the fastest sight you have ever laid eyes on
► critics articles

Game Reviews and Their Biggest Problem

Methods that IGN and others use to rate games


The thing is rating something is probably one of the toughest things to do. While I was working for a big German game magazine I whitnessed the change of a rating system based on fun to one that is divided into graphics, sound, gameplay, story and such. While a lot of it speaks for it and most of the personal did, too, me and some others saw several flaws in the system.

First there is no way you could balance this for different game types. When graphics for a first person shooter is most important how about a game like Peggle or Angry Birds? Not to mention that graphics depend on taste like nothing else except the story. What is a good story? Is it one that just helps you to understand the world a little bit better like in Destiny? Or is it the all-in-all story of Half-Life - that no one really understands?

Secondly the big problem is the result you get. So let us just take a look at Battlefield 4 (or any Battlefield for that matter). While you get awesome graphics and sound, both 10/10 you do not really get a story at least in multiplayer. So how do you rate that shitty single player campaign if no Battlefield really needed a story? Is it a plus because you get more out of it or is it a minus because it basically sucked?

But the biggest problem is subjectiveness. While almost everybody likes to play Destiny for way longer than its 8 hours of story gameplay, everyone is hating the game for its non-perfectiveness. I do understand that it isn’t perfect, but does it really deserve a 7.8 IGN gave it while they put more and more content on their site with journalists of IGN telling they played over 80 hours and do not want to play even more for higher gear? It is a misjudgement and it is misleading buyers into thinking you will have more fun playing Wolfenstein while you will not, obviously, ever touch near the experience you are getting playing Bungies product. Isn’t it appropriate giving a game that tries to be much more than any game before but fails in being perfect a better score than another brainless shooter that does not even have any sort of multiplayer in it?

This leads me to believe that we need a new system. A system where several players state what they like and dislike about a game and what they would change. Then they should focus on the parts they think are good and how much fun they have playing the game and give an inside on that with a rating from shit to premium.

Lightningsoul: "I like that IGN was giving Destiny a 7.8 while they post more stuff about the game than the Sun would post about David Beckham and the queen having a child."

Links: related

Friday 26th of September 2014 at 09:29



No comments yet.



You can post URLs (will be clickable automatically) and images via the [img]http://picurl[/img] tag.
Security Calculation

© 2014 all rights reserved - imprint - mail