Personally I wish there was something more like a decimal system, or at least out of 10, or out of 100 (or even half-stars, like 3.5 stars or 4.5 stars). I often find myself rating games around the 7.5 or 7.0 rating and I feel weird about giving it 3 or 4 stars.
Perhaps a good system would be a bit like the Ludum Dare system. The reviewer can give a game a score for things like fun, graphics, audio, immersion, mood, etc. And then a final score is generated based on an average.
4 Likes
And it does. Every time I see it.
3 Likes
lol I’m liking the glimpse behind the scenes. It’s like a whole other world back here.
2 Likes
Generally, in five star ratings for other media (i.e movies) three stars means the reviewer liked the object. a rating such as ok would likely be 2.5.
1 Like
Ha! I never even noticed that. I’ll never unsee it now though. 
2 Likes
Although we cannot directly rate something 2.5, Grouvee averages all ratings to produce an overall picture that has more nuance. I know that is not exactly what you are looking for. However, as someone skeptical of rating systems in general, I think what Grouvee functions well. It is based on subjective interest in a game rather than functioning as an attempt to provide an objective measurement of game quality.
This is specifically the type of system I do not have interest in. I do not mean to disparage others for liking this system, I have no doubt it has its appeal. However, because I believe the experience of consuming media is highly subjective, and there is no way to measure the objective quality of a game I find systems like these difficult to accept. A friend of mine using something similar to rate films on Letterboxd, instead of the built in 5-star system because he specifically wants to prove the objective quality of films he deems good cinema versus those he deems bad cinema. I find that whole attempt both futile and misleading. Media experience is subjective, based on one’s experience or affectual relationship to the game, or movie, etc. I find I can pull very little from such a rating system because it requires I understand a person’s subjective position (biases, preferences, experiences, history) to understand why a game receives an 8/10 for sound/music or a 5/10 for mechanics.
I like Grouvee’s system (to a point) because it is based on enjoyment. I do not need to know anything about a person to understand that they liked, or did not like a game. That works for me. It also tells me a certain number of Grouvee members enjoyed a given game. Since more complex systems are just as subjective, a simple like to dislike scale tells me just as much information and delivers it in an uncomplicated way.
With all that said, I do not think your desire @Torgo is wrong, and if it were to be implemented I would not be against it. What I do enjoy is the discourse surrounding rating systems that is occurring in both academic and professional spheres, as many sites, journalists, critics and academics are currently debating the merits of various rating systems. As mentioned earlier by @Himuton, content delivery platforms such as Netflix are moving away from rating systems, or at lease discussing it, and I find it fascinating discourse.
2 Likes
Yeah, I’ve never liked that idea. If you only have 5 stars to work with, the 3rd star (which is directly in the middle with 2 stars under it and 2 stars above it) should be the average or neutral rating. The fact that people see 2.5 as the ok or neutral rating means they are no longer thinking about a 5 point scale, but a 10 point scale.
Personally, I wouldn’t want to see a 10 point scale (or a 100 point scale) because there are two large groups that think very differently about how to interpret a 10 point scale. You have one group that believes 5 is the average, while another believes 7 is the average because that is what has been ingrained in their mind from their particular school system.
2 Likes
@headrollsoff ah, but a 3 is 60%. 60 on Rotten Tomatoes is fresh. 2.5 is half way, neutral, neither good nor bad.
1 Like
I’m such a horrible person, if I knew how to fix it, I would… but I would go mis-word something else instead and eagerly wait for you to find it. 
2 Likes
@ClaudiusWhite I pointed out to @headrollsoff that a 3 is mathematically not the middle of a 5 point scale. Visually it may appear that way, but 2.5 is the middle. Even if we ignore decimals, we can’t ignore that 3 is not half way between 1 and 5, regardless of how it presents itself visually when written down.
1 Like
@bmo That’s only because mathematically the space between 0 and 1 is counted. If you were only counting the space between 1 and 5, the middle would be 3. Considering it’s impossible to rate something below 1 star on this site (you can’t give something 0 stars), I’m not sure the 2.5 middle is even relevant. The subtext for 1 star on here is “did not like it at all”, which I consider to be the base line.
3 Likes
I agree with you that each player’s experience and “score” for a game is totally subjective. Because of this any and all rating systems will be flawed or incomplete in some way or another. I mean, if you’re measuring sea level or something there’s a good way to measure it (with a ruler for example) and a bad way (with a like and dislike button haha). But with reviews/ratings it’s different.
