As the gaming industry has grown over the past decade, things have changed immensely. With millions of gamers and a multitude of avenues for gamers to learn about games and reviews, the words of a few are becoming the deciding factor in how a game is received by the general public. IGN editor in chief Hilary Goldstein believes that this is a bit of a problem, as reviews are meant to be informative, not authoritative.
“More and more the score (with a 100-point scale) has come to define the game, which is not our intention,” says Goldstein. “The score should say, 'This game is in the same league as these other games of the same score' and the criticism lives within the text (which we hope you all read) as well as the discussions that occur after the review.”
The review “is not the critical impression of a game. It's actually a benchmark so gamers can easily understand in one flash the overall quality of a game. The criticism is in the text of the review,” he says.
For reviews to really help a game, they must inspire gamers to discuss the merits of each review. “My hope is that by simplifying the score, we open up further debate. The 'best' game won't be determined strictly by a tenth of a point (as is the current case with Mass Effect 2 and Red Dead Redemption) but instead by legitimate discussion comparing the quality of two games that are relative equals.”
2 Comments
August 5, 2010
Good for IGN. Their scale has always been one of my biggest complaints with the site. Glad to see them take this step, and I'm intrigued to see what they change next.
August 5, 2010
Wow, rounding to the nearest 0.5. My life will never be the same again.
Honestly, if you're gonna take a stand, then DO IT you pussies.