A 100-point scale is completly useless. Giving a game a score of say 87 is so arbitrary that it becomes meaningless. A simple thumbs up/down tells me more.
I personally like a simple 1-10 scale. And not by .1's (that's the same as a 100-point scale!). Either just use simple whole numbers, or at most by .5's (hence a 20-point scale).
"each scale will work, just don't assume an exact conversion from one scale to another"
That's EXACTLY why a simple 5-point scale can be useful. Using a small range means there's a much better chance people can come to a consensus on what to give it. Hence why X-Play uses it.
"the more numbers you have, the better you can express exactly how you feel about the game."
Another reason to use a small scale. Too often reviewers use the rating to convey their opinion of the game rather than the text of the review. A small scale 'forces' the reviewer to better explain their opinion.
And oh, you did mention Outtrigger...
Anonymous: Re: ratings/reviews
A 100-point scale is completly useless. Giving a game a score of say 87 is so arbitrary that it becomes meaningless. A simple thumbs up/down tells me more.
I personally like a simple 1-10 scale. And not by .1's (that's the same as a 100-point scale!). Either just use simple whole numbers, or at most by .5's (hence a 20-point scale).
"each scale will work, just don't assume an exact conversion from one scale to another"
That's EXACTLY why a simple 5-point scale can be useful. Using a small range means there's a much better chance people can come to a consensus on what to give it. Hence why X-Play uses it.
"the more numbers you have, the better you can express exactly how you feel about the game."
Another reason to use a small scale. Too often reviewers use the rating to convey their opinion of the game rather than the text of the review. A small scale 'forces' the reviewer to better explain their opinion.
And oh, you did mention Outtrigger...
Mon, 2004-08-09 12:29