EZA review scale changing to numerical system



  • @tokyoslim I think that's a problem with the industry honestly, which is probably based off of school grading systems in some weird way. You certainly aren't an average student if you're at a 50% for your grades, but personally, I'd love to see a shift in reviews where 5 truly does represent an average, a la Angry Joe.

    I still say we'll have less people upset in a year's time and I have enough confidence in that to offer up a bet but the unfortunate thing is, there's no way to quantify the number of angry people.

    Fun fact - The Inpatient received 2.5 stars and was marked as Inferior, if that helps your point any.



  • I don't get how Opencritics most trusted review site changed their scoring system to suit sites like Opencritic and Metacritic. It's not EZA with the problem it's the aggregaters



  • It's not even really a "problem" unless EZA feels like their scores are drastically being misrepresented by the aggregators , which according to general scoring consensus, they don't seem to be.


  • Global Moderator

    I welcome this so much! as fancy as the stars was, 10 with decimals really adds to the scale and makes (as they state) it easier to keep scores apart on a wider scale!



  • I'm open to this change, I think it'll work a bit better. Around that four star border we'll now have two or three more options which should offer some more variety and just in general reveal a bit more of the game's nature.

    The stars will live on in Ultima Brad's championship belt.



  • Just wait until Damiani is forced to choose between giving the next Zelda a 7.5.or an 8, but he really wants a score somewhere in the middle...You'll see how bad it can get. :p



  • So what is Wolfenstein 2: New Colossus? A "Nein/10"?



  • I welcome the switch-up, but I now ask what we all know is the most pressing question regarding this change. Are we also trading the stars for numerical emotes on twitch?



  • This is probably for the best, the out of 10 system is so ingrained that the stars never really caught on. It's just one of those things where to trying to change it is like trying to swim up stream.



  • I disagree strongly with this change.

    From a purely emotional perspective the stars are part of the EZA brand for me. To lose them means giving up a major part of its identity, and that's a bummer.

    But it also doesn't even make sense within the context of their explanation.

    This is not a site that reviews bad games. We will never, ever see a game rated 5 or less. So what's the point of making the scale bigger?

    Further, numerical scales always invite comparison in a way that stars do not. reviews will always fall apart when you start comparing them, especially across different reviewers.

    This must be due to some outdated notion that Metacritic in any way provides visibility. It doesn't. Think of other sites on the same strata as EZA - how many use 20 point scoring scale? How many score games at all? Not Kinda Funny Games. Not Giant Bomb.

    You're removing something that makes EZA unique and replacing it with something that has no benefits. It's impossible to be happy with that.



  • I'm firmly in the camp of "scores are dumb and anything beyond a buy/rent/pass rating is a waste of time" but I get that such a thing doesn't gel with metacritic scores which is all most people (not the reviewers or the people on this board, but I mean at large) ever care about, so whatever. The only thing that actually matters is the review itself anyway.


  • Global Moderator

    Ya, I'm also in the camp of not really caring about the actual score but I'm glad they made this change for themselves. Clearly they didn't like how the star were thought of by aggregate sites and probably viewers too so now being able to get those a bit more accurate will help.

    As for the people that did complain that too many reviews were 4 stars or whatever, I really just don't get that complaint. It would be unbelievably negligence to just give one game 3.5 and another 4.5 just so the overall score spread of EZA reviews could be more diverse.

    For me, nothing changes, the words have always been the most important thing.



  • 10 points, 100 points or any system is stupid if you don't use the other half the scale. I fully support a 5 being an mediocre game. This isn't academics.

    The real problem is that the industry is so stuck in their ways and it would be risky for any reviewer to change the system with actually scoring an okay game with 5. It would anger publishers, your review would be pulled and you would be talked to by your higher ups. Because a 5 on any 10 point scale looks like complete shit because that's what we're so accustomed to with reviews.

    I dont think it really chsnges to much except that 10 points is cleaner to deal with and for ppl to understand.

    I would rather no scores and ppl read. But I do also like quick figures. With how limited I am for time for games I usually don't buy less than a 9 and am already liking what I hear. So scores work against publishers for ppl like me.



  • @cgamor7 said in EZA review scale changing to numerical system:

    The real problem is that the industry is so stuck in their ways and it would be risky for any reviewer to change the system with actually scoring an okay game with 5.

    With how limited I am for time for games I usually don't buy less than a 9

    lol
    Better start buying more 5's then



  • @tokyoslim said in EZA review scale changing to numerical system:

    @cgamor7 said in EZA review scale changing to numerical system:

    The real problem is that the industry is so stuck in their ways and it would be risky for any reviewer to change the system with actually scoring an okay game with 5.

    With how limited I am for time for games I usually don't buy less than a 9

    lol
    Better start buying more 5's then

    Lol. Hey I buy 7 and 8's too sometimes if it's game I want. Those are pretty much 5's.



  • @cgamor7 But they're not. That's the irony. The pattern of behavior you're describing is exactly why nothing below a 6 matters. There is no functional difference between a 1 and a 5 because neither are worth your time. a 5 might be halfway up the scale, but it's much closer to 1 than it is to 7. That's why we are where we are!



  • @TokyoSlim And that's why 10 points is useless. If nothing under 5 is if value then why use it at all. What's wrong with a 5 being an okay game? You can then use the numbers in between to be more meaningful.

    To many games are 8's that are just okay. Having a 7 8 9 to tell you the difference between a low good game vs a high good game. As for now scores are completely meaningless except 9 and up because it typically means they did something exceptional to be there.

    Overall id rather scores go away and you read the review. Or at least a rubric measuring different areas of the game.



  • @josh-bossie EZA does on occasion review games not so great (There are several 2 1/2 star reviews) but in reading your assertion that, "We will never, ever see a game rated 5 or less," I can simply point to Huber's Umbrella Corps. Review.

    Granted, it was a game in a franchise he deeply cares for, but there is precedent. (If you don't want to click the link, he gave it one star or "Terrible" by the now former standards.)



  • @CGamor7 I agree. That's why I feel that NUMBERED REVIEW SCORES are generally useless. The scale and granularity of an individual review in numerical form doesn't matter. There is no more of a difference between an 8.5 and a 9 from any one person on the current scale than there is between an 8.5 and an 8.6 on a 100 point scale because it's all just arbitrary values on a line that isn't accurate or consistent from game to game or reviewer to reviewer. The judging criteria changes and the number applied is a distillation of a "feeling" .

    If 7's became 5's industry wide overnight, less people would buy those same games, because why would you buy a 5?



  • I just hope that all my thoughts were well represented by someone in whatever group meeting was had to determine this shift. I'm ok with my position being overruled by the majority that wanted to change, but it would be nice to know someone at EZA takes this seriously and is willing to stand up against the tyranny of numbers.