CAG Game Review Suggestions Thread
- Thread starter Wombat
- Start date
dubbfoolio
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
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.
Shadowgram
CAGiversary!
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
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
InuFaye
Banned
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.
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.
GLOCKGLOCK
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 60 (100%)
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 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.
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.
[quote name='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)[/quote]
I like Bartex's idea. Anyone else?
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)[/quote]
I like Bartex's idea. Anyone else?
SeanNOLA
CAGiversary!
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.
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!
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!
[quote name='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.[/quote]
Ha I totally wrote the opposite while you were posting it. Great conclusions reached at the same time.
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.[/quote]
Ha I totally wrote the opposite while you were posting it. Great conclusions reached at the same time.
InuFaye
Banned
[quote name='DJSteel']you need to quantify the scores.. How else would you consider what games are better than others.[/quote]
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.)
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.)
[quote name='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.)[/quote]
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..
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.)[/quote]
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..
[quote name='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?[/quote]
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
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
FoxHoundADAM
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 20 (100%)
I think the "Buy it/Rent it/Avoid it" is the best idea for CAG although I do like the idea of assigning a value to a game ($1-$70). It is kinda different but it would give CAG a little distinction in the wide realm of video game review systems.
Also, I'd be willing to give my input for video game review on CAG. Pro bono or paid, either way.
Also, I'd be willing to give my input for video game review on CAG. Pro bono or paid, either way.
It!, written as "Shaq-Fu It!"I don't know if giving the games dollar amounts is such a great idea on this website. Simply because all of us here are here for cheaper games. The dollar amount we spend on games here varies a lot. Even when games are great most of us wait for a deal or sale, I for one waited to get Cal of Duty 4 until Amazon had the CE for $40. I knew it was a great game but i still didn't want to dish out $60 for it even if it was worth it. I was pro the ESRB rating system but i think the Avoid, Rent, Buy would also be good.
vampireblood
CAGiversary!
Okay this is my suggestion.
Give the game a score out of 10 or 100
And give each different section of the game out of 10 or 100.
Like Gameplay, Graphics, Storyline, Fun Factor etc.
Also have a suggestion and show other similar games review score. That way fellow CAGs can get a sense of is this game better than the original etc.
That's my suggestion, take it or leave it
Give the game a score out of 10 or 100
And give each different section of the game out of 10 or 100.
Like Gameplay, Graphics, Storyline, Fun Factor etc.
Also have a suggestion and show other similar games review score. That way fellow CAGs can get a sense of is this game better than the original etc.
That's my suggestion, take it or leave it
Xarathustra
CAG Veteran
I've thought out a simple system of only 3 ratings, they are;
Bad
Good
Great
The difference between a good game and a great game would be the sort of sparkle of excellence that a game has that sets it apart from the rest.
Bad
Good
Great
The difference between a good game and a great game would be the sort of sparkle of excellence that a game has that sets it apart from the rest.
doc_zaius
CAGiversary!
5 point scale, whether it be letters or stars or whatever, it seems like 5 levels of variation are all you need to give a shorthand summary to a review.
5 - fantastic! groundbreaking! best of its genre! must buy! [Bioshock, Oblivion, COD4, Super Mario Galaxy]
4 - great game, you'll enjoy it [Condemned 2, Ikagura, Devil May Cry 4]
3 - good game, you'll like it (if you like that kind of thing) [The Club]
2 - Not really worth it unless you're really desperate/a fan [Lost:Via Domus]
1 - an embarrassment, Stay Away! [Bliss Island]
you don't need any further granularity than that, it's only confusing.
what's the difference between 8.8 and 9?
5 - fantastic! groundbreaking! best of its genre! must buy! [Bioshock, Oblivion, COD4, Super Mario Galaxy]
4 - great game, you'll enjoy it [Condemned 2, Ikagura, Devil May Cry 4]
3 - good game, you'll like it (if you like that kind of thing) [The Club]
2 - Not really worth it unless you're really desperate/a fan [Lost:Via Domus]
1 - an embarrassment, Stay Away! [Bliss Island]
you don't need any further granularity than that, it's only confusing.
what's the difference between 8.8 and 9?
