destructoid.com— If there's no such thing as a perfect game, period, then why do we only reserve a 10/10 score as meaning "flawless"?
Apr 17, 2008View in Crawl 4
I very much disagree. Rating systems are meant to give readers an impression of how good a game is compared to other games; if you had no intention of comparing, the review sans rating would be enough. That said, I give you this example: say a game comes out, it is the greatest game ever created, the best story, the best graphics, everything is perfect except for a small glitch in the camera that makes it difficult to traverse ledges in the game. This game receives a perfect score of 10/10, despite this problem, and is widely considered the best game ever. Then, 2 years later, its sequel comes out, has perfect graphics, great story, but fixes that glitch. Shouldn't it get a better score than its prequel, which was clearly the inferior game due to that camera glitch?My point is, we may never see a perfect game, but I do believe that there will be games that are better than the games so many give a perfect score to. I also believe that those games should receive a score that portrays that superiority. In order for that to happen, it's necessary to reserve the score of ten for only perfect games.
10/10 means the game publisher paid for it. For example, Halo 3 shouldn't be a 10/10 if CoD4 (9/10) and TF2 (9/10) are more popular and considered better by gamers.
I don't think TF2 or CoD4 Deserve a 10/10 just because Halo 3 received one.Consider that Halo 3 did a s**tload of new and innovative things that have never been done together in tandem on a console FPS game.And the reviewers liked the game a lot. *GASP*Now I await to be dugg down because I said Halo 3 is a good game.
Gau is straight up awesome. Maybe not in dialog but in gameplay. His ability to leap off of the Veldt is crucial to completing a low-level game in FF6. You can beat the game with mostly level 6 characters! Not to mention in that type of run, his rages are actually useful.
We reserve it so that when we give a game a really good score, like a 9.8, we can wait till we find a game that we like even *more* and give it a 9.9. and then even a 9.95, etc.
Now that I think about that punch in the Godfather really does kinda ruin the immersion. I always kinda blocked out of my head how bad that punch due to how perfect everything else in the movie is but it definitely is really lame and immersion ruining considering the high standard the rest of the movie follows.
I did not say the same game, I said a different game with just as good graphics for its time, just as good a story, but also fixed the problems of the original. There is a very large difference.
Black & white deserving a 10? Are you insane?I remember buying this game on release and the outrageous bugs that accompanied it. First of all the game constantly crashed and corrupted save files and secondly at release the game could not be finished!!!! There was a game breaking bug at world 4-5(forget which world) and everybody that bought the game had to wait 2-3 months to be able to complete the game. The game is absolute rushfest(I've played it on 3 different computers and it froze and corrupted saved files on all 3) with a some interesting concepts. If anything I'd give this game a 3/10 at release and maybe a 6 /10 or 7/10 now that most of the bugs have been dealt with.Anyways as for the topic I really think no games should really get 10/10. 10/10 should be the score you're trying to reach but can never get there(perfection is unattainable of course). How close they get to 10/10 should be the deciding factor of how good a game is. Some things naturally shouldn't be included in scoring such as singleplayer vs multiplayer or rts vs fps. However, things such as story, controls, visuals, audio, pacing, difficulty, and length should all be used to determine a games quality. I don't see why reviewers give games 10/10 reviews because personally it will always seem biased.
Ho, ho, funny guy.Do people like you always read the first paragraph and jump to conclusions so you can appear to be cool?Tell you what, read the whole thing then read what you wrote. Maybe you will see that the number 0 was also counted making 5 average. Oh noes! I said 1-10 scale, even though every media outlet says the same thing and also includes the number 0 your going to be cool and pull me up on it.Damn, you rock. In fact, besides being a retard, your view is as appreciated as much as this month old reply.
