Today's Takeaway - 10/24
I don't get it. Sticking to a review scale you've developed should be easy. While reviewing games is difficult, because it is impossible to manage expectations for the whole of the Internet. It is just rather misleading. Sure, there is no industry standard and that makes it difficult to bounce from site to site and expect a 7 to mean the same thing everywhere. I myself having only written a handful of reviews for ScrewAttack am still getting used to the scale. So if it is so difficult, why make it harder on everyone, by breaking your own scale? Like YAHOO did by giving Batman: Arkham City a 6 out of 5... WTF?!
Even if I could find the review scale on your site (which I couldn't), a six is not on there. So if a five signified that this was a must play game for any gamer, any console, any generation, then what is a six? Should I sell all my personal possessions, abandon my family, and try to go out playing this game, like Nick Cage drank booze in Leaving Las Vegas? Is that what you want me to do YAHOO Games?!
I just think we all need to stop blowing things out of proportion. Think about what happens on meta-critic when you give a 6 out of 5. That translates to a 120! Like that smart kid that keeps blowing the curve in Chemistry. I hate that kid. What do you guys think? Should a website be allowed to break their own review scale? And if they do, do you also think it makes reviewing more difficult?
Playing Arkham Asylum on hard to remember... Waiting for City to come to pc... :)
In all likelihood, they did it just to attract more attention to themselves BECAUSE Yahoo games isn't a trusted review site.
First off, I love that header pic.
Second, I think it's ok for reviewers to break their own review scales from time to time. It just shows they are having fun, which are what games are about...having fun.
I love Victor Lucas from Reviews on the Run and always trust his scores, but I also know he's a HUGE Batman fanboy. He scored Arkham City a 12/10, while ridiculous, I absolutely loved that he did that. He had so much fun with the game, even being a fanboy, that he would do that? Totally awesomes.
Indeed, the solution to the problem, if there was one (that the scale was ignored), is in the source itself: Yahoo. It's freakin Yahoo. I blame them, and old people out there who think they could hang with the youts.
I think I'd pick a slightly better review site than Yahoo Games...
What has Screwattack done to get on the Riddler's shit list?
"Should I sell all my personal possessions, abandon my family, and try to go out playing this game, like Nick Cage drank booze in Leaving Las Vegas? Is that what you want me to do YAHOO Games?!"
That is absolutely what you should be doing. This game is fucking amazing.
Batman Offers the full package. anyone who reads reviews on yahoo is likely to feel batman arkham city is a 6/5 game, anyone who cares wouldn't trust them anyways.
Usually the review scores give me an idea of if I should buy it, and then I do my freaking homework to see if it's the right game for me. I don't go by peer pressure from just one site and buy the game baised on the 56000 out of 1000 they gave it. I see the score on at least 5 sites, and analyze the game. A game like the first Deus Ex was given an incredible score, being praised by millions, but the game is a first-person stealth-baised game, which I was not into after finding out on my brother's steam account.
Yes it does!
To be fair, it does DESERVE a 6/5.
Breaking a scale should only happen as a joke, like when Craig asked the guy at High Moon Studios on a interview for "Transformers: War for Cybertron" what he would rate the game from a scale of 1 to Purple.
Seriously though, other than that it is stupid to rate something higher than your scale.
Victor Lucas of Reviews on the Run gave it a 12 out of 10, saying that it is without a doubt his favourite game he's ever played
The only time I find ignoring a review scale acceptable is when a review for chicken shoot on the wii was given a -2 out of 10, looking at the game it was totally acceptable
Personally I believe that scales, whether 1 to 5 or 1 to 10, are there for a reason. Keeping in mind once that standard is set that it shouldn't be messed up by anyone. There are those out there who take reviews seriously as a literary form and respect those who stick to the system. Going one above is not "cute" or even "cool", it's just a fancy way of saying "I've whored out so pay me lots of money to give good scores." Why create a rating system if it's not going to be followed?
er... anytime now.
I never judge by review scores. I usually watch the review to hear what the reviewer is saying about the game and I look at the gameplay video that come with review. And make my decision that way :)
it also shows how unprofessional and biased you are, just because there was a super hero games that was actually good doesnt mean that you have to praise the game like it was the best thing ever since Jesus turned wine into water and people into gingerbread men
lol i just imagined some of the most ridiculous review scales, "i give batman arkham city a 28 out of a 36"
I have a similar form of thinking. Me and my friend argue about what is better Arkham City, or Uncharted 3. Despite Arkham City receiving higher scores, it seems Uncharted has gotten better praise in terms of opinions. That is what I go by, that and the awards the game wins.