All of your suggestions on how CAG should score game reviews should go here, enjoy!

I think this would be the perfect cheapassgamer review scale:Buy it 0-100%. Where this percent represents what percentage of retail is worth paying for this game. 50% represents average and that's probably the most a typical CAG would pay for an average game. "Rent it" (Yes good experience in a short time/ no because it takes time to get into it) and "Avoid it" (Stick to your backlog) should be included too. A long with an estimate of gameplay hours for single player campaigns!!! This is something I wish was in every review. You guys were talking about this last week. I bought Gun for $5. By no means is it a great game but I' had a blast tearing through the very short single player game. This review is future proof for CAGs who are likely to pick up games that flopped once they've dropped to rock bottom prices. I'm sure this type of review would be very controversial for developers/publishers but I think it is perfect for CAGs.

5 star rule with a rental or buy recommendation. should be simple.

I like the idea of price based rating. This is CAG after all. There are daily posting of deals, discounts, and mark down. I think it would be very nice to know how much a game is worth to the reviewers and CAG at large in general. I would recommend using a $5 increment or even $10 to avoid too much granulation.
As you mentioned in earlier podcast, CAGs in general do not make purchases or beat games based on release dates but purchase price, I think a price based system will work well with CAGs general attitude. Let's say Vegas 2 is rated as a $40 game, then I know if the price goes down to $40, it's a good price for the game. Furthermore, it might also allow advertisers / game seller to know what sales price would likely move a game with the CAG community. Lastly, it will bring a general uniqueness to the CAG rating system distinguishing it from the tens and hundreds of reviews we can get everywhere else.
This is just my 2cents,
-Shadowgram

The problem with the dollar review scale is that it still is numerical.
We don't need to assign numbers to any review, and the problem is that **if** numbers get assigned to reviews it will simply become something that can be added to metacritic.

We don't need a scale, since all scales are completly pointless and end up becoming tools for metacritic, and it does not matter what you use for a scale it can still be put to a percentage point.

We need a more simplified approach, and something that easily be converted to a percentage.

We need to have a system like Cheapy suggested with a "Buy it Now", "Buy it Later", and " Avoid". This way it conveys the three simple things that most all people take away from a review without trying to quantify something, since a game score really only serves to feed metacritic, and appease the people that are to lazy to read text, and make their own valid opinion from the text.

I highly advocate having a Buy it Now, Buy it Later/Rent, and an Avoid, system.

This would be easy to program into the new database, and it can quickly convey to someone what a games worth is, without quantifying it.

With this system you could also have the community vote on what they think. You could have a "Featured" review that an offical reviewer could give, and then have the commnity vote on what they think. You could have a percentage that says 78% of CAGS think this game is a must buy, or something along those lines.

This way you can have an official opinion from someone, and what the majority of CAGS think about it, and it cant be quantified to be thrown up onto metacritic.

I wish people weren't so obsessed with ranking and rating things. Just hearing people's impressions about a game is usually enough for me to decide if I am interested--I don't need a score at the end. It's too bad that everyone is so score crazed that even the more independent sites feel the need to get into the ratings game to stay competitive. One of the things I like about the CAG Cast and the site in general is that there isn't a ratings scale. I realize I am probably in the minority, but I feel like there are SO many other places I could go and see a score if I wanted to. Sigh.

I like the idea of a Buy it, Rent it, or Forget it rating scale for the CAG Reviews. Also maybe add another option that is something like "fanboys only" for a game that indicates that while it isn't a must buy for everyone, it could be for someone if the subject matter is up their alley. i.e. star wars, nintendo characters, etc.

I also wouldn't mind throwing on a dollar figure that indicates what the reviewer would purchase the game for at release. This wouldn't be used as a 'rating' merely a guideline as to what the game is actually worth. So a bad game might be a $15 or under game, while a great game is a $60 (full retail) game.

I like the Price scale. Increments of 5 or 10 bucks up to the full price. So then when you get a ton people reviewing it. You take the average.

Now this would be helpful because the users would look at the deals thread. They will see a deal with a game. Say Overlord for 19.99. Then they could click the name of the game. A screen pops up and says that 30 CAGs reviewed the game and the CAG Average is $30.50. They would see that this is a good deal. Then if you want you can look over the reviews. This also works for bad games. If Dark Sector was reviewed for a CAG Average of 20.00, people will see this 59.99 is way to high and they will more likely to wait and buy it. You should also show which CAGs own the game.

Originally Posted by Bartex for the CAG review system you should use what i like to call my ESRB review system E - Eject it ([0-3] terrible game, not worth your time/money) S - Steal it ([4-5] mediocre game) R - Rent it ([6-7] good game) B - Buy it ([8-10] awesome game, worth your time/money)

I like Bartex's idea. Anyone else?

Originally Posted by eliter1 I like Bartex's idea. Anyone else?

No because it can be quantified.

