2009 June 22 2009
Again with the notes to the analysis
Lately there is much controversy with the notes. That are too low, that if they are high, that without rigor ... I summarize my position: You must provide an easy and quick to inform the user if the game is good or bad, ie missing something, but I do not think they are the notes, which only give us trouble. For years I have been saying that the ideal would be to the stars:
In film and music criticism is much more mature and do not use these scores. Limited to the stars, they do not say much, and force the user to read the review if you really want to know something. By the way, we could also stay with the short film reviews. Do you really need to write a treatise of 50 paragraphs? Do you need the user as much information? ( Written in August 2007 here ).
Two years later we still the same.
Leo Anait a pair of opinion articles on the subject. One of them (who could defend their arguments with more respect, less insults and more briefly) argues that "the standard and professionalism be measured by the quality of texts rather than scale that uses half notes, "the relativity of notes and detract them because nobody believes them. He also says that Metracritic is bullshit of "cosmic proportions" due to the subjectivity of criticism and has just concluded that the notes "should disappear if we want a quality specialized journalism."
I do not believe that the texts themselves are the solution. Let's be honest: reading some analysis is not realistic. Most are infumables and even rather weak despite its length. I still say we must help the user with a system of notes, but need not be (or try to be) as required. The movie star is ideal, since it helps the user to form an idea, it is well known and is loose enough to the dealership you can pull take my ears by a few tenths there.
I also say that the vast majority of users gives importance to the notes and Metracritic helps iron out the excesses and defects in the standings. Just agree with the end of the article: Scores should be eradicated.
In another article on the subject Anait , DonDepre head speaks a lot more about it. The notes are not important just because, but because they "allow the user to get a quick idea of whether a game is good or crap and companies can assess fairly accurately the quality of the games." Metacritic is also important because although there will be pages who score too happy, and people who do not have the reviews slightest criterion, the average of 40, 50 or 60 scores usually quite defining quality, and an indicator more reliable score that gives a specific page. "
Related Articles:
" The scores of the games
" Four words on independence in the game
" This is not the typical review of Red Dead Redemption (by the boss)
Totally agree, the best would be a score from 0 to 5, period. What is laughable are the scores with decimals, and tell me the difference between 82 and 83. It is totally ridiculous.
Also hate the extensive analysis, some think that by writing more is better, but they are very wrong. We need to say the important thing in a nutshell, if not, as you said, is a true suckling pig.
Actually use 5 stars, a number from 0 to 10 or 0 to 100, or Select cable range you want, is just a note to the game.
Amounts to the same put on a game a 9 out of 10 stars and half that 4 out of 5 stars.
Obviously scoring a game with stars, do not allow much tuning note 7'3456666 period style. Why that note and not 7'5 or 7'4. I guess too many rough edges smoothed between companies, the style: the Fifa has taken a 7'8 and a 7'6 Pro. But can that continue to give the pro has taken 4 ½ star, while only 4 fifa, and would return to them.
However, like almost everything in this world, if you have an idea about an issue shapely should read different opinions from different sources and with it form your own opinion and decide upon it.
Do not tell with half stars ... haha would tune too. In the case of FIFA and PES, both with four stars out of five, all happy, and whoever wants to learn, to read, but not a type Truñó Mr. of the Rings, but rather concise.
Stop to look at the notes that put the editors, and notice more in the note as there are users on many websites, or the number of readings, sales, things like that.
Unfortunately, many users think without playing it ...
I do not like the notes, but sometimes you can have fun seeing how they score better or worse according to the company or type of game.
The problem is that in this country what it says Hobby Consolas going to church. So we go XD
No jorobes uncle, the Hobby is very outdated ...
put notes the company according to the game or let the dough is in advertising much more publicity but also up the note and is especially noticeable in the magazines if you have physical exclusivity of telling her or not is an example Playmania and according playstation exclusive give is reflected in the punctuation of the two case infamious and win playstation prototype in Playmania infamiuos and prototype. and the most unfortunate if the punctuation of the halo is a game that would happen on October 1 of 8 lepusieron a game with mediocre graphics and an online short campaign obsolete. put graphics etcc 10 duration 10 hahaha the paste will have left microsoft