Should More Games Score A Ten/100%?

[callum]

Go on then, I'm lazy

It’s a can of worms I've no wish to open.

I can envisage the carnage already.

[Daanos]

Rating a game is pretty hard and sometimes almost impossible (an MMORPG cannot be rated properly).

While most people think a game that gets 10/10 (or 100%) is the perfect game that most people like, I look at the ratings a bit diffrently.

A game that scores 10/10 might be a very good game for many ppl but not everyone. Halo got a 10 from Edge, but I know tons of gamefreaks that really loathed the game.

So my point is...?

Well, a game should get a 10 when it does everything properly, like when the controls just feels right, when the right soundtrack is played at the right moment, when the design of the game suits everything else..in other words: When everything works really well, when you can sit down and play the game and think for yourself "Wow, this game couldn't been any better than it already is...nothing should've been diffrent", that is a 10 game IMO. There might come along a better game after a while, but you know that the one you once gave a 10 never could've been better than it was....You don't know why but for what it was, it was kinda perfect.

For me, FF VII was a 10....nothing about it should've been diffrent and the recent talk about a remake really makes me worried that it might happen. FF VII was a masterpiece and no remake could ever make it better than it was. Ever. A true 10.

My thoughts exactly. Brilliant explanation

[callum]

Yes, FFVII - a ten that was never given. A dark hour and a missed opportunity. Truly landmark and truly divisive. A 10 for that title should have been given and if it had, we would be arguing about it forever more, I've no doubt.

[Guest]

Yes, FFVII - a ten that was never given. A dark hour and a missed opportunity. Truly landmark and truly divisive. A 10 for that title should have been given and if it had, we would be arguing about it forever more, I've no doubt.

Considering FF8 got Nine out of ten! THE HORROR!

[Cacophanus]

If a game pushes a genre forward and innovates in ways that games previous to it haven't done, then that is worthy of a 10 score.

I have never thought that 10 denotes perfection, and anyone that gets on their high horse about that (in order to vindicate their tastes in gaming) is a pathologically insecure twat.

[Paradigm]

10 for you, but for all? Tetris is not my idea of fun. I think 10 suggests it is a game that is sufficiently good that almost any gamer would be gripped.

I could argue very strongly that Tetris is perhaps the most perfect game ever invented. There isn't actually anything wrong with it at all.

[callum]

I could argue very strongly that Tetris is perhaps the most perfect game ever invented. There isn't actually anything wrong with it at all.

Then do it man, I've no objection at all. As an example though, wasn't it before Edge's time - the first one? I'm not sure - I have never played tetris for more than 10 minutes, dull, hurts my hands on the GB and I had better things to do when it came out.

I still find it tedious, tedious like patience.

[ACole]

I tend to buy all 9/10 rated games in both Edge and Games TM. If a games gets a 10/10 I know bloody hell that's one to look forward to.

10/10 might mean revolution to them but I just interpret it as bloody good fun which gaming should be... right?

[choddo]

I just interpret it as bloody good fun which gaming should be... right?

Yep which is why FF7 didn't deserve one. Tedious random battle strewn drudgery that it was. I still loved it though.

[iloverage]

This is ridiculous. I've seen people here say that they're no-longer going to purchase a game they were looking forward to because 'edge only gave it a 7'.

By all means, consider the score, but it's stupid to base a purchase around a score out of ten that one particular journalist just so happened to award it.

[Spunky Monkey]

If a game pushes a genre forward and innovates in ways that games previous to it haven't done, then that is worthy of a 10 score.

I have never thought that 10 denotes perfection, and anyone that gets on their high horse about that (in order to vindicate their tastes in gaming) is a pathologically insecure twat.

But what if that game is utter utter rubbish? Say there was a hoovering sim, thats pushing the sim genre forward with its complex hoover phsyics. Yet its so dull as it makes you want to do some real hoovering?

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

This is ridiculous. I've seen people here say that they're no-longer going to purchase a game they were looking forward to because 'edge only gave it a 7'.

By all means, consider the score, but it's stupid to base a purchase around a score out of ten that one particular journalist just so happened to award it.

