Navigation

News
Reviews
Previews
Features
Comic
Forums
Site News
Policies

Regular Features

Fanning The Flames
Best and Worst
Top 10
Fight The Hype
Retro Column

Gaming Corner Contributors
flameboy
Happenstance
Daft
not_so_tiny
goaferboy
darksnowman
Gaming Corner Twitter News Feed
    follow me on Twitter
    Contact Us
    Reviews Policy; What does it all mean?!
    Wednesday, 30 July 2008
    Ok so whilst we have posted about this in the past it is now time to explain the scores a bit more indepth and their relation to one another.




    Ok so we have a very unique scoring system based on the UK University System, whilst it is very specific an article on the blog has been posted previously it merely explained why we had picked a different system not why what each socre meant. With a 10/10 scoring system it is fairly simple what each score means, although the definition of average has definitily become altered in recent years. We feel our scoring system demonstrates enough range in scores to work well and clearly detail what is excellent, average and what is sub-standard. The title of 1st Class Honours for a great game is a very grand title for it to hold, just as Fail is an awful title to be used for a game. Here is a basic breakdown of each of the scores;

    1st Class; Exceptional, not perfect, but excels in many areas and in what it aims to achieve.

    2:1; A fantastic title that just falls short of excellence, perhaps for notable flaws such as camera system, but these can only be notable flaws not game breaking flaws.

    2:2 Above Average, a grade given to a game that succeeds on many levels and has perhaps some potentially gamebreaking flaws, but no real major flaws, but is also devoid of enough merits for it to achieve the higher rankings.

    3rd Class Average, a perfectly playable game, that does little to offend whilst at the time doing nothing to demonstrate it is anything more or anything less than average. May have noticeable flaws.

    Pass A title that is below average but is not without its merits as a game.

    Fail For a title to be described a fail, it has to be so bad, it should have been abandoned long ago in the infancy of its development cycle.

    So there it is laid bare the basic criteria by which we mark our games. We of course do have plenty of other ways we differentiate good from bad and certain policies we bare in mind when reviewing, but for now these shall shall remain closely guarded. In truth they should be the sort of thing that reveals itself through the writing as we champion certain gaming traits.

    Finally we will soon be updating our reviews with new graphics showing each of the scores next to each other with a graphic displaying the exact score the game recieved. This is to help give the scores context to new readers not familar to the system as well as remind those who may have forgotten.

    Here's a little demo of what we mean;


    In the very near future a more snazzy and robust version of this graphic with highlighted scores will be showing on the bottom of every review.

    Labels: ,

    posted by flameboy @ 12:18  
    2 Comments:
    • At 31 July 2008 at 16:26, Anonymous Danny said…

      I think this is a rubbish way to score a game. Only people who have been to university will know what they mean. Anyone younger, or who hasn't gone to uni won't understand. I think you should use something simple, so that you don't need a specific place to explain how the scoring works. RUBBISH!!!!!!!

       
    • At 3 August 2008 at 19:28, Blogger flameboy said…

      Thanks for your comments we are currently reviewing the policy and are deciding upon alternative policies.

       
    Post a Comment
    << Home
     
    Latest Comic

    "Nook's Town Part One"

    Previous Post
    Archives
    Links
    Powered by

    BLOGGER

    © 2006 Gaming Corner .Blogspot Template by Isnaini Dot Com