The paradox of perfection.

This thread is in regard to the belief that games are perfect, or a game can be given a review of 10/10.

As I see user reviews and even some site reviews there appear to be obscene amount of 10/10's or perfect scores, Why obscene? because no game is perfect. Because of the fact that perfection is impossible, due to the fact there creators are not, like all people they are prone to make mistakes. The presence of bugs, control problems, gameplay structure, and story issues are there despite how major or minor they are. For no matter how good a game might be in all aspects there are still problems.

All the 10/10 reveal is that personal preference takes priority over rationality, which reduces the legitimacy of the review itself. The whole purpose of a review is to be be critical, analytical and to spare no criticism. In passing such judgement not only do we convey to devolpers that we respect their work, but we believe like all things that it can be improved to further the franchise and to force dev's to push boundries in order to capture our attentions. Which brings benfits to the gamer, for we will see an increasing evolution in the video game products.

So the question is, do you believe that a videogame ever deserves a 10/10?????

For the most part yeah. For it to happen I'd have to be "moved" by the game or completely enamored and play it non-stop. So it's possible I think, I mean everything can get better, but based on the time of release it can be pretty damn perfect.

I personally have never played a game that didn't have small glitches, whether exploitable or not.

No game is perfect and for god's sake people a 10 out of 10 doesn't mean perfect. It just means "OMG this game is amazing and you need to play it. We're giving it a 10 to make you interested to play it". That's all it is.

Every game can be longer and bigger, no game is perfect

In an ideal world many things could be perfect.

This is the real world though, nothing is perfect.

Yet another misinformed person that thinks that 10/10 means the game is perfect.

10/10 means the game is as close to being perfect as a game can be. No proffessional site nor magazine will ever tell you that a game is perfect. Ever.

Every game can be longer and bigger, no game is perfect

eagles_band

Yet another misinformed person that thinks that 10/10 means the game is perfect.

10/10 means the game is as close to being perfect as a game can be. No proffessional site nor magazine will ever tell you that a game is perfect. Ever.

Making_Pudding

You are misinformed, 10/10 is a perfect score. If it was close to perfect, then it shouldnt get a perfect score.

Well the OP clearly outlined what HE thought the purpose of reviews are, but I would have to guess that not everybody will agree completely with him.

And that is the key to discussing whether or not a 10/10 can ever be justified. We need general acceptance of what goes into a game's score before we'll be able to talk somewhat objectively about it.

And since that'll never happen........I'll simply give my opinion on it:

I have no problem with a perfect score. In fact, I have no problem with any score ever given out by any professional reviewer because I can trust they at least thought about it and didn't just resort to fanboy impulses. That said, nobody is bias-free and we all have genres or aspects of games that we value more than others, and for this reason, there's no such thing as a completely objective review. It just cant happen. Its a bit like reviewing a music album. Read the review first and foremost and then take a glance at the points score for reference, but keep it mind its just a subjective score.

As for the whole, 'nothing can be perfect' idea, well this is true and its not. For one, we as gamers generally have little knowledge of the tiny intracacies of what goes on in making these games. We may say, 'oh well, this or that could have been done better', but we dont know that it really could have been done better. Every game has to be made within a certain amount of time, on a certain budget, with a certain amount of resources, and a certain amount of people working on it. There's always many compromises and you simply cant do everything you absolutely want to. We may have an idea of which games we think are really pushing these limits and minimizing compromises, though, and this is where a perfect score is arguably justified.

And then you have the idea that if a 10/10 is considered perfect, a 9.9 then becomes thehighest realisticscore you can give to a game, right? Well, I imagine that since many gaming sites give reviews based on .5 intervals, that anything that they'd score above a 9.76 could be rounded up, right?This would also make a 10/10 score justified.

No. There is no game that can be perfect because there is something slightly wrong with every game. IMO anyway.

I just find it funny that people say 10/10 doesn't mean perfect, look below the score of a game review. It says perfect, below all the 10/10's.