lacronicusApr 18, 2008
I very much disagree. Rating systems are meant to give readers an impression of how good a game is compared to other games; if you had no intention of comparing, the review sans rating would be enough. That said, I give you this example: say a game comes out, it is the greatest game ever created, the best story, the best graphics, everything is perfect except for a small glitch in the camera that makes it difficult to traverse ledges in the game. This game receives a perfect score of 10/10, despite this problem, and is widely considered the best game ever. Then, 2 years later, its sequel comes out, has perfect graphics, great story, but fixes that glitch. Shouldn't it get a better score than its prequel, which was clearly the inferior game due to that camera glitch?My point is, we may never see a perfect game, but I do believe that there will be games that are better than the games so many give a perfect score to. I also believe that those games should receive a score that portrays that superiority. In order for that to happen, it's necessary to reserve the score of ten for only perfect games.
unicronbandApr 18, 2008
That's why they should devise a Spinal Tap-esque review system that goes to eleven.
yourookiesApr 18, 2008
10/10 means the game publisher paid for it. For example, Halo 3 shouldn't be a 10/10 if CoD4 (9/10) and TF2 (9/10) are more popular and considered better by gamers.
sscrowApr 18, 2008
I don't think TF2 or CoD4 Deserve a 10/10 just because Halo 3 received one.Consider that Halo 3 did a s**tload of new and innovative things that have never been done together in tandem on a console FPS game.And the reviewers liked the game a lot. *GASP*Now I await to be dugg down because I said Halo 3 is a good game.
Closed AccountApr 18, 2008
Gau is straight up awesome. Maybe not in dialog but in gameplay. His ability to leap off of the Veldt is crucial to completing a low-level game in FF6. You can beat the game with mostly level 6 characters! Not to mention in that type of run, his rages are actually useful.
theshrikeApr 18, 2008
How about this... When you read a review (for anything), take it with a pinch of salt instead.
lavarockApr 18, 2008
We reserve it so that when we give a game a really good score, like a 9.8, we can wait till we find a game that we like even *more* and give it a 9.9. and then even a 9.95, etc.
destroyposeursApr 18, 2008
Now that I think about that punch in the Godfather really does kinda ruin the immersion. I always kinda blocked out of my head how bad that punch due to how perfect everything else in the movie is but it definitely is really lame and immersion ruining considering the high standard the rest of the movie follows.
lacronicusApr 18, 2008
I did not say the same game, I said a different game with just as good graphics for its time, just as good a story, but also fixed the problems of the original. There is a very large difference.
mrsteamtankApr 19, 2008
Black & white deserving a 10? Are you insane?I remember buying this game on release and the outrageous bugs that accompanied it. First of all the game constantly crashed and corrupted save files and secondly at release the game could not be finished!!!! There was a game breaking bug at world 4-5(forget which world) and everybody that bought the game had to wait 2-3 months to be able to complete the game. The game is absolute rushfest(I've played it on 3 different computers and it froze and corrupted saved files on all 3) with a some interesting concepts. If anything I'd give this game a 3/10 at release and maybe a 6 /10 or 7/10 now that most of the bugs have been dealt with.Anyways as for the topic I really think no games should really get 10/10. 10/10 should be the score you're trying to reach but can never get there(perfection is unattainable of course). How close they get to 10/10 should be the deciding factor of how good a game is. Some things naturally shouldn't be included in scoring such as singleplayer vs multiplayer or rts vs fps. However, things such as story, controls, visuals, audio, pacing, difficulty, and length should all be used to determine a games quality. I don't see why reviewers give games 10/10 reviews because personally it will always seem biased.
lawrApr 19, 2008
umm, that's because 10/10 DOESN'T mean it's a perfect game, just the best game of its kind, relative to others.
zujikMay 25, 2008
Ho, ho, funny guy.Do people like you always read the first paragraph and jump to conclusions so you can appear to be cool?Tell you what, read the whole thing then read what you wrote. Maybe you will see that the number 0 was also counted making 5 average. Oh noes! I said 1-10 scale, even though every media outlet says the same thing and also includes the number 0 your going to be cool and pull me up on it.Damn, you rock. In fact, besides being a retard, your view is as appreciated as much as this month old reply.