ForumsGamesHow to rate a game correctly

88 20043
Soltis
offline
Soltis
29 posts
Nomad

I've spent a lot of time playing games on AG, and to put it bluntly, most games I encounter have ratings wildly out of proportion to their actual quality. In a few cases a game is rated too low, but usually it's the opposite: people appear to rate games based on what other people have rated them, nearly as much as their own opinion -- or they simply don't want to give any game a "bad" rating.

Here are some general thoughts and pointers:

1. A game author may not like getting a low rating, but it's important to rate games accurately -- for two reasons. First, so other players know what to expect; second, so the author knows if they need to try harder in order to produce a good game.

2. Other people's opinions are not yours. All a 9.5 rating means, is that the game has a 9.5 rating; don't be afraid to rate a game a 6 or 5 just because everyone else didn't.

3. Every rating number has its own meaning - the entire spectrum, from 1 to 10, should be used when appropriate.

4. Most games should get between 4 and 7 in ratings -- 1-3 should be reserved for spectacular failures, and 8-9 should be used sparingly.

5. You should never rate a game a 10 unless you've thought about it pretty hard, first - if the "10" rating is to have any meaning, it should be extremely uncommon; I don't think I've ever given a 10; I've given a couple 9.5s, but there are always flaws.

6. Once in a while, a game is simply so creative you want to give it credit for being so original; I suggest rating it like usual, and then adding no more than 1 to the resulting rating... even creativity needs to be balanced by discipline and skill.

Anyway, to help people give better ratings, I've provided a number-by-number breakdown of possible ratings and when they should be used:

1 - AWFUL: unplayable, impossible to enjoy, or even tolerate; games which are so buggy you can't even play a minute or two might qualify, too.

2 - Terrible: nobody in their right mind would enjoy it; comparable to watching paint dry for sheer entertainment value.

3 - Bad: boring, annoying, repetitive; terribly balanced; severely buggy, etc.

4 - Mediocre: amateurish, tedious, or suffers serious balance issues; you wouldn't say it's out right bad, but you wouldn't say it's anywhere near good.

5 - Average: no crushingly bad flaws, but nothing impressive - a good way to waste time, but nothing more.

6 - Above average: fun, but with flaws; there may be balance issues, bugs, or implementation issues of a good idea. This should be the highest rating a game gets if it has even one serious complaint.

7 - Good: no serious complaints or bugs; above-average enjoyability, or an unusually creative game concept.

8 - Great: a great idea, with good implementation; there may be minor issues, but nothing that would stop a reasonable player from having a great time.

9 - Amazing: not quite perfect, but a masterpiece. No real issues; the only problems should be extremely slight, or subjective (matters of opinion).

10 - Perfect: flawless; absolutely no complaints whatsoever, and game play slightly more addictive than crack.

  • 88 Replies
Pazx
offline
Pazx
5,845 posts
Peasant

Soltis
ur an idiot
a total idiot
thats just unbelivable that society is coming to people restricting others personal opinions, im going out there right now and rating 5 games 10/10 just to show how much i despise u
ur insane u idiot



Wheeeeeeeee~

I figure its self explanatory that 10 is better then 9 or 4 is better then 3. I think this is rather useless


But most people wouldn't understand not to use 10 and 2 often, and most wouldn't say 5 is average.

...

I'm bad. I use 5.5 as average... AAAAGGGHH

Anyway, a very nice guide~ Onya~
goodgameman
offline
goodgameman
5 posts
Nomad

i usually rate good games between 7 and 8.5
bad games i rate between 2 and 4

Soltis
offline
Soltis
29 posts
Nomad

Pazx:

If you wanted to get really technical, 5.5 is actually the most correct "average" rating -- so congratulations, you're actually more correct than I am; I just didn't want to cloud the guide by getting into the ".5s" of ratings.

VincentPopp:

Thanks for some critical, but polite feedback, though I'm going to have to disagree on a few points:

First, bugs are an extremely important aspect of game quality; one element you neglected to list was "Polish", which is actually the single most important aspect to consider when rating most games; it would be less fair to consider bugs, though, if people commonly FIXED the bugs in their games, but sadly, that's a rarity on AG.

Although innovation and originality can be helpful in making a game good, I'd rather someone recycle ideas and do it better than anyone else has, than haphazardly toss together some really neat new concepts without bothering to make sure everything works correctly -- which is essentially what polish is: making sure that everything works together in a sensible fashion, and there aren't any unpleasant surprises that shouldn't be there.

