Is 7/10 a good, average, or bad review score?

[SCUMMbag]

A average score of 70 basically means "this game is divisive" and is probably more interesting to me than a game that averages a 90.

This forum is incredibly populist though so 90+ is good, 85-89 is divisive and everything below disappointing.

 

[Why would you do that?]

I think it's both good AND average. In other words, so many games get a 7/10 because games are in general pretty good.

A 6/10 is lower than average, but not necessarily bad.


In other words, the terms "good" and "average" don't really have anything to do with one another.

 

[oni-link]

A nice game. Some MC 70 around games are pretty fun and enjoyable. hey, first NieR had an MC 70 and look what it became. It wasn't a great game aside for the story and art style (not tech), but a game select people could enjoy and love.

Click to shrink...

Neir is a good example of why review scores can be really unhelpful

Neir is a really niche game with a ton of flaws, but if you can overlook them because you love what makes the game great, it's a 9/10, but if the flaws the game has are a deal breaker, then it's a 5/10, so you have a ton of reviews like that, and it ends up with a 7/10 average

Which means loads of people who might love it will skip it, and loads of people who take a chance on it end up hating it

 

[mario_O]

gaming reviewers don't use the full scale, they normally rate games from 5 to 10. most of the time. so 7 is a "okay" game.

from 8 to 10 is where a game goes from good to masterpiece.

 

[theAllseeingEYE]

Average is such a poor term.

Perhaps the average review score is 7/10, but a 7/10 could be a good game, it could be a very good game. It could be a great game that's simply divisive for various reasons.

I think anyone seeing a 7/10 on a game could probably safely walk away know that it's probably a good game, but perhaps one with faults, or a certain lack of appeal to a broader audience.

 

[PK_Wonder]

The only reason 7/10 is seen as a bad score in recent years is so many Americans who grew up with video games are probably anxious of seeing 70% because it's for a lot of grading scales as barely passing (69 is usually a fail grade). And to appease the masses reviews began to skew high.

Click to shrink...

Yes, this always bothered me so much in school. In the same math class where you learn the actual definition of "average," your A-F grade scale would contradict it.

 

[Prine]

If it's Edge, it means good.

 

[hey it's that dog]

I voted average because statistically it's average but subjectively I consider it to be on the bad side. There are way too many games to spend time and money on a 7/10.

 

[Milennia]

I've seen this graphic thrown around a lot and some times I think there is some truth to it though it isn't as bad as this graphic makes it out to be.

I do not consider a 7/10 a bad game.

Click to shrink...

Almost everyone I know follows the modern scale, whether they admit it or not, the bias is there if a game has a 7/10, ESPECIALLY a 6, at least in my circle.

 

[Sky Walker]

"9 to 10" is best of the best.

8 is very good - excellent.

7 is good.

6 is mediocre.

"5 and under" is worst of the worst.

 

[sibarraz]

A 7 for me is a good game that could be ranked higher by people who are fans of the series/genre.

I will consider almost all Falcom games in this category

 

[oni-link]

depends on the reviewer

Click to shrink...

I agree with you here, but if we believe that, then doesn't that make the entire concept of a "metascore" flawed?

Spoiler

I believe it does

 

[Davidion]

I'd read it as a game with notable flaws. However, particular quirks of the game (genre I like, particularly novel design, etc) may overcome said flaws easily

 

[Weiss]

Review scores are worthless in the first place because they weigh multiple aspects of a game together into one average when I sure as hell don't ascribe the same value of NieR's shitty combat as I do everything surrounding it.

But they make for good spectacle, so here they are to stay.

 

[jaymzi]

I see a 7/10 as an average score from most review outlets.

Even metacritic categorizes a 7/10 as a yellow score.

 

[Jonathan Lanza]

In the most literal sense of the scale it is well above average. Personally I say it's good as I think on the level of Ontario grades where 70% = B-

In the context of video game reviews it usually means Average. Video game reviews usually don't use the entire scale and typically speaking 1-5 and 10 are almost never used. So effectively the scale is this:

6 - Bad Game
7 - Average Game
8 - Good Game
9 - Great game

All the other scores happen so rarely that they mostly just act as outliers. Personally I'm a fan of 5 star ratings with no half stars.
For a comparison

.. is a game score

...is a movie score

 

[maGs]

Some people here will say a 7/10 is an average or good score and then be majorly upset when a game they were looking forward to gets that score sending the idea of it being 'good' out the window.

