The "Nintendo Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I think it's wrong to rate games with percentages. All magazines do it. It drives me mad. Do you know why? I'll tell you why.
Say for example we take an excellent game like
Zelda : Majora's Mask.
It's average score is about 96%. Whoa, wait a minute. 96%! That's 4% off from the PERFECT game.
I'm quite sure that the zelda game on the gamecube will be better than the n64 ones.
So the mags rate it, oh say; 98%. Now that's 2% off from the perfect game.
Let's say in the future (2007 for example) they come out with a brand new console called gamecube 2. They make a zelda game for it and it's amazing! Fabulous sound, gameplay and the graphics are the best they have ever seen. So they rate it 100%. The PERFECT game.
Nothing is better than PERFECT. That's a fact.
Now let's say in the year 2018, another nintendo console comes out. It's called "Magic". It's 512 bit. A zelda game comes out and it's the best game yet. It's much better than the zelda on gamecube 2.
But wait a minute. Zelda on the gamecube 2 was "perfect". And nothing's better than perfect.
How do the magazines rate it???? They can't!
So I introduce my brand new way of scoring games.
Let the scores be out of infinity!
Games are bound to get better and better in the future so we cannot give any game the perfect score.
So therefore in my way of scoring games there is no such thing as the perfect score. The higher the number, the better the game. It's that easy.
There's also another thing I would like to clear up. How can we SCORE games? It's all to do with OPINION.
For the the perfect example, I investigated a little. I bought two completely different magazines about n64 games.
(I'm not sure if I'm allowed to say their names on this so I won't). Anyway, I noticed something.
They all have a section where they score the games.
Of course all the scores vary a little, but I came across a game that had two completely different scores. It was
Tom and Jerry : Fists of fury.
One magazine rated it 88%. "Excellent fighter. Loads of fun."
The other rated it 47%. "Poor fighting game with no 4 player mode."
They disagree a lot. Who is the reader supposed to believe??
So, in my way of scoring games, I would come up with something called "Widespread scoring". I would give the game several scores on the types of games. Its hard to explain.
I have to use an example. Let's say Banjo-Kazooie.
This is how I would score it.
Platform - 95
Fighting - 43
Racing - 9
Puzzle - 67
Shooter - 10
So, if you were a platform kind of person, 95 is a good score so it's good for you. Where as if you were a racing kind of person, this wouldn't be the game to buy (unless you liked platformers too).
It would give people the right idea of what exactly the game is like without having to hunt for a full review. All that the magazines say are "good" or "bad". And that's not very reliable.
So to conclude I would say that if I ever pulished a magazine, I would surely use my method of scoring games! (ie. scoring games out of infinity and widespread scoring).
Thanks for reading.
Kukumber
Say for example we take an excellent game like
Zelda : Majora's Mask.
It's average score is about 96%. Whoa, wait a minute. 96%! That's 4% off from the PERFECT game.
I'm quite sure that the zelda game on the gamecube will be better than the n64 ones.
So the mags rate it, oh say; 98%. Now that's 2% off from the perfect game.
Let's say in the future (2007 for example) they come out with a brand new console called gamecube 2. They make a zelda game for it and it's amazing! Fabulous sound, gameplay and the graphics are the best they have ever seen. So they rate it 100%. The PERFECT game.
Nothing is better than PERFECT. That's a fact.
Now let's say in the year 2018, another nintendo console comes out. It's called "Magic". It's 512 bit. A zelda game comes out and it's the best game yet. It's much better than the zelda on gamecube 2.
But wait a minute. Zelda on the gamecube 2 was "perfect". And nothing's better than perfect.
How do the magazines rate it???? They can't!
So I introduce my brand new way of scoring games.
Let the scores be out of infinity!
Games are bound to get better and better in the future so we cannot give any game the perfect score.
So therefore in my way of scoring games there is no such thing as the perfect score. The higher the number, the better the game. It's that easy.
There's also another thing I would like to clear up. How can we SCORE games? It's all to do with OPINION.
For the the perfect example, I investigated a little. I bought two completely different magazines about n64 games.
