How about a score better than 9.5?

Under the current review system, a 9.5 is the best score possible as their are no "perfect" games. Crysis, Halo 3, Mario, The Orange Box, and World in Conflict are all games that have scored a 9.5 in the past two months, and while they are all great games, they should all not be given the best possible score. Hypothetically, what happens if GS finds the upcoming Mass Effect to be better than Mario? They can't give it a 10 because it isn't perfect, but they can't differentiate it score-wise from, what they feel, is an inferior game. I know that reviews should be about the content and not the number, but I find it disheartening that "the best possible score" is being dished out like candy on Halloween. 5 games have been given a 9.5 since September!

Using increments of .5 on reviews has been working for the most part, but fails when it comes to truly exceptional games. GS should continue its scoring method for game reviews, but when the next Ocarina of Time comes up for review, a higher score than the traditional 9.5 should be available to a reviewer. There will never be a perfect game, but there will be ones deserving of a score higher than 9.5, and Game Spot should recognize that.

10 is prime, not perfect.

and mass effect looks pretty damn prime

10 is prime, not perfect.

and mass effect looks pretty damn prime

Awinagainov

GS reviews are a joke now. SMG should have got higher than 9.5 and many 9.5 games should have got less.

It's a system totally useless, there is no ways to really make any real comparaisons between games having the same scores.

and mass effect looks pretty damn primeAwinagainov

10 is prime, not perfect.

and mass effect looks pretty damn prime

Awinagainov

agreed this game may be reason alone to own a 360

Does anyone know the motivation behind the .5 system?Can-o-Mark

Casuals

[QUOTE="Awinagainov"]

10 is prime, not perfect.

and mass effect looks pretty damn prime

HarlockJC

agreed this game may be reason alone to own a 360

GS has come out and said that there will be no more 10 reviews. I think thats fine as long as the compensate with treating a 9.6 like they used to treat 10'stothedogsforme

When did they say that? I seem to remember Jeff recently saying that the idea that GS will never give out another 10 is ridiculous.

READ the reviews if you want details.Litchie

Reading the reviews is extremly important, but unfortunatly it provides no quantifiable way to compare games.

Under the current review system, a 9.5 is the best score possible as their are no "perfect" games. tothedogsforme

I don't know where you're getting this from, but it isn't true.

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26011973&msg_id=295047189#295047189

reason being that reviews and scores are subjective. A 10 would imply that a game is so great that everyone will love it and want to play it."

Maybe on your own double-secret personal review scale. On ours, it means that the game couldn't be improved upon in any meaningful way, given current standards for that game's platform. As part of the review change, we relabeled 10.0 as "Prime" instead of "Perfect." The meaning of the score hasn't really changed, but too many people couldn't handle the concept of perfect meaning "perfect... given current standards for that game's platform and blah blah blah blah blah." It was sort of silly and overly confusing that way, I agree. We will give a 10 again someday, by the way. I occasionally see people saying "GameSpot said they'd never give another 10." That's insane and we've never, ever said that.Jeff

10 is prime, not perfect.

Awinagainov

[QUOTE="Litchie"]READ the reviews if you want details.tothedogsforme

Reading the reviews is extremly important, but unfortunatly it provided no quantifiable way to compare games.

Why do you need to compare games? Just read the review for a game you're interested in, and see if you think it sounds good or not before you get it. I thought it was better the way it was before (the reviews had a little more depth), but if this new rating system will minimize "Hah! *insert name of game here* is better than *insert name of game here*, since it got .2 more!"-threads, I certainly welcome it.

10 is prime, not perfect.

and mass effect looks pretty damn prime

Awinagainov

After seeing the review, something should have become very clear to people. If crysis didn't get a 10, nothing else currently announced will.

[QUOTE="Can-o-Mark"]Does anyone know the motivation behind the .5 system?Redgarl

Casuals

actually no. It's because of hardcores nitpicking every little .1 difference between games.

