Gamespot overhauling site and review system. (Now with poll!)

If anyone is interested this is Alex Navarro's response.

"There's nothing wrong with giving games the same score. Review scores were never intended to give the impression that a game that scores a 6.6 is clearly better than a game that gets a 6.4. With this new system, the ratings actually mean more, as there will be more significant differentiation between them. Jeff will be posting a note up soon that explains our reasoning for all of this in more detail."

"I will say this is not about dumbing down things for the masses. It's about evolving a system that hasn't changed while the industry itself clearly has. Our standards for reviewing games aren't changing, so you'll still be getting the same in-depth critical reviews you've been getting all along."

gmastersexay

But what about two versions of the same game? Multiplats ring a bell? Fence-sitters may look to multiplat scores when deciding on a console purchase.HuusAsking

Good point actually. It is a flaw in the system. It can be rectified though if they made a dedicated paragraph focusing on the differences between the platforms, perhaps near the end of the review. Or better yet, divide the game into three seperate platform centric reviews and just point out any little naunces or problems in each specific version. Much like the Oblivion PS3 review. It poses the problem of re-reading what is essentially the same review thrice though... a good point indeed, good sir..

For those of you thinking that 9.2 is not much different from 9.3, think about it this way.

9.2 is rounded to 9.0. 9.3 is rounded to 9.5. The difference, or lack of between 9.2 and 9.3 just became huge.

Compression

Agreed.

Instead of a precise score... We get a generic one.

let's edit gamespot's wikipedia score system now! :D-Sora

[QUOTE="sHaDyCuBe321"][QUOTE="darklord888"][QUOTE="Warrior_Poet"][QUOTE="darklord888"][QUOTE="mestizoman"]

[QUOTE="jim_shorts"]I do not like this new system. It's just not precise enough for me. darklord888

both AA

$60

tell me which is the game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I blame the sheep for this because of the Zelda backlash. With the new formula , they would just give it a 9 just to avoid the hassle.

[QUOTE="-Sora"]let's edit gamespot's wikipedia score system now! :DJPOBS

:lol: i already put a sentence on there with bad grammer and spelling, i think i forgot a period too.

That ship has sailed already anyway.

The only thing that's concerning me now is that, as it is now GS can't handle all the glitches they currently have, I hope it doesn't get worst with their new layout.

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"] Am I the only one who isn't upset? I've been annoyed to death at people who think that because one game scores 0.2 or 0.3 higher, it's proven better, even though that's not the case. Statements like "PS2 version of RE4 is better than Wii, it got 9.3 while the Wii got 9.1" or the Oblivion statements of "9.6>9.3." >_>HuusAsking

The only reason the ps3 version scored lower was because it come out a year later. Technically the ps3 version is better(graphics/load times).

I saw this coming the instant I heard the review system was going to be altered. OXM did the same thing around the launch of the Xbox 360 in an effort to "simplify" things. I can't say I like it too much, but I'll get used to it. The .1 increments help a lot in refining the score and personally, I like that system. The .5 system isn't terrible or anything, I would just prefer the old system.

The bright side of things is that System Wars will msot likly benefit from all of this.This will cutdown on the"HA!mygame scored .1 higher than your game! OWNED!" comments you see around here, and in that respect, I like the new system.

I saw this coming the instant I heard the review system was going to be altered. OXM did the same thing around the launch of the Xbox 360 in an effort to "simplify" things. I can't say I like it too much, but I'll get used to it. The .1 increments help a lot in refining the score and personally, I like that system. The .5 system isn't terrible or anything, I would just prefer the old system.

The bright side of things is that System Wars will msot likly benefit from all of this.This will cutdown on the"HA!mygame scored .1 higher than your game! OWNED!" comments you see around here, and in that respect, I like the new system.

The_Game21x

[QUOTE="-Spock-"]

[QUOTE="JPOBS"]im guessing no one realized all they did was basically turn thier entire review system into an advanced Tilt component. Basically, what purpose tilt served in the old review, is the sole basis for the new reviews. flop. JPOBS

Shouldn't that be what all reviews are about though, a detailed personal opinion? You can't just analyse a game technically, you have to go into the specifics of exactly how it plays and feels.

"ooh, it has great graphics" or "ooh, it has great sound".... blah blah blah blah blah. Boring! I can tell all that from watching some Gametrailers videos. Instead, I want to know what it plays like, how long it's going to take me to finish, all the innovative little features.. not just some drone of stuff I already know.