(I'm not sure if I'm allowed to say their names on this so I won't). Anyway, I noticed something.
They all have a section where they score the games.
Of course all the scores vary a little, but I came across a game that had two completely different scores. It was
Tom and Jerry : Fists of fury.
One magazine rated it 88%. "Excellent fighter. Loads of fun."
The other rated it 47%. "Poor fighting game with no 4 player mode."
They disagree a lot. Who is the reader supposed to believe??
So, in my way of scoring games, I would come up with something called "Widespread scoring". I would give the game several scores on the types of games. Its hard to explain.
I have to use an example. Let's say Banjo-Kazooie.
This is how I would score it.
Platform - 95
Fighting - 43
Racing - 9
Puzzle - 67
Shooter - 10
So, if you were a platform kind of person, 95 is a good score so it's good for you. Where as if you were a racing kind of person, this wouldn't be the game to buy (unless you liked platformers too).
It would give people the right idea of what exactly the game is like without having to hunt for a full review. All that the magazines say are "good" or "bad". And that's not very reliable.
So to conclude I would say that if I ever pulished a magazine, I would surely use my method of scoring games! (ie. scoring games out of infinity and widespread scoring).
Thanks for reading.
Kukumber
Another point is that over time I reckon you have to mark down games, I know not all makes do this which is very annoying when i had my ps1 about a year ago i brought ridge racer that got a well good score only to find that there are now so many better racers out there oh well my bad!!
I'm going to answer your question with an example:
Quake 1 on PC got, 92%
Quake 2, which was better, got 90%
Why? Well, Q2 wasn't original. So although it's a better game, it got a lower score.
I think that what you need to do is find a magazine that scores how you like. I like one PC mag as i thinks its scores are spot on. My mate may like another mag has he thinks their reviews are better.
Also, don't just look at the score! Read the actual review. If it's a good review it will tell you why it got the score it did, that way you can decide if you want to buy it.
If in one mag, a PC game gets 45%, and says "Rubbish graphics and multiplayer is pants". But another mag says "85%, the single player is fantastic if you don't mind the dodgy graphics." It may well be your cup of tea, if you have an old PC with no 'net connection.
Don't just go by the scores, read the whole review!
Quake 1 on PC got, 92%
Quake 2, which was better, got 90%
Why? Well, Q2 wasn't original. So although it's a better game, it got a lower score.
I think that what you need to do is find a magazine that scores how you like. I like one PC mag as i thinks its scores are spot on. My mate may like another mag has he thinks their reviews are better.
Also, don't just look at the score! Read the actual review. If it's a good review it will tell you why it got the score it did, that way you can decide if you want to buy it.
If in one mag, a PC game gets 45%, and says "Rubbish graphics and multiplayer is pants". But another mag says "85%, the single player is fantastic if you don't mind the dodgy graphics." It may well be your cup of tea, if you have an old PC with no 'net connection.
Don't just go by the scores, read the whole review!
I think it's wrong to rate games with percentages. All magazines do it. It drives me mad. Do you know why? I'll tell you why.
Say for example we take an excellent game like
Zelda : Majora's Mask.
It's average score is about 96%. Whoa, wait a minute. 96%! That's 4% off from the PERFECT game.
I'm quite sure that the zelda game on the gamecube will be better than the n64 ones.
So the mags rate it, oh say; 98%. Now that's 2% off from the perfect game.
Let's say in the future (2007 for example) they come out with a brand new console called gamecube 2. They make a zelda game for it and it's amazing! Fabulous sound, gameplay and the graphics are the best they have ever seen. So they rate it 100%. The PERFECT game.
Nothing is better than PERFECT. That's a fact.
Now let's say in the year 2018, another nintendo console comes out. It's called "Magic". It's 512 bit. A zelda game comes out and it's the best game yet. It's much better than the zelda on gamecube 2.
But wait a minute. Zelda on the gamecube 2 was "perfect". And nothing's better than perfect.
How do the magazines rate it???? They can't!
So I introduce my brand new way of scoring games.
Let the scores be out of infinity!
Games are bound to get better and better in the future so we cannot give any game the perfect score.