Super Smash Bros. Brawl is going for a 10. Cant think of anything else that will get a 10.Sonicplys

Smash bros is NOT GOING TO GET A 10.

Please just stop with the nonsense brawl fans, its not going to happen.

I've been thinking there should be smaller increments of 0.1 or 0.2 at 9+. Because every incredible game made gets 9.5 now, there's no distinguishing between them.mmogoon

Try actually reading the reviews.

Under the current review system, a 9.5 is the best score possible as their are no "perfect" games. Crysis, Halo 3, Mario, The Orange Box, and World in Conflict are all games that have scored a 9.5 in the past two months, and while they are all great games, they should all not be given the best possible score. Hypothetically, what happens if GS finds the upcoming Mass Effect to be better than Mario? They can't give it a 10 because it isn't perfect, but they can't differentiate it score-wise from, what they feel, is an inferior game. I know that reviews should be about the content and not the number, but I find it disheartening that "the best possible score" is being dished out like candy on Halloween. 5 games have been given a 9.5 since September!

Using increments of .5 on reviews has been working for the most part, but fails when it comes to truly exceptional games. GS should continue its scoring method for game reviews, but when the next Ocarina of Time comes up for review, a higher score than the traditional 9.5 should be available to a reviewer. There will never be a perfect game, but there will be ones deserving of a score higher than 9.5, and Game Spot should recognize that.

tothedogsforme

your problem is that you are comparing scores to other games, if a game gets a 9.5 then its worth buying, if another game gets a 9.5 it means its worth buying, so you either decide to buy it or not, but when you sit in front of a computer and argue and fight with other people that your 9.5 should have been higher than someone elses 9.5 game, then you are missing the point of video gaming.

It's impossible to get an accurate score if you only score in .5s, what if a game deserves in between a 9.2 and a 9.3? its either going to be 9.0 or 9.5.

Does anyone know the motivation behind the .5 system?Can-o-Mark

[QUOTE="tothedogsforme"]

Under the current review system, a 9.5 is the best score possible as their are no "perfect" games. Crysis, Halo 3, Mario, The Orange Box, and World in Conflict are all games that have scored a 9.5 in the past two months, and while they are all great games, they should all not be given the best possible score. Hypothetically, what happens if GS finds the upcoming Mass Effect to be better than Mario? They can't give it a 10 because it isn't perfect, but they can't differentiate it score-wise from, what they feel, is an inferior game. I know that reviews should be about the content and not the number, but I find it disheartening that "the best possible score" is being dished out like candy on Halloween. 5 games have been given a 9.5 since September!

Using increments of .5 on reviews has been working for the most part, but fails when it comes to truly exceptional games. GS should continue its scoring method for game reviews, but when the next Ocarina of Time comes up for review, a higher score than the traditional 9.5 should be available to a reviewer. There will never be a perfect game, but there will be ones deserving of a score higher than 9.5, and Game Spot should recognize that.

LEGEND_C4A

your problem is that you are comparing scores to other games, if a game gets a 9.5 then its worth buying, if another game gets a 9.5 it means its worth buying, so you either decide to buy it or not, but when you sit in front of a computer and argue and fight with other people that your 9.5 should have been higher than someone elses 9.5 game, then you are missing the point of video gaming.

You are missing the point of System Wars. When you're sitting behind our computer or console playing games, the scores dont matter, its all about what you think. But as soon as you open IE (IE>Mozilla) and you go to System Wars, it doesnt matter what you think. All that matters is what GS gives to a game. Period.

I've been thinking there should be smaller increments of 0.1 or 0.2 at 9+. Because every incredible game made gets 9.5 now, there's no distinguishing between them.mmogoon

if you look at the score and read the review itself, then there are enough things to distinguish a game. if you go by score alone then your not doing yourself any favors.