Perfect? The day I find one perfect thing in life I'll personally give you a call. In my honest opinion, I wouldn't wait excitedly by your phone for a call that most likely will never be made.

Video games are a constantly evolving tech, so even if you make the best game ever made, it will eventually be surpassed. Plus you have to factor in opinions since perfection is part perspective.

Zelda: Oot was perfect, flawless. at it least it felt perfect. played it 8 times start to finish and never found a flaw or got bored. if thats not perfect then i don-t know what is.

when a game takes full advantage of the days' technology and surpasses the standards set in terms of gameplay, and also manages to revolutianize the industry with new features.

a perfect game is just a game that became as good as it could have been, when no options available could have made the game better, then its perfect. Zelda Oot was perfect. 10/10

[QUOTE="Making_Pudding"]

Yet another misinformed person that thinks that 10/10 means the game is perfect.

10/10 means the game is as close to being perfect as a game can be. No proffessional site nor magazine will ever tell you that a game is perfect. Ever.

eagles_band

You are misinformed, 10/10 is a perfect score. If it was close to perfect, then it shouldnt get a perfect score.

define perfection

and if perfection is impossible, then why use the term? Or more to the point, why define perfection in such a way that it is impossible to acheive? The term perfection, as most people define it, is a pointless fu-king word.

[QUOTE="eagles_band"]

[QUOTE="Making_Pudding"]

Yet another misinformed person that thinks that 10/10 means the game is perfect.

10/10 means the game is as close to being perfect as a game can be. No proffessional site nor magazine will ever tell you that a game is perfect. Ever.

Making_Pudding

You are misinformed, 10/10 is a perfect score. If it was close to perfect, then it shouldnt get a perfect score.

10/10 = 100% which is perfect. Go back to remedial math, you are in the minority in this thread.

Nothing man-made is perfect, but there are some things that are "as good as it gets." For games in that category, they should be given a ten.

[QUOTE="Making_Pudding"]

Well, if no game will ever be a 10/10, I guess we should change things to 9/9. Oh wait. Then, 9/9 would be a perfect score. 10/10 isn't a perfect score. It's simply the best score. Like I said, no professional website or magazine tells you that a 10/10 means a game is perfect. Is every single one of your 1600+ posts this deluded? Or just the ones you've posted here? eagles_band

10/10 = 100% which is perfect. Go back to remedial math, you are in the minority in this thread.

Wow. I see that you're unable to see past what is said and see what is meant.

But let me ask you a simple question. Why is 100% perfect? In real life (which you do not see much of, by the looks of it), when you see a girl, and a buddy tells you, "Hey, that girl is a 10", do you really argue with him? Do you go, "NO! NO GIRL SHOULD EVER BE A 10!". Just like games, no girl is perfect. Some are pretty, but dumb. Some are smart, but hideous. Some are the whole package. Those girls, by everyone's account, are 10s. Not because they have no flaws, but because they are, as superstud101 mentioned, "AS GOOD AS IT GETS".

So get on with the program, kid. I'm not in the minority in this thread. The majority of people see my point. You're the only one that saw fit to argue with me. You're alone.

Something that's subjective cannot be perfect.magicalclick

Something that's subjective cannot be perfect.magicalclick

While I agree that no game is perfect and that critics (for anything) often misinterpret a 10/10 or 100% because to be 10/10 or 100% means that there was not a single thing wrong with it (unless there is some extra credit I am unaware of). The only reason I can see giving anything a 10/10 is because the rating system is fairly flawed (like rating in .5 increments), so the issue of rounding comes into play, but other than that I can only imagine that they want to be able to give out this rating every so often, so they lower their standards so they can see a 10/10 every so often. It seems to me that more and more gaming review people are getting more and more giddy with throwing a 10/10 around, but, to me, the games aren't getting better, taking into account technology changes.Z0MBIES

I don't think a game can be perfect, but I do think games should be able to get a 10/10 for being really, really good. I mean, whats the point of having a score that can't be earned? Thats like going to school believing it's impossible to get an A+.

