I've got a beef with you Gamespot, but let's be civilized gentlemen about it.

This is, or should be, a follow-up to the "I seriously wish GameSpot kept its old review system" thread. Many things have changed on this website since I first became a member. I realize that things change over time, with the premise usually being that newer, more accessible additions improve the website. I feel this is not the case.

Alex Navarro-You should've paid him more to stay...or made him chief editor or president. I don't know. I feel that he emboddied all that was good in this website. He had some cool features, he was funny and knew how to entertain, and he was fair. He had a feature called "Burning Questions" or something like that. Just because an editor retired doesn't mean his feature needs to be retired as well. THAT feature was what brought me to this website in the first place and was incredibly fun to read. Balance out your less-accurate rating system by bringing that back.

Perfection-Now I'm not saying that the Gamespot reviewers are un-fair, but I am saying what the aforementioned thread has elaborated on...the new review system comes with some sense of laziness on the part of Gamespot's employees. There is a certain enjoyment when I see a game that gets a "10" on this website...or I used to feel something. Now it's just, well, watered-down. The score of "10" comes with the title of "perfect". The word perfect means no flaws, regardless of how negligible they may be. It also seems to me that no game should be perfect...ever. To me, perfect symbolizes the end of something. Nothing can surpass perfect or match it. After all, how do you make something that's perfect better? You can't.

Matt Rorie-I like you Matt. You remind me of Alex. If my memory serves me correctly then you also had a feature, albeit shortlived, called Boss of Bosses. Whatever happened to that?

Bias-Oh, this one's tough and something that is not likely to be remedied, but I will attempt this nonetheless. This ties in with your rating system. I KNOW that some part of that "10" score for MGS4 was from the reviewer (or series of reviewers) who just love the game. Perhaps it was because someone thought that the game could not get anything less than "perfect" because of how good the series is/was. How else could the game get a "perfect" if flaws were mentioned in the review. Like I said, it is probably impossible to get rid of bias in the reviewing of a video game, but steps can be taken to minimize it for the good of the game and for the respect of the people who made it.

Don't get me wrong Gamespot, I love you guys. If I didn't then I would tell you all to **** off and I wouldn't be writing this. Maybe if enough people get behind this and it reaches the higher-ups, then something can change. If nothing does and I'm still surfing the same website one year from now then at least I'll know what's important to you.

-E.W.

perfect =/= prime

thread = /

Why don't people understand that a 10 doesn't mean perfect. No game is perfect and no game will ever be perfect. But if the game is overwhlelmingly awesome and/or is extremely ambitious, would it really be fair to give it less than a ten just because of a couple minor problems that have no effect on the overall game?

Look at Zelda: Ocarina of Time, for example. It took the Zelda franchise to a whole new level and set the bar higher for every game. It excelled in every single category. Now if you tried hard enough you could find something that isn't perfect about the game, like the fact that it doesn't include the original Zelda theme. But when everything else is so ridiculously good, it would be a disgrace to give it a 9.9. What would even be the point of having a 10 point rtating system if no game could ever get a 10?

I sort of agree a little, I miss Navarro and the old review system, but how do you "KNOW" that the mgs4 review was biased. even if youve played it and you hated it that doesnt mean that the review was biasedxisytenin

A review will ALWAYS carry bias, its the nature of reviews. People are different and we dont all think the same way. Reviews are just opinions back up by good evidence. (the good reviews anyway, im still not happy about the score army of two was given)

Every game that GameSpot has scored a 10 in the past was imperfect. Even I could point out that the rupee economy in Ocarina of Time was unbalanced and often useless, the story wasn't as compelling as it could have been and a few small sections of the game dragged a bit. Imperfect, but this didn't impact the overall quality anything terribly, and thus, I understood it getting a ten.

The criteria for a game getting the highest score is that the game has to be so good, that anything other than the highest possible score wouldn't do it justice.

If a game is as good as it could be, given the technology of it's time and the fundamentals of it's gameplay, then it should get a ten, even if it has some obvious flaws. As already pointed out, no ten so far has actually been perfect.

Another one of those... *sigh*

Metal gear solid 4 is free of technical errors and I dare anyone to prove me wrong. Not using the most cutting-edge technology is not a flaw. As for gameplay formula or storyline and whatever, you can only go by the technical errors a journalist points out in his/her review and not their personal opinion. A reviewer praises a game for other reasons and not only for its technical acheivements. Most of the time the other reason is emotional attachment.

Yeah, I also miss gamespot old review system.Thiago26792

I hope someone locks this topic. It doesn't look like it will spark a good conversation.

This whole 10 review thing is one of the most sad things I have seen. It just shows how immature so many of the people that come to this site are. I cannot believe you guys cannot understand the simple concept of a scale. dvader654

It's totally true. However, unlike you, I am not really surprised anymore. After all, look at what usually happens on election day, eh?