[QUOTE="mmogoon"]I've been thinking there should be smaller increments of 0.1 or 0.2 at 9+. Because every incredible game made gets 9.5 now, there's no distinguishing between them.LEGEND_C4A

if you look at the score and read the review itself, then there are enough things to distinguish a game. if you go by score alone then your not doing yourself any favors.

if i see a score of 8.5 or higher and i wanted to buy it i go ahead and get it :P

It's impossible to get an accurate score if you only score in .5s, what if a game deserves in between a 9.2 and a 9.3? its either going to be 9.0 or 9.5.

Franky-the-bat

of course numbers are never accurate enough :roll:, how about we get serious and go all out 8). how about 0.0.0 scores.

if halo 3 was a 9.5.1

and Metroid a 9.5.2 then we really can tell what game is better.

10's?

Gross. /doubt it

GS reviews are a joke now. SMG should have got higher than 9.5 and many 9.5 games should have got less.

It's a system totally useless, there is no ways to really make any real comparaisons between games having the same scores.

Redgarl

Yes there is you could actually read the article, people shouldn't just check the score anyway because you completely miss the point, although I will admit I am guilty of it myself on occasions (I try to avoid spoilers though).

[QUOTE="LEGEND_C4A"][QUOTE="tothedogsforme"]

Under the current review system, a 9.5 is the best score possible as their are no "perfect" games. Crysis, Halo 3, Mario, The Orange Box, and World in Conflict are all games that have scored a 9.5 in the past two months, and while they are all great games, they should all not be given the best possible score. Hypothetically, what happens if GS finds the upcoming Mass Effect to be better than Mario? They can't give it a 10 because it isn't perfect, but they can't differentiate it score-wise from, what they feel, is an inferior game. I know that reviews should be about the content and not the number, but I find it disheartening that "the best possible score" is being dished out like candy on Halloween. 5 games have been given a 9.5 since September!

Using increments of .5 on reviews has been working for the most part, but fails when it comes to truly exceptional games. GS should continue its scoring method for game reviews, but when the next Ocarina of Time comes up for review, a higher score than the traditional 9.5 should be available to a reviewer. There will never be a perfect game, but there will be ones deserving of a score higher than 9.5, and Game Spot should recognize that.

Can-o-Mark

your problem is that you are comparing scores to other games, if a game gets a 9.5 then its worth buying, if another game gets a 9.5 it means its worth buying, so you either decide to buy it or not, but when you sit in front of a computer and argue and fight with other people that your 9.5 should have been higher than someone elses 9.5 game, then you are missing the point of video gaming.

(IE>Mozilla)

as soon as you said that, your opinion didn't matter to me lol.

Does anyone know the motivation behind the .5 system?Can-o-Mark

If Crysis didn't get a 10 nothing is this year and maybe even the next. You have to be silly to think that Mass Effect is better than Crysis.whocares9

crysis is already at 92% on gamerankings, its may end up dropping below overall AAA by the end of november. Lets bring this up then and see.

[QUOTE="Can-o-Mark"][QUOTE="LEGEND_C4A"][QUOTE="tothedogsforme"]

Under the current review system, a 9.5 is the best score possible as their are no "perfect" games. Crysis, Halo 3, Mario, The Orange Box, and World in Conflict are all games that have scored a 9.5 in the past two months, and while they are all great games, they should all not be given the best possible score. Hypothetically, what happens if GS finds the upcoming Mass Effect to be better than Mario? They can't give it a 10 because it isn't perfect, but they can't differentiate it score-wise from, what they feel, is an inferior game. I know that reviews should be about the content and not the number, but I find it disheartening that "the best possible score" is being dished out like candy on Halloween. 5 games have been given a 9.5 since September!

Using increments of .5 on reviews has been working for the most part, but fails when it comes to truly exceptional games. GS should continue its scoring method for game reviews, but when the next Ocarina of Time comes up for review, a higher score than the traditional 9.5 should be available to a reviewer. There will never be a perfect game, but there will be ones deserving of a score higher than 9.5, and Game Spot should recognize that.