Besides, with Gamespot's newer rating system it's easier than ever to get a 10/10 since it rounds in .5 increments. A game could really deserve an 9.8 or a 9.9 but gets rounded up to a 10. But really can you honestly say that a .1 or .2 difference is so huge that you actually need to complain about it?

I've said it before and I will most definitly say it again...

Reviewers on magazines and websites are not professionals. They are paid, over-analytical opinion givers. Simple as that.

What on earth makes them a professional? Ibet none of you can provide a reasonable explanation. 10/10 = PERFECTION. You are lying to yourself if you say otherwise. Metal Gear Solid 4 was more along the lines ofa movie rather than a video game + pointless to replay and GTA4 had bugs/loading problems.

I don't think a game can be perfect, but I do think games should be able to get a 10/10 for being really, really good. I mean, whats the point of having a score that can't be earned? Thats like going to school believing it's impossible to get an A+.vashkey

Horrible analogy. As far as school and grades go, people can actuallyachieve PERFECT scores on exams, projects, etc etc. Games on theother hand will never be 100% flawless.

No one understands what perfect means.

I don't think a game can be perfect, but I do think games should be able to get a 10/10 for being really, really good. I mean, whats the point of having a score that can't be earned? Thats like going to school believing it's impossible to get an A+.vashkey

You can't just not allow a 10. It's a 1 to 10 scale, not a 1 to 9 scale.

10 is not labelled as a perfect game, and there is no perfect game.

I've said it before and I will most definitly say it again...

Reviewers on magazines and websites are not professionals. They are paid, over-analytical opinion givers. Simple as that.

What on earth makes them a professional? Ibet none of you can provide a reasonable explanation. 10/10 = PERFECTION. You are lying to yourself if you say otherwise. Metal Gear Solid 4 was more along the lines ofa movie rather than a video game + pointless to replay and GTA4 had bugs/loading problems.

I don't think a game can be perfect, but I do think games should be able to get a 10/10 for being really, really good. I mean, whats the point of having a score that can't be earned? Thats like going to school believing it's impossible to get an A+.vashkey

Horrible analogy. As far as school and grades go, people can actuallyachieve PERFECT scores on exams, projects, etc etc. Games on theother hand will never be 100% flawless.

No one understands what perfect means.

I don't think a game can be perfect, but I do think games should be able to get a 10/10 for being really, really good. I mean, whats the point of having a score that can't be earned? Thats like going to school believing it's impossible to get an A+.

Besides, with Gamespot's newer rating system it's easier than ever to get a 10/10 since it rounds in .5 increments. A game could really deserve an 9.8 or a 9.9 but gets rounded up to a 10. But really can you honestly say that a .1 or .2 difference is so huge that you actually need to complain about it?

all video games have at least a minor glitch even GTA4 even though people said it was perfect ask those who played it online.

The 10/10 rating on gamespot called Prime not Perfect as it shows that a game can be as good as can possibly be like GTA IV which got 10/10 it isn't perfect but i would say it is as close as a game can be to perfect as possible.

I've said it before and I will most definitly say it again...

Reviewers on magazines and websites are not professionals. They are paid, over-analytical opinion givers. Simple as that.

What on earth makes them a professional? Ibet none of you can provide a reasonable explanation. 10/10 = PERFECTION. You are lying to yourself if you say otherwise. Metal Gear Solid 4 was more along the lines ofa movie rather than a video game + pointless to replay and GTA4 had bugs/loading problems.

[QUOTE="vashkey"]I don't think a game can be perfect, but I do think games should be able to get a 10/10 for being really, really good. I mean, whats the point of having a score that can't be earned? Thats like going to school believing it's impossible to get an A+.Nocturnal15

Horrible analogy. As far as school and grades go, people can actuallyachieve PERFECT scores on exams, projects, etc etc. Games on theother hand will never be 100% flawless.