It was, in a way. The separate categories kinda forced you to talk about each specific area in minute detail. You can't just say "10 for graphics", otherwise people need to know reasoning behind your decision. It can also be argued that categorisation disrupts review flow by *making* you write about certain aspects you would otherwise ignore. To me at least, reviews which don't insist upon addressing key areas are the most effective and enjoyable to read. A whole number score reflects this s tyle.

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

I saw this coming the instant I heard the review system was going to be altered. OXM did the same thing around the launch of the Xbox 360 in an effort to "simplify" things. I can't say I like it too much, but I'll get used to it. The .1 increments help a lot in refining the score and personally, I like that system. The .5 system isn't terrible or anything, I would just prefer the old system.

The bright side of things is that System Wars will msot likly benefit from all of this.This will cutdown on the"HA!mygame scored .1 higher than your game! OWNED!" comments you see around here, and in that respect, I like the new system.

diggyzoom

But resistances score will be scaled to an 8.5 as well.

[QUOTE="gmastersexay"]

If anyone is interested this is Alex Navarro's response.

"There's nothing wrong with giving games the same score. Review scores were never intended to give the impression that a game that scores a 6.6 is clearly better than a game that gets a 6.4. With this new system, the ratings actually mean more, as there will be more significant differentiation between them. Jeff will be posting a note up soon that explains our reasoning for all of this in more detail."

"I will say this is not about dumbing down things for the masses. It's about evolving a system that hasn't changed while the industry itself clearly has. Our standards for reviewing games aren't changing, so you'll still be getting the same in-depth critical reviews you've been getting all along."

HuusAsking

That may hold truth for multiplats released at the same time, but multiplats released later on a different system are often times better but receive a lower score because they were released later. Look at RE4 Wii for instance. It only got a 9.1 but in the review, it specifically says that the Wii version is the best. Oblivion is also better on ps3 than 360(graphics/loading time), but it received a lower score due to the time of release.

I posted this in another thread but I thought it was this one. :P

This is my idea for the new rules of ownage.

New systemwars rules:

A: 6.5-7.5
AA: 8.0-9.0
AAA: 9.5-10.0

Ownage can be based on medals, score, and with the more in-depth'The good and bad'

Example:

Halo 3: 9.5 + gameplay medal

Killzone 2: 9.5(lol) + no medals

Halo 3 wins.

Example 2:

Super Mario Galaxy: 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 4, Cons: 3

Rachet and Clank 4(?): 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 5, Cons: 2

Rachet and Clank wins.


Any good? darklord888

[QUOTE="JPOBS"][QUOTE="-Spock-"]

[QUOTE="JPOBS"]im guessing no one realized all they did was basically turn thier entire review system into an advanced Tilt component. Basically, what purpose tilt served in the old review, is the sole basis for the new reviews. flop. -Spock-

Shouldn't that be what all reviews are about though, a detailed personal opinion? You can't just analyse a game technically, you have to go into the specifics of exactly how it plays and feels.

"ooh, it has great graphics" or "ooh, it has great sound".... blah blah blah blah blah. Boring! I can tell all that from watching some Gametrailers videos. Instead, I want to know what it plays like, how long it's going to take me to finish, all the innovative little features.. not just some drone of stuff I already know.

It was, in a way. The separate categories kinda forced you to talk about each specific area in minute detail. You can't just say "10 for graphics", otherwise people need to know reasoning behind your decision. It can also be argued that categorisation disrupts review flow by *making* you write about certain aspects you would otherwise ignore. To me at least, reviews which don't insist upon addressing key areas are the most effective and enjoyable to read. A whole number score reflects this s tyle.

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="PannicAtack"] Am I the only one who isn't upset? I've been annoyed to death at people who think that because one game scores 0.2 or 0.3 higher, it's proven better, even though that's not the case. Statements like "PS2 version of RE4 is better than Wii, it got 9.3 while the Wii got 9.1" or the Oblivion statements of "9.6>9.3." >_>ultima-flare

The only reason the ps3 version scored lower was because it come out a year later. Technically the ps3 version is better(graphics/load times).

[QUOTE="diggyzoom"][QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

I saw this coming the instant I heard the review system was going to be altered. OXM did the same thing around the launch of the Xbox 360 in an effort to "simplify" things. I can't say I like it too much, but I'll get used to it. The .1 increments help a lot in refining the score and personally, I like that system. The .5 system isn't terrible or anything, I would just prefer the old system.

