Wulfram wrote...
I do think there's an interesting question of whether your score should reflect how you feel about a game or it's objective strengths and weaknesses?
If someone hates the game because a specific feature like autodialogue is ruining for him personally, but recognises that it possess many strengths that would appeal to others, what's the appropriate score? 1/10, because you hated it? 9/10, because it's a good game? Or 6/10, which really reflects neither of those things.
I think he should make the score lower to a point where the scale won't imply that it's without flaws, but is still a good game.
Which can be achieved if the reviewer specifies the negatives and positives that made the score go up or down.
Much like how Angry Joe does it. Because he isn't rating every game 9.5/10 or something like that, which defeats the purpose of having a score scale from 1-10 to begin with.
Each number has a meaning as well. 8 is great and you should go and buy it when you have the chance or if you're a fan of the previous installments, 6 is slightly above average and below 5 is when it's starting to get crappy.
There's also the factor and sort of requirement that the reader/viewer has the same/a similar taste as the reviewer, which is a great reason to find a reviewer who is sharing your views on what makes a good game. Because if you don't, he might think some parts are good while you think they're just trash.
Retour en haut
