Kevin Trotter Posted March 8, 2006 Report Posted March 8, 2006 I couldnt agree more. Numerical ratings are just one more stone in the dumbing down of America wall. For example, I dont think any BC game ever can be given a fair rating numerically.While BC3000.ad was flawed and that was complicated by my rudimentary at best computer skills, no game I ever played before captured my attention and imagination. the first time I planned and executed a campaign on land in the air and from space was mind boggling. If I had to depend on a simple numerical scale I would never hav chosen to play it. Second example was Advent Rising Game Informer's rating was 7.7/10 which is pretty pedestrian. I even had sales staff at Game Stop try to talk me out of buying it, based on scores alone, though none of them had played it. I loved the game despite its obvious flaws. Games have evolved to such a level of complexity that is stupid to even try to assign them a numerical score. X-Play assigns scores one 0-5 scale, but obvious dreck like Aquaman gets 2/5 and Fable gets 3/5. Huh? Is there that little difference between those two titles? or is there a tendency not to assign scores based on other factors? Truly, there is only one fair way to critique games, that is a narrative examination of the games merits (or lack thereof)with as little personal and corporate subjectivity as posible. Good riddance!
Kevin Trotter Posted March 8, 2006 Report Posted March 8, 2006 Excuse me if my transition and logic is a little off. I am all hopped up on cough medicine and suffering from a wicked cold.
Darien Wolfe Posted March 9, 2006 Report Posted March 9, 2006 About time. Now I wonder if GamesXtreme will follow suit...or if I could get GX to follow suit heh.
Scrivener Posted March 10, 2006 Report Posted March 10, 2006 I do believe I'll have to subscribe to CGW now. I've always ignored the scoring systems and read into the reviews. I'm so adept at it now that I can filter out the biases and read between the lines enough to deduce whether it's something I, personally, might enjoy.
TSCavalier Posted March 10, 2006 Report Posted March 10, 2006 I am probably the kind of gamer that publishers hate, then. In general, it's because I don't have much disposable income (or time), I use GameRankings to help me pick the next game I'm going to play. I don't know that I own a game that has an overall score less than 80%. So, my taste in games could be considered quite "mainstream". And, I generally don't give a game with less than 80% a second look. The only exception is Universal Combat (which has a 54.1% overall). UC pulled me in because I downloaded the demo and found I couldn't pull myself away from it. Also, I found UC for $19.99 at the time, which is my magic price-point. In general, my gaming purchases go something like this: - Check GameRankings - Scan down from highest to lowest rank in whatever genre I'm in the mood for. - The first one that's < ~$30 on Amazon and > ~75% is my next game. Cheesy, perhaps. Detrimental to the industry, perhaps. But it hasn't burned me yet.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now