|
|
Post by Paladin on Oct 16, 2023 17:32:27 GMT -5
I just saw an interesting topic on another board. Some one was talking about the new Spider Man review score. They asked if old scores for old games were inflated. He thought this cause a game from many years ago had a score like Spider Man. He said Arkham was a good game but not as good as Spider Man. Is he crazy?
|
|
|
|
Post by Yeti on Oct 16, 2023 18:00:24 GMT -5
The bar keeps getting raised over time, but the scale remains the same. Consequently, what it takes to be a 9/10 twenty years ago won't be the same as 9/10 today. For that person's evident line of thinking to work, as he seems to feel newer games need to be rated higher than old ones, the ratings scale would be increasing higher. If a really good game was a 9/10 on SNES, a really good game today must be 132/150 or whatever. We can't realistically keep addicted onto the scale. An upper limit of 10 remains practical. Review scores simply need taken in context.
He may be reacting to this:
|
|
|
|
Post by Paladin on Oct 16, 2023 21:48:44 GMT -5
Yea that's probably why he was on about that. Those were good games.
|
|