So therefore in my way of scoring games there is no such thing as the perfect score. The higher the number, the better the game. It's that easy.
There's also another thing I would like to clear up. How can we SCORE games? It's all to do with OPINION.
For the the perfect example, I investigated a little. I bought two completely different magazines about n64 games.
(I'm not sure if I'm allowed to say their names on this so I won't). Anyway, I noticed something.
They all have a section where they score the games.
Of course all the scores vary a little, but I came across a game that had two completely different scores. It was
Tom and Jerry : Fists of fury.
One magazine rated it 88%. "Excellent fighter. Loads of fun."
The other rated it 47%. "Poor fighting game with no 4 player mode."
They disagree a lot. Who is the reader supposed to believe??
So, in my way of scoring games, I would come up with something called "Widespread scoring". I would give the game several scores on the types of games. Its hard to explain.
I have to use an example. Let's say Banjo-Kazooie.
This is how I would score it.
Platform - 95
Fighting - 43
Racing - 9
Puzzle - 67
Shooter - 10
So, if you were a platform kind of person, 95 is a good score so it's good for you. Where as if you were a racing kind of person, this wouldn't be the game to buy (unless you liked platformers too).
It would give people the right idea of what exactly the game is like without having to hunt for a full review. All that the magazines say are "good" or "bad". And that's not very reliable.
So to conclude I would say that if I ever pulished a magazine, I would surely use my method of scoring games! (ie. scoring games out of infinity and widespread scoring).
Thanks for reading.
Kukumber
Say for example we take an excellent game like
Zelda : Majora's Mask.
It's average score is about 96%. Whoa, wait a minute. 96%! That's 4% off from the PERFECT game.
I'm quite sure that the zelda game on the gamecube will be better than the n64 ones.
So the mags rate it, oh say; 98%. Now that's 2% off from the perfect game.
Let's say in the future (2007 for example) they come out with a brand new console called gamecube 2. They make a zelda game for it and it's amazing! Fabulous sound, gameplay and the graphics are the best they have ever seen. So they rate it 100%. The PERFECT game.
Nothing is better than PERFECT. That's a fact.
Now let's say in the year 2018, another nintendo console comes out. It's called "Magic". It's 512 bit. A zelda game comes out and it's the best game yet. It's much better than the zelda on gamecube 2.
But wait a minute. Zelda on the gamecube 2 was "perfect". And nothing's better than perfect.
How do the magazines rate it???? They can't!
So I introduce my brand new way of scoring games.
Let the scores be out of infinity!
Games are bound to get better and better in the future so we cannot give any game the perfect score.
So therefore in my way of scoring games there is no such thing as the perfect score. The higher the number, the better the game. It's that easy.
There's also another thing I would like to clear up. How can we SCORE games? It's all to do with OPINION.
For the the perfect example, I investigated a little. I bought two completely different magazines about n64 games.
(I'm not sure if I'm allowed to say their names on this so I won't). Anyway, I noticed something.
They all have a section where they score the games.
Of course all the scores vary a little, but I came across a game that had two completely different scores. It was
Tom and Jerry : Fists of fury.
One magazine rated it 88%. "Excellent fighter. Loads of fun."
The other rated it 47%. "Poor fighting game with no 4 player mode."
They disagree a lot. Who is the reader supposed to believe??
So, in my way of scoring games, I would come up with something called "Widespread scoring". I would give the game several scores on the types of games. Its hard to explain.
I have to use an example. Let's say Banjo-Kazooie.
This is how I would score it.
Platform - 95
Fighting - 43
Racing - 9
Puzzle - 67
Shooter - 10
So, if you were a platform kind of person, 95 is a good score so it's good for you. Where as if you were a racing kind of person, this wouldn't be the game to buy (unless you liked platformers too).
It would give people the right idea of what exactly the game is like without having to hunt for a full review. All that the magazines say are "good" or "bad". And that's not very reliable.
So to conclude I would say that if I ever pulished a magazine, I would surely use my method of scoring games! (ie. scoring games out of infinity and widespread scoring).
Thanks for reading.
Kukumber