[quote name='eliter1']I don't know if giving the games dollar amounts is such a great idea on this website. Simply because all of us here are here for cheaper games. The dollar amount we spend on games here varies a lot. Even when games are great most of us wait for a deal or sale, I for one waited to get Cal of Duty 4 until Amazon had the CE for $40. I knew it was a great game but i still didn't want to dish out $60 for it even if it was worth it. I was pro the ESRB rating system but i think the Avoid, Rent, Buy would also be good.[/quote]
we all want cheaper games.. but everyone also spends a lot of cash on games. I think the monetary system gives people an idea how much a game is worth. I think a lot of fans of Halo 3 would have given it 60 bucks (or full price).. and other people would average the score out..
we all want cheaper games.. but everyone also spends a lot of cash on games. I think the monetary system gives people an idea how much a game is worth. I think a lot of fans of Halo 3 would have given it 60 bucks (or full price).. and other people would average the score out..
vampireblood
CAGiversary!
[quote name='DJSteel']we all want cheaper games.. but everyone also spends a lot of cash on games. I think the monetary system gives people an idea how much a game is worth. I think a lot of fans of Halo 3 would have given it 60 bucks (or full price).. and other people would average the score out..[/quote]
A monetary system is ridiculous.
Considering how many CAG listeners are outside the US for a moment. Consider us Aussies and Europeans.
Here in Australia the average game price is 70-90AUD per game.
For a monetary system to work well you'd have to take different currencies into consideration.
And the fact that out dollar is worth like 95-96US cents.
It's just to hard to comprehend.
A monetary system is ridiculous.
Considering how many CAG listeners are outside the US for a moment. Consider us Aussies and Europeans.
Here in Australia the average game price is 70-90AUD per game.
For a monetary system to work well you'd have to take different currencies into consideration.
And the fact that out dollar is worth like 95-96US cents.
It's just to hard to comprehend.
Look, as far as a reviewing system is concerned, I don't care which systems are "going out of style", "what everyone else does", "only gets its upper half used" or "is the new black".
What I care about doing is using a system that is fair, everyone understands, and fits in with the CAG theme. Nothing else really matters, even if we used a system where we compare the value of video games to the value of some 3rd world countries (This game is worth 3/20ths of Cuba!)
Thus, I support the CAG Value Evaluation Method©. It should be based on the current industry scales ($60 for standard PS3/360, $50 for Wii), and the review based on how much an individual CAG believes is the price the game should be picked up for. The scale will allow down to the dollar (or cent) evaluations, and then display the average and give a bit of feedback on where the majority of votes landed ("15 CAGs voted between $45-60.") so as not to allow the single $0 vote to throw off the entire scale.
Combine that evaluation with a comparison to the a retail price online with a little notice around the lines of "This game is currently being sold under evaluation price at these retailers". This will help both deliver a "green light" to buy a game and a direction for CAGs to go to pick it up (to a CAG sponsor if possible and help support the site).
International prices are also an issue, but then again, I've never really seen any deals in anything other the American dollar, so we'll cross that bridge later. International voters can do the research and find the exchange rates from their currency to the American dollar:
http://www.xe.com/ucc/ (Universal Currency Converter - Uses up to the minute market rates)
This is the direction I believe the Evaluation System should head in. Keep it close to the CAG theme, don't give two shits about what other sites do, or whether all games end up close to the "This game is worth $50!" range. If you feel that the dollar system is a little constrained, and that "All the great games are going to get $60 ratings, how will I know what to choose?" I think the formal reviews done by the CAG panel and the number of $60 votes will help justify a purchase.
~HotShotX
What I care about doing is using a system that is fair, everyone understands, and fits in with the CAG theme. Nothing else really matters, even if we used a system where we compare the value of video games to the value of some 3rd world countries (This game is worth 3/20ths of Cuba!)
Thus, I support the CAG Value Evaluation Method©. It should be based on the current industry scales ($60 for standard PS3/360, $50 for Wii), and the review based on how much an individual CAG believes is the price the game should be picked up for. The scale will allow down to the dollar (or cent) evaluations, and then display the average and give a bit of feedback on where the majority of votes landed ("15 CAGs voted between $45-60.") so as not to allow the single $0 vote to throw off the entire scale.