Agreed. I've played some 9/10 games which I found dreadful (Black & White, TimeSplitters 2, Broken Sword 3 and Turok 2 come to mind) and I've also played some 5/10 or 6/10 games I loved to bits (Rayman 3 and Wakeboarding Unleashed for example).

Still, if you expect a game to be very, very good, and it gets a 7/10 you know in most cases something went wrong. So I'm disappointed about the PoP2 score, as I hoped this would be the Game of the Year. It seems it isn't. That doesn't mean it's bad or that I won't play it, but it reduced my personal hype severely.

[choddo]

You're right Napole0n, except that Broken Sword3 was superb

[StephenM]

I think the moral of this story is that scores aren't the be all and end all, the review content (albeit more useful) isn't even conclusive, it's just a case of if you like the look of it, try and it see for yourself.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but I get the feeling we've wasted three pages discussing it...

[choddo]

Oh, a lot more than 3 in the history of the industry

[TheSlugFormerlyKnownAsNap]

You're right Napole0n, except that Broken Sword3 was superb

I'm a fan of the Broken Sword series, but I found BS3 shoddy, buggy, glitchy and ugly. And I liked the story and atmosphere of the first two better too. I think BS3 could/would have been a lot better if they had used a pre-made engine, because my dislike for BS3 is mainly because of technical issues.

[Ravern]

I think the moral of this story is that scores aren't the be all and end all, the review content (albeit more useful) isn't even conclusive, it's just a case of if you like the look of it, try and it see for yourself.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but I get the feeling we've wasted three pages discussing it...

Agreed.

Reviews are all personal, the review score will not be the rating from the whole magazine, let alone the whole culture. The best thing to do is read the review, not just the score, and make your own rating from that to base a purchase on. So don't write off buying PoP2 just yet, you don't know what the flaws will be, or if they'll aggravate you like they did for the reviewer.

But still, like Stebie said, not even the text is always conclusive. That's where Blockbusters or a demo comes in.

On the matter of what is a 10, once again it's all personal! If my memory serves me correct though, an EDGE 10 is a game that is either truly revolutionary (Mario 64) or offers a perfect cohesion of all the good elements in that genre (Gran Turismo).

[ianwuk]

I'm being really harsh here but no game should ever really recieve a perfect score because something will always come along and beat it, technically it is the essence of competition, although saying that nothing has beaten Goldeneye yet.

[Guest]

I tend to buy all 9/10 rated games in both Edge and Games TM. If a games gets a 10/10 I know bloody hell that's one to look forward to.

10/10 might mean revolution to them but I just interpret it as bloody good fun which gaming should be... right?

Well not really.

It might be a game in a genre which you, or whoever, doesn't like.

The Edge rating system will never take into account everybody. It does not take into account ANYONE. It takes into account the game, within it's own context, and of course compared to the other games of similar style that are/have been available.

If the game is that good, but say three people in the world will like it, Edge could theoretically give it a ten.

[choddo]

I'm a fan of the Broken Sword series, but I found BS3 shoddy, buggy, glitchy and ugly. And I liked the story and atmosphere of the first two better too. I think BS3 could/would have been a lot better if they had used a pre-made engine, because my dislike for BS3 is mainly because of technical issues.

Don't get that at all, it ran smoooth for me with very few glitchey bits

[PaB]

I'm being really harsh here but no game should ever really recieve a perfect score because something will always come along and beat it, technically it is the essence of competition, although saying that nothing has beaten Goldeneye yet.

But you can only rate a game based on factors at that point in time. You can't mark something down based on the supposition that in 12 months time something better will come along.

Take Gran Turismo, at the time it was a quantum leap in terms of realism, scope, and graphical/aural achievement. Of course it was going to be superceeded, because it relys so heavily on the technical capability of the hardware its running on, it's that sort of game. But to mark it 9/10 purely because at some point in the future something else is going to come along and beat it, is silly.

[rjpageuk]

But you're right, 10/10 = 100% = completeness.

This isnt true at all though.

100%/10 out of 10 IS exactly the same as an A or a first class degree (not 2:2 ;p).

You need 70% to get first class degree, 80% (or whatever) to get an A.

You need 95% or higher to get 10 out of 10 and you need 99.5% or higher to get 100%.

If you define a 10/10 or 100% as perfect you are on a loser from the start.

