Can a game really score a perfect 10/10?

To score a perfect 10, the game would have to exceed in so many places. Let's see, gameplay, level design, story (If it has one), and a few other things like world and pacing etc. Now imo, technically, I repeat, technically, I don't think a game can truly score a 10 because it would have to be perfect in all these things. But it certainly could if this isn't the criteria. That's just an opinion, what do you guys think?

You have to schools for this:

One: Nothing is perfect, therefore a game cannot score a perfect 10. It implies it being flawless.

Two: What's the point of including a 10 on a scale if it's impossible to achieve? A 10 is a game with such minor flaws you can overlook them because of its amazing qualities.

Depending on how you look at it, yes games can (and did and will continue to) get a perfect score.

Yes, if a game sets up to be the dream sequel that improved on the original in every single way (like Horizon Forbidden west is looking like it will be).

Or if a new IP simply hits all the high notes (Deathloop comes to mind).

I just feel like games shouldn't be held up to rediculous standards:

Oh yeah this 60 dollar game needs to have a robust multiplayer, solid coop and lenghty SP campaign to be worth it.

That's ludicrous.

Yes,if a reviewer scores it 10,but if another reviewer scores the same game 6 who's opinion is more valid?

The simple answer is neither,it's your own opinion that counts.

Yes. 10 represents highest quality in genre. With that said, I disagree with most if not all 10s.

Elden Ring. Yes.

Yea it's been done already. Do your research!

Everyone has their own metrics.

I don't see why not. After all, a reviewer is an opinion to pass judgment on the game and whatever that reviewer scores it just giving you the info what you want to know and if the opinion doesn't favor you, go to somebody else's opinion. If the game deserves a 10/10, than the reviewer did his/her job.

On most review scales, 10 doesn't mean perfect. It just means it's of the highest level of quality.

I think it was OXM who addressed this very reader misunderstanding by having its review scale go 1-11, with 11 being described as the non-existent game that was absolutely perfect in every way, freeing them to use the full scope of review scores.

Yes

Not sure where this idea a 10 is perfect.

A 10 to me means a game executes upon its chosen design about as well as could be hoped for. Does that mean that there couldn’t be another method of design that is better suited respective to the initial goal it seeks to address? No, just that it is excellently done in the one that it does.

Perfection doesn’t exist, it’s just another way of saying, “this is about as good as it’s going to get given the chosen direction towards its goal”.

I personally don't think a 10/10 is "perfection", just "really fucking good".

I don't think I've given anything a 10/10. Easiest games to give a 10/10 would probably be games made on hardware with many limitations, like NES or SNES. Games like SMB3, Super Metroid and A Link to the Past, I wouldn't change a damn thing about. And they're super impressive for their time. Might be 10/10s in my eyes.

Can a game score 10/10? Silly question. Look no further than the 10/10 ratings that Gamespot and any other gaming publication has handed out over the years.

10 at GS does not mean perfect. Period. They've defined its meaning clearly and provided articles on it as well. So sure, a 10 is readily achievable

Yes, absolutely. A 10/10 doesn’t literally mean it’s “perfect”, it simply means that the overall experience of the game just negates any possible negatives that it might have. It would seem silly to me to make 10/10 some unobtainable goal. What would be the point in doing that?

Go look at a 10/10 game on IGN or Gamespot; specifically the word underneath the 10 score. Do you see "Perfect?" No. You see "Editor's Choice" and "Essential." That's what 10/10 really is; not a perfect game, but a game that does something that elevates it above just "Amazing" or "Superb."

And that's how I personally see 10/10 myself. I have probably personally rated about 5 games 10/10 in total. They were anything but "perfect," but they had an extra something that elevates them above 9/10s. Portal and Portal 2, for me, just nailed puzzle design that made them so satisfying to solve and had brilliant writing and humour, for example.

No game can be perfect, unless it is created by God.

I don't think I've ever played a 10/10 game they don't exist.

10/10 doesn't mean perfect. GameSpot classifies it as 'Essential' as most others do as well.

All it means is it's a best-in-class game that you shouldn't miss out on. I.e. GOTY and, GOTG candidates.

Yeah I can 10-out-of-10 games all day!

Factorio. 10/10

See?

RimWorld. Boom. 10/10

Hollow Knight. 10/10

I could keep going.

@worlds_apart: no, at least here on GS, it's based on one review. Ff7 remake and integrade both scored a perfect 10 here. If you check metacritic, neither game cracked a 90/100. Meanwhile, forza scored a 9/10 here and sitting at a 92/100 on MC.

