Numeric Supremacy
by Ben
Nothing ignites a websites comment feed in flames quite like a review score, but with that in mind it does begs the question – Do you review scores really matter?
Reviews on the whole have so much about them that is open to debate, but nothing quite sparks the controversy than a review score that the masses deem either too high or too low. But it’s just a number right, it doesn’t matter? People should read the review and make their minds up for themselves? Who needs a number to tell them how good a game is anyway? That’s one way of looking at it but, at the end of the day, those who are of the mindset to read the entire contents of a review, will do. Those who just flick to the last paragraph glance at the score and make a purchasing decision there and then, will do.
The biggest problem these days (in my opinion) is with websites such as Metacritic which, over the last couple of years, has really gained momentum and, as a result, is now not only embraced by websites all over the world, but game publishers as well who can often be heard touting just how well their current game is scoring. So why is it then that a score which, in a nutshell is only an opinion of a sole reviewer, can generate so much debate and even so much controversy?
Perhaps it’s the loyalty that many gamers feel to certain brands that causes them to act in such a way, it’s like a whole new subsection of the Fan Boy movement where a score no less than perfect is nothing but defamation in their eyes. Slap an 8/10 sticker on the upcoming Halo Reach and you will literally be able to watch the Internet weep tears of bitterness and hatred, it’s going to be one of those games where nothing short of a 10/10 is going to satisfy people, and that’s surely going to put pressure onto the reviewer, whether subliminally or not.
There’ll be those that will no doubt claim that a reader should be able to make up their mind from the review itself and not have to rely on a number to do it for them, which I can sympathise with, but it’s never really that clear cut. For instance, not all reviewers will be able to describe how good, or bad, a game is within a limited amount of text. Sure they can give pointers here and there but, for many, the ability to put a score at the end of their review helps clear up any confusion they may well have had and adds that final level of clarity. You may not agree with the score given, but that’s not the point – it’s the reviewer’s score, not yours.
On the flip side of the coin there will be many people who find it hard to read a full review and come to their own conclusion; a score helps them balance what they read as well as give them a simple visual indicator of what the reviewer thought. But, then again, you will always have a selection of readers that will read a review and come to their own conclusion about the game, score at the end or not – there’s just no right or wrong way to go about it. There’s always the argument that, because of the tendency review scores have to invoke a good old fashioned flame war, some websites may well choose to instigate said war in order to boost their page views and, as a side effect, their advertising streams – it’s bound to happen somewhere on the internet.
Oh noes! With almost half the sites giving "Every Which Way But Loose - The Videogame" 8/10, the other half giving it two stars and some not even scoring it at all... what is an orangutan to do??
Going back to Metacritic though, you have to wonder how many websites choose to add scores to their reviews just to get themselves listed; it’s kind of sad in a way but sometimes you just have to do what you do in order to carry on doing it, survival of the fittest and all that. If your website isn’t listed up there along with the Gamespots, 1UPs and IGNs of the world then it’s going to have a knock on impact somewhere down the line.
It’d be ignorant to dismiss either method of reviewing; it is, after all, an internet full of opinions and, regardless of what sort of reviews you might prefer, it won’t be long before an opposing voice is heard, such is its nature. Obviously there’s a big argument for and against review scores; it doesn’t really matter it’s all just preference, it’s just a matter of deciding what crowd you want to appease more – those for, or those against. In the end it’s just a number, it’s not that important, is it?
8/10
Last five articles by Ben
I recently came to the realisation that a review score is only the opinion of one person on a game or film, and not necessarily the entire company they work for – so it can seem a bit irrational to base your opinion of a game or film on a review by someone who may enjoy games that you don’t and vice versa, and it’s generally not someone who you don’t know personally that’s reviewing it.
It can be good to see the game from the point of view of someone who sees, plays and writes about games every day though – be they good games or bad.
Awesome piece Ben, its a great debate, and you’ve given a great perspective to it
Personally, I like to read reviews from a few sites, to make sure I don’t base it on just one other person’s perspective. Sometimes its good to read a positively scored one against a negatively scored one to get the most information about the positives and the flaws.
I’d give this 8/10, I guess.
think i do it a little differntly when i’m looking for reviews – I try and find ones by writers that have the same kinds of thoughts as me about what they like. good example is the toy story 3 game – I love it to bits but games-tm only gave it a 6/10 which i didnt think was fair and gametrailers.com tend to rate games a little higer than I would. I only tend to read ones I’m on the fence about and if its a review for a big game eg Halo Reach. I stear clear of reviews and news as much as I can if i read that the aiming is shit somewhere I’ll be convinced the aiming is shit and it’ll ruin the game. Even if the aiming is spot on
I buy most games anyway and just take um back if i think they are naff – gamestation must hate me
The day I lost faith in review scores is when I saw the score for Blue Dragon on Eurogamer. That game deserved to be an 8/10. At least.
I’m personally in the camp of “screw review scores, learn to read, plebs”. I suppose the liberating thing about the internet over printed media is that word limits aren’t such a concern, because there isn’t limited space to fit a review into. You can go into a game in depth, critique the finer points of things, and take the time to mention what works and what doesn’t and precisely why. There’s no real excuse anymore, other than sloppy standards, or the actual reviewer not being up to the job. If you let pressure from hype and expectations get in the way of your being objective, then you shouldn’t be doing it at all, and I don’t much care what you think anyway. “You” being general here, not directed at you yourself Ben. Actually, your reviews DO have depth, and I’ve always admired that. If a reviewer can’t be entirely objective and honest in their appraisal, and actually express that in a way that isn’t open to the kind of vagaries and flaws a number score system is prone to, then they might want to reconsider their chosen career. Harsh, but true, in my opinion.