[Guest]

But you can only rate a game based on factors at that point in time. You can't mark something down based on the supposition that in 12 months time something better will come along.

Take Gran Turismo, at the time it was a quantum leap in terms of realism, scope, and graphical/aural achievement. Of course it was going to be superceeded, because it relys so heavily on the technical capability of the hardware its running on, it's that sort of game. But to mark it 9/10 purely because at some point in the future something else is going to come along and beat it, is silly.

To mark it at 9/10 because it was really just the Edge of the time being Car fan-boys and that's part of the reason it got a ten, would have been more suitable

[Codger]

10/10 doesn't mean 100%, it's stupid, you can't possibly quantify enjoyment and fun to such a fine degree (even an out of 10 system is too detailed, out of five is better). I've always thought like the Edge system. I tend to think of the top possible score as a 9 (i.e. must have game for anyone that likes that sort of thing) whereas 10 is given only very rarely for a game that goes beyond just "Excellent" and is something special indeed (especially for those people that like that type of game).

I hate flight sims, but I can understand why people give them 9/10 or 10/10. I don't like it, but I can understand why other people do. Personal preferences are just that, personal. I've played plenty of games that were given average marks that I thought were more enjoyable than games give 9's and even 10's.

[hungry joe]

No game should get a 10

a 10 means that the game is perfect in everyway.

No game has yet been made that is perfect in every way

not played HL2 then?

[Rin]

I was thinking, ten/100% is a game that is 'perfect' everyone should play it and own it and love it. Yet lets look at edge, only what, 4 games have got a 10. Are they telling me that theres only 4 games in the whole world that are must haves in my collection and are games i must play?

See i think scoring systems are totally wrong. If a game keeps me hooked and is great it gets a 10 in my book, its all about enjoyment. And theres loads of games out there that give that to me. For example in my books shenmue would be a ten, samba de amigo would be a ten, bishi bashi special would be a ten, wario ware would be a ten, rez would be a ten, iss98 would be a ten, Theme park would be a ten, Amped 2 would be a ten, i could go on.

You see these games get a ten because they play a great game, keep me coming back for more and dont leave me disappointed at the end. Take a game like halo 2, that wouldnt get a ten even though the live is near perfect and the one player is great fun because it leaves me feeling empty at the end at the lack of a climax. Not the empty of leaving the game world after completing say ff7, but empty that i did all that for nothing.

The games i mentioned dont have 50 hours worth of gameplay or 4 trillion particle effects or voices of holly wood stars or graphics to rival real life. They just play the most perfectly enjoyable games ever, and everyone should have them in their collection, because they are fun, they dont try to be anything other than a fun engrossing game.

Why do we mark out of ten on presentation, sound, gameplay, life span etc. Thats not what games are about, games are about fun. Tetris in multiplayer may not look or sound great but the fun factor is a TEN!

So why dont more games get a ten for being what they are, fun?

Jesus flippin' Christ.

You have to wonder. You really really do.

[giant_frying_pan]

>>> "Wow, this game couldn't been any better than it already is...nothing should've been diffrent", that is a 10 game IMO.

Exactly. There's only one game I've played that I feel meets this description though (and for the sake of not causing offence, I won't mention it)

giant_frying_pan

[___]

If you define a 10/10 or 100% as perfect you are on a loser from the start.

Post, thread and, er... forum. We have a winner. Ding ding etc. etc.

[Fry Crayola]

In the context of a games magazine, I'd certainly like to see a simple mark out of five, with extra special mention to games that really set a fine example.

Those who said Edge really marks games out of 9 are spot on. When I'm anticipating a title and read the Edge review, and see it get a 9/10, I know it's going to be something special. It's going to be worth my money, it'll give me hours of enjoyment and I'll love it.

If it gets a 10, it's only gone and done that because it's set new standards. It's still a bloody great game like any 9, and it's still got its flaws, but it left those who played it and enjoyed it breathless at the end, knowing that it just feels damned right.

It's a game where they've simply said "This is a fucking great game, but it's more than that. We can't really put it in words, we'll just say that it's something really special indeed, and you're going to feel that way too."

That's what Mario, Zelda and Halo felt like.

[Reynard]

Halo didn't feel like that, IMO - it felt like I'd finished a great FPS, but not really anymore than that.