6.5 is better than 9.0

[JC48573]

Yup, I would go as far to say that bad games are more enjoyable than AAA titles. You know is the truth!!

[MrEco]

Cool story bro.

But seriously, it depends on the game, it depends on the person, and it depends on what reviewer you're talking about. One website might give a game a AAA score while another might think it was lousy. So a score alone isn't a good indicator of a games quality no matter what kind of games you like.

[JC48573]

I preferably enjoy the games that people bash at for being simply bad. If it weren't for these so called reviewers, I wouldn't have given Deadly Premonition a go. A bad score is simply a sign or chance for me to test the game.

[emwearz]

A lower score also gives you a lower expectation which means you dont go into it expecting it to be amazing, then when its average, you think THATS AWESOME...Case closed.

[Alex WS]

Games that score 9 or more are usually so streamlined for the mass market *COUGH* Call of Duty *COUGH* that they can feel very bland for many of us. A 6.5 on the other hand usually has a few unique ideas, even if they could be better implemented. Those games often takes more risks in settings and scenarios, giving them much more character.

[ZenErik]

I find that when it comes to mainstream Western reviewers reviewing Japanese games the statement in the thread title is often true.

[irixith]

Yup, I would go as far to say that bad games are more enjoyable than AAA titles. You know is the truth!!

Review scores, the term "AAA" and reviews in general are all irrelevant to gamers. The whole review machine is just one bought and paid for circle jerk to market games and drive sales.

You know what I want to see in a review? Tell me about the game. What's it about? What's the story like? How are the control mechanics? Maybe add in some subjective comments at the end, i.e. whether or not you felt it was "fun" to play. Don't score it, don't spend your review telling me how much like another game it is. (How many reviews do I have to read where a game is described as a "Zelda clone" or a "Metroidvania" .. and the game is about as far from either of those types as could be?) Don't spend half your review re-writing the tutorial for me, or telling me what certain buttons do. I don't need that, I need to know about the GAME. Just give me the individual pros and cons of the particular game you're reviewing, and let me make up my own mind whether or not it's a game that I want to try.

The current system as it exists in the majority of places sucks.

[yomomma1]

I find that when it comes to mainstream Western reviewers reviewing Japanese games the statement in the thread title is often true.

Hasn't famitsu started to recently give out a lot of higher and perfect scores?

[AppleQueso]

Yeah, I remember when Famitsu had this reputation for being 'harsh', yet you look now and there's 40/40s given left and right. I mean they gave out FOUR 40/40s in 2009

[CFFJR]

Play magazine abolished scores in their reviews a couple of years ago. I felt it made their reviews, which were already superior to a lot of the competition, much better.

Of course, they caught no end of shit for it because that number is all that matters to most people.