View Single Post

Default 

September 22nd, 2013, 20:47
About the Numerical Score:

There are already big discussions about that and the question is, if you want to have a score system for other sites like metacritic or for your site.

Some of you might know Tom Chick from Quarter to Three and who is a regular guest at 3 moves ahead. He is one strongly arguing for using the whole scale.
Metacritic and most "mainstream" media is using only parts of the scale, the "academic" scale, which is basically using 70% and more for games which run decently and have graphics and sound.

Personally I think the RPGWatch score is much better because it doesn't try to give one game 2% more than another due to some strage calculations. In a scope like that it's mostly personal impressions anyways.

If I had to create a score system I would use a 5 "state" system was well.
Just that I would not call it stars. I think the presentation is of importance to understand a system.
If you do not know the system one star still implicates some value, while you know it's garbage.
But if you used a thumb down, thumb on the side, thumb up and one state in between each it would show a completely different picture and you would instantly know what to think about a game.
For now I only see systems like that at movies. For movies it's more obvious that a lot of it is a matter of taste and they don't try to give a movie 1/100 more than any other movie and instead they say "it's a good one and you'll probably like it if you like the genre".
I am aware that IMDB uses a 0 to 100 system (0.0 to 10.0 which is the same) but I'd call them an exception focused on averages.
Kordanor is offline

Kordanor

Kordanor's Avatar
Wastelander
RPGWatch Donor

#42

Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 864