3 ms·
Wonder if it started before that to be honest. It's pretty common knowledge that game reviews have ridiculously inflated scores for example, with anything lower
by CM30 7y ago
Wonder if it started before that to be honest. It's pretty common knowledge that game reviews have ridiculously inflated scores for example, with anything lower than 70% being seen as bad and people not bothering with anything under 80-90% when choosing what to buy.
So perhaps the average for a review score/rating has just steadily crept upwards over time, til the scale collapsed into a two choice system with 'bad' and 'great' being the only options.
- Fnoord 7y agoYes, gaming scores were inflated indeed. This gaming magazine from the 90s called Hoog Spel [1] never gave ratings to games. Instead they gave a summary of plus and minus points. Such a summary takes slightly more time to read (but not a lot) and gives the reader a good idea on the positive and negative sides of the story. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoog_Spel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoog_Spel
- nearbuy 7y agoCoincidentally, the inflated subjective scores from game reviews tends to match the percentage of players that rate a game as "recommended" on Steam. The median rating on Steam is about 80% positive (meaning 80% of players who rated it would recommend it). A game with a 70% Steam rating tends to be mediocre. It's interesting that even though a rating system where you choose between "recommended" and "not recommended" is much less subjective than trying to rate a game on a scale from 0-100, in aggregate, you get similar scores.