No one understands what perfect means.

For one, most journalists, of the video game variety or otherwise, went to school for it. You learn the importance of objectivity and source finding and whatnot. So yes, they definitely can be considered professionals. Just because you dont agree with their opinions sometimes(or even all the time)doesn't make them any less of a professional.

And the analogy is not wrong. Yes, you can receive perfect scores for exams and whatnot, but essays and everything are largely judged subjectively aside from proper grammar and punctuation.

The fact that you're saying 'no one understandswhat perfect means' kind of shows how intolerant you are about others opinions. For one, some have argued that 10/10 does not imply perfection, only that its an incredible freakin game. Two, you dont have to take the literal interpretation of perfection, either. I have a girlfriend who is perfect for me. Does she have little flaws? Sure, but everything else is good enough for me to be able to overlook those to the point where they aren't noticed. And if something isn't noticed, they can effectively be ignored and taken out of the equation. The same kind of standards can be applied to video games.

I suggest being a bit more understanding that not everyone sees everything the same wayyou do. You're gonna end up a very angry person if you keep thinking like that.

[QUOTE="Nocturnal15"]

I've said it before and I will most definitly say it again...

Reviewers on magazines and websites are not professionals. They are paid, over-analytical opinion givers. Simple as that.

What on earth makes them a professional? Ibet none of you can provide a reasonable explanation. 10/10 = PERFECTION. You are lying to yourself if you say otherwise. Metal Gear Solid 4 was more along the lines ofa movie rather than a video game + pointless to replay and GTA4 had bugs/loading problems.

[QUOTE="vashkey"]

Horrible analogy. As far as school and grades go, people can actuallyachieve PERFECT scores on exams, projects, etc etc. Games on theother hand will never be 100% flawless.

No one understands what perfect means.

seankane

For one, most journalists, of the video game variety or otherwise, went to school for it. You learn the importance of objectivity and source finding and whatnot. So yes, they definitely can be considered professionals. Just because you dont agree with their opinions sometimes(or even all the time)doesn't make them any less of a professional.

And the analogy is not wrong. Yes, you can receive perfect scores for exams and whatnot, but essays and everything are largely judged subjectively aside from proper grammar and punctuation.

The fact that you're saying 'no one understandswhat perfect means' kind of shows how intolerant you are about others opinions. For one, some have argued that 10/10 does not imply perfection, only that its an incredible freakin game. Two, you dont have to take the literal interpretation of perfection, either. I have a girlfriend who is perfect for me. Does she have little flaws? Sure, but everything else is good enough for me to be able to overlook those to the point where they aren't noticed. And if something isn't noticed, they can effectively be ignored and taken out of the equation. The same kind of standards can be applied to video games.

I suggest being a bit more understanding that not everyone sees everything the same wayyou do. You're gonna end up a very angry person if you keep thinking like that.

"Just because you dont agree with their opinions sometimes(or even all the time)doesn't make them any less of a professional." Contradiction max

I will say it again, they are just professional opinion givers. What they say isn't law. Whatqualifies as a good game toto them can becrap to me/everyone elsevice versa. Just because they received a degree in journalism and just because you think their opinions are above alldoesn't automatically make them professionals. What you andplenty of other people are saying is "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" but that again simplymeans everyone can disagree with something. In a sense, reviews have some degree of fanboyism to it. You can be stubborn and say they have degrees in journalism which means they are fair people. Think again, reviewers are human.

Since you want to be subjectivity into this, and you have done soquite a bit....

Something that's subjective cannot be perfect.magicalclick

Win.

I will say it again, they are just professional opinion givers. What they say isn't law. Whatqualifies as a good game toto them can becrap to me/everyone elsevice versa. Just because they received a degree in journalism and just because you think their opinions are above alldoesn't automatically make them professionals. What you andplenty of other people are saying is "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" but that again simplymeans everyone can disagree with something. In a sense, reviews have some degree of fanboyism to it. You can be stubborn and say they have degrees in journalism which means they are fair people. Think again, reviewers are human.Nocturnal15

Huh? First you say they aren't professionals, and now you're saying they are?

