Comments on: Eurogamerated: The Path Review

By: UK_John

UK_John — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:33:15 +0000

Surely we buy PC games (not necessarily console games) for the ‘experience’ we will have with it. The Path has more of an ‘experience’ in it;s little toe than most other games have totally?! For that reason, I would give it an easy 9.5!

By: eyemessiah

eyemessiah — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:54:13 +0000

The Path: I loved it; 8/10.

By: Wildbluesun

Wildbluesun — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:49:08 +0000

Pink Floooooooyd.

All I can deduce from that review is that I am a Path Person, and must go play it again.

By: The Hammer

The Hammer — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 11:23:17 +0000

Great review. Made me want to play the game again.

By: Kieron Gillen

Kieron Gillen — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 11:07:37 +0000

Rei: Thanks. I actually did it first try, but had the luxury of a couple of weeks to chew over what I wanted to say.

By: Thirith

Thirith — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 11:06:19 +0000

Every time I’ve done assessments with a 5-point scale (e.g. evaluating applications for an event), I’ve ended up giving half-points. Five points simply seemed to blunt as soon as I had to compare individual entries. I felt much more comfortable with a 10-point scale, however it’s distributed (1-5 with half-points (yes, I know it’s really 9 points) or 1-10). However, that’s obviously a personal preference, and games can’t be compared as immediately as 100+ applications that you’re all evaluating within a few hours and days of each other.

By: Ian

Ian — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:56:29 +0000

“1: Sucks. Don’t play it. Ever.
2: It’s a bad game. You won’t enjoy playing it, unless you’re truly desperate and addicted to the genre.
3: It’s ok… ish. Not worth spending money on, but if you have access to it anyway, and don’t have anything better to do, you probably won’t hate yourself for playing it If you like the genre, you may even enjoy it.
4: Good. You’ll like it
5: Classic. Everyone must play it.”

That is exactly why I prefer /10 to /5. Straight from “not worth spending on” to “good and you’ll like it”? Okay, so a good review should fill in the gaps that might explain why a 4/5 isn’t quite a 5/5, but still.

I’d rather have out-of-10.

By: jalf

jalf — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:44:46 +0000

@Rei: And that degree of difference means what, exactly? That the reviewer was in a hurry? That he had a bad day? Or that he tried to fit the game in so its score fit relatively with other games of the same caliber in that genre?

7/10 simply means “pretty decent”, or “worth playing if you like this type of game, but hardly a classic”. If you want details, read the review. What does 70/100 mean? And how does it differ from 69 or 71?

I think the best scale is only up to 5.
That gives us:
1: Sucks. Don’t play it. Ever.
2: It’s a bad game. You won’t enjoy playing it, unless you’re truly desperate and addicted to the genre.
3: It’s ok… ish. Not worth spending money on, but if you have access to it anyway, and don’t have anything better to do, you probably won’t hate yourself for playing it If you like the genre, you may even enjoy it.
4: Good. You’ll like it
5: Classic. Everyone must play it.

For a grade to work, it has to be boiled down to the essentials, to something you can more or less objectively agree on. Picking 88 over 86 is in no way objective, and depends more on who reviewed it, and what random games he thought of comparing it with, than on the game itself.

But if your you have to choose between “it’s playable if you really like the genre”, and “it’s a good game”, I think most reviewers would settle for the same score.

And the funny thing is, it’s just as informative to the reader. 79% doesn’t convey any additional information to me. It doesn’t even say that the game is better than all the games that got 78% or less. Those couple of percent may be a fluke. Looking at the grade for a review, I simply want to know “is this game something I’d enjoy?” And a minimalist 5-step scale would tell me that just as well as a 82% score.
It’s about not promising more precision than the reviewer is able to deliver. No review can authoritatively say that “this game is a 93%. It is two percent below Half-Life, three percent below Starcraft, but 4% above Oblivion. It’s simply bullshit. How much gameplay can you get in one percent anyway? The games can’t be compared in this way. The only comparison that makes sense is “this is a good game. But so is this”, or “this game is a classic, that one sucked”.

By: MD

MD — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:41:29 +0000

@John, I think what Persus was getting at is that doing away with numerical scores would not force those who normally rely on them to suddenly start engaging with the text at a deeper level. It seems likely to me — though obviously this is nothing but speculation — that those who currently focus on scores to the exclusion of actual reviews would either take even less away from a scoreless review, or more than likely simply not bother reading it. Leaving aside the question of whether score-centrism is actually a problem that needs addressin, simply removing the numbers would basically just be an “up yours” to those who like them, without improving the service/experience for anyone else. Plus, from the looks of it a lot of reviewers would struggle to meet their wordcounts if they were no longer able to fall back on lengthy discussion of what their numbers mean/why their numbers are ultimately meaningless. :p

By: Thirith

Thirith — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:26:06 +0000

Rei Onryou: a percentage score suggests a degree of precision that simply is bullshit. How is it meaningful in any way to say that RTS 1 gets 86% and RTS 2 gets 88%? Chances are that any differences in how much people will enjoy them will depend on the games’ style and feel but not on any actual, absolute superiority of one game over another. Going for a 10-point scale is closer to saying, “The game is pretty good” or “The game is absolutely awesome.” It doesn’t pretend to be scientifically exact.

By: Rei Onryou

Rei Onryou — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 10:18:09 +0000

@Helio: I find a number out of 10 worse than a %. What makes one 7/10 the same as another 7/10 (assuming we’re looking at two games from same genre/style/what-have-you). A % at least gives degrees of difference.

I’m not from the “down-with-scores” group, but I definitely agree that scores aren’t what counts. If someone were to read KG’s critique, skip to the end, see the 7, buy it and then dismiss it as they thought the 7/10 was bull, then more-fool-them.

Well done Kieron, that was a well thought out piece. I expect that must’ve taken a few attempts to put your point across while not spoiling the experience. No doubt you’ve gained Tale of Tales a few extra sales.

By: Lewis

Lewis — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 08:49:27 +0000

“Yeah, shame eurogamer doesn’t have the balls to do it though. At least they don’t use a percentage *glares at pc gamer*”

I’d say the percentage is actually *less* authoritative than out-of-ten. Picking a number out of a hundred makes it ludicrously subjective, something it’s important for more people to understand reviews are. The precision’s there if the nitpickers want to buy into it, but ultimately, what’s the difference between a 45 and a 46? It’s there if you want to pick it out, probably, but y’know.