Topic: How do you consider ratings?

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: PartyBear
As for trying to come up with something that means something emotionally, that's just going to cause confusion.  If people are free to assign their own ideas to the goofy pictures you use for ratings, they're not likely to assign the same meanings you do, and then you have failed to communicate at all.

If they're looking at the end score, you're already not communicating. The text of the review is for communication. The review score itself, whether it be pictorial, numerical, or emotionally-based, is just a quick-and-dirty touchpoint for those who aren't particular enough to read the actual review anyways.

Oohhboy has it right: review scores are nothing more than a recommendation. And you don't recommend something by saying it got 87% out of 100%. You recommend something with abstract, human-centered, EMOTIONAL terms like "better than average," "excellent," or "meh." I really believe that appealing to, and using, our emotional intelligence will allow game review recommendations to be far more meaningful, and perhaps even convey more information than a dry, draconian, dispirited number system.

[oohhboy]

You are some what mistaken Kairon. It is not only the score that is the recommendation, it is also the body of the review as I mentioned earlier. The score is meant to be a dry counter point to he emotion of the review. Hence it is pointless trying to assign emotional value to the number.

[IceCold]

I like your star plus/minus ratings, Freyr, but the as for the "meter" rating, it would be great for relative scores. However, like oohboy said, a game that is past the centre of the bell curve might still warrant a "not recommended".  

[ThePerm]

nice ratings meter! a bell curve makes sense

[Freyr]

Sorry another one


Older Versions
Version 1
Version 2
Version 3  

[oohhboy]

You guys know what a bell curve is? It is a form of mathematical representation of raw data in to something that humans can easily interpret.

NOT A SCALE.

If I was to plot all the scores from NWR on to a leaf and stem graph, it would form a crude bell curve. I would bet real money that the crest of that curve will not sit in the center.

[Kairon]

So are we now arguing where to put the crest of the curve?

[KDR_11k]

No, he's arguing that it's pointless to complain about that. Some people complain that reviews don't average at 5.0. I've posted my views on the matter in the talkback thread about Evan's editorial.

[Kairon]

Oohhboy in the talkback thread to Svevan's NWR editorial on the subject just gave me an awesome idea!

Quote
Originally posted by: oohhboy
Rubbish. For as long art has existed, we have applied ratings and scales to it. For things like classical art, there is no limit to that scale. An item can be brought for a million dollars or a hundred million. Is that not an arbitrary value tied to a scale we call money?

... why don't we rate games... using MONEY!

Why isn't the review score a monetary amount that the reviewer says would be a "fair price" for the game? That way we wouldn't have 9.0's or 8.0's... we'd have games that are great for $30 but cost $50, and games that people should and would pay $60 for (Zelda titles for example) but only cost $40 (Zack & Wiki)!

...bad idea? ... yeah, probably... but it's a new one at least!

[vudu]

No cross posting.  

Also, money's not an absolute value.  If I have more money than you do I may be willing to part with more money for a game I enjoy just as much as you.  We're not communists.

Can I get a Hell Yeah?  

[IceCold]

Also, price is determined through supply and demand, not through critical merit. Popular games like Madden inherently would have a higher price than, say, Okami, even though they may not be as good.