 

[JEH]

If it's less than a 95 MC it's trash imo.

 

[Era Uma Vez]

0- Not a game
1- Unplayable mess
2- It plays, but has no redeeming qualities
3- Horrible
4- Bad
5- Average
6- Good
7- Great
8- Amazing
9- Excellent
10- Masterpiece

 

[2Blackcats]

I usually see it as...

10 = Perfect
9 = Amazing
8 = Great
7 = Good
6 = Average
5 = Bad
4 = Terrible
3 = Horrible
2 = Abomination
1 = Do not buy

Click to shrink...

Ha ha, got a good laugh out of this.

The jump from average to terrible and the fact that "do not buy" is one notch below "abomination" were particular highlights.

For me 7/10 is good for a genre I'm interested in and average\bad for a genre I'm not.

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

it depends on the context.
Is it a fun, engaging videogame that was scored a 7 because the production value is low, the genre is niche, there are technical imperfections?
(i.e Mount & Blade, Risen, Solasta).
I'm fine, it's good enough to me.

Is it a triple A that sucks on basically any level when it comes to core mechanics but it's "redeemed" by the "shiny", because of excellent graphics, art and voice acting?
(i.e. The Order 1886, Assassin's Creed Something, "NBA Aggressive Monetization 2K"?)
Yeah, it most likely blows.

 

[travisbickle]

7's good if the meta is well over 80 and average if the meta is below 70.

 

[GamerDude]

7/10 is good. A 5 is average.

Click to shrink...

That's not true though. If you take an average of all the review scores out there, it isn't 5.

 

[Mr.Deadshot]

It pretty much goes like this for me:

10= Outstanding
9 = Great
8 = Good
7 = Mediocre
1-6 = Bad

 

[Captain Tuttle]

Man, Edge reviews scores really live rent free in some of your heads

A 7 is an average game, no shame in it

 

[LavaBadger]

Scores are a weird thing and not strictly indicative of game quality.

But to go with the thought experiment, a 7 out of 10 is probably an "OK" game, but I have limited game time in my life, and frankly, I don't want to spend that time playing a lot of 7/10s. There are too many truly good games for that.

So in mind, yeah, a 7/10 isn't a good enough score most of the time for me. I generally consider that bad.

 

[JooJ]

7 is average. There are hundreds of games in my library waiting to be played. Time is limited and now that I'm in my mid 30s my interest is very limited as well. Unless something I'm very specifically interested in, a 7 is a pass from me.

 

[thomas_cale]

I dont care since I make up my opinion about games.
I just know that I hate reactionary threads because of 1 review score

 

[Chronos]

Personally it should be a good score, but is effectively minimum viable product now.

 

[Strike]

Decent.

 

[ghostcrew]

I've seen this graphic thrown around a lot and some times I think there is some truth to it though it isn't as bad as this graphic makes it out to be.

I do not consider a 7/10 a bad game.

Click to shrink...

I disagree with this image whenever I see it, mainly because 7 in the 90s/early 2000s definitely DID NOT get read as 'really good'.

If anything, I feel like it was even more like the first chart back then.

I was reading an old 64 Magazine earlier and their Turok 1 review closed with:

The gameplay soon becomes repetitive and any clever ideas bought on in the early stages make way for mindless shooting and maze exploration near the end. The last level is utterly boring when it should have been the most thrilling of all. This stinks of a lack of imagination and a desrire to the the game finishehd on time. A decent game, but one that misses the target too often.

Click to shrink...

Gave it 80%

That sounds much lower than that!

 

[Drachen]

7/10 is good and I think anyone who doesn't see it as such is bonkers.

And people who write off any game with a score below an 8 are even more bonkers.

 

[oni-link]

The only reason 7/10 is seen as a bad score in recent years is so many Americans who grew up with video games are probably anxious of seeing 70% because it's for a lot of grading scales as barely passing (69 is usually a fail grade). And to appease the masses reviews began to skew high.

Click to shrink...