Combine that evaluation with a comparison to the a retail price online with a little notice around the lines of "This game is currently being sold under evaluation price at these retailers". This will help both deliver a "green light" to buy a game and a direction for CAGs to go to pick it up (to a CAG sponsor if possible and help support the site).
International prices are also an issue, but then again, I've never really seen any deals in anything other the American dollar, so we'll cross that bridge later. International voters can do the research and find the exchange rates from their currency to the American dollar:
http://www.xe.com/ucc/ (Universal Currency Converter - Uses up to the minute market rates)
This is the direction I believe the Evaluation System should head in. Keep it close to the CAG theme, don't give two shits about what other sites do, or whether all games end up close to the "This game is worth $50!" range. If you feel that the dollar system is a little constrained, and that "All the great games are going to get $60 ratings, how will I know what to choose?" I think the formal reviews done by the CAG panel and the number of $60 votes will help justify a purchase.
~HotShotX
Nephlabobo
CAGiversary!
You guys are making this *way* too complicated.
I like Cheapy's suggestion of Buy, Rent or Avoid it.
As for a numbered score of some sort, Cheapy can can just attach the number that each person selected in the choices above.
(Ie 80 people said Buy it, 50 said Rent and 30 people said avoid)
Cheapy's right about numbered scores, everything gets stuck in that 7-9 range and Buy, Rent, Avoid is good enough as a monetary system. It tells you whether it's worth your money or not and it's simple.
I like Cheapy's suggestion of Buy, Rent or Avoid it.
As for a numbered score of some sort, Cheapy can can just attach the number that each person selected in the choices above.
(Ie 80 people said Buy it, 50 said Rent and 30 people said avoid)
Cheapy's right about numbered scores, everything gets stuck in that 7-9 range and Buy, Rent, Avoid is good enough as a monetary system. It tells you whether it's worth your money or not and it's simple.
I think a 1-10 scale with .5 increments would be fine. People have different standards of "buy, rent, avoid it", the same can be said for the number system. But I think the numbered scale (1-10) is just right for flexibility and uniformity. I would suggest some sort of description for the certain scores, like someone posted earlier "5 - great, perfect, must buy", etc.
And you'd probably need some sort of review score reporting system to keep those spammers out of the system. Or basically some sort of input confirmation.
But in all seriousness, I don't think a review system would be good for this site, atm.
And you'd probably need some sort of review score reporting system to keep those spammers out of the system. Or basically some sort of input confirmation.
But in all seriousness, I don't think a review system would be good for this site, atm.
[quote name='doc_zaius']please don't do a monetary system, value is very much in the eye of the beholder. Even though we're all "cheap-asses", what is worth $60 to me is different than what is worth $60 to you.[/quote]
That's the whole point behind review systems in general. Regardless of whether or not we stick a price tag along with our review, we're still saying whether or not a game is worth buying, renting, or avoiding.
But as CAGs, we should take it a step further and say what the game's value is, instead of having to read every detail of a review just to learn "So they really liked the game, but felt $60 was a tad high, and $30 is a good price".
Buying is a very detailed issue in and of itself on CAG. As you said, one CAG might be willing to pay a certain amount while another CAG is not, but both are willing to buy if the price is right.
As a fellow CAG taking game suggestions from other CAGs, I already know the game itself is worth picking up at some point (Buy it, Rent it, Avoid it), but a normal review still leaves me scratching my head as to whether I should buy it right away or wait for the price to drop. On the forums, this is what I'd like advice on, and I feel the review system can do a wonderful job at achieving this in a time efficient manner (displaying overall votes in the Value Evaluation System rather than it's average score on the 1-10 scale).
~HotShotX
That's the whole point behind review systems in general. Regardless of whether or not we stick a price tag along with our review, we're still saying whether or not a game is worth buying, renting, or avoiding.
But as CAGs, we should take it a step further and say what the game's value is, instead of having to read every detail of a review just to learn "So they really liked the game, but felt $60 was a tad high, and $30 is a good price".
