ForumsGamesHow to rate a game correctly

88 20045
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
vinster132
offline
vinster132
5,881 posts
Jester

I think 5 should be Mediocre, not 4. Since essentially, mediocre and average are the same thing. Not good enough to be good, not bad enough to be bad.

Well, then it's average.
BeastMode10
offline
BeastMode10
374 posts
Nomad

Because they are not masterpieces. I gave them ratings around 6.5.
But the votes' meaning should become a sticky.


Aw, come on! Those were great games ^-^

This guide certainly is an excellent way to unify the rating-attitudes of AG members, but it deserves to shine in the Newcomers thread.

My own idea was to limit the number of ratings a player could give, outside of the 4-7 range -- so you could rate any game in the middle, but your votes for the extremes would have to be reserved for when they were really called for.


Nice idea! Perhaps the limit should be time-based, like 1 extreme vote per week, or something, so that long-living members wouldn't become uber-conservative about voting.
IAmAce
offline
IAmAce
196 posts
Peasant

that guy has a ton of merrits

Soltis
offline
Soltis
29 posts
Nomad

knight_34 & vinster132:

Mediocre means "moderate to inferior in quality" -- so no, "average" is better than "mediocre".

knight_34
offline
knight_34
13,822 posts
Farmer

Mediocre means "moderate to inferior in quality" -- so no, "average" is better than "mediocre".


Mediocre - Wikitonary
Mediocre - Merriam-Webster
Mediocre - Dictionary.com
Mediocre - The Free Dictionary
Mediocre - YourDictionary

I've checked a few dictionaries and average can be defined as "ordinary", which is what mediocre is defined as. And I checked a thesaurus, and mediocre is a synonym of average.

Thus, I think one of them should be eliminated.
Soltis
offline
Soltis
29 posts
Nomad

knight_34, you are mistaken; even in your own examples, there are multiple definitions listed for the word; four of them list the definition as being "of average to inferior quality" or some approximation thereof; one explicitly includes a secondary meaning of "rather poor or inferior"; and only one specifically says "average" and nothing else -- and Wiktionary is hardly an authoritative source.

As a writer and an editor, it is my job to know the precise nuances of words, their particular meanings and uses, and how best to employ them; 'average' carries a much more neutral connotation than does 'mediocre', even though they can be used (loosely) as synonyms.

The rating of 4 is between "average" and "bad" (or &quotoor" since "mediocre" means "average to poor in quality", the term is both perfectly descriptive and not at all redundant.

Slick101
offline
Slick101
5 posts
Nomad

This is really usefull that can help lots of people who like rating games and for me i like to rate games based on what Soltis said and that those ten ways of rating are very usefull for me.

Soltis
offline
Soltis
29 posts
Nomad

If the newecomers' forum would be a better place for this, would a mod mind moving it? Or should I just repost the topic over there?

knight_34
offline
knight_34
13,822 posts
Farmer

You should ask a moderator, to do that. It would be best to ask all the active ones (Strop, Gantic, Zophia and NoNameC68) and Carlie.

Haku1234567890
offline
Haku1234567890
1,720 posts
Nomad

dude, what are you talking about you made 20 rules for rating games, I would say there only one rule. Alot of poeple rate games and when game for example have 6.0 rating if you give it 6.5 that is not going to change ratings, only giving 10 could raise it a litle bit, and also giving 5.0 if you don't like it will not change anything, only giving 0.5 will also lower it for a little bit

my rule:
1. if you like game give it 10, if you don't give it 0.5

knight_34
offline
knight_34
13,822 posts
Farmer

If people do follow your rule en masse, it will be unfair on the ratings. If you prefer it the way you do, there might as well be a thumbs up or thumbs down system. But that kind of system is flawed.

Milos
offline
Milos
848 posts
Peasant

I never rate below 5. If a game is on AG that means someone put a lot of effort in making it and doesn't deserve low rating as a consequence of players who give 0.5 because they don't like certain genre of games or because they are in a bad mood.
But when it comes to rating I usually get carried away with a present rating when deciding what mark to give. If I am indifferent about some game I give it 1 above the current average.

...when game for example have 6.0 rating if you give it 6.5 that is not going to change ratings


Read a starfish story.
Haku1234567890
offline
Haku1234567890
1,720 posts
Nomad

Very true, most of the players rate the entire genre low if they don't like it.
yea, giving it 1 rate less than rate it currently has won't change it
RodnayZion
offline
RodnayZion
11 posts
Peasant

Thnak you for that, i rated a couple of games and i realized that i am not way off with my suggestions, but i fully hate it when a new game comes out and its rated 10/10 by some people und u think MEAN!! but then it is just a average game

Soltis
offline
Soltis
29 posts
Nomad

Milos:

You are completely missing the point of the rating system, if you never rate below 5 -- in essence, your parlance of ratings simply reduces to "5 = sucks; 10 = rocks", and that means you're wantonly skewing the ratings much higher than they deserve.

Ratings aren't about mutual back-scratching contests, or "feel-good" pseudo-feedback: they're a way to communicate to the author if they did a good job or not, and you are completely sabotaging the process if you don't communicate openly, honestly, and fairly -- even when the fair rating is a poor one.

Showing 16-30 of 88