|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » CD Projekt - Conference Summary

Default CD Projekt - Conference Summary

November 19th, 2009, 21:13
10-11 million I think, yeah, but I don't recall where I heard that. And yes, that's a lot by Polish standards.
Brother None is offline

Brother None

Brother None's Avatar
SasqWatch

#21

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,552

Default 

November 19th, 2009, 21:40
Originally Posted by Brother None View Post
That's what I meant. Maybe I'm too much of an underachiever, but if I had a straight-rating press, I'd be pretty happy to go into the 80s range.

Hell, I myself, as a reviewer, don't go into the 80s range that easily. Let alone the 90s. Even Dragon Age, easily RPGotY, might not hit the 90s if I were reviewing it (I'm not).

And yeah, that 8.2 rating looked weird after that interview, but is pretty high by GB standards, even though Carter habitually rates a lot higher than I do. Personally, and I've said this before, I loathe ratings and would just like to dump 'em from GB wholesale. Or at least just give them over to the head editor so they're more consistent.
Thing is 90%+ has been the 'we love this game you should buy it' rating for games since day one. I've noticed a few 'hardcore' individuals claiming that knocking, or not giving out so many high scores is the way to go. The reality is that it just takes the scores out of context with what the mainstream is doing. If your 8 is as good as, say, Gamespot's 9 and you're put along side Metacritic your 8 is an 8 plain and simple. If the niche won't stick their necks out for their titles you can hardly expect the mainstream guys to do it for them.
woges is offline

woges

woges's Avatar
SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team

#22

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,110

Default 

November 19th, 2009, 21:59
Just look at it like school — 90+% == A, 80-89% == B, 70-79% == C, and below 70% well it's probably not worth differentiating.

It does seem odd to me to be unhappy an arbitrary rating scale. There is nothing that intrinsically says that 50% must be "decent" or 80% must be "decent". The only advantage of pushing it down is to have more precision to differentiate between higher-rated things, but even ten different degrees of "A" makes little sense (and heck, you can also use decimals if you really want).
hackbod is offline

hackbod

Watcher

#23

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27

Default 

November 19th, 2009, 22:12
For example, good ol' days review of Bard's Tale from Your Sinclair. Basically, I haven't played this game at all 9/10.
woges is offline

woges

woges's Avatar
SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team

#24

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,110

Default 

November 19th, 2009, 22:33
Originally Posted by woges View Post
Thing is 90%+ has been the 'we love this game you should buy it' rating for games since day one.
To some extent, sure, though I feel scores have been going up it's easy enough to point to older titles with high scores (I believe BG2:SoA has 95 on metacritic), but that is untenable without statistical research. My other issue is also unprovable without statistical research, but I feel that the 60-100 scale is used for NA AAA titles, in which 80-90 is decent and only 90+ is good; stay away from AAA titles that rate in the low 80s, and can you even name an AAA title that ranked below 80 on metacritic in the past 5 or so years? Meanwhile, the full 10-100 or 0-100 scale is used for non-NA AAA titles that lack NA clout (some are not NA but still have clout, like BW), and is definitely used for non-AAA titles and indies.

Does that partially make sense because AAA games are what it's all about anyway, and with the money involved tend generally not to be horrifically terrible? Sure. Does that make it fair or even? Not really.

Originally Posted by woges View Post
If the niche won't stick their necks out for their titles you can hardly expect the mainstream guys to do it for them.
Stick their necks out? I stick my neck out by refusing in any way to adapt my writing to anything but my own views and standards on journalism. I'm certainly not pumping up grades because mainstream sites do. What'd be the point? GB is not on Metacritic or GameRankings anyway.

Originally Posted by hackbod
It does seem odd to me to be unhappy an arbitrary rating scale.
Is it? If every AAA title defaults over 90% anyway, how are casual gamers supposed to tell what's a good reception and what isn't? You say it's nothing to be unhappy about because as an "insider" you've adapted to the scale anyway. What about people not that into games? People news to game? In other words: MetaCritic's audience.
Last edited by Brother None; November 19th, 2009 at 22:54.
Brother None is offline

Brother None

Brother None's Avatar
SasqWatch

#25

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,552

Default 

November 19th, 2009, 23:11
Heh, I just checked Gamespot's review of MotB and it scored an 8.0. I do agree that scores are BS especially if you're dealing with an audience that knows what it likes, but I'd like to see an depth study of the Watch's or GameBanshee's audience. Thing is as an alternative source you don't think something is amiss when you're giving out the same/similar rewards as the same guys you're complaining about?

Kieron Gillen gave it one of its lowest marks on Metacritic, for example, with arguments like 'it's only for the western rpg head'. An awful premise that could be substituted with any genre to give a lower score. If you're giving the same score as these guys then you're just climbing into bed with them instead of offering an alternative viewpoint. I'm not singling KG out as a bad man fallacy either, or that I disagree with all his opinions/reviews just that if there is little opposition in niche web-sites then there's little point to them doing reviews - because what are they then offering really?
woges is offline

woges

woges's Avatar
SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team

#26

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,110

Default 

November 19th, 2009, 23:36
Originally Posted by woges View Post
I'm not singling KG out as a bad man fallacy either, or that I disagree with all his opinions/reviews just that if there is little opposition in niche web-sites then there's little point to them doing reviews - because what are they then offering really?
GB can be pretty close to mainstream sites when it comes to mainstream games. But we cover and support indie games where we can (Buck always has, I just added to that), and give a more fair ear to European titles, I'd say. I don't think being close to mainstream sites is a huge problem…

What I do agree is a problem is our ratings, and I've complained about that before (in this thread, no?), but that's of course an internal issue and I don't want to hang out all our dirty laundry. Suffice to say I'm often a bigger fan of Steve Carter's text reviews than his final ratings, and if you read stuff like GB's Oblivion, Mass Effect or Fallout 3 review you'll see where and how it separates from the mainstream.
Brother None is offline

Brother None

Brother None's Avatar
SasqWatch

#27

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,552

Default 

November 20th, 2009, 00:27
Everybody moans about ratings that's the best part of em. I'm not meaning to single out GB or anything either just pointing out that scores are definitely a problem. I don't think it's all that simple for the major sites either. More money, more pressure, goes without saying but don't think that the old mags were any different. In the context of expansion packs though I'd have no problem giving a high recommendation to MotB even though I found it a bit 'emo' at times.
woges is offline

woges

woges's Avatar
SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team

#28

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 2,110
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » CD Projekt - Conference Summary
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:26.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch