I voted "top 10%", but was waffling between that and "awesome to the max." I'll acknowledge that in casual conversation the latter is far more common... but I hope that (most, anyway) reviews are a bit more considered than that.
I don't think the "perfect in every way" criterion can ever be met, which would make a 10/10 impossible to attain and therefor actually become a 1-9 scale... a ten-point scale is far too coarse for that sort of pedantry.
-- Steve's not a fan of numerical scoring, himself, as it provides a false sense of precision and objectivity about what can be a very imprecise and subjective experience.
Instead of going with an arbitrary or formula-driven 10 point scale, I think I'd rather see "starred" reviews using something like the following criteria:
***** Excellent in concept and execution, a must-see/buy for fans of the genre and worth viewing/trying even for those who are not.
**** Very good overall. Fans of the genre will enjoy this but minor flaws may spoil the enjoyment of others.
*** Good overall, but with notable flaws in concept and/or execution that may spoil enjoyment even for fans. Not recommended for non-fans.
** Fair. Die-hard genre fans will still enjoy this despite the flaws, but others would be advised to stay away.
* Poor. For completionists only. Fundamental flaws in concept or execution will spoil the enjoyment for all but a small portion of the audience.
0 Broken. So egregiously flawed that it cannot be enjoyed on its own merits, or is functionally unplayable/unviewable/unreadable and so cannot be completed. Suitable only for MST3K-ing, if that.
-- Steve's seen a few games that rated a 0. Oh, the pain, the pain...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
I don't think the "perfect in every way" criterion can ever be met, which would make a 10/10 impossible to attain and therefor actually become a 1-9 scale... a ten-point scale is far too coarse for that sort of pedantry.
-- Steve's not a fan of numerical scoring, himself, as it provides a false sense of precision and objectivity about what can be a very imprecise and subjective experience.
Suggested alternative
***** Excellent in concept and execution, a must-see/buy for fans of the genre and worth viewing/trying even for those who are not.
**** Very good overall. Fans of the genre will enjoy this but minor flaws may spoil the enjoyment of others.
*** Good overall, but with notable flaws in concept and/or execution that may spoil enjoyment even for fans. Not recommended for non-fans.
** Fair. Die-hard genre fans will still enjoy this despite the flaws, but others would be advised to stay away.
* Poor. For completionists only. Fundamental flaws in concept or execution will spoil the enjoyment for all but a small portion of the audience.
0 Broken. So egregiously flawed that it cannot be enjoyed on its own merits, or is functionally unplayable/unviewable/unreadable and so cannot be completed. Suitable only for MST3K-ing, if that.
-- Steve's seen a few games that rated a 0. Oh, the pain, the pain...