Print

[ChrisF]

QUOTE (rgtaa @ May 3 2004, 11:55 PM)

The same standard they use in school most sites and people use in rating games! : 100 A+ excellent 90 A GREAT 80 B  Good 70 C  Fair 65 D  Just passing 60 and below fail!  In school if I got a 40-50 (average according to ChrisF)   I would be embarassed to tell my parents or show my friends ...  I could live with a 76!   Same with this game  7.6 is maybe B minus or C+! I would give it a Solid B to B+  ... because I like the concept , atmosphere and gameplay!

Stats 101:

The school letter rating is tremendously squeued - hell, over 60% of the distribution is a single letter grade.  Why?  They are assigning a letter grade based on a distribution of numerical grades and consider anything below 60% bad enough to fail you.  They center their letter grading distribution at the 80% mark accoring to your scale which is important to consider since this is their distribution range for letter grades (100 high, 80 mean, 60 low).  However the underlying numerics still use the full % scale - meaning that 10-20% is very possible but anything under 60 earns you the same letter grade - basically a floor value for the letters - they run two sets of distributions and this is where your confusion comes from.  In the case of games you could give a game a 3.5 with anything under 6.0 as a 'Failure' rating.

For numerics you need to consider a uniform distribution or a bell curved distribution, you can center it at any mark you like and assign any arbitrary endpoints.  My point is that if you truly grade on a 10 point scale then 5 is the center.  Yeah, it might be bell curved and harder to get extreme values (i.e. standard normal dist.) or a uniform dist. but it still centers around a mean value.  Now you can do what you want - if you want to run a scale from 5-10 and have 7.5 be your mean feel free (makes more sense to go 1-5 and use 2.5 but that's neither here nor there).  This is what most gaming sites do although they say they rank on a 10 point scale - meaning they don't do what they say at all because they never use the bottom end and claim to rate numerically.  What good is the bottom end of the scale if it is never ever used (i.e. I'd bet the total number of games 9.0 and above exceeds the total number of games below 5.0 by a wide margin).  Ironically they are not alone in this by any means - sell side investment analysts almost never give a stock a 'Sell' rating so smart people adjust and interpret a 'Hold' as a sell, an 'Accumulate' as a hold, etc... (interestingly they have 3+ terms for 'Buy' but only one for sell and hold - lesson: don't take things at face value).

All that being said, the author claims to rate on a 10 point scale and he does.  It is not his fault that people don't understand statistics enough to realize that.

[rgtaa]

ChrisF!

The orginal poster rated this game as 4 out of 10 with a graphics of 2 out of 10 ...and many of us that read his review thought he was being a little too harsh on the game.  If you look below there is a Pro-review site that gave it 5 out of 10 ...so he is not alone in giving the game a bad rating ... but he is NOT the average!
If you look below you can see that I made the major repected Review sites font alittle Bigger than the ones that are not that well known... and the blue color shows the 2 sites that gave it a "bad" rating.

MANHUNT scores taken from Gamesrankings.com:
IGN    4/20/2004  8.3 out of 10  83.0%  
GameSpot    4/20/2004  8.3 out of 10  83.0%  
 Gamespy    4/20/2004  4 out of 5  80.0%  
 TeamXBOX    4/24/2004  8.2 out of 10  82.0%  
 Eurogamer    4/30/2004  6 out of 10  60.0%  
 1UP    4/22/2004  5 out of 10  50.0%
 Game Zone     5/2/2004  8.3 out of 10  83.0%    
 PGNX Network    4/27/2004  8.2 out of 10  82.0%  
 3D Avenue     5/6/2004  88 out of 100  88.0%  
 Videogame City     5/4/2004  8 out of 10  80.0%

[ChrisF]

You missed the point - the distributions used on these sites are squeued.  They are not a clear or proper distribution for unbiased rankings.  They do not properly use the rating systems they claim (i.e. the 10 point scale).  This is all a fact and inarguable - to verify count the number of games given a 1's, 2's ,3's...9's, and 10's on and plot out how many times they occur.  You'll find tons of 8-10 but no 1-3.  This makes a lot of sense as their business depends upon keeping the developers happy.  You can't claim to rate from 1-10 if you don't ever use the lower end.  The %'s quoted can't be used as they implicitly assume there is some distribution all the way to 0 and that just isn't the case.  People rank games relative to each other because there is no quantitative benchmark - some game must be average and if you use 1-10 that game should be 5.