[QUOTE="dvader654"]This whole 10 review thing is one of the most sad things I have seen. It just shows how immature so many of the people that come to this site are. I cannot believe you guys cannot understand the simple concept of a scale. AtomicTangerine

It's totally true. However, unlike you, I am not really surprised anymore. After all, look at what usually happens on election day, eh?

Americans are forced to choose between one of two candidates, and if they vote for a third party candidate, their vote is said to have been "thrown away"?

Because honestly, I find that a lot more disturbing than whoever actually does get elected.

It doesn't matter what review system Gamespot uses when it no longer has a shred of integrity. Post-Gerstmann-gate, no review system that Gamespot uses will matter in the years it will take for this site to earn back the credibility that CNET cashed it in for to score more advertising revenue.

As long as we're discussing review systems, I'd rather Gamespot have done away with review scores long ago, thereby forcing gamers to, get this, actually read the text of the reviews OMFGBBQ1!!1111!!!!!SHIFTONE!1!!!1111 NOT THAT!?

Hey, if you wanted to complain you should have blogged this. You probobly don't even know how great MFS4 is and just because it got a 10 doesn't mean you have to think so ( although I do...)

Why don't people understand that a 10 doesn't mean perfect. No game is perfect and no game will ever be perfect. But if the game is overwhlelmingly awesome and/or is extremely ambitious, would it really be fair to give it less than a ten just because of a couple minor problems that have no effect on the overall game?

Look at Zelda: Ocarina of Time, for example. It took the Zelda franchise to a whole new level and set the bar higher for every game. It excelled in every single category. Now if you tried hard enough you could find something that isn't perfect about the game, like the fact that it doesn't include the original Zelda theme. But when everything else is so ridiculously good, it would be a disgrace to give it a 9.9. What would even be the point of having a 10 point rtating system if no game could ever get a 10?

arachosia

Alright, I guess what I should've said was that the sub-title "Perfect" should be changed to something more along the lines of "Masterpiece".

This cannot be stressed enough. For those who are whining/moaning/b*****ing, you of all people need to open your eyes and read the reviews through and through, from the very top all the way to the very bottom. Don't just take a quick glance at the score and make knee-jerk reactions. BladesOfAthena

I never said that I didn't read the entire review from top to bottom...I always have and did for MGS4. I love reading game reviews, but the way that they score a game just has to be mended. That's all.

[QUOTE="arachosia"]

Why don't people understand that a 10 doesn't mean perfect. No game is perfect and no game will ever be perfect. But if the game is overwhlelmingly awesome and/or is extremely ambitious, would it really be fair to give it less than a ten just because of a couple minor problems that have no effect on the overall game?

Look at Zelda: Ocarina of Time, for example. It took the Zelda franchise to a whole new level and set the bar higher for every game. It excelled in every single category. Now if you tried hard enough you could find something that isn't perfect about the game, like the fact that it doesn't include the original Zelda theme. But when everything else is so ridiculously good, it would be a disgrace to give it a 9.9. What would even be the point of having a 10 point rtating system if no game could ever get a 10?

edgewalker16

Alright, I guess what I should've said was that the sub-title "Perfect" should be changed to something more along the lines of "Masterpiece".

The subtitle associated with a 10 here on GameSpot is P-R-I-M-E... Prime. That "perfect" thing is in your head. It's only in your head.

Anyway, I think I might start a running tally of how many different people post these exact same "insights" every few days. It's getting old.

[QUOTE="BladesOfAthena"]This cannot be stressed enough. For those who are whining/moaning/b*****ing, you of all people need to open your eyes and read the reviews through and through, from the very top all the way to the very bottom. Don't just take a quick glance at the score and make knee-jerk reactions. edgewalker16

I never said that I didn't read the entire review from top to bottom...I always have and did for MGS4. I love reading game reviews, but the way that they score a game just has to be mended. That's all.

Sorry, I shouldn't have come off as antagonistic. Yeah the system isn't perfect but at the same time I honestly don't see the point in calling them out for it when everything is set in stone.

Alex Navarro killed off Burning Questions because he didn't want to do it any more. That was his decision, not something that was forced on him by his superiors.

10 is not perfect. It means "Prime". It was changed when the scoring system was changed. But if you read the last paragraph of the Ocarina of Time review, you'll find a mention of occasional slowdown. So indeed, even "perfect" games can be imperfect.

And your claims of bias make me smile, because many people have tried to claim that GameSpot is biased against the PS3 and prefers the Xbox 360. Anyone can see bias if they choose to see only what they want to see.

And your claims of bias make me smile, because many people have tried to claim that GameSpot is biased against the PS3 and prefers the Xbox 360. Anyone can see bias if they choose to see only what they want to see.

LordAndrew

GS is so, like, totally biased against the PS3. I mean come on, a launch center page and all the extensive coverage on MGS4, pshaw.:P

I agree, I suppose some people just go looking for a fight.