[PG Exclusive] Ratings and Reviews Policy

[Buland]

This thread will be short and simple and should provide new reviewers with a basis to form their reviews from. It'll briefly elaborate what every score means here on PG and what the different segments of reviews (graphics, sound, etc.) refer to as a whole.

~ 10 ~ [Divine]
A rare score, games that are given a full 10 here on PG are games that are considered a must-have! Games with this rating are the best games of their time.

~ 9.5 to 9.9 ~ [Breathtaking]
Titles in this range are some of the best pieces of gaming history! Fans of the series will absolutely love the title and newcomers are guaranteed to have a good time!

~ 9.0 to 9.4 ~ [Marvellous]
Titles in this range are excellent games with very few drawbacks. They're must-haves that fans of a series are going to definitely enjoy.

~ 8.5 to 8.9 ~ [Awesome]
Games that are awarded a score within this range are guaranteed to be great games but with a few noticeable cons. Fear not, however, as they are absolutely recommended by PG, especially if you're a fan of the genre/series!

~ 8.0 to 8.4 ~ [Capital]
Such games usually lack in certain areas but make up for it by excelling in others. These games will provide a great experience and are not to be missed by fans of the genre.

~ 7.5 to 7.9 ~ [Good]
Games in this range have several noticeable imperfections but also include a fair amount of pros to back itself up. Newcomers may feel reluctant to try such games, or even like it for the matter, but these titles should not be ignored. They will provide a good experience to those who seek for it.

~ 7.0 to 7.4 ~ [Fair]
Games with a score in this range may not appeal to most gamers. But it will manage to provide a fun experience every now and then.

~ 6.5 to 6.9 ~ [Admissible]
Their cons overcome their pros and they will not appeal to many. If you can find them for a reasonably cheap price then they're not that bad.

~ 6.0 to 6.4 ~ [Tolerable]
Such games are usually identical to their [6.5 to 6.9] counterparts but they include more obvious cons and are less appealing.

~ 5.0 to 5.9 ~ [Dull]
Normally, these games tend to be less appealing to majority of gamers and will barely provide a decent experience, let alone a good one.

~ 4.0 to 4.9 ~ [Imperfect]
Games with a score within this range should not be looked upon. They are worthless and have many more cons than they have pros.

~ 3.0 to 3.9 ~ [Awful]
You shouldn't bother with such titles as they are noticeable flaws in the gaming world.

~ 2.0 to 2.9 ~ [Abhorrent]
These titles do not include any quality that'll help them rise the level. They are only filled with imperfections.

~ 1.0 to 1.9 ~ [Disastrous]
Such games are a waste of time for the reviewer himself/herself!

~ 0.0 ~ [Epic Fail]
We can only hope that games are never demerited with such a score!


To stay true to the Aurora Review Scale (created by our very own radd), I've set up different ranges for Green, Yellow, and Red. These three colours were originally supposed to be used to rate a particular title but never quite succeeded. Now, they'll be implemented along with the numerical rating system.

GREEN: [A must have. We strongly recommend games in this range.]
8.0 to 10

YELLOW: [A solid game that delivers hours of enjoyment but falls just short in some areas.]
5.0 to 7.9

RED: [Games in this range are not worth your time and money.]
2.0 to 4.9

Anything below a 2.0 (i.e. a RED) will be considered as a don't-have.
​

 

[Chandoo]

er, every other person interprets a numerical score differently, you can't just force your view on everyone else who writes a review ya know -_-

 

[NighteySenpai]

^^I agree with and OP dont FOLLOW LULZSPOT

 

[Buland]

er, every other person interprets a numerical score differently, you can't just force your view on everyone else who writes a review ya know -_-

I haven't put this up to enforce others with their numerical interpretation of scoring a game. This is just to be used as reference for reviewers who don't know what to give a particular game. Since the overall rating isn't supposed to be an average of all the other categories a new reviewer might find my thread helpful.

^^I agree with and OP dont FOLLOW LULZSPOT

I'm not copying. I'm simply taking the best ideas from other sites in the same category and implementing them on PG for it's own good. And besides, the one-word descriptions beside a particular score range are all unique!