Now the original poster doesn't use the 'gaming site scale'.  He actually rates what he considers a slightly below average game as a 4.  This is the proper use of a true 10 point scale.  Your confusion comes from the fact that you aren't used to seeing this and it looks odd.  It's not the reviewer's fault that the pay sites bias their scores upward as an industry.

What do you do with deliberate upward bias, you relativise it:  
1) All gaming site scores range from 5-10 with no exception that I can recall but I'm sure there's a 4 out there somewhere
2) If you want a true decile distribution of 1-10 you make 5 = 1, 7.5 = 5, and 10 = 10.
3) So now 7.5 becomes an average score of 5.

CONCLUSION:
It's stupid to argue about it.  The bottom line is that the game sites' scales are totally upward biased (no one can dispute this) and you would prefer the original poster to bias his own scale for comparability.  This is a fine rational and there is nothing wrong with that.  I'm merely making the point that the scales used by the gaming sites are incredibly flawed and misleading unless you realize that 7.5 is actually their average game rating - most gamers realize this even if only subconsciously but it is a massive departure from what is considered standard from a true statistical point of view.  My point is - if anyone is at fault you have to blame the industry and not the reviewer.  That being said, for comparability you have to use the industry biased scale which turns a 4/10 (below average) to a 6.5-7.0/10 (below average).  Scores you quoted range from 6-8.8 or somewhere around there - that puts his 4/10 as a 6.5/10 and right in their range (obviously some people really like it 8.8 while others done 6.0 - this guy just doesn't).  Still the same departure and relative ranking but the absolute numbers become kind of meaningless once the mean moves away from the center.

BTW - The point is established and rational clear from both sides.  I'm not going to post stats anymore on this thread but I didn't care to see the original poster maligned for his rating when it is the gaming sites that use their scales incorrectly.

[rgtaa]

And the rating system that is in place everwhere ... gives all of us a quick and easy way to see if the game is GREAT, Good, Average or Poor!  And what you are saying would be very confusing unless everyone used that system... which they don't.
The bottom line is if a GAME sucks and a pro site rates it as GREAT! .. the Readers would have contempt on that site...and that site would fold.  Period!  
Yes, the Game Developers are gonna KISS ASS!  Just like in the movie industry ... but in MOVIE RATINGS it's the same way ... a Respected SITE will not be a party to Advertizing or other crap that will unduly influence  the REVIEW.  But YES ...it sometimes happens.  That's why I made the RESPECTED SITES FONT bigger ... because the little guys I don't know and they could be UNDULY influenced ... and I am skepical.

[ChrisF]

Understood - let me translate the original review for you:

Original Poster: 4/10 (below average)
Gaming Scale Conversion: 6.5/10 (below average assuming 7.5 is their average) - 65%

I'm really not sure what's average.  I can't even remember a 5.0 which means average may well be the 80% mark in a 6-10 range.

Gaming sites are very biased in the fact that they don't use the scales they claim - there is a huge upward bias for the reasons explained earlier in that there are no 1-3s while many 8-10's.  The reason is the same as the reason that has been creating major legal issues for the recommendations of sell-side analysts.  They should be unbiased yet they do not want to alienate their firm from investment banking business.  So a hold rating is much more palatable than a sell but it still means to get the hell out of Dodge fast.  There's a lot of money on the table there and far less in gaming so you don't see the same type of concern and amounts of people filing suit.  The gamesites give 7 to a below average game, much more palatable than a 3-4.  Why do they need to be palatable - advertising revenue, click referals, and very good inside news sources to attract more people.  The larger sites are more prone to bias and not wanting to offend since more traffic = more advertising dollars at stake.  You don't think they survive on donations based on their reviews do you?  They aren't doing it out of malice, they just need to make the ratings palatable and not offend people - a 7.5 sounds okay while a 5.0 sounds shitty yet both represent an average game.

If this doesn't make sense to you, I'd suggest you speak with a math or finance professor.  He will tell you exactly what I've told you.  You are welcome to use whatever rating system you want but there is no way to rationalize that 7.5 on a true 10 point scale represents an average game and say that there is no upward statistical bias.  In any type of unskewed distribution the midpoint is always the average i.e. 5/10.  If it's not then there is a skew/bias to the distribution.  This in unrefutable.  If you find bias, you have to ask why and there is a marketing factor that I've already provided for you as well as a convention factor (everyone else is doing it).

[rgtaa]

[addyb]

OMG what has this post become.. ev1 arguing about the rating systems?

hahah they way i see it is this, if your still not convinced from a review, just rent the game before you buy and see for yourself, i do this all the time, even for games that are highly rated i rent because theres no guarantee i will like them.

To argue over % and ABC etc grades is kinda sad really, RENT the game out and make your own mind!

I read a few reviews on manhunt, i then was undecided so i rented and found out it wasnt for me so im not going to buy, simple as that!

[Angerwound]

QUOTE (Mr. Blonde @ Apr 30 2004, 03:24 PM)

Wow I really should of expected this from Rockstar games lately, but they completly fooled me. I thought this game would be a visceral action game on war torn post-aplocaleptic streets similar to the cult hit Freedom Fighters or even Beats of Rage. But instead what I ended up getting was a piece of crap, badly written, hide in the shadoes and kill people stealth game Gameplay/Controls Now don't get me wrong I loved Splinter Cell for Xbox and the PC. There was nothing like hiding in an alley waiting for a terrorist to walk by before putting a 9mm bullet in their skulls. But in Manhunt they take the whole "stealth" thing to a ridiculous level. Not only do they put "hide space" every 10 steps but if you are caught it's almost impossible to fight your way out of the situation. Even if your armed and the enemy is not. The controls are lousy and after playing such classics as Ninja Gaiden and Freedome Fighters the camera that they give you in this game is awefull. The controls are okay and it's realively easy to execute your "finishing moves" but the game is too lost in it's own faults to be playable to me. 4/10 The Story Oh rockstar why do you try? Nah just kidding Vice City and GTA had great stories. But this game.....You play a convict who is about to be executed who escapes the death chamber thanks to a film director. Now for the rest of the game you follow his "stage directions" as he guides you and films your "executions" of various gang members. No I promise I am not making that up. 2/10 Graphics I really like the video overlays at the start of the game and taping of executions. But overall the actually in game graphics are your basic Xbox. Nothing special and most of the enviroments are so dark I guess it doesn't matter that much. 4/10 Overall Score 4/10 Stay away from this one if you can. Instead save your money and pray that Rockstar doesn't f-up GTA 4. Review posted at Xbox-Scene, Xboxanomics and FG

STFU you stupid piece of shit.
This game is excellant. It take's violence in games to a new level. What other game can you stab someone in the neck with a glass shard or suffocate someone with a plastic bag? How about kicking them in the mouth till they die?
You just pissed because you can't play the fucking game you need to die a slow and horrible death like all the bastards I kill in this game!
GO TO HELL!

[Mr. Blonde]

It would make that last guy WAY to happy....

[ChrisF]

QUOTE (gescom @ May 7 2004, 05:53 PM)

angerwound - this will ease your pain

LOL -   .

[rgtaa]

The picture of the chair and person strapped in it is toward bottom of page.  

http://www.claytonbailey.com/chair.htm

a little taste of the link without the picture

Insert 25 cents. Execute the condemned man. "

When a coin is inserted, and the switches are pulled, the condemned man twitches and jerks in the chair. Sparks fly and the odor of burning hair is emitted from the panel.

The coin operated Electric Chair inspired complaints when it was first shown at the Triton Museum in Santa Clara, CA.
The artist says: "People love to see violence when it's happening to others. We see violence and crime as entertainment all the time and nobody complains. Now we see punishment and somebody complains.

While counting his pile of coins at the close of the exhibition, he notes that "crime doesn't pay, but punishment does.

[DuDeR MaN]

QUOTE (roar @ May 5 2004, 02:16 PM)

Perhaps I'm a little confused... but is this the "Xbox Game Review" forum or the "Xbox Review Game Reviews" forum? You don't agree with someones review, fine, you want to give your own reivew or disagree with this review, fine, you want to tell someone their review is WRONG? Not fine, reviews are opnions, neither right nor wrong, this person gave it a score, end of story, quit telling the guy he is wrong, if you did that to every review people would eventually stop writing reviews.

Amen to that

Now as much as I have enjoyed reading this thread, it's getting a little out of hand so I'm putting it on a temporary lock.