And obviously what they say isn't law and I never said otherwise. In fact, if you read further back in this thread, you'll see me expanding upon that obvious observation.

[QUOTE="Nocturnal15"]I will say it again, they are just professional opinion givers. What they say isn't law. Whatqualifies as a good game toto them can becrap to me/everyone elsevice versa. Just because they received a degree in journalism and just because you think their opinions are above alldoesn't automatically make them professionals. What you andplenty of other people are saying is "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" but that again simplymeans everyone can disagree with something. In a sense, reviews have some degree of fanboyism to it. You can be stubborn and say they have degrees in journalism which means they are fair people. Think again, reviewers are human.seankane

Huh? First you say they aren't professionals, and now you're saying they are?

And obviously what they say isn't law and I never said otherwise. In fact, if you read further back in this thread, you'll see me expanding upon that obvious observation.

Oops. My fault. See what insomnia does to me. I meant paid opinion givers. =P What I saw you write in your previous statements was that you would trust a "professional reviewer."

[QUOTE="seankane"]

[QUOTE="Nocturnal15"]I will say it again, they are just professional opinion givers. What they say isn't law. Whatqualifies as a good game toto them can becrap to me/everyone elsevice versa. Just because they received a degree in journalism and just because you think their opinions are above alldoesn't automatically make them professionals. What you andplenty of other people are saying is "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" but that again simplymeans everyone can disagree with something. In a sense, reviews have some degree of fanboyism to it. You can be stubborn and say they have degrees in journalism which means they are fair people. Think again, reviewers are human.Nocturnal15

Huh? First you say they aren't professionals, and now you're saying they are?

And obviously what they say isn't law and I never said otherwise. In fact, if you read further back in this thread, you'll see me expanding upon that obvious observation.

Oops. My fault. See what insomnia does to me. I meant paid opinion givers. =P What I saw you write in your previous statements was that you would trust a "professional reviewer."

I trust that they make an effort to be objective for the most part. Thats all.

What I think happens is that some people read a review that they dont agree with, and then they suddenly jump to the conclusion that this reviewer isa 'fanboy' or a 'basher' or something, and completely ignore the possibility that this genuinely is their objective(as much as possible) opinion. It seems that some people just dont understand how somebody can think differently than they do.

Let this thread die. It's quite pointless to argue, when we're clearly never going to come to the same conclusion.

I have a girlfriend who is perfect for me. Does she have little flaws? Sure, but everything else is good enough for me to be able to overlook those to the point where they aren't noticed. And if something isn't noticed, they can effectively be ignored and taken out of the equation. The same kind of standards can be applied to video games.seankane

This is likely to be the most perfect way to describe the way I feel about the video game rating system. I thought of people who rejected the "10/10" scale as thickheaded and overly picky. After all, I found it to be common knowledge that nothing is perfect, let alone a video game. I saw no point in arguing against the scale, since it looked to me as just another system to classify a specific set of things from worst to best. It's no different than the 1-to-5 star ratings for hotels, the several different rating systems for movies, etc.

It never occurred to me, though, that some minds are far more literal than mine and, for that, I apologize. Being as sarcastic as I am, there's few things that I take literally. I think the rating system would be much improved, however, if games were rated not by numbers, but in the same way that our work is evaluated in schools. You know, A+, A, A-, B+, etc. The letters are not literal representatives, like numbers, as anyone who has ever been in school knows. People will recognize that something does not have to be perfect to earn the best score (much in the way that a test does not have to be perfect to earn the best grade).

Also, Nocturnal, I memorized V's entire introduction to Evey from the movie and it's probably the most well-written line in the history of movies. I found the graphic novel to be dull and lifeless, by comparison.

EDIT: 500TH POST. EPIC. :D