Talk:Metal Gear Solid: Difference between revisions
imported>Petréa Mitchell m (Updated checklist) |
imported>Oliver Smith (Replaced Checklist with Subpages) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{subpages}} | ||
== Review scores == | |||
Converting to percentages - I wouldn't do this. The funny thing with game review scales is that the larger numbers they contain, the more biased they are towards the upper range. Usually, "3/5" means "pretty good", "6/10" means "so-so", and "60/100" means "pretty bad". Further, even taking this into account, the scales are totally inconsistent from publication to publication, so placing the figures in a table for comparison is misleading. | |||
I'd say that review scores are pretty much useless as indicators of anything. Of course, there are always exceptions, such as when a game gets a 40/40 from Famitsu, and if MGS got several 100% reviews, that may be worth noting. But generally, summarizing what the reviewers actually wrote is far superior; the scores don't give much information. [[User:Fredrik Johansson|Fredrik Johansson]] 13:46, 28 April 2007 (CDT) | |||
| | |||
:I see what you mean. I thought though that it would be eaiser to read a list of percentages than a list of scores out of different amounts. Having seen your comment, I now agree that comments would be more constructive to the article. When I have time, I'll read all of the reviews and replace scores with some comments (not in a table). However, I do think MGS got several full score reviews, but I'll need to reference that. Anyway, thanks for the advice, as I haven't had any feedback on the article before now, [[User:Oliver Smith|Oliver Smith]] 13:57, 29 April 2007 (CDT) | |||
==Plot== | |||
How should I reference the plot section? Do I need references from the game script? Or should I just leave it as it is? [[User:Oliver Smith|Oliver Smith]] 11:04, 5 May 2007 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 16:16, 10 November 2007
Review scores
Converting to percentages - I wouldn't do this. The funny thing with game review scales is that the larger numbers they contain, the more biased they are towards the upper range. Usually, "3/5" means "pretty good", "6/10" means "so-so", and "60/100" means "pretty bad". Further, even taking this into account, the scales are totally inconsistent from publication to publication, so placing the figures in a table for comparison is misleading.
I'd say that review scores are pretty much useless as indicators of anything. Of course, there are always exceptions, such as when a game gets a 40/40 from Famitsu, and if MGS got several 100% reviews, that may be worth noting. But generally, summarizing what the reviewers actually wrote is far superior; the scores don't give much information. Fredrik Johansson 13:46, 28 April 2007 (CDT)
- I see what you mean. I thought though that it would be eaiser to read a list of percentages than a list of scores out of different amounts. Having seen your comment, I now agree that comments would be more constructive to the article. When I have time, I'll read all of the reviews and replace scores with some comments (not in a table). However, I do think MGS got several full score reviews, but I'll need to reference that. Anyway, thanks for the advice, as I haven't had any feedback on the article before now, Oliver Smith 13:57, 29 April 2007 (CDT)
Plot
How should I reference the plot section? Do I need references from the game script? Or should I just leave it as it is? Oliver Smith 11:04, 5 May 2007 (CDT)