 

[Zeus MK]

er, every other person interprets a numerical score differently, you can't just force your view on everyone else who writes a review ya know -_-

ur right dude

 

[zainnaeem]

sorry dude but i gotta agree with with the rest
u get points for effort though

 

[Buland]

To those agreeing with a certain someone known as Chandoo:

I'm not enforcing my idea onto anyone. This simply acts as a means to describe what each score means. For example, I want to rate a game but don't know what to rate it. I'll click on this thread and see the one-word description for each score range. After finding out, I'll find it a wee-bit easier to rate! Like GameSpot and IGN, I believe PG should also have 'tags' for certain ranges of numbers.

 

[Magma]

I find this as a very good idea. Nice work there

 

[Buland]

I find this as a very good idea. Nice work there

Finally a sane poster!

 

[Ranger Taffles]

I understand also. Everyone can post according to their ratings, but if they find something confusing, they can head over here.

Good Work Buland!

 

[Buland]

If only Chandoo saw it that way. *sigh*

 

[r3aper]

Nice work mate will surely help the new reviewers in deciding ratings.

One could always use a referece guide and this can be a reference guide for new reviewers

 

[Zeus MK]

the game experience can NEVER EVER be quantified into Monetary or Unit terms.. That's why i say logically You are wrong.. the only reason why reviewers quantify them is so that the buyers can have a rough or vague idea of how the game is gonna be like and nothing more.. This is the REALITY dude.

 

[Bad Mofo]

Suddenly, I find the Aurora scale much more appealing than I did initially.

We should do a mini-meta-review everytime. Have 3 people review the game, write up a short 150 word article about it (from all 3 people) and average the whole thing up to the nearest whole number. That way at least you're getting a more rounded review.

 

[Buland]

the game experience can NEVER EVER be quantified into Monetary or Unit terms.. That's why i say logically You are wrong.. the only reason why reviewers quantify them is so that the buyers can have a rough or vague idea of how the game is gonna be like and nothing more.. This is the REALITY dude.

What you have said is completely with my idea, not against it. I have simply given each monetary term a one-word description so that the reviewer finds it easier to quantify the game. And that gamers have a comparatively clearer idea of how the game is. If a game receives a 9.5 from PG, then it would help a particular gamer even more that he knows how to sum up that '9.5' in one word.

 

[Zeus MK]

What you have said is completely with my idea, not against it. I have simply given each monetary term a one-word description so that the reviewer finds it easier to quantify the game. And that gamers have a comparatively clearer idea of how the game is. If a game receives a 9.5 from PG, then it would help a particular gamer even more that he knows how to sum up that '9.5' in one word.

yeah u CAN do that but u CAN'T compare games after rating them because the practical is entirely different, on the other hand the rating is based upon the judgement of the reviewer only but in reality for some the game might be crap but for some the game might be a killer.. that's what i am talking about :guitar:

 

[Buland]

yeah u CAN do that but u CAN'T compare games after rating them because the practical is entirely different, on the other hand the rating is based upon the judgement of the reviewer only but in reality for some the game might be crap but for some the game might be a killer.. that's what i am talking about :guitar:

Well, if you wanted your idea to be implemented then why not tell the PG mods to stop the numeric rating system? Since that system is being followed, I just decided to make a few alterations of my own in it. Your idea cannot conflict mine since I am not the one to have introduced the numeric scores on this site.

 

[Magma]

Suddenly, I find the Aurora scale much more appealing than I did initially.

We should do a mini-meta-review everytime. Have 3 people review the game, write up a short 150 word article about it (from all 3 people) and average the whole thing up to the nearest whole number. That way at least you're getting a more rounded review.

No no no no no.
The current system is perfect so far.

 

[zainnaeem]

ok so how about this.............
who ever wants to test this method than do it otherwise USE THE OLD METHOD!!!no big deal!!

 

[Zeus MK]

No no no no no.
The current system is perfect so far.

OMG.. nothing except GOD is perfect dude!

---------- Post added at 06:07 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:52 AM ----------

Well, if you wanted your idea to be implemented then why not tell the PG mods to stop the numeric rating system? Since that system is being followed, I just decided to make a few alterations of my own in it. Your idea cannot conflict mine since I am not the one to have introduced the numeric scores on this site.

nah thatz not the point dude... The system of rating is just a mere idea of what the game is gonna be. But only the player himself as an individual judge the game by practically playing it and experience it thoroughly thats it.