9.5/10: The state of game reviews

We've all seen game reviews over the years and most of you are probably fairly content with them, right? I mean, what could be wrong with them?

If you see a review, it likely has a little something at the bottom.

Yep, a rating.


What do you mean you don't get it? Really?
You don't see a problem here?
Allow me to explain then...

Nowadays, too many people rely on ratings like these to influence their purchase decisions. You see a game rated 4/10? You ignore it. 9.5/10? You buy it. Some people flat out ignore entire reviews for the sole purpose of seeing that final rating, that one arbitrary number that will shape their opinions on a game. This is ridiculous.

You may be thinking to yourself,

"What's your problem? Do numbers scare you?"

How about this, tell me the meaning of a 9/10.
Think about it.
You're probably thinking something along the lines of,

"Okay, it means a game is great but not flawless, right?"

That is indeed what you are meant to think but if you just take a second to reflect on the subject...what does 9/10 REALLY mean?

For starters, what is a 10/10? A 10/10 would imply a game is perfect, there is nothing higher in the scale you have chosen so clearly it cannot get any better.
But games are not perfect, none of them. In the end, somebody in the world will have problems with a game based on personal preference, thus technically making it imperfect. A small bug may affect a small percentage of users, making it imperfect. A small clipping issue? Imperfect.

No matter how precise you make the scale, you will always be wrong with a numerical rating.

Not enough for you?

What are we using as an example of a 10? What is a 0? How are these games being compared anyway? Sound? Aesthetics? Gameplay? Something else? Do certain game elements matter more than others for the score?

Numerical ratings are, to be frank, pathetic. They say absolutely nothing about a game in any reasonable sense.
You may now be thinking,

"What does it even matter? It's a number, deal with it."

Oh, trust me, I would. Sadly, these little numbers hold too much sway in this industry. Need an example?

Remember when Fallout: New Vegas released? Pretty good game right?
Obsidian, the developers of the title, had a contract with Bethesda, the publisher, that stated that they would receive a large royalty payment if the game received a 85 or higher on popular rating site Metacritic.

That's right, thousands of dollars for a group of hardworking developers was put in the hands of a single number on a ratings website.

What happened in this case? They got an 84.

1 point off.

 







http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/fallout-new-vegas
http://www.joystiq.com/2012/03/15/obsidian-missed-fallout-new-vegas-metacritic-bonus-by-one-point/

Yeah.

Obsidian employees lost out on thousands of dollars because of a single arbitrary number that meant NOTHING. Why did the money rest in the hands of Metacritic? Because this site for petty ratings got popular enough to hold sway with a publisher.

This is, quite frankly, scary.

Need another example? Just look at Call of Duty games. They get consistently high scores by reviewers who claim they feature revolutionary improvements over previous entries in the franchise only to be panned by users for being the same bland game year in, year out.
 

 

http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/call-of-duty-black-ops-ii
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2

How should games be reviewed if not for a number? Just text.

That's right, that other part of a review, the one that isn't at the bottom of the page.

Yeah.

Reviews should be in-depth and explanatory with opinions held off until the end. Reviewers need to write about the game in general before giving personal opinions and they need to emphasize the fact that the opinions are indeed their own. These would be fair reviews, these would be much better at conveying information than a 9/10 or an 87%.

"But Alex", I hear you cry, "I don't have time to read full articles on a game, I need that number".

You have time to play the game you're thinking of buying, you have time to read some text to make sure you're not buying a shoddy product. Think about it.

I see no reason that gamers shouldn't take their time to analyze a product before making a purchase. Not doing so could be downright harmful to the industry, who wants to reward a company for making a bad product just because a website says it's a 9.5/10?

Does that mean we do away with summaries? No, not at all, summaries would just be longer than a single number. They would discuss individual elements of the game that were touched upon earlier but in a much shorter format. A sentence on the style of aesthetics, a sentence on interesting gameplay features, a sentence on sound assets. Lazier gamers would still have something to look to, they would just need to put in a tiny bit more effort.

Gamers need to stop being controlled by numbers. No game can be summarized in such a simple way, time and effort is put into these titles, the least you can do is put the same into reading or writing about it.


Feel free to make a comment if you have an opinion you want to voice on this subject.
Thank you for reading.