100% agree with this. I think it would help if more people stated why they are giving the scores they do. For example if everything about a game is perfection - gameplay, graphics, music, competently programmed etc - then it’s an 100% game. Aspects that aren’t perfect would slowly chip away at that 100%.
My favourite example to use for this is Uru:Ages Beyond Myst. Personally I find it to be an incredible game that I’d recommend everyone play if they like puzzle exploration, but I also aknowledge that not every aspect of it is perfect. So, using that “100% then chipping away” method it’d go like this;
- Core puzzle/ exploration gameplay: Perfect - 100%
- Music : Beautiful, fits the atmosphere wonderfully - 100%
- Controls: Functional, but a bit awkward. Still character movement can make some of the puzzles harder then they should be - 90%
- Graphics: Environments are beautiful but the character sprites are pretty ugly - 80%
- Story: Pretty decent, but doesn’t really lead to anything amazing - 70%
Final Score - 70%
Obviously this is just an example and you’d probably weigh thing less/more than 10% depending on how important you felt they were etc. This would only work if you’re looking at a “technical” review as well. If you were looking at a game from any other angle it probs wouldn’t.
Personally if I see a game rated 70% then I think it’s probably still worth checking out if your a fan or interested, it’s just there may be a few shortcomings.