I recently turned down the opportunity to review a game myself, because I wouldn’t be able to be objective about it, because of my history with other games by the same developer. And I will not apply a numerical score to reviews I write. Not now, not ever. I’d much rather read a good lengthy, open review that shows both sides of the story, than waste my time with a number and a couple of short paragraphs. I don’t want to look like I’m tooting our own horn, but the Gaming Lives system for reviewing games with a detailed comparative analysis, summarised at the end with the pros and cons and a brief recap summary, is the way I wish all reviews would be written.
Number scores are just a distraction from the actual review, and also, a sop to people who can’t be bothered to read more than a few sentences, and I have no time whatsoever for people who simply refuse to read more in case they exceed their daily quota of words.
As I said though, that’s just my take on it.
I tend not to read many reviews nowadays and when I do I tend to go to Gametrailers and watch a video review so I can see the game in motion whilst also being told about the game; and sometimes I lose concentration when reading. I would prefer to decide what I like/dislike about a game from the review itself and not the score as I’ve enjoyed games that scored low and not been fussed on games that scored high.
The review should tell you all you need to know.
I can see the good and bad in both, and though I think that scores can have a use in the right time and place, I think that the bad tends to outweigh the good. I admit to glancing at the score first in a review out of curiousity, but it has never once put me off reading the actual review. In fact, seeing a certain score has often encouraged me to read a review that I may have otherwise skipped over in the case of very bad scores. After all…if I see a 2 out of 10 slapped on something, my ghoulish side can’t wait to find out why.
I think that scores can, however, encourage laziness and the text of a review is far and away the most compelling and important thing. Scores can be great for limited space but a ‘pros and cons’ list and summary work just as well. I’ve seen some attrocious behaviour associated with scores, with fanboys flaming and marching onto magazine forums to vent at their game not getting the perfect ten that they think it should; it is embarrasing for an industry that is trying to grow up and out of the childish rep which has plagued it for so long in the eyes of the outside world.
Some score systems work better than others and seems to operate on a bears’ porridge sort of system – finding the ‘just right’ method is tough but for me, the ‘out of ten’ seems to be the best. It is more comprehensive than five stars and far less stupidly convoluted than the 100 percent system. After all, what is the difference between one game getting 87% and one getting 88% really?
For me, I’m happy with the way GL handles reviews, though I’m also happy to read mags such as GamesTM where they appear to handle the scores with care. What is an issue, as Ben has mentioned with Metacritic, is that publishers take an unhealthy interest in review scores to the point that in the past, devs’ bonuses have been affected or denied based on scores and projects have been turned down on the basis of a company’s last game’s Metacritic score. Unpleasant stuff.
Great article Ben, as ever, and a lot to think about
This reminds me of something that I discovered when I was rekindling my passion for Team17… my usual browsing trail pulled me back to Wikipedia, as is usually the case, and I discovered something that I didn’t actually know before. I’ll try and find it again…
It’s something that I have quite an aversion to and, even though I always loved the Team17 games, it’s pretty shocking to think that they weren’t allowing publications to write fair and unbiassed reviews of their games, because of this magic “73%” number that they wanted to achieve even if their games weren’t particularly exciting or pleasurable. Whatever happened to objective opinions, and magazines or any other periodicals/publications having the freedom to judge something fairly, based on its actual performance or artistic merit?
Scores, to me, are just lazy summations by lazy reviewers aimed at lazy people who don’t necessarily want to take the time to digest information and make their own minds up based on facts… they want to be spoon fed a simple-to-follow key system whereby anything from 1 through 3 is disregarded entirely, 4 or 5 you pretty much avoid, 6 and 7 you may give it a chance but not hold your breath, 8 you consider to be “anything that’s halfway decent”, 9 is a gem and 10 is… let’s be honest… written by a fanboy who chooses to ignore the flaws. That’s perhaps a little harsh, as there may actually be 10/10 games out there… but I’ve never come across one yet.
Ooops… didn’t know that quote would be so big, sorry
Generally I only use the score as a guide and that is all – experience taught me never to 100% trust a score or single review. Meta critic is a great way to scan many different views so I usually go there first.
Some reviewers like EDGE magazine are awful for their reviews. Very often they are inconsistent and and just plain inaccurate – i.e. Crackdown 2 and Bayonetta. If there is one publication I **never** trust, it’s EDGE. Countless times they have given poor reviews to decent games and vice versa.
I’m with you on that one, Jimmy. I was absolutely floored that Edge gave Bayonetta 10/10. Crazy. And yet, they gave an innovative new IP like Mirror’s Edge a 5?
Scores are a necessary evil if you want to make it onto Metacritic but they are problematic.
I gave Onechanbara 5/10 because it was a very equal split between good things and bad things. Yet overall I enjoyed the game. 5 sounds like a hammering but it’s not.
Anyway, I’d say a 5 is worth trying.
Good article, dude.
[...] Numeric Supremacy [...]