Buying is a very detailed issue in and of itself on CAG. As you said, one CAG might be willing to pay a certain amount while another CAG is not, but both are willing to buy if the price is right.
As a fellow CAG taking game suggestions from other CAGs, I already know the game itself is worth picking up at some point (Buy it, Rent it, Avoid it), but a normal review still leaves me scratching my head as to whether I should buy it right away or wait for the price to drop. On the forums, this is what I'd like advice on, and I feel the review system can do a wonderful job at achieving this in a time efficient manner (displaying overall votes in the Value Evaluation System rather than it's average score on the 1-10 scale).
~HotShotX
How about a 5-level scale like the following:
Buy It Full ($60)
Buy It Used/Sale ($25-$50)
Buy It Clearance ($9-$20)
Rent It
Avoid It
From my collection, here are some examples on how I would rate my own games in the buy it range and some games I would put in the rental/avoid range:
Buy It Full (COD4, Halo 3, Mass Effect, Oblivion, Lost Odyssey, MLB The Show 08)
Buy It Used/Sale (Eye of Judgement, Stranglehold, Blue Dragon, Eternal Sonata, Heavenly Sword, Ratchet and Clank)
Buy It Clearance (Earth Defense Force, Bullet Witch, Elite Beat Agents, The Darkness, Splinter Cell)
Rent It (The Simpsons, Frontlines, TimeShift)
Avoid It (Turning Point, Lair, 90% of the third-party games on the Wii/DS)
Buy It Full ($60)
Buy It Used/Sale ($25-$50)
Buy It Clearance ($9-$20)
Rent It
Avoid It
From my collection, here are some examples on how I would rate my own games in the buy it range and some games I would put in the rental/avoid range:
Buy It Full (COD4, Halo 3, Mass Effect, Oblivion, Lost Odyssey, MLB The Show 08)
Buy It Used/Sale (Eye of Judgement, Stranglehold, Blue Dragon, Eternal Sonata, Heavenly Sword, Ratchet and Clank)
Buy It Clearance (Earth Defense Force, Bullet Witch, Elite Beat Agents, The Darkness, Splinter Cell)
Rent It (The Simpsons, Frontlines, TimeShift)
Avoid It (Turning Point, Lair, 90% of the third-party games on the Wii/DS)
B
Blackout
Guest
A price based score would be perfect and would go along great with the rest of cheap ass gamer.
I'm a fan of a dual rating system. The main rating would be a 3 or 5 scale system as has been suggested (Buy It / Rent it / Burn It ,etc). I also like the price based system and feel it could be a good supplement to the main rating. There are some problems with the pricing system like how long ago a game was released, exchange rates, etc., but it's a fun and unique grading model that fits in well with CAG.
-Bob
-Bob
H.Cornerstone
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
Seeing how this is CAG, and it's never been done before, I vote for the how much money is a game worth method. Personally, when it comes down to it, reviews are there for you to determine if it's worth spending your hard earned cash on it. And this will let you know how much of that cash you should feel like spending before feeling rip offed.
I vote for a 5 star system with, possibly with half stars allowed, with 2.5 or 3 stars being average. From a UI point of view, if you could emulate the netflix system where every game review has a blank 5 stars next to the reviewers score so that logged in users can just click that scale to score the game in a single click, I think you would get very many more scores from users.
SnotRocket
CAGiversary!
The idea I like the most, and it pertains to the site, how much you would pay for the game. I use this scale myself when I tell people how good a game it. Good example, Army of Two, decent game but for $45 I would pick it up, as $60 is just to much for the reply vaule.
I also like the idea of gradeing the game, rental, buy, destroy, .etc. As this helps avoid the trail of every game being between 7-9. Perhaps twist both ideas together? Army of Two is a buy, it's fun and the multiplayer is decent but it's a buy at my recomended vaule of $45.
This may have a flaw of everygame is a buy at a certain price, so maybe two scales? Maybe I like the idea of a price scale to rate a game simply because my friends and myself use it to describe games that we pick up.