NUMBERS ARE THE ENEMY!

Originally Posted by InuFaye No because it can be quantified. NUMBERS ARE THE ENEMY!

Alright EGM...lol

Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Originally Posted by DJSteel Alright EGM...lol

LETTERS ARE BAD ALSO.

see note: Letters are grades which are numbers so this can be quantified also.

I'VE GOT IT!

Okay, so the reviewer uses this value system, saying they would pay $x, but then the readers can say rent it/buyit/avoid it and then that will affect a dial-meter so you can have 2 ways to look at it.

The great thing about this is you can say "I want to buy this game. Should I wait until the price drops? The reviewer says yes."

OR

you can say "I am interested in this game. Should I buy is? The readers say no, I should rent." or if they say yes, the reviewer will tell you if you should wait or not. double the opinions.

I'm pro-dollar amounts. It ties in nicely with the theme of the site. Plus the problem I see with the "Buy It/ Rent It/ Avoid It" Is that anything rated "But It" implies full price. There are some games that I want to buy, don't particularly want to rent, but don't want to pay $60 for and will wait until they are $40 or $30 it's a very all or nothing system.

I know Cheapy's concern is that proces decrease over time, that works perfectly. If you see that say Rainbow 6 Vegas is rated and average of $55 and now it's a platinum hits title for $30 or on clearance for $15 then heck yeah I should buy it.

Or there could be a combo, where the "official" reviewers use the "Buy It/Rent It/Avoid It" scale, and then the site's users assign the dollar value to pay. That would please everyone and allow for the majority to assign the value.

Why this would work: If you have just the one official reviewer assigning a score it could be skewed away from the average, so they should only be allowed to put it in general categories. The larger the quantity of rankers assigning dollar values the more it will even out (the larger the quantity of participants the closer it gets to a normal curve). For example,

Let's say Assassin's Creed comes out.

The "official" reviewer says the game is good, and fun, and he really likes it and he tags it with "Buy It"

Then everyone comes in and plonks in dollar values. The uber fans of the game can all say $60 but I thought the game was meh and worth $30 it will help to regulate the skewed average.

Yaay for numbers!

Originally Posted by SeanNOLA I'VE GOT IT! Okay, so the reviewer uses this value system, saying they would pay $x, but then the readers can say rent it/buyit/avoid it and then that will affect a dial-meter so you can have 2 ways to look at it. The great thing about this is you can say "I want to buy this game. Should I wait until the price drops? The reviewer says yes." OR you can say "I am interested in this game. Should I buy is? The readers say no, I should rent." or if they say yes, the reviewer will tell you if you should wait or not. double the opinions.

Ha I totally wrote the opposite while you were posting it. Great conclusions reached at the same time.

Originally Posted by InuFaye LETTERS ARE BAD ALSO. see note: Letters are grades which are numbers so this can be quantified also.

you need to quantify the scores.. How else would you consider what games are better than others.

Originally Posted by DJSteel you need to quantify the scores.. How else would you consider what games are better than others.

The Buy it Now, Buy it Later, or Avoid.

Its Simple, and does not have any kind of stupid number or letter attached to it.

I honestly dont think anyone is reading what I am saying because I have solved the problems to what everyone was complaining about the scale I am suggesting.

You have a percentage of users that also feel that way. IE. 75% of Cags think you should wait for a price drop or rent the game.

The money scale sounds good in theory but its just another problem.(Partly to try and code into the database, partly to implement, and partly because of ethics.)

Originally Posted by InuFaye The Buy it Now, Buy it Later, or Avoid. Its Simple, and does not have any kind of stupid number or letter attached to it. I honestly dont think anyone is reading what I am saying because I have solved the problems to what everyone was complaining about the scale I am suggesting. You have a percentage of users that also feel that way. IE. 75% of Cags think you should wait for a price drop or rent the game. The money scale sounds good in theory but its just another problem.(Partly to try and code into the database, partly to implement, and partly because of ethics.)

That is what I do.. database work.. It's not that hard and I would trust an average of the CAG people.. you could also post the average for the Shipwrecks, CheapyD, and Wombat seperately if you don't trust the CAG public..

The problem comes in when people think game "X" is better then game "y". We have enough sites out there with arbitrary scores, and you can draw conclusions from that as you will. This is a shopping site so shouldn't we just say if a game is worth your money or not?

Originally Posted by InuFaye The problem comes in when people think game "X" is better then game "y". We have enough sites out there with arbitrary scores, and you can draw conclusions from that as you will. This is a shopping site so shouldn't we just say if a game is worth your money or not?

That is why I like the putting the review number as a price from full price to 0. All CAGs think a game is about average of a 20 dollar game. Then you know it would be a good value for 20 dollars or under.

You make it a three option grading system. You leave to much up to interpretation and I guarantee people will want more tiers in between when games don't particularily fit in the three tiers