Uh Oh, First Review Score in, 6/10

[JaoSming]

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/ ... 0live%2009

The UK OPM's review of Live 09 is a 6/10, may we all tremble in fear.

No actual info on what they didn't like yet, and I don't think we have many if any prominent members here over in da UK..


Edit:

For the Record, they gave Live 08 a 8/10

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages4/939307.asp

[kingjames23]

so they gave a review of a game that is still being beta tested? i am not too worried.

[Andrew]

Very strange that they'd post a score without a review and do so this early. Perhaps it's an error, though giving a game a score out of ten (or whatever) is fairly arbitrary anyway.

[Patr1ck]

Well, the review is from a periodical, that's why it can't be posted.

[Andrew]

True. All the same, without a review to back up the score it's even more arbitrary and useless than usual.

[benji]

There is a review to back up the score. It's in the magazine.

And how is it arbitrary? The magazine assigns some numerical score to represent a summation value of their opinion. They didn't just randomly pick "6" this time and "8" last.

Or is rating players also arbitrary?

[Andrew]

Yes, I realise there is a review in the magazine. I meant that it's hard for us to draw any conclusions without being able to see the review. For argument's sake, what if they rated it 6/10 because they didn't like the fact you can't dunk from the three point line or hit 90% of your shots? That would run contrary to most people's expectations and standards.

It's arbitrary in that there is no set standard for what constitutes 6/10 or 8/10 or whatever. You could say the graphics are a 3/10 or an 8.5/10, but what does that mean? It certainly does represent a summation of their opinion but I find commentary and descriptions much more informative than numerical scores. If a review was to sway me, it would take more than the score to change my mind.

And yes, one could rate players arbitrarily but given that the ratings (in theory) influence how they perform it's something you'd try to avoid.

[benji]

It certainly does represent a summation of their opinion but I find commentary and descriptions much more informative than numerical scores. If a review was to sway me, it would take more than the score to change my mind.

That's fine, but that doesn't make the 6/10 score arbitrary.

It's arbitrary in that there is no set standard for what constitutes 6/10 or 8/10 or whatever.

Except there probably is, I have yet to see a magazine that doesn't outline the meaning of their scores. Either way, we know that it is considered to be of lesser quality against games today than 08 (and 2K8) were against games then. And considering there's a demo, the only use a review could provide is whether or not there is more crap in the rest of the game.

The scoring is only arbitrary if you're accusing OPM UK of assigning random scores to games and not following their own standard of the value of these scores. That by whatever the scale says a 6/10 is, Live 09 is not one, but the reviewer just picked 6 for no reason. He couldn't even pick it because the symbol 6 is an inverse of the symbol 9, it had to be completely random.

And yes, one could rate players arbitrarily but given that the ratings (in theory) influence how they perform it's something you'd try to avoid.

You rate players based on standards. Standards that everyone else is probably unaware of. Should someone accuse you of choosing arbitrary ratings?

[Andrew]

The magazine has their own standards but there's no global standard for rating a video game, especially across genres. If a reviewer gives NBA Live's graphics a 5/10, is that necessarily accurate? Does that rating carry more weight than a screenshot or in-game footage that would allow people to judge for themselves? I wouldn't think so.

Same thing with gameplay. The reviewer's standards might be radically different from hardcore fans and not take into account the same sort of things (like the right players scoring the most points, to use a common example) so their dissatisfaction might not come as bad news to all members of the demographic. Of course, that's merely speculation, the reviewer might be an avid basketball fan and longtime player of NBA Live and other basketball video games.

Perhaps it's not fair to describe their ratings as arbitrary, I realise they're following their own standard but I'm just suggesting that their standard (or IGN's standard or anyone else's for that matter, including my own) is not necessarily definitive. But more to the point, without seeing the detailed review - which I know exists but remains unseen at this time - the score doesn't mean much as we don't know what the reviewer liked or disliked and whether or not that should be a concern. Having played the early build and the demo, I'm not concerned by the 6/10 rating.

Perhaps I should have just stated it that way and left it at that.

[bender15]

For the Record, they gave Live 08 a 8/10

Anyone who gives Live 08 8/10 should be shot. Definitely not worth 8/10

Will wait for a review of the full version. Not Demo.