However! Saying that, no matter what the rating system is, I would argue that it is useful to have some sort of system. Although each person’s experience is subjective, when hundreds of people play a game the average score becomes much less subjective. Ignoring the peculiarities and individual differences on a granular scale, when looking at the broader population a clearer picture is formed. If 90 out of 100 people say a game is awful, there’s a pretty good chance that you (or I) might agree with them. And vice versa.
So yeah, while every system will be flawed in some way or another, I would argue that overall it’s good to have some kind of system because statistically it’s likely to give everyone a pretty good idea of whether or not they will enjoy a game.
Ultimately I use the system for personal cataloguing purposes, so I’d prefer more fine-grained control, but that’s just me. I find it a bit irritating because I give most games a 3-star rating, even though many of them are “really good” and many of them are “below average.” With only 5 stars it’s difficult to distinguish between “really good” and “below average” games.
3 Likes
Exactly.
I can appreciate that and when it comes down to it I am comfortable with whatever the Grouvee userbase collectively wants. I do, however, find it interestingto debate, especially when debating the various nuances.
This is part of my problem with rating systems. A majority of people either like, or dislike a media object (film, game, book). That seldom helps me determine the likelihood I will enjoy something. Majority taste is not an indication of anything but dominant trends within cultural norms and ideologies. The Transformers movies draw vast amounts of viewers and make disgusting amounts of money. So much so that they are making, what, five more of them? However, I am squarely in the camp that does not enjoy those movies. Majority taste is a hard metric to go by. For some things I am in the majority, for others I am in the minority. I find it unreliable as a way to gauge if I will enjoy a media object. To determine whether or not I will I need more info on who the majority is, what other media objects they enjoy, and why. That is part of why all rating systems tend to fail me, why I tend not to back rating systems as useful systems of measurement.
Completely understood and I respect that. Because rating systems fail my way of thinking my own ratings constantly bother me. No matter the rationale I implement I am bound to be dissatisfied with how I rated a game. And invariably, I will feel a need to readjust my ratings for any number of reasons, all of which vary from day to day. However I do respect that each person needs something that suits them, and while I am open to discussing the various merits (or failings) of rating systems I am happy to see implemented whichever system suits the userbase.
2 Likes
Statistically then you would probably be considered and outlier. So, if we go to bestmoviesever.com and we see that Transformers XIV has a 5-star rating, but you would give it 1-star, then it means generally your opinion goes against the grain of the common opinion. Admittedly I fall squarely in this camp too for a lot of things; I too find rating systems (for film, games, music, etc.) totally unreliable. But for most people they probably find their opinion aligns with the mainstream.
Personally if I want to check whether I will like a game or not I will seek the opinion of people or reviewers who have tastes similar to mine. The general consensus often disagrees with mine but there are particular people/reviewers who I can depend upon for a reliable recommendation.
That’s another factor: each day opinions change, people change, trends shift. For me I might really like a game one week and then I won’t be impressed the next week. I have a list on grouvee of my “top games ever of all time” and I find myself constantly shifting and changing it and being dissatisfied with it. Admittedly it is rather silly and pointless to attempt to arrange games (or art objects) from best to worst; it’s like trying to project a 3D problem down into 1 dimension. I used to ask myself “what’s the best souls game out of them all?” but now I’m starting to think that this question is kind of meaningless; it’s more productive to specifically outline the strengths and weaknesses of each game rather than to over-simplify.
But ultimately I agree with you, personally it’s not a big deal for me. I am also happy to go with whatever rating system is chosen or to stick with the current one, I won’t lose any sleep over it. 
2 Likes
You’re speaking my language. I’m with you 100%.
And I agree with attempting to find reviewers with similar taste. It’s just plain easier when you know the reviewer’s predilections.
1 Like
Very meaningful discussion. I reflected on myself too.
In other news, apart from extremes voters, there are fanboy voters in our midst…
(Game is not out yet)
1 Like
Lol. It was in public beta though. Perhaps that was enough for a rating?
1 Like
haha, I’ve noticed that on a couple of games that haven’t been released yet.
1 Like
Lol, I’ll confess I gave Hitman a tentative rating based on the open beta. I then played the first instalment to confirm my feelings.
I’ve held off on rating Doom because the open beta felt incomplete to a degree to which I wasn’t comfortable rating it yet. Same with Battleborn.
1 Like