Review Scores: Why I Don't Them

If you've been following this blog at all, you might've noticed that I've starting trying to refine my review structure a bit. You probably would also have noticed that I never give things a score, and that I still haven't started doing this. I assure you, this is not an oversight, and the purpose of this short rant is to explain why.

In short, I feel like all giving a game a numerical score achieves is giving more opportunity for my opinion on a game to be misunderstood or misconstrued, for two main reasons. Firstly, numerical scores on reviews are completely arbitrary, and secondly, if there's a score on a review, that's all that people tend to remember about it, rather than what was actually said.

The biggest point is probably how arbitrary they really are and how much they're meaning differs from person to person. To me, a 7/10 is something that's quite good, and worthy of praise. A 4/10 is a little bit below average, but still a long way from being really terrible. Compare this to what you see on most mainstream gaming sites. A 7/10 is generally an average score, and anything less than 6 normally means that the game was very bad.

Generally speaking, if I read a review on IGN or Gamespot, the only thing I remember is the score. I don't tend to remember much of what was actually said about a game, I just remember X game was a 9.7 and Y game was a 7.4. Because these numbers don't actually mean anything concrete, this actually means that I still know effectively nothing about a game, and a game that was a 7 for someone else may well be a 9 for me, because the problems with the game that were very big issues for somebody else hardly bother me, for example, or because I like the style of game more and am a fan of the source material.

And who hasn't just skipped to the end of a review to check the score? That's really the most poisonous thing of all. It gives you the impression that you know something about a game, when in reality you know precisely nothing except for what number somebody who isn't you assigned to it. What I hope for is that, in lieu of a score, if people don't want to read my full reviews, they'll skip to the “Verdict” section, and read 1-3 short paragraphs that sum up my feelings on the game. Surely this is much more useful and informative than a number.

I've still considered adding scores though. Here's how I'd do it – scale of 1-10 with increments of 0.5 (because what the hell is the difference between 8.2 and 8.3 on a practical level anyway?) and the different scores would mean approximately this;

1 – Game was terrible, completely irredeemable, developers should be shot. If you like this game, I would probably try to argue that your opinion is objectively and provably incorrect.

2 – Very, very bad. Would be surprised if anybody likes it.

3 – Heavily flawed product that's only likely to be enjoyed by serious fans of the genre or source material who are able to overlook the mass of shortcomings.

4 – Below average title with more bad about it than good, but at least some redeeming features.

5 – Average game. Has some issues but was playable without being particularly enjoyable or particularly painful, and some aspects of the game made it a little worthwhile. Cavalcade of Mediocrity.

5.5 – Probably put Alpha Protocol here – maybe a 6. Keep in mind, I LIKED Alpha Protocol a fair bit.

6 – Above average. A fairly solid game with some pretty good parts but generally marred by being a little bit dull or derivative. Probably Uncharted: Drake's Fortune.

7 – Good. A good game which should be enjoyable to the majority of players, provided they normally go for games in that genre. A “7” RPG will probably be regarded as a pretty good game by people who like RPGs, or as a very average game by people who aren't really into them.

7.5 – Probably Uncharted 2. Again, this is a game that I enjoyed quite a lot, actually.

8 – Very good. A strong title which is a very good example of the genre, and may even appeal to players who don't typically delve into that style of game. Probably put Medal of Honor SP and Risen (MAYBE an 8.5) in this area.

9 – Exceptional. This describes a game that is so good that it should easily be recognised as an excellent title, even by those who don't normally appreciate its genre or style.

9.5 – Maybe Deus Ex?

10 – Flawless. I cannot think of a single way to improve this game. To play it is to achieve nirvana. Essentially unattainable.

Maybe if there's enough demand I'll go with this. Maybe. But I don't like the idea of people glancing at a review, seeing I gave something a 5 or a 6, and assuming it's not a good game. Because it very well could be. And I wouldn't want to spread misinformation, or misrepresent my own opinion, or something.

Besides, it's way more of an ego trip if I get to think that people actually read – and therefore at least care a little bit about – what I think.