Though sometimes, in very rare cases you get a super politically correct time ticking bomb of a game like tlou2, or cyberpunk, where the game isn't that good and gamespot gives an accurate and honest review, but metacritic jumps on the hype train.

Most of the 10s so far have been driven by nothing but nostalgia. e.g. Breath of the Wild. Despite botw being a boring game with an empty world and annoying puzzles, it scored a 10.

Not even the Witcher 3 deserves a 10, and that is to this day the greatest game ever created.

sure, but like any entertainment, there's always a subjective element.

UT2004 10/10

Ninja Gaiden 10/10

SC Chaos theory 10/10

THPS 10/10

SSX3 10/10

Blitz 2000 10/10

Galaga 10/10

NBA Street vol 2 10/10

Quake 3 10/10

Dawn of War 10/10

MegaMan X 10/10

Donkey Kong Country 10/10

DJFFNY 10/10

Tekken Tag tournament 2 10/10

MvC2 10/10

Painkiller 10/10

Half Life 10/10

Super Mario 64 10/10

Link to the Past 10/10

Banjo Kazooie 10/10

Spyro Riptos rage 10/10

Halo 2 10/10

Kingdom hearts 10/10

CS 1.6 10/10

Day of Defeat Source 10/10

Ratchet & Clank going commando 10/10

Downhill Domination 10/10

I got more, I could keep going

I

I have a bigger problem with all the 8’s and 9’s reviewers throw around.

No such thing as perfection. If a game represents the pinnacle of its genre, then it should deserve a 10.

That's why I sometimes don't understand GS's rating because it'd be subjective. Meaning it would vary from person to person. Unless it's one whole consensus in the boardroom.

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild is a 100/10.

Super beyond perfection

@onesiphorus: and since god doesn’t exist no game is perfect??

Portal 2...

I always liked aggregate scores given by reviewers where they break the game down into several different categories and give the game scores out of 10 in each one. In that regard I would say some games have hit nearly perfect marks in individual categories. Do I believe there has ever been a perfect game? No I don't, but that said I tend to give scores based off of how much I liked a game compared to others most of the time and in that regard yes, there are some games I have given perfect scores to throughout the years. Technically speaking there will probably never be a perfect game, but if you just do comparisons to other games then I'd say it's just personal opinions and I have no problem seeing perfect scores. That's the problem though... different people rate games on different scales.

I have an issue with GTA 4 getting a 10/10 on 7th gen consoles because of the choppy frame rate while driving. Imo that's easily enough to knock it down to a 9/10.

I'm not asking for the perfectly coded game, but driving around plays a huge part in these games.

@djoffer123: God does exist, though, but that’s not relevant to the topic. On topic, Nintendo has made some perfect games, and I’ve given a few imperfect non-Nintendo games a 10/10 as well.

@The_Deepblue: no

As several people have already pointed out 10/10 doesn't mean perfect, why some people can't understand that yet is mind numbing.

I like to think of a 10 as a game that I HAVE to play. It's systems work together in a way that makes it stand alone in your mind.

But I do often wonder what is happening in the mind of someone making a sequel to a well received game. Did they have a true vision that couldn't be completed in the time they had, or are they just stretching out people's goodwill while they have it? I believe the F-ZERO guy said he didn't want to make a sequel because he had no new ideas on how to improve it. Versus something like Halo 2 where they were closer to purity with CE, then muddled it up with dual wielding, worse physics, weaker weapons, etc. Did they lose sight of what they had, or did they even truly know what they had? Sorry, kinda went of on a tangent there :)

Where does it says a 10, at least in gaming, means perfect?

And I'm in the latter school of thought. What's the point of having a scale out of 10 if the 10 is gonna be on perpetual reserve for some hypothetical accomplishment that has no precedent?

Scoring a game works the same as scoring for food - it's always relative, and never absolute. If you go to a restaurant and ate the best steak you've ever tasted in your life, then it's a 10/10....until you finally eat another steak from another restaurant which sets a new standard, then said steak takes the 10/10 spot and the previous one gets downgraded to 9/10. And that's why a 10/10 game in 2005 may not hold a candle to a 10/10 game in 2020.

if the game truly is perfect - like Metal Gear Solid 4 or The Last of Us yes of course.

Metal Gear Solid 5 and The Last of Us 2 were last gens closest 10s

Just put it simple- a 10 should go to the games you've had the best times with.

10 does not mean perfect on a 1-10 scale rounding up or down. If a reviewer thought the game was a 9.6 it'd be a 10 on that scale. I've played a few games I'd give high 9s to.