I also like the idea of gradeing the game, rental, buy, destroy, .etc. As this helps avoid the trail of every game being between 7-9. Perhaps twist both ideas together? Army of Two is a buy, it's fun and the multiplayer is decent but it's a buy at my recomended vaule of $45.
This may have a flaw of everygame is a buy at a certain price, so maybe two scales? Maybe I like the idea of a price scale to rate a game simply because my friends and myself use it to describe games that we pick up.
SeanNOLA
CAGiversary!
What I don't like about "buy it, rent it, avoid it" is that there are some WONDERFUL rental games. A "rent it" for me doesn't mean the game is worse than a "buy it", its just that the game is concise enough that I can get my fill after 5 days. Like Shenmue; one of my favorite games of all time. I rented it and beat it within 5 days, and after that, there wasn't much to do but wait for Shenmue II. It wasn't a bad game by a long shot, but I didn't need to buy it. Final Fantasy XII, however was not one of my favorite games, but I felt I needed to buy it simply because you get more enjoyment out of the length of a game like that. I personally would have ranked Shenmue higher on some "point scale", but I would have given it a rental based on runtime. The same goes for games like Uncharted or Heavenly Sword.
InuFaye
Banned
[quote name='SeanNOLA']What I don't like about "buy it, rent it, avoid it" is that there are some WONDERFUL rental games. A "rent it" for me doesn't mean the game is worse than a "buy it", its just that the game is concise enough that I can get my fill after 5 days. Like Shenmue; one of my favorite games of all time. I rented it and beat it within 5 days, and after that, there wasn't much to do but wait for Shenmue II. It wasn't a bad game by a long shot, but I didn't need to buy it. Final Fantasy XII, however was not one of my favorite games, but I felt I needed to buy it simply because you get more enjoyment out of the length of a game like that. I personally would have ranked Shenmue higher on some "point scale", but I would have given it a rental based on runtime. The same goes for games like Uncharted or Heavenly Sword.[/quote]
We would use the rent it for an average on the reviewers expirence.
Not based solely on runtime.
Obviously a 40 hour RPG can't be rented and beaten, but its cheaper to rent a 40 hour RPG that mediocre and find out that you dont like it, then to waste the 50 dollars on it.
We would use the rent it for an average on the reviewers expirence.
Not based solely on runtime.
Obviously a 40 hour RPG can't be rented and beaten, but its cheaper to rent a 40 hour RPG that mediocre and find out that you dont like it, then to waste the 50 dollars on it.
mnine
CAGiversary!
I wrote this blog on the subject a few weeks ago, take from it what you will:
http://ilovesuicide.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-to-write-video-game-review-right.html
http://ilovesuicide.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-to-write-video-game-review-right.html
Quintessence
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 5 (100%)
There should be separate review marks for the actual game, and then for the price. Scoring it in letter grades is probably best since that is clearest what is actually a mediocre game.
CMorrigu
CAGiversary!
I like something similar to the following scale:
Pre-Order/LE
Full Price Buy
CAG Buy
Rent
Borrow
Don't Bother
I think this sort of thing gives a little more detail without resorting to just numbers. A great game is worth putting money down for now (and perhaps getting the LE/CE), where a game that's great but has some big flaws might be worth picking up for full price after a patch. A CAG buy (always a good idea), means that it's worth buying when it has a discount, where a game that may be extremely short or have a narrow audience might be in the Rent category. Something that is briefly amusing would be worth borrowing from someone, but not actually worth paying money for. Finally, Avoid means the game isn't worth your time at all.
Pre-Order/LE
Full Price Buy
CAG Buy
Rent
Borrow
Don't Bother
I think this sort of thing gives a little more detail without resorting to just numbers. A great game is worth putting money down for now (and perhaps getting the LE/CE), where a game that's great but has some big flaws might be worth picking up for full price after a patch. A CAG buy (always a good idea), means that it's worth buying when it has a discount, where a game that may be extremely short or have a narrow audience might be in the Rent category. Something that is briefly amusing would be worth borrowing from someone, but not actually worth paying money for. Finally, Avoid means the game isn't worth your time at all.
bread's done