Polish also includes balancing difficulty, making sure that there aren't game breaking interactions between items/skills/etc, and that it's not unreasonably easy for the player to get "trapped" by seemingly benign strategic choices they make early in the game, much later on.

As for graphics, music, and sfx, they simply need to not be grating; many games, such as Infectonator, have really *lousy* graphics, but that has absolutely nothing to do with how fun they are; likewise, their sound effects are third rate, but they're still engaging and fun.

Gameplay *is* an important aspect of games, but that is expansive enough to cover controls, as well as the basic game concept -- it also covers responsiveness, timing, and other minutiae which are so important when considering enjoyability.

As for replayability, if a game is fun, it's got replayability; a lot of the contrived crap that people add to enhance "replayability" amount to locking basic game functionality, so you have to play a GIMPED version of the game several times to get the really good stuff. That's not replayability, that's extortion.

Things which truly enhance replayability are varied and dynamic gameplay, lots of different ways to accomplish the same goal, and branching story/mission structures, where the player can explore the game without feeling bullied into doing it to "earn" stuff they need to have fun.

Now, regarding the trolling:

I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about; I've made a point of ignoring the people who simply toss insults at me, but I am going to debate the point with anyone who disagrees, if they make their statements in a reasonable fashion, since otherwise I'm ignoring potential debate of the topic; they might even be able to prove me wrong, in which case they've done me a favour.

There was one person who started out seemingly reasonable, and then became insulting, and I simply asked him to leave the thread; beyond that, though, I'm not sure who you're referring to, whom I've engaged, who was trolling.

piperluke
offline
piperluke
4 posts
Nomad

Thanks!!!Helps me
Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,026 posts
Nomad

comparable to watching paint dry for sheer entertainment value.

I'll be completely honest with you. I can entertain myself for hours from merely thinking about things. Watching paint dry wouldn't be so bad.

However I don't think a game should be rated through a huge amount of thought. It sounds terrible but how much the game actually strikes you as interesting is basically the basis of how good it is. All you need to know is:
1) How many upgrades and fixes from its original game (if it had one).
2) How long you can play it without being bored.
3) What the purpose / function of the game was (lasting short and sweet or long but exciting), which should be the basis of what you think.

That is it. If you dislike that kind of game though (say... I hate flash games that are RTS's, but I love RTS's that aren't flash games ), you should try not to do it in a biased fashion since it can influence other peoples thoughts on the game when really the creator of the game deserves a rating based on who would actually play it.

But for the record:
The problems the OP has stated already show that ratings can't be incredibly trusted and thus any rating on anything should always be taken with a pinch of salt.

- H
zakristone
offline
zakristone
4 posts
Nomad

This is a very nice rating guide.

Carasio
offline
Carasio
5 posts
Nomad

Agree. There are a lot of games which are underrated, and even more of them which are overrated; but it's barely impossible to unstuck a game's rating when thousands of users have voted regarding to the average, even although most people rate carefully... that is the "mass effect".

yt0
offline
yt0
45 posts
Farmer

people have a different taste, so it is impossible i think to have 10/10 in a long time

Hellsharky
offline
Hellsharky
56 posts
Nomad

Oh... well :3
Maybe I should start rating games at 6-7 :/ not just 8-9 as usual.
Im afraid of low numbers (dunno why :3)

Hellsharky
offline
Hellsharky
56 posts
Nomad

hay how do u rate a game


when you play a game, when you scroll a bit down you should see a bar that has

1-10 scoring. The above shows the current total rating and below it you should be able to pick the rating you want.
KXIsystem
offline
KXIsystem
106 posts
Nomad

I totally agree, but the sad part is that most people don't care what they rate as long as they get AP or other stupid reasons. Its the internet, its full of idiots. Look at youtube and see how many people try to get thumbs up on any popular video, and contrast it to the actual video.

TheLegitGamer
offline
TheLegitGamer
181 posts
Nomad

Amazing. I'll definitely use this guide when rating games.

visitlegend
offline
visitlegend
398 posts
Nomad

wow This is amazing and very legit

krsdii
offline
krsdii
6 posts
Nomad

Excellent guide! Thanks. And I agree with you KXlsystem.

Dregus2
offline
Dregus2
502 posts
Blacksmith

I never seen a single game having 10/10


What would that accomplish, it wouldn't make any difference at all. And the only games with 10/10 ratings are the MMOs.
Showing 61-75 of 88