Topic: Absolute or Relative Ratings?
My bro was telling me a while ago that he wished music mags gave exactly on fifth of albums a 5/5 and so on. Essentially, there should be an equal number of things getting each score.
I thought about this and realised that in a way there are 2 ways to review.Relatively and absolutely.
In reviewing relatively, we are just trying to show how things compare to each other. Get a good number of subjects to be on each point in our scale. A perfectly relative scale would constantly be updated, to ensure that the number of items with each rating remains the same. The optimum relative scale would simply be an ordered list of how we think each item compares.
In rating absolutely, we are just trying to define exactly how good each individual item is. If we take a step back and consider absolute quality, we'd probably find that the number of examples diminish as we stray further above and below mediocrity. At the same time, absolute quality has no limit.
So perhaps a perfect absolute rating scale would be a number from negative to positive infinity, with 0 representing mediocrity. I believe there was a fanzine back in the 90s that simply gave games whatever number it wanted, with no maximum cap. It certainly makes sense when some would say that games are just continually getting better.
Anyway, this got me thinking about the way I and others use rating systems. Both relative and absolute in some ways.
I ask of all reading this:
What numbers do you use most and why?
What number (if any) represents to you something that you're totally impartial about?
When rating things do you often find yourself thinking back to other things you rated, for comparison?
Do you use another magazine/person's ratings as a guide?
At 11/25/06 08:31 PM, Seamonky wrote:
At 11/18/06 09:19 AM, Bahamut wrote:
It's your choice to shorten your reviews, although that may not be a good idea. For me, my length of reviews hasn't really changed. I made 4 reviews before just to get myself back to 1k which I couldn't be arsed doing for quite a long time. :P
I shorten my flash reviews but they still look good. Maybe I could review more this way.
Are you saying that your recent reviews are shorter?
They're still pretty long!
One thing I would say is that maybe it's not necessary to say some of the more obvious things or explain all elements. I mean often what you say for 'violence' or 'interactivity' often doesn't need to be said and is just taking your time and maybe not helping the author much.
Everyone's style is different. I mean, you, milinko and I all have fairly individual styles. Just do whatever works best for you.
In the favour of my own style: it means I can type stuff quickly as it comes into my head and maybe reorder the points later if I so wish (like if +/- are totally mixed up, I'll maybe take a second to organise). I can quickly check that I have indeed done what I consider the min. requirements - one positive, one negative. Also means that authors could see the points more easily than if it's in a body of text.
Anyway, as long as what you're doing is helping the author, keep it up and just do what you have time for.