The bright side of things is that System Wars will msot likly benefit from all of this.This will cutdown on the"HA!mygame scored .1 higher than your game! OWNED!" comments you see around here, and in that respect, I like the new system.

kittykatz5k

But resistances score will be scaled to an 8.5 as well.

I posted this in another thread but I thought it was this one. :P

This is my idea for the new rules of ownage.

New systemwars rules:

A: 6.5-7.5
AA: 8.0-9.0
AAA: 9.5-10.0

Ownage can be based on medals, score, user score and with the more in-depth'The good and bad'

Example:

Halo 3: 9.5 + gameplay medal

Killzone 2: 9.5(lol) + no medals

Halo 3 wins.

Example 2:

Super Mario Galaxy: 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 4, Cons: 3

Rachet and Clank 4(?): 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 5, Cons: 2

Rachet and Clank wins.


Any good? darklord888

I agree with the ownage with medals, but we cannot determine the range for A,AA,and AAA until we see how harsh the review system is(i.e. How easily they give out 9.0s). I expect it will be similar to 1up, in which case, 9-9.5 should still be AAA and 10 be AAAA.

No wonder that I have been seeing dark clouds across the sky (especially one shaped like a skull)!!!! The End is near!!!!

In System Wars that is!!!

No it won't , unless we scale it ourselves.

diggyzoom

[QUOTE="kittykatz5k"][QUOTE="diggyzoom"][QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

I saw this coming the instant I heard the review system was going to be altered. OXM did the same thing around the launch of the Xbox 360 in an effort to "simplify" things. I can't say I like it too much, but I'll get used to it. The .1 increments help a lot in refining the score and personally, I like that system. The .5 system isn't terrible or anything, I would just prefer the old system.

The bright side of things is that System Wars will msot likly benefit from all of this.This will cutdown on the"HA!mygame scored .1 higher than your game! OWNED!" comments you see around here, and in that respect, I like the new system.

diggyzoom

But resistances score will be scaled to an 8.5 as well.

They're not chaning the scores for past games?

[QUOTE="darklord888"]I posted this in another thread but I thought it was this one. :P

This is my idea for the new rules of ownage.

New systemwars rules:

A: 6.5-7.5
AA: 8.0-9.0
AAA: 9.5-10.0

Ownage can be based on medals, score, and with the more in-depth'The good and bad'

Example:

Halo 3: 9.5 + gameplay medal

Killzone 2: 9.5(lol) + no medals

Halo 3 wins.

Example 2:

Super Mario Galaxy: 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 4, Cons: 3

Rachet and Clank 4(?): 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 5, Cons: 2

Rachet and Clank wins.


Any good? HuusAsking

[QUOTE="darklord888"]I posted this in another thread but I thought it was this one. :P

This is my idea for the new rules of ownage.

New systemwars rules:

A: 6.5-7.5
AA: 8.0-9.0
AAA: 9.5-10.0

Ownage can be based on medals, score, and with the more in-depth'The good and bad'

Example:

Halo 3: 9.5 + gameplay medal

Killzone 2: 9.5(lol) + no medals

Halo 3 wins.

Example 2:

Super Mario Galaxy: 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 4, Cons: 3

Rachet and Clank 4(?): 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 5, Cons: 2

Rachet and Clank wins.


Any good? HuusAsking

You could try reading the reviews...I am sure they would say if one version is better than another. Take VT3 for example. You honestly think they would not say that the ps3 version has no online?

[QUOTE="darklord888"]I posted this in another thread but I thought it was this one. :P

This is my idea for the new rules of ownage.

New systemwars rules:

A: 6.5-7.5
AA: 8.0-9.0
AAA: 9.5-10.0

Ownage can be based on medals, score, user score and with the more in-depth'The good and bad'

Example:

Halo 3: 9.5 + gameplay medal

Killzone 2: 9.5(lol) + no medals

Halo 3 wins.

Example 2:

Super Mario Galaxy: 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 4, Cons: 3

Rachet and Clank 4(?): 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 5, Cons: 2

Rachet and Clank wins.


Any good? ultima-flare

I agree with the ownage with medals, but we cannot determine the range for A,AA,and AAA until we see how harsh the review system is(i.e. How easily they give out 9.0s). I expect it will be similar to 1up, in which case, 9-9.5 should still be AAA and 10 be AAAA.

