What Does a 7/10 Mean to You?
- Thread starter Deleted member 4034
- Start date
A 'solid' video game.
Doesn't do much to push it's genre or games as a whole, but is a solid video game all around. It won't wow you much but it won't feel like a bad purchase either.
7s can be amazing games however and I love a lot of games that are 7s.
Doesn't do much to push it's genre or games as a whole, but is a solid video game all around. It won't wow you much but it won't feel like a bad purchase either.
7s can be amazing games however and I love a lot of games that are 7s.
It can mean a few things to me. One, it's a passable, mediocre game that's a decent way to kill time, but it doesn't do anything that well, and there are plenty of better games out there. Two, it actually does a few things well, but it also has a lot of flaws that mar the experience. Three, it might actually have some really outstanding features, features better than a lot of games, but it also has major flaws that makes it hard to recommend (so I guess possibility three for me is just a more extreme version of possibility two).
That's why you can't rely on scores alone. If you are refined enough in your tastes to know you have a distinct preference for something such as an emphasis or gameplay or story, a cursory glance at the synopsis of reviews will likely give you an idea of whether or not it's worth "investing the time" to look further into a game with a relatively mediocre meta score. Or, you can base you interest on a selection of reviewers.
Ultimately there's no way to discern any characteristics of a game based purely on a number other than what the general consensus of reviewers graded it. Even then context matters, because a niche game might only get 8 official reviews and could be well received by the small subset of people into the subgenre whereas a game might be broadly appealing but not particularly noteworthy and have a 76 meta score. That doesn't mean, obviously, that the niche game that got let's say an 84 is better than the mainstream game with a 76.
It's all about the context.
My personal scale
1 - Abhorrent, avoid at all costs.
2 - Horrendous
3 - Rubbish
4 - Bad
5- Average
6 - Above Average
7 - Good
8 - Great
9 - Fantastic
10 - Essential
1 - Abhorrent, avoid at all costs.
2 - Horrendous
3 - Rubbish
4 - Bad
5- Average
6 - Above Average
7 - Good
8 - Great
9 - Fantastic
10 - Essential
7 out of 10 - even a 6, sometimes - means that I like the game just enough to probably finish it, especially if it's short.
Anything less than that I might buy cheap and play for a couple of hours, but not finish it.
I guess my definition of a 7 out of 10 is Quantum Break.
Anything less than that I might buy cheap and play for a couple of hours, but not finish it.
I guess my definition of a 7 out of 10 is Quantum Break.
As someone with a full-time job, a 7 is a game I'll more than likely skip without giving it a second look, unless it's God Hand/Deadly Premonition levels of unique. If it's a middle of the road, decently executed video game without anything to really make it stand out, I'm not going to spend my time on it.
My impression is that most people in here saying "games scoring a 7 are often better than 9s" probably mean the same thing. However, most 7s aren't diamonds in the rough, but rather competently made games without anything really setting them apart.
My impression is that most people in here saying "games scoring a 7 are often better than 9s" probably mean the same thing. However, most 7s aren't diamonds in the rough, but rather competently made games without anything really setting them apart.
This is the whole problem right here. What's wrong with you people? Metacritic was a mistake.
It's either going to satisfy the bizzare niche game experience I want, or it failed to meet the expectations placed upon it.
It doesn't mean anything to me because I don't use traditional reviews or metascores to evaluate games I am interested in. If something catches my eye that isn't from a studio or creator that I'm already a fan of, then just watching some gameplay footage and reading through player impressions in various communities is enough to decide if it's something I'll want to play.
I guess it depends who is giving the score. If I am giving a 7/10 that means that I thought it was a good game that I enjoyed but had some issues to where I didn't really love it. A 7 game would not be something that I would automatically recommend someone to play but may recommend situationally depending on someone's likes or dislikes.
A reviewed 7/10 however reads to me as an average game at best. Unless there is a hook that I find potentially really interesting or have had previous positive experiences with the developer I probably won't ever play it.
A reviewed 7/10 however reads to me as an average game at best. Unless there is a hook that I find potentially really interesting or have had previous positive experiences with the developer I probably won't ever play it.
There are lots of solid games that have been hit with 7s, so if what you are saying is true, you've missed out on a lot of good games. Why would anyone let others dictate what they play?
Exactly what it should mean, worst game imaginable and a clear example of a big company cheating us poor consumers out of our hard earned money.
A game scoring a 7/10 is basically a clear cut example of the developers spitting in our face and licking up our tears. (not necessarily in that order.)
A game scoring a 7/10 is basically a clear cut example of the developers spitting in our face and licking up our tears. (not necessarily in that order.)
To me, a 7 is a niche game that a lot of people will really enjoy, but if you're not into that niche, you can pass on it.
There are many 70/100 metacritic games that I'd put as a "must play" on my list because i'm into that niche.
There are many 70/100 metacritic games that I'd put as a "must play" on my list because i'm into that niche.
Depends on what we are talking about specifically. If it's reviews, then I perceive a 7/10 as a "this publisher did not pay enough/put enough pressure onto the review site to gain a favourable review so it might be a decent game" or "this game is utter arsewater and the publisher just paid enough to get it a decent but not awful score".
Personally, if I were to give out a 7/10, mine would be a good game that has some flaws, but is still a fun experience.
Personally, if I were to give out a 7/10, mine would be a good game that has some flaws, but is still a fun experience.
But you, and I, know that context doesn't really matter to a number close to almost everyone.
A consensus arbitrary number is worthless for anything than to use as advertising.
Well actually they're 4/10's because 7 - 3 = 4 but you get the point.
It's a solid game. I usually rate on a 5-scale and 7 is what my 3s tend to become. They're not bad games, just ones I don't feel strongly about.
A 7 is generally a game that if I'm interested in is probably worth trying. In all likelihood, it'll end up being decent to good, but has an outside shot at becoming one of my favorites (Spec Ops: The Line) or me not really liking (this is more rare and I have no examples, though Okamiden and Lego City Undercover came to mind they were both actually in the 80s if I consider Lego City's Wii U release only).
That's true...kind of. For me, I have broad enough tastes that a 70 meta score doesn't mean I won't enjoy the game. I've really enjoyed games - though not often - that are around that threshold or even lower.
However, there are plenty of people who have a more mainstream gaming preference and don't bother with games that aren't generally considered very good. Even, what constitutes very good is subjective, but while I think it's unfortunate there are plenty of people who only play games that are 80+ unless it's a franchise they are comfortable with and likely will only play games they've heard of before checking an aggregate site.
It means that unless it's part of a franchise I really like, it means I'll buy it later when it goes to $20, or maybe borrow it off a friend.
It means to me above Average but below the standards pushed by the best the industry has to offer, which can be harmful to reception because videogames are not an industry where the creme of the crop is out of reach for the general audience (ie, top notch games do not cost more than bad games, like cars or phones) so in the gaming audience mind, full price is the standard for a 9 or 10 game and anything short of that should be worth less.
7, to me, means that if I was already interested in the game, then I'll probably enjoy it despite its flaws. But if I'm not already a fan of the genre or presentation, then the gameplay probably won't be enough for me to enjoy it.
BBTag got a bunch of 7s and it was one of my favorite games of last year, even though I know it has issues (heavy asset reuse, mediocre single player, uneven balance). I loved it but I'm not sure I'd recommend it to someone who didn't already have an inclination towards tag team fighting games and/or the ArcSys anime aesthetic.
BBTag got a bunch of 7s and it was one of my favorite games of last year, even though I know it has issues (heavy asset reuse, mediocre single player, uneven balance). I loved it but I'm not sure I'd recommend it to someone who didn't already have an inclination towards tag team fighting games and/or the ArcSys anime aesthetic.
A 10/10 is a flawless game. A game that breaks new ground, moves the medium forward, and an example that will be referenced for years to come.
9/10 is a very good entry in a long-running franchise that doesn't do anything terribly new but is still enjoyable. Or, it's a game that would be flawless if it wasn't for a couple of issues.
8/10 is a game that's probably still worth buying at full price, or near full price.
7/10 is a game to put on your Steam wishlist to get "eventually."
6, 5 and 4/10 are games you'll probably end up with, either thanks to a Humble Bundle, or because they were under $5, or because they were being given away for free. It's hard to say they're BAD games, but you really have to squint to see the good, sometimes.
3/10 and below are games you gift to your friends on Steam as a mean joke.
1/10 probably isn't even worth spending the $0.59 you have in your Steam wallet.
That's how I rate things, and I've actually gotten a lot of angry comments on my reviews in my day from people who are upset that I use the full scale and not just 7-and-up.
9/10 is a very good entry in a long-running franchise that doesn't do anything terribly new but is still enjoyable. Or, it's a game that would be flawless if it wasn't for a couple of issues.
8/10 is a game that's probably still worth buying at full price, or near full price.
7/10 is a game to put on your Steam wishlist to get "eventually."
6, 5 and 4/10 are games you'll probably end up with, either thanks to a Humble Bundle, or because they were under $5, or because they were being given away for free. It's hard to say they're BAD games, but you really have to squint to see the good, sometimes.
3/10 and below are games you gift to your friends on Steam as a mean joke.
1/10 probably isn't even worth spending the $0.59 you have in your Steam wallet.
That's how I rate things, and I've actually gotten a lot of angry comments on my reviews in my day from people who are upset that I use the full scale and not just 7-and-up.
7/10 for me is a game thst is a lot better than a general public thinks about the game, kay or msy not have a controversial aesthetic to its art direction and music, and will somehow be far more replayable than the 10/10. I dunno why, but w lot of 7s fit that description for me.
I guess it depends on the size of the production. My impression is that reviewers tend to really like AAA games and grade them generously. They're not, for example, going to say that there's something fundamentally broken and shallow about this AAA RPGs game design and so it gets a 5/10 on the strength of its aesthetics. So in the AAA context, 7/10 means egregious bugs, an unpleasant experience, and something that betrays the expectations of the reviewer.
Outside the AAA space, 7/10 could mean an awful lot more. A 7/10 could end up showing up on year-end top ten lists.
Granted, my impressions may be out of date. I make my purchasing choices based on experience + word-of-mouth, so I hardly ever read reviews or check aggregators.
Outside the AAA space, 7/10 could mean an awful lot more. A 7/10 could end up showing up on year-end top ten lists.
Granted, my impressions may be out of date. I make my purchasing choices based on experience + word-of-mouth, so I hardly ever read reviews or check aggregators.
For me anything 5 out of 10 is playable and purchasable. I don't mind playing mediocre. So 7/10 is pretty solid and worth playing.
In all honesty I think rating systems suck. They should rate games by how much you'd be willing to pay for a game.
In all honesty I think rating systems suck. They should rate games by how much you'd be willing to pay for a game.
OP
OP
A 7/10 to me is a game that has major flaws, but still mostly succeeds at what it sets out to do. It's a competent action game or RPG or whatever, and will probably appeal to fans of the genre or franchise its a part of, but will likely not make many new fans or change the mind of anyone who wasn't interested in the first place.
My favorite and classic example of 7/10 would be Saboteur.
1) It has a couple strengths (stylized presentation, setting).
2) yet generic/doesn't stand out in a lot of other ways
3) Nothing is so irritating that I couldn't finish or shudder at the thought of it.
4) I'd recommend it to certain people that love the theme/open world games
5) but it would not be the top of my recommendation list (ie, if you have to play 1 open world game, this would never be it)
Mass Effect Andromeda after patches is probably 7/10 as well, with the caveat of "don't even look at the lowest priority tier of tasks, not worth it"
1) It has a couple strengths (stylized presentation, setting).
2) yet generic/doesn't stand out in a lot of other ways
3) Nothing is so irritating that I couldn't finish or shudder at the thought of it.
4) I'd recommend it to certain people that love the theme/open world games
5) but it would not be the top of my recommendation list (ie, if you have to play 1 open world game, this would never be it)
Mass Effect Andromeda after patches is probably 7/10 as well, with the caveat of "don't even look at the lowest priority tier of tasks, not worth it"
Nah. Those games are slightly above average and not worth my time. I only give attention to the cream of the crop.
Yup.
Some games I liked got mid to low 60's on Meta Critic, lol. Under that and I'm looking a lil more closely at reviews, game play.
From smartphones to TV's, I look up what may be a deal breaker for me, not really caring about the score or rating.
Depends on a variety of things:
-Is this a single person?
-Is this an aggregate?
-What is the outlet?
7/10 broadly to me means a good game that holds more for fans of it's genre than newcomers, but is still basically enjoyable for anyone.
-Is this a single person?
-Is this an aggregate?
-What is the outlet?
7/10 broadly to me means a good game that holds more for fans of it's genre than newcomers, but is still basically enjoyable for anyone.