Where I work, 50/100 is a pass and 40-49 is a compensated pass. 39 or under is a fail

(This in the higher education sector in the UK)

 

[Dolce]

It's a good score but also the average. Generally, stuff in that range is worth playing and that's what defines something being good to me.

 

[lightning16]

Really depends on the person reviewing since not everyone uses scores the same way. I personally use a 7 as a good game, but most video game critics don't use it this way and in general I probably read it as being pretty average.

 

[slothrop]

depends on the outlet and their general distribution of scores. its irrelevant in a vacuum without that context.

 

[Dedazen]

Average.

 

[SilverArrow20XX]

It is average among good games.
Most people don't play bad games.
So it's good.....which is the norm for games with a budget.

 

[Astral]

It's alright yeah. But considering how expensive games are, I'd rather not pay full price for an alright game.

 

[TheMadTitan]

1. Trash
2. Garbage
3. Next to no effort
4. Mistake
5. Meh
6. Average
7. Good
8. Great
9. Amazing Spider-Man
10. Perfect Cell

 

[PlatypusDude]

Typical 7 is average for me.

How I usually interpret Meta scores.

75+ = good/typically worth a play for most people.
60-74 = average with a few large shortcomings. Or quality niche game that didn't click with reviewers.
<=59 = Do not touch.

Obviously exceptions and some weighting I do based on hype (large budget AAA game scoring in 60s is usually a warning due to hype cycles or some quality AA/indie review too low for various reasons).

 

[Rayasab]

It's a B tier, many games I enjoy are in this category. But for publishers and investors, it's more important
Reviews, especially for full-price games, affect the sale (Alien Isolation getting 5 from IGN)

 

[DevilMayGuy]

In the games industry, with the way most reviewers use the point system, a 7 is average. In a better world, it would be good. Some reviewers use the scale that way, but a quick look at opencritic's review aggregate, to be in the top 50% of games (literally average) you need a 72 or so.

 

[Mauricio_Magus]

For me it usually:

Under 6, it's not that good.

In between 6-8, it's good.

8-10, I recommend it and it's great.

 

[Aaronrules380]

I mean it would depend on the reviewer and how they tend to score things. For some people a 10/10 means a flawless game with absolutely no room for improvement, for some it just means a masterpiece where any flaws didn't feel significant compared to the strengths. If a reviewer throws 9s and 10s out all the time, then a 7 from them is much worse in comparison. I feel like right now the standard that most use is decent but heavily flawed but that's not really universal. There's also the fact that average is inherently a relative concept. It's possible the average could be really amazing if the selection is super high quality, or the average could be complete garbage if 90% of stuff is shit with a small number of gems in their midst.

 

[Digital Savior]

I'd say between good and average. Game has good things and not so good things. 7 is above average. Not quite good.

 

[Serpens007]

I've seen this graphic thrown around a lot and some times I think there is some truth to it though it isn't as bad as this graphic makes it out to be.

I do not consider a 7/10 a bad game.

Click to shrink...

Yup, sadly this is how things are. A 7/10 game should be considered good, despite the flaws it gets. But no, every game has to be a 9 or it's worthless for a lot of people

For this, scores just doesn't matter anymore. Just there to fuel stupid platform wars

 

[Huey]

I recall Greg Kasavin explaining this well when he was editor in chief at gamespot. The average game - meaning the sum of all game scores divided by the number of games - is not too bad to pretty good. So 7/10 fits the bill. Forcing "average" to a 5/10 is forcing a normal distribution, which doesn't reflect the reality of game releases or what game reviewers currently do. So 7/10 is both the average (or mean) score and it's also pretty good.

the biggest problem is people excluding games on this basis. If it's a genre you enjoy or the game does some outstanding things, you're gonna be really missing out.

 

[TooFriendly]

I think the point is that the 1 - 10 point scale is not standardised, the numbers do not mean the same thing to all reviewers.
So asking if a 7 is a good score just illustrates how the scoring system itself is arbitrary and incapable of conveying a consistent measure of quality.

In fact 'Quality' itself is pretty much impossible to quantify, so the Whole idea of a hard number being used to denote quality kind of falls apart. I'm getting 'Zen & the art of motorcycle maintenance' flashbacks.

 

[tophu]

EDGE 7/10 is a good game.

anywhere else, it's dogshit.