Slayer1189285,996 (204,795)

Crisis averted. My pen drive has been found straggling at my mother's house though in other less vital news, I've lost my fitbit charger =(

Slayer1189 has won 6,928 Trophies in 410 games

Registered on 12 May 14 | On site now | Last scanned today at 11:42 by TT Pro Scanner

41.80 (33.67)

Slayer1189's Blog (2 followers)

Dec
06
A Sense of Scale
Just a short blog today for an idea that has resurfaced in me ol' noggin. This one is for all the stat/math/list monsters out there (I'm sure on this site of all places there must be a few besides me )

...................if you don't like stats, look away now.......................

I would love to hear your opinions

When rating something, I feel the scale is important. This could be in terms of games, movies, locations, food etc. Obviously, for the purposes of this blog, I am talking about games, though i would say most people have a preferred scale across the board.

So, the most common increments it seems are 2, 5, 10, 20 and 100. These can be mixed up a little and some use multiple categories to form a composite rating, but most basically fit the above common ones.

My Personal favourite
A 20 increment scale is my favourite. This can obviously be done as 1-20, or 1 -10 in "0.5" increments.

My preference is 1-10 in "0.5" increments. I tend to feel that you can get a clear answer as to where something sits at this scale. You rarely find yourself thinking "this is really between two increments".

The Others
Obviously TGN uses a 10 point scale. I find a 10 point scale to be pretty good, but I still sometimes find myself wrestling between two increments. Overall it creates a pretty good picture though

As for 2, and 5 increment scales, I really dislike these. Each increment is far too broad and it causes far too much to sit at the same level, making the true rating indistinguishable from so many others.

I also really dislike scales of 100. I find that there are so many increments that the human mind isn't capable of accurately weighing up the options and placing it at the right increment. What is the discernible difference between 68 & 69 (mind our of the gutter you, stick to the stats! ). Overall, the only useful application of 100 scales are to aggregate, but i'd still prefer 20.

Well, fellow stat junkies, what is your favourite and why? Do you prefer one that isn't common or a more complex composite method? Or just one of the more common ones?

Tell me in the comments
Posted by Slayer1189 on 06 December 17 at 21:35 | Last edited on 07 December 17 at 20:50
I think 20 is a good amount. When I rate games, I tend to rate a lot of them 3.5/5... and I think it would be nicer if I could distinguish them a bit with 6.5, 7, 7.5/10. But the one we have here gets the job done enough, I think.

I guess I might like stats after all, since I didn't heed your warning to look away!
Posted by biff_beefcake on 06 Dec 17 at 23:08
Agreed , both in that 20 is a good scale and that 10 does work fine for most purposes. yup you must like stats too
Posted by Slayer1189 on 07 Dec 17 at 00:28
Honestly, nowadays I find numerical rating systems pretty arbitrary and I don't put much weight in them personally. When I rate a game on here I just pick a number that feels about right and then never think about it again. I just don't feel I can ever accurately convey my experience with a game with numbers so I gave up trying to do that a long time ago.

It definitely is interesting to see how others feel about it though. I find the consideration you put in to this quite impressive.

The only thing I truly hate about ratings systems is when people get mad about metascores and turn into horribly toxic man-babies. For example, the outrage on display whenever people give Nintendo games (mainly Mario and Zelda) less than perfect scores is disgusting and cringeworthy and I just want to distance myself as much as possible from those kinds of "fans".
Posted by Reevys-91 on 07 Dec 17 at 10:11
PS - 20 point scale (1-10 in 0.5 increments) is my fav too though
Posted by Reevys-91 on 07 Dec 17 at 10:13
I would say you are far more emotive than most Reevys, which would then make sense that you struggle with rating systems in general. For me, there isn't anything in life I couldn't comfortably put on a 20 point scale (though obviously I could expand on any particular point if needed.)

Other people's ratings
Regarding metascores, ratings, etc, I completely agree with you and even go a step further. I simply do not consider another persons rating for a game as important. They are not me, so why would I take into consideration how they rated a game?

When I rate something I rate it specifically based on my experience and for my reference. (hence why I dislike many games that are loved and like many games that are hated )

Metacritic is the worst offender of this. I would never look to metacritic, as an aggregate score tells me nothing about the game. It is simply an average of what people many other people thought. Given that I already disagree with the premise by which many people rate games, why would I then trust the aggregated figure of what I consider to poorly judged decisions?

Of course, a caveat can be applied to the above and should go without saying. There are exceptions to the rule. If you know that someone in particular has similar taste to you, then it makes sense that in some cases you will enjoy the same games. Also, someone may know what I like very well may recommend a game based on my preferences, not their own etc.

Regarding your comment about fans. I also completely agree here. In fact, I am generally against the idea of a "Fan". Fans can become toxic as you expressed... but by dint of being a fan, they can also end up overcompensating for their fandom.

I believe in taking each thing on it's own, forming your own opinion and coming to a conclusion. You might like a series or company, but if they mess up you shouldn't dismiss it out of fandom. You also shouldn't shout down everyone who isn't a fan just because you are.

The true sign of someone who thinks for themselves is that they have opinions that agree with the mainstream as well as ones that go against the grain.

An even better sign is when they don't feel the need to force those opinions on other and can agree to disagree respectfully. This community on TT have all been great in this regard IMO which is great .

I don't expect others to love a flawed game like Venetica the way I do, just as I don't expect everyone to dislike Minecraft just because I do. The fact we have different opinions is what makes the discussion fun and engaging

P.S. The worst is when you find someone who rails on and on about how terrible a game is, despite the fact they have never played it. Fine if they have played it, but it is funny when they are so passionately against a game based on the what other people said
Posted by Slayer1189 on 07 Dec 17 at 13:52
Wow! This one took me some time to get to, sorry, mate!

Anyway, good read! It's not something I've really thought about all that much before, if I'm honest but a scale with marks out of 10 but with halves in between (thus making it 20), is pretty good!

I think, though, just for simplicity's sake, a score out of 10 is (overall) the best (or easiest) way but you're right, sometimes, you wanna put a score in the middle and it's maddening lol.

A score out of 100 is also trickier because of 69 being such a crude...I mean meagre difference compared to 68.

I think in this case, using increments of 20 definitely makes sense as if you use increments of 10, why bother marking out of 100 but using increments of 20 gets rid of the decimal.

So to summarise, I'd say either marks out of 10 period or marks out of 100 with increments of 5 (hence, a scale of 20) makes most sense to me personally! Though your ideal scale wouldn't be one I took issue with either!
Posted by AtsumaKarin on 27 Jan at 23:31