Woohoo! Awesome. 99 point scale or whatever it was was stupid as people would argue over 8.9 vs. 9.0. .5 makes it better. Honestly just 1 to 10 would be even better; however, I'm glad GS is moving toward what I recommended months ago.

Thanks

They're not chaning the scores for past games?

kittykatz5k

[QUOTE="ultima-flare"]

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="PannicAtack"] Am I the only one who isn't upset? I've been annoyed to death at people who think that because one game scores 0.2 or 0.3 higher, it's proven better, even though that's not the case. Statements like "PS2 version of RE4 is better than Wii, it got 9.3 while the Wii got 9.1" or the Oblivion statements of "9.6>9.3." >_>HuusAsking

The only reason the ps3 version scored lower was because it come out a year later. Technically the ps3 version is better(graphics/load times).

From the Ps3 review: "The graphics are slightly better, the load times are shorter, and there is a bit of new content in the form of the Knights of the Nine add-on, which is available as a separate purchase on other platforms."

...
Example 2:

Super Mario Galaxy: 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 4, Cons: 3

Rachet and Clank 4(?): 9.0 + no medal. Pros: 5, Cons: 2

Rachet and Clank wins.


Any good?darklord888

No way, mario galaxy will get less cons than rachet, and probably an innovation medal!! (lol, just testing out system wars with new system)

[QUOTE="-Spock-"][QUOTE="JPOBS"][QUOTE="-Spock-"]

[QUOTE="JPOBS"]im guessing no one realized all they did was basically turn thier entire review system into an advanced Tilt component. Basically, what purpose tilt served in the old review, is the sole basis for the new reviews. flop. JPOBS

Shouldn't that be what all reviews are about though, a detailed personal opinion? You can't just analyse a game technically, you have to go into the specifics of exactly how it plays and feels.

"ooh, it has great graphics" or "ooh, it has great sound".... blah blah blah blah blah. Boring! I can tell all that from watching some Gametrailers videos. Instead, I want to know what it plays like, how long it's going to take me to finish, all the innovative little features.. not just some drone of stuff I already know.

It was, in a way. The separate categories kinda forced you to talk about each specific area in minute detail. You can't just say "10 for graphics", otherwise people need to know reasoning behind your decision. It can also be argued that categorisation disrupts review flow by *making* you write about certain aspects you would otherwise ignore. To me at least, reviews which don't insist upon addressing key areas are the most effective and enjoyable to read. A whole number score reflects this s tyle.

Basically, yeah. It's easy to come to conclusions about graphics and sound from just watching a video. However, it is not easy to come to conclusions about gameplay. At least reading something in-depth gives you a very good idea about how it really feels. In the end, rather than a reviewer just telling me what I already know, I want to know in detail about their own experience playing it and whether or not they think the same will apply to me. That's the "enjoyment" of it all, especially when I myself play it.

This is lame!! I don't think I'll be hanging around on Gamespot much longer.

If someone would start an online petition to stop the new ratings system from taking effect, I'd sign it.

This is totally lame. There wasn't anything wrong with the old system, it provided a more accurate rating than any other gaming site. Every change you guys make just seems to worsen the site IMO. -Sniper

More accurate? You mean one person's opinion of 9.7 on Game X really makes a big difference vs another reviewer of a different game at 9.6? Just call them both 9.5 as they are both in the same league and what we are splitting here is personal tastes of the reviewer.

Well I dunno about .5 increments, but I'm glad the score will be based on the game's overall quality and not on an average of components, which I always thought was kind of stupid.

Wow, it sounds so lame to think that I'm getting excited over a new review system on a game site lol

I wonder what this will mean for Ninja Gaiden Sigma. I guess it'll have to get 9.0 as I don't see it getting 9.5 or 8.5.

WE ARE NOT AMUSED!

Seriously, now we'll never know which game would have broken the 9.6 curse :cry:

I sent my new rules idea to casey in a PM with a few small changes. I just don't think the current rules will workwith this new system.darklord888

Why not? If Halo 3 gets an 8.5 it's a flop.If KZ2 gets a 9.5 it's a big hit (and vice versa). What has changed is if they both get 9.5 to be able to say Halo3 > KZ2 because it got .1 higher score (and it was probably reviewed by a different person so what did that really matter to begin with)?

Editor's choice games (the new superb) = AAA.

WE ARE NOT AMUSED!

Seriously, now we'll never know which game would have broken the 9.6 curse :cry:

super_mario_128

That would have been such a great day, to see a game break it and all the ownage that would occur. :cry: