What is the average score for games? (And other interesting statistics)

#1_FalstaffPosted 10/19/2013 11:42:32 PM
After seeing plenty of topics and posts surrounding the subject, I decided to finally discover what the ďaverageĒ score games receive really is. Some people say itís 5 of 10, others say itís 7 of 10. Iíve even seen some say an average game is an 8 of 10. There are lots of arguments for and against these stances.

What I did was take a look at gamerankings.com. I searched for all games from 2013 up to this day. In order for a game to make it into my data collection, it also had to have 10 or more reviews. And after entering 401 points of data, I came up with an average score of:

73.39

So, from this, we can definitively say that the average score awarded to a game this year is 73.39 based on a 100-point scale. The median of these scores is 75.83. Based on the median, in order to be in the top 25% of all games for this year, the score required is an 82.19 or higher. Top 10% is 86.86. Top 5% is 88.69.

I wanted to figure this out because of the recent reviews of Sonic: Lost World. Currently, it has a score of 62.00 (24 reviews) on gamerankings.com. A score that low puts it in the bottom 25% of all games this year. Does that mean itís necessarily a bad game? My answer is ďno.Ē Can it still be enjoyed? Certainly, yes.

As a side note, I think the current system for "scoring" games is utterly ridiculous.
---
9 days to go, and I'm out of here.
#2star_guy_100Posted 10/19/2013 11:45:55 PM
that seems reasonable. anyone who thinks 5/10 is average doesnt understand the scaling that has happened to game scores over a decade.
#3HermeticJusticePosted 10/19/2013 11:55:56 PM
star_guy_100 posted...
that seems reasonable. anyone who thinks 5/10 is average doesnt understand the scaling that has happened to game scores over a decade.


I hate scores too, but if you have a 5/10 game and a 7/10 game, it doesn't matter which is average or not, you're going to pick the 7 every time if you're only obsessed with the number

that's the problem IMO, people don't look to play games and then review them, they look to review them and then play them
---
Currently Watching:
St. Elsewhere, Days of Our Lives, Full House
#4The13DoctorsPosted 10/20/2013 12:00:02 AM
85

The scale is 70-100.
---
Platinum, Monolith, Atlus, Retro, Next Level Games | Sonic + [Mega Man?]
Good time to be a Nintendo Gamer :D
#5adampeltzPosted 10/20/2013 8:49:17 AM
Absurd lack of distribution on the low end. There's no distinction for games that get anywhere from a 1 to games that get... say a 4.9.

If I wrote game reviews for a living, I'd stick to just a 4 star scale similar to that used in the movie industry.

Basically, almost everything gets above a 6 anyway.
---
XBL gamertag: Peltz | Wii U NNID: Peltz-0
3DS Friend code: 1161-0129-0691.
#6JobocanPosted 10/20/2013 8:56:11 AM
star_guy_100 posted...
that seems reasonable. anyone who thinks 5/10 is average doesnt understand the scaling that has happened to game scores over a decade.


"Average" in the case of 5/10 doesn't mean the average scores of games, it's just that the game doesn't really do anything remarkably good, but nothing remarkably bad.

Basically, this is how it should work if people weren't complete ****ing idiots:

1 = unplayable
2 = really bad
3 = bad
4 = unless you're a BIG fan or the series, it's not worth playing
5 = average, indulge only if you're a fan of the series
6 = good, but there exists better
7 = very good
8 = great
9 = amazing (very few games deserve such a high score, this should be reserved to the strongest games ever)
10 = no one in existence can deny this game's awesomeness (see: there doesn't exist a single game ever that deserves a 10)


The problem is that people now are unable to think so now it looks something like that:

1-7 = horrible
8 = kinda bad
9 = crap
10= sort of good
---
www.vgcollect.com/jobocan - My Collection
#7star_guy_100Posted 10/20/2013 1:09:01 PM
Jobocan posted...
star_guy_100 posted...
that seems reasonable. anyone who thinks 5/10 is average doesnt understand the scaling that has happened to game scores over a decade.


"Average" in the case of 5/10 doesn't mean the average scores of games, it's just that the game doesn't really do anything remarkably good, but nothing remarkably bad.

Basically, this is how it should work if people weren't complete ****ing idiots:

1 = unplayable
2 = really bad
3 = bad
4 = unless you're a BIG fan or the series, it's not worth playing
5 = average, indulge only if you're a fan of the series
6 = good, but there exists better
7 = very good
8 = great
9 = amazing (very few games deserve such a high score, this should be reserved to the strongest games ever)
10 = no one in existence can deny this game's awesomeness (see: there doesn't exist a single game ever that deserves a 10)


The problem is that people now are unable to think so now it looks something like that:

1-7 = horrible
8 = kinda bad
9 = crap
10= sort of good


i agree that 1-10 should be how it is. because of the way reviews keep increasing their scaling of scores it really is 7.0-10 now, anything below 7 is viewed as a bad game and most of the time is actually a bad game. 8-10 as things are now is generally viewed by everyone as good, unless your a zelda fanatic, in which case anything other then a 10 is grounds to have someone fired from their job or even shot. anyway like i said, some people claim 5-6 isnt bad and is average because they have your rational rating in mind, but the actual rating scale in current gaming reviews is different
#8SkyCrackersPosted 10/20/2013 1:12:11 PM(edited)
The problem with your logic is that there are piles of obscure shovelware games that often don't get any reviews at all, let alone 10 reviews. Most reviewers only bother with games that don't look totally horrible, or are otherwise noteworthy.

So 73 might be the average score given in reviews, but it still signifies an above average game.

Also, if Gamerankings uses a weighted average like Metacritic, where more popular sites are given more weight, that could throw off your results as well.
---
"Darwin gave us sensory organs for a purpose" -my friend, demonstrating his understanding of evolution
#9_Falstaff(Topic Creator)Posted 10/21/2013 12:09:36 AM
adampeltz posted...
Absurd lack of distribution on the low end. There's no distinction for games that get anywhere from a 1 to games that get... say a 4.9.

If I wrote game reviews for a living, I'd stick to just a 4 star scale similar to that used in the movie industry.

Basically, almost everything gets above a 6 anyway.

Actually, this is the exact distribution:
http://imgur.com/0twGK18

I agree with using a four-star scale, though. In fact, I think it can be simplified even further. Instead of giving a score, a reviewer would just provide his general impression of the game. Generally enjoyed the experience, had mixed feelings about the experience, or generally did not enjoy the experience. From there, they could provide support for their experience. Metascores would then be determined from general impressions from the reviewers. This would provide consumers with a way to see how many people liked the game, rather than a subjective rating of the game's quality.

Jobocan posted...
Basically, this is how it should work if people weren't complete ****ing idiots:

1 = unplayable
2 = really bad
3 = bad
4 = unless you're a BIG fan or the series, it's not worth playing
5 = average, indulge only if you're a fan of the series
6 = good, but there exists better
7 = very good
8 = great
9 = amazing (very few games deserve such a high score, this should be reserved to the strongest games ever)
10 = no one in existence can deny this game's awesomeness (see: there doesn't exist a single game ever that deserves a 10)

That's essentially the scale IGN uses. The problem with it is that it is still mostly subjective based on the individual reviewer. When assigning a product with a numerical score, there should be standards in place for determining that score. Usually, there is no such standard, even within companies, let alone across companies. The drifting of the scale demonstrates that there is no standard, and reviewers just assign scores based on the unspoken consensus of what constitutes a good or bad game, which will vary from person to person.

SkyCrackers posted...
The problem with your logic is that there are piles of obscure shovelware games that often don't get any reviews at all, let alone 10 reviews. Most reviewers only bother with games that don't look totally horrible, or are otherwise noteworthy.

So 73 might be the average score given in reviews, but it still signifies an above average game.

Also, if Gamerankings uses a weighted average like Metacritic, where more popular sites are given more weight, that could throw off your results as well.

You can't actually say 73 represents an above average game because 73 IS the average. Now I understand that I didn't include games with less than 10 reviews, but I ran a similar initial test with games with only 5 reviews or more over the past month and found a similar trend.

The problem with your logic is that you can't include a statistic where no statistic was reported. For example, if I conducted a survey of 100 people and one question I asked everybody to answer was what gender they were, but only 60 responded to that question, say 10 males and 50 females, I cannot come to the conclusion that the other 40 people who did not respond were males simply because it sounds right in my mind. Similarly, I cannot assume that a game that does not receive a review would have received a low review simply because that seems to make sense. That's not how statistics works.

Gamerankings.com doesn't use a weighted average to calculate the metascore. All reviews are weighted equally. This is why I used gamerankings.com instead of Metacritic.
---
9 days to go, and I'm out of here.
#10HermeticJusticePosted 10/21/2013 12:21:35 AM
I don't think their should be a score

if you can quantify how you felt about the game you're doing something wrong

just write how you felt playing the game, almost a diary, and end with some finishing thoughts

tantalize the gamer by not giving it a score on any system LOL

but hey, if you're going to decide to buy a game on a review, you should at least read it
---
Currently Watching:
St. Elsewhere, Days of Our Lives, Full House