Gamerzk

your problem is that you are comparing scores to other games, if a game gets a 9.5 then its worth buying, if another game gets a 9.5 it means its worth buying, so you either decide to buy it or not, but when you sit in front of a computer and argue and fight with other people that your 9.5 should have been higher than someone elses 9.5 game, then you are missing the point of video gaming.

(IE>Mozilla)

as soon as you said that, your opinion didn't matter to me lol.

If Crysis didn't get a 10 nothing is this year and maybe even the next. You have to be silly to think that Mass Effect is better than Crysis.whocares9

Graphics are all that matter! Seriously, people need to grow beyond that train of thought. It's phemonenally immature.Not denying the greatness of Crysis, a 9.5 is indisputable, but to say that no other game in the next couple of years can possibly be better is just plain stupid.

GS reviews are a joke now. SMG should have got higher than 9.5 and many 9.5 games should have got less.

It's a system totally useless, there is no ways to really make any real comparaisons between games having the same scores.

Redgarl

[QUOTE="whocares9"]If Crysis didn't get a 10 nothing is this year and maybe even the next. You have to be silly to think that Mass Effect is better than Crysis.mtradr43

crysis is already at 92% on gamerankings, its may end up dropping below overall AAA by the end of november. Lets bring this up then and see.

Crysis is the best shooter ever made. It is 93 on metacritic and some reviewers miss the point of this game. It doesn't matter. Nothing is getting higher than 9.5 on GS. You will see. Crysis is by far the best shooter ever made.

[QUOTE="whocares9"]If Crysis didn't get a 10 nothing is this year and maybe even the next. You have to be silly to think that Mass Effect is better than Crysis.LordMontezuma

Graphics are all that matter! Seriously, people need to grow beyond that train of thought. It's phemonenally immature.Not denying the greatness of Crysis, a 9.5 is indisputable, but to say that no other game in the next couple of years can possibly be better is just plain stupid.

I didn't say a "couple" of years. Don't put words in my mouth. Read the review, clearly as amazing as the graphics are it has the gameplay to match it.

Right under the "good" in the Crysis review the first thing it says "Dynamic, emergent shooter gameplay". He doesn't even mentioned the graphics first. It will be a while before a shooter beats out Crysis. Everything else is linear and boring compared to it. It is the greatest shooter made thus far. It won't be forever...that is not want I am claiming.

I don't agree with them not giving 10s to REALLY stellar games, and I don't agree with a lot of GS' reviews.

Having said that however, I will come to their defense here. The purpose of their reviews is not so fanboys can brag that "their" game is slightly better than the other fanboys' game. The purpose of reviews is to help you make a purchasing decision. If any game scores a 9.5 and you own that console, that score says you should definitely buy that game unless you really dislike it's genre. What does it matter if it really deserves a 9.4, 9.6, or 9.7. It's a great game and you should buy it.

Under the current review system, a 9.5 is the best score possible as their are no "perfect" games. Crysis, Halo 3, Mario, The Orange Box, and World in Conflict are all games that have scored a 9.5 in the past two months, and while they are all great games, they should all not be given the best possible score. Hypothetically, what happens if GS finds the upcoming Mass Effect to be better than Mario? They can't give it a 10 because it isn't perfect, but they can't differentiate it score-wise from, what they feel, is an inferior game. I know that reviews should be about the content and not the number, but I find it disheartening that "the best possible score" is being dished out like candy on Halloween. 5 games have been given a 9.5 since September!

Using increments of .5 on reviews has been working for the most part, but fails when it comes to truly exceptional games. GS should continue its scoring method for game reviews, but when the next Ocarina of Time comes up for review, a higher score than the traditional 9.5 should be available to a reviewer. There will never be a perfect game, but there will be ones deserving of a score higher than 9.5, and Game Spot should recognize that.

tothedogsforme

Why don't they do it the best way, by .25 increments. Game Informer does it, and it works perfectly. Not too specific but not too casual.