviewers who share your tastes and get game recommendations from them.
I'm not disagree with you on that, in fact I agree with you 100% on that. I'm sick of "bias" talk when referring to journalists and their scores. I just think that IGN should give to the reviewers the possibility of emphasizing a game in a certain category rather than just round an average. I don't find anything wrong with the category scores. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
C.A. Sinner
|
|
« Reply #12 on: February 14, 2012, 11:04:41 AM » |
|
people who complain about "biased" or reviews havent understood the concept of reviews
i think a lot of the problems of mainstream gaming journalism can be explained by the fact that it caters to kids
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cynicalsandel
|
|
« Reply #13 on: February 14, 2012, 12:09:05 PM » |
|
people who complain about "biased" or reviews havent understood the concept of reviews
i think a lot of the problems of mainstream gaming journalism can be explained by the fact that it caters to kids
I think the problem is the concept of 7 being the average. I don't think scores utilize enough of the 10 point scale. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
C.A. Sinner
|
|
« Reply #14 on: February 14, 2012, 12:53:56 PM » |
|
thats not a problem its a symptom  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Player
