Pretty much, yeah. The "professional" reviewers I've talked to say the same thing.Originally Posted by boatofcar
Pretty much, yeah. The "professional" reviewers I've talked to say the same thing.
Ziff Davis (1Up, EGM) file for bankruptcy recently...we will see how long that stretches them. I think that the magazine has lost its fanbase and direction. I was a HUGE fan and subscriber of the mag for a long time(issue 9). I wish them luck, but do not see the new ratings thing fixing the mags problems.
personally I think the UK mags kick our countries asses!
Would you like to know more about collecting video games? Check out my extensive Youtube channel! https://www.youtube.com/user/swlovinist
Yes, UK mags have always been superior, IMO. Bigger in size, off-the-wall humor and some really grade-A coverage over the years spanning multiple UK mags. Of course, some were average, but a few pubs really stood out.
As for EGM, it is a sinking ship. A new rating system won't change much, if anything. You mentioned lack of direction, and I'll throw in lack of soul. IMO, what helped made EGM from inception to about '94 so good was the "soul" each issue carried. To me seeing the latest EGM in my mailbox, or at the grocery store, was like opening a present on Christmas morning. They gave me a similar sense of joy.
True, I have a bias in that I don't care for today's current games, but the writing quality straight up leave no lasting imprint. The layouts are fugly and the mag feels like a cheap, very light paperweight.
well I don't understand why they would complicate things with +/- if they're gonna use A-F... it's a magazine, not a course curriculum... and if you think about it, it really doesn't make any sense at all to use A-F for game ratings...
A = 91% - 100%
B = 81% - 90%
C = 71% - 80%
D = 61% - 70%
F = 0% - 60%
so what they're saying by using a system like this is that any game that isn't more than 10% better than the average game is a failure, if you consider 50% to be average... and when using a percentage system, it should be safe to assume that 50% is average, as that would be the halfway point... just as 5 is average on a 1-10 scale, because 5 is the halfway point, then it makes sense that 50% is average on a percentage scale for the same reason, and the A-F grading system has always been based on a percentage scale... DUH!
I still think A-F is the only system that makes sense (other than maybe a simple 5 star rating). The reason is demonstrated by your post. Some people consider 70% - or 7/10 - "average." Yet there are a lot of sites that use the whole scale and therefore 5/10 is average (like the old EGM system). For those places 50% is average, not terrible. Using a letter grade removes all ambiguity. C means average. There's no question. Everyone has a good idea what a "C" grade means. Whereas a 7/10 - who knows? It depends on the reviewer, it depends on the site, and it depends on the reader's perception of the number. People complain all the time about games that "only" got a 7/10, when the mag/site itself lists 7/10 as "good." There's too much ambiguity and subjectivity in numeric grades - letter grades are immediately clear.
Also, I still think the text of the review is most important. That's why I don't like review system that have too much granularity. 5 stars, or A-F is plenty. One person's 73% will be another's 74%. That's kind of ridiculous. But the text of the review will tell me that regardless what the score is, I might really enjoy or dislike the game.
Last edited by BydoEmpire; 03-07-2008 at 12:59 PM.
If you can't do it with 8 bits, you don't need to do it!
Posting Permissions
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Similar agreements apply to other advertising or affiliate programs such as those from eBay, Google, etc.
Copyright © 1991 - Present of Digital Press. All rights reserved.
Reply With Quote
