Regarding the rating system:
Keeping it simple is best. This isn't a videogame magazine, where people will bicker about .5 off a score. It's just a website profile review. A quick 1-5 scale will suffice. Let's face it, not many CAGs would even write reviews justifying their scores. With the 1-5, it keeps it quick and clean. That's just my view.
The dollar idea is, well....terrible as far as a rating for a game. Consider Portal. That game is definitely a 5 (going with the aforementioned scale). However, there is no possible way I would pay $60 for it (i.e. the max score in this scale). It's a short game, which is partially why it's great. It doesn't needlessly drag. However, it's SO short, that I would most certainly only pay $20 max (I am a CAG after all
). Because of using currency as a rating, I can't rightly give Portal the rating it really deserves. A game can't just be rated in the sense of "how much is it worth". Portal is soooo damn great, but under the money system, it would be rated so damn low. That defeats the purpose of a rating system altogether to me.
Keep ratings as ratings. Let dollar value be something else. Combining the two into one will only serve to confuse the
out of everybody. If the dollar thing is actually not meant to be a rating of the quality of the game, then disregard the previous rant.
Also regarding Wombat's comments about the harddrive and WiiWare titles:
He failed to think that if someone could manage to set up a wireless network, and get their Wii working on it, they could manage plugging a harddrive into a USB port. There's obviously SOMEONE in the household that could help Susie Homemaker with her predicament.