Front Page

Content

Authors

Game Index

Forums

Site Tools

Submissions

About

KK
Kevin Klemme
March 09, 2020
35153 2
Hot
KK
Kevin Klemme
January 27, 2020
20834 0
Hot
KK
Kevin Klemme
August 12, 2019
7421 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
December 19, 2023
3978 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
December 14, 2023
3504 0
Hot

Mycelia Board Game Review

Board Game Reviews
O
oliverkinne
December 12, 2023
2078 0
O
oliverkinne
December 07, 2023
2584 0

River Wild Board Game Review

Board Game Reviews
O
oliverkinne
December 05, 2023
2255 0
O
oliverkinne
November 30, 2023
2498 0
J
Jackwraith
November 29, 2023
3018 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
November 28, 2023
1973 0
S
Spitfireixa
October 24, 2023
3696 0
Hot
O
oliverkinne
October 17, 2023
2625 0
O
oliverkinne
October 10, 2023
2462 0
O
oliverkinne
October 09, 2023
2291 0
O
oliverkinne
October 06, 2023
2507 0

Outback Crossing Review

Board Game Reviews
×
Bugs: Recent Topics Paging, Uploading Images & Preview (11 Dec 2020)

Recent Topics paging, uploading images and preview bugs require a patch which has not yet been released.

× Talk about the latest and greatest AT, and the Classics.

Let's talk rating systems

More
07 Feb 2014 04:26 #171437 by Matt Thrower
Given the choice, I wouldn't rate games. It detracts from what's being said in the review, and if the reader's been paying attention and it's a good review, the reviewer's opinion should be clear.

That said, I think it can help to separate (paraphrasing Ska Baron) "good side of mediocre" and "bad side of mediocre". And that's not a small thing, because in honesty most games fall into one of those categories.

I'm against binary rating systems because they give little to people who don't agree with the reviewer's steer. If you have similar tastes to a critic you can trust their binary ratings, and you've got a clear indicator. But if not, a thumbs down tells you virtually nothing about whether you yourself might like the game.

Whenever I rate games myself, I fall back on a 5-star system in my head and then multiply it by whatever's required to fall into the publishers review scale. But the key thing is that three stars is good because games are meant to be good. A lot of people, especially those dishing out sevens to average titles on BGG, ought to remember that.
The following user(s) said Thank You: wadenels

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Feb 2014 11:29 #171467 by RobertB
Computer Gaming World, back when they were still alive, had one of the best descriptions of their 5-star system:

5 - Outstanding. The rare game that gets it all right. A must-play experience.
4 - Very Good. Worthy of your time and money, but there are drawbacks.
3 - Average. Either an ambitious design with major flaws, or just vanilla.
2 - Seriously lacking in play value, poorly conceived, or just another clone.
1 - Abysmal. The rare game that gets it all wrong. Pathetic. Coaster material.

I also seem to recall someone else (maybe an older CGW - I subscribed to it for forever) had a good description of 3 Stars. It's worth your time if it's a playstyle or subject that you really like. For example, Ticket To Ride: Middle of Nowhere is good enough that a TtR fanatic will really like it, but a casual fan will think it's merely okay.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Feb 2014 15:44 #171479 by Gregarius

wadenels wrote: Like Nate I love ranking games on BGG too. But if I'm going to use a 1-10 scale than 5 is the average. If it isn't I'm mis-using the scale and diminishing its usefulness.

This would only be true if you played games indiscriminately, like a professional reviewer. Almost all of us have a selection bias that prevents us from playing games we don't think we'll like.

The problem isn't that everyone rates games a 7 (well, it partly is, but I'm making a point); the problem is that very few people bother to play and rate the 4s.

I've often told myself I was going to switch all of my ratings to a 5-point scale like Mark Johnson, but I just get intimidated by the task. Hell, I'm still way behind on rating and commenting my current games, let alone everything in the past.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
07 Feb 2014 15:49 #171481 by SuperflyPete

Bull Nakano wrote: I mention Mark Johnson's (5 star) system because he describes it as avoiding 7's and encouraging 10's. I like the concept of committing a game in that way, thus avoiding half stars, and having to decide if a game is a 6 or an 8.


I use a 5 star ratings system. It works because I aggregate scores from the entire group over 3 plays.

Here's my ratings system:
superflycircus.blogspot.com/2011/12/this...ow-we-dooooo-it.html

Here's some personal commentary on how I, personally, rate games, not how the Circus rates games:
superflycircus.blogspot.com/2012/07/pete...us-game-ratings.html

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
08 Feb 2014 15:58 #171558 by Space Ghost
I do want Sag does..I'm trying to move towards nothing having the same ratings, so it is a true ranking. In principle, everyone's collection (whether it is what they own or games they have played) could be reduced to a ranking by asking for every pair of games, "given the opportunity to play Game A or Game B under optimal conditions, which would you rather play?" If everybody did this, the system on BGG would be really useful. As it is now, it is borderline useless.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
09 Feb 2014 16:22 - 09 Feb 2014 16:26 #171601 by Bull Nakano

Gregarius wrote: The problem isn't that everyone rates games a 7 (well, it partly is, but I'm making a point); the problem is that very few people bother to play and rate the 4s.

This is a really good point. On a 10 pt scale, most games I'm interested in playing tend to fall into the 6-8 range due to taste. What I like about the 5 pt scale is it differentiates the 6's from the 8's and, for me, puts my most common rating at 6. But I make it a point to rate every game I play, I try to comment on every one, but I'm a bit behind.

I also like that the 5 pt scale makes a "perfect" score, for me, more common. I feel often people put a strong emphasis on games they give a 10/10. "Go is my only 10." and I think removing the sanctity of "perfect" allows more of a personality to come through in ratings.
Last edit: 09 Feb 2014 16:26 by Bull Nakano.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Gregarius

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
09 Feb 2014 17:40 #171605 by Hex Sinister
The following user(s) said Thank You: Black Barney

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: Gary Sax
Time to create page: 0.279 seconds