Thread 718224997

Are 10/10 scores given out too easily?

If a game is getting 10/10s across the board then I expect it to have the BEST visuals I've ever seen and the BEST music and the most compelling story etc on top of the best in class gameplay

Tons and tons of supposed 10/10 games look just fine, and don't have notable music, and usually have a sad excuse for a story premise, and have gameplay that is just serviceable without major hitches though still flawed, if a game like that can get 10/10s then a game exactly like it but with amazing visuals and music and story and no gameplay flaws can't get a higher score despite objectively being better

>>718224997 (OP)
gen 5 really was just THAT good

Nintendo Bonus.

>>718224997 (OP)
Then no game would get a 10/10. Nintendo games would never have the best visuals, Microsoft games would never have the best music, and Sony games would never have the best gameplay.

>>718224997 (OP)
>Are 10/10 scores given out too easily?
No. They're unironically not given out enough.
People need to realize that 10/10 does not represent perfection, it's just the score perfection would have received if it existed. In other words, a game does not need to be perfect to deserve a 10/10.

A 2/2 does not need to be perfect to deserve 2/2. A thumbs up or thumbs down does not represent irredeemable trash and perfection. A 3 point scale does not go from 1/3 absolute irredeemable garbage, to 2/3 it was ok, to 3/3 absolute perfection.
Movies and books that were traditionally reviewed on a 5 point scale often received 5/5s and people understood that 5/5 does not mean perfection.

But when it comes to videogames and 10 point scales, people are all of a sudden retarded and think 10/10 means perfection? Why?

>>718226030
>Microsoft games would never have the best music
Hold the fuck up though

There are dozens of games whose music I love Absolute bangers.
But when giving out scores for "Music" in any game, even those games can only ever be a 9.5/10 at most. Why?
Because Ar Tonelico games exist. Excellence has been achieved and a 10/10 score is only for that game.

The same thing happens for platformers. Your platforming game may be pretty damn good, but you're only going up to 9.5/10 because Donkey Kong Country 3 exists.

A 10 should belong to a single game.

>>718226046
>a game does not need to be perfect to deserve a 10/10.
But what about the scenario in the OP?
>two games are almost identical
>except the other one has much better visuals and music and story and no gameplay flaws
>game 1 comes out today and gets 10/10s
>game 2 comes out tomorrow and despite being better at everything, it can only get 10/10s as well
How is that fair?

>>718226645
>But what about the scenario in the OP?
Tons and tons of scores are total bullshit. Yeah.
But that doesn't change how more games should receive 10/10s. The 9/10s scores are comically inflated because people are just not bold enough to actually give deserving games 10/10s and gives them 9/10s instead because they figure only perfection can get 10/10s. Which is dumb as fuck.

>>718226030
>no game would get a 10/10
Then maybe no game should. Maybe we should save 10/10s for when the games are actually worth that

>>718224997 (OP)
>Are 10/10 scores given out too easily?
For every generation there's probably a few 10/10 if you aren't jaded.
>Best visual, music, story, gameplay
All subjective as shit. Photorealism bores me, good music is rare in vidya, I usually hate stories in games because gameplay is king.
Scores give the illusion of objectivity but it's always given by people based on vibes and feelings. There is no such thing as a perfect game for everyone.

A game doesn't need to be the best in every category to deserve a top score.
If music or visuals or even gameplay or whatever, isn't important to the game in question, then why should it prevent the game from getting a top score?

VNs for instance are very unashamedly book-games. Are they conceptually incapable of being able to get top scores just because they don't have much of a gameplay element even though gameplay is not the point? Even if you took the best book-game conceivable, it should never get a top score?

Tetris might have great music. But the game is so fully and wholly focused on its gameplay. Should Tetris not be allowed to get a top score if you removed its music or replaced it with worse music? Even if the gameplay remains as golden as ever?
Was Dwarf Fortress even really improved by receiving non-ascii visuals?

A game shouldn't need to be the best at everything to get a top score. It should just need to do what its game needs. And that obviously differs depending on what kind of game we're talking about and how it's designed.