Our review scores explained

We hate review scoring.

Distilling an entire game to a number, letter or some other quantifiable thing is a difficult and divisive endeavor, and a practice we believe is largely a waste of time.  The biggest problem has become that reviewers tend to not define what their scores really mean, and this has led to a complete distortion of scores among both reviewers and consumers.  For some reason, it’s become acceptable to give a “perfect” score to anything that you enjoy, regardless of any faults.  And I don’t just mean PC or console games.  Take a look through the App Store, the Android Market or even Amazon reviews for just about any product; if someone so much as likes something, they award it a five out of five.  Five out of five, 100%, A+ — all of these things should mean “perfection,” but now they just mean “worth it.”  If that’s all you’re trying to convey, then forgo a score-based system and just say “buy it” or “don’t.”

We believe that to make a review so black-and-white is to do a disservice to the reader.  There are far too many variables involved in each reader’s decision-making process for any one person to be able to definitively say, “you will enjoy this.”  Have you played a game like this before?  Does that matter?  If this is a sequel, are you familiar with the franchise, and does that matter?  Have you been following the game’s development?  Do you have certain expectations?  Do you play on a PC?  PS3?  360?  And on and on…

With all that said, the unfortunate reality is that people read Metacritic, and Metacritic demands a score that can be translated into a number, along with one or two sentences that summarize the overall tone of the review.  So in the interest of expanding our readership, we’ve decided to go against our better judgment and get totally conformist.

In our minds, a review’s purpose should be to present the reader with enough information to make the decision for himself.  To that end, we’re calling for a return to sanity when it comes to reviews, and will do our part by adhering to the not-ridiculous scale laid out below.

90 and above

Anything at a 90 or above can be considered great.  Really great.  As in, we’ll probably be comparing things to this for years to come.  Just go play it.

80 – 89

We consider this range to encompass “above average,” and things in this category tend to have an appeal beyond just hardcore fans of whatever genre the game may fit into.  Yes, that can mean many things.  No, I will not give you any examples.  Read the damn review, jerks.

70-79

If we were to use letter grades, this would be a solid “C.”  I know your kids are all straight A students, and some of them probably even go to one of those stupid schools where it’s possible to have a GPA above a 4.0, but this is what once was and shall again be considered “average.”  Usually the game has some issues, but if you dig the concept enough, or are a hardcore fan of the genre, you should probably give it a go.

60-69

Games in this range are a little below average.  Something is holding them back, whether it be too many bugs, poorly executed design or mechanics, or maybe the developer has wronged one of us personally.  You know who you are.

50-59

Fundamentally flawed in some way.  It has a few redeeming qualities, but the overall experience is just not good.

40-49

See above, but likely with only a single redeeming quality.

30-39

We only played it because one of our girlfriends made it, and she thinks our scale goes to 10.  And by “girlfriends,” I mean “your mom.”

20-29

Games in this range tend to be the ones where you start out hating it because it’s so bad, then you feel like it’s in the “so bad it’s good” category, then it makes you want to kill someone.  It’s sort of like a Stockholm Syndrome thing…

0-19

Giving a score this low is worse than just ignoring a game’s existence altogether.  Also, this is prime Induced Rage territory.

Basically, we’re not all that different from the average gamer in that we’re looking forward to the day when we can all look past the gimmicks and judge a game solely on the awesomeness of its dinosaurs.