Which game will get the coveted A+?

[ROH_mark]

Post which game you think will get the frst A+ from the GR vulgus.

I believe Fire Pro Returns (PS2) will be the one:

-327 playable characters
-500 creatable characters
-Gameplay system widely considered the best in a wrestling game
-Artificial Intelligence "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""

 

[Longo_2_guns]

None.
No game will ever be perfect.

 

[TheNesMan]

None.
No game will ever be perfect.

Agreed. If Ocarina of Time didn't get it, no other game will.

 

[Longo_2_guns]

Plus, when Ratchet and Clank Future gets a "B", I doubt they will give anything an A+.

 

[used44]

Before Bioshock was released, I thought the game had A+ potential. But then, playing it, I can see how its not quite that.

 

[JCD]

The A+ grade has become something of a legend hasn't it? Anyway, GR would be wrong to give any game an A+ since the perfect game cannot possibly exist.

 

[grandmagoodtimes]

I was thinking about this topic for a long time and then I felt stupid because the answer was so clear. Activision made the perfect game a couple years back, I can't believe no one mentioned it. Behold:

 

[LinksOcarina]

No comment, because I already named two games the perfect game.

 

[GRColin]

I read a rant bitching about game critics and how they use systems like this where the top grade is somewhat mythical. Ebert and replaceable skinny guy with glasses give things just an up or down vote, allowing movies that aren't exactly their taste to be given a positive review. And that's supposed to be better.

Personally, I think the problem is that no one sees B's as good grades anymore. Honor roll at my school was a B+ average. That means that if across all you did, you managed to score a B+, you did really well. Sure, people did better, but dammit if that HONORS stamp on your report card didn't get you extra dessert or a phone or tv in your room.

Look at my recent review of Buzz. Generally positive review, points out the flaws, but recommends the game for fans of that genre with a B-. Not a bad grade.

I like this system for GR, though I am biased being that I helped come up with it. Actually, we were all sitting around deciding how to grade (Numbers, Icons, Just Word Summaries) and my friend Brian said we should just use grades. Grades with the summary at the bottom of the review. The way its been done ever since (with a minor bad redesign that had the grade at the top for a short period of time).

Wow, I really must be bored to have typed all that.

- C!

 

[AcidTrip]

Post which game you think will get the frst A+ from the GR vulgus.

I believe Fire Pro Returns (PS2) will be the one:

-327 playable characters
-500 creatable characters
-Gameplay system widely considered the best in a wrestling game
-Artificial Intelligence "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""

Yeah, I agree. For the wrestling game genre, there just isn't anything better than Fire Pro Returns... but I don't think the GR Staff would give that game an A+. Their job is to find any flaw--any flaw at all--and if they can, they can let out a sigh of relief and not give a game an A+.

Honestly, I don't see the problem with giving a game an A+. There can be no such thing as "perfection" I guess, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't review a game and grade it based on the audience it was made for.

I don't think any of the GR staffers are wrestling fans, so I can't see them reviewing FPR or giving it an A+.

 

[damo_ds]

I don't think there will ever be a "perfect" game. To be honest, how well you rate a game is based on your opinion, which is generally different to the person to your immediate left. So there is no point in giving an A+ grade because chances are, there is someone out there who simply will not like it.

Just because there are no flaws doesn't mean everyone will definitely love it.. it's all based on your opinion.

 

[Longo_2_guns]

One system I think works pretty well is EGM's system, where more than one reviewer grades each game. That way, if person A doesn't really think that a certain game isn't very good, like Gamespots Tools of destruction review but reviewer B thinks that it is a better game then reviewer A thinks that it is, then they will be two opinions at play there.

 

[GRColin]

See, I gotta disagree with you Longo, multiple reviews by one magazine does a disservice to both the reader and the voice of the magazine. How can I trust the reviews of a publication if they're always contradicting each other? Reviews are, in the end, opinions and everybody has them. The reason review publications work is that readers come to trust the opinion of that source.

GR has a distinct voice, and we're harder (and more honest) on our reviews than most other publications. But there have been battles internally. Editors make sure any review written follows that voice and justifies the grade given. Sometimes writers disagree, but in the end, there is one review that is the opinion of GR. Hopefully you agree.

- C!

 

[LinksOcarina]

Which is also why you guys take a lot of flak from the gaming world, because you do things in a way that is more or less different from other online and magazine reviewers.

In reality no game is an A+. The only reason I even consider it is because of the good times I have had with those type of games. OOT and Banjo-Kazooie I spent whole summers on, trying to find every single secret and get 100% completeion. To me, that warrants a A+ because even with the flaws the game may have, it is so fun it doesn't matter. Your too into it to care about any problems.

I try to be fair in all of my reviews now, but every once in a while I need to indulge myself in writing about games that I would consider one of the greatest games ever made. Hence my few but existing A+ ranks.

So for me, it's one thing to say the game is cool. It is another to explain why it was so cool.

 

[Boringman54]

I'm sorry if I burst anyone's bubble but I dont't think GR will ever give give out an A+ because it can't exist unless it represents 105/100. I say this because I was on www.metacritic.com and I was looking at OoT and they show quotes from all the magazines, websites, etc. that reviewed the game and GR was one of the websites they quoted from,(oh and by the way, OoT is the highest rated game with a ranking of 99/100) and it showed that GR gave it a 100 but they only gave it an A so if they gave an A+, it would have to translate to being a 105/100 or so.

 

[GRColin]

MetaCritic is not GR. They have nothing to do with GR. GR actually had a bit of a spat with them awhile back after this article was posted.

http://www.gamerevolution.com/features/mind_over_meta/3

I went to page 3 (metacritic), but that article covers all the different aggregate scoring sites. As a response, they actually didn't include GR for a period of time. Their scores are still wonky. Buzz, which I gave a B- to, is listed as a 67 on Metacritic. Funny, I thought I was giving the game an 80. 67 is a pathetic score reserved for a truly bad performance, in our opinion and the opinion of my 5th grade teacher.

GR has no control over whatever voodoo witchcraft they use to come up with those scores.

 

[Boringman54]

Oh, I didn't know that an A could be a 100 too. My bad, but I never said anything about "MetaCritic being GR", it's just their opinion on how an A or B or whatever will be translated into a number is different then GR's opinoin.

 

[masterchris]

Which brings me to the only beef I have with GR's grading system: letter grades.

 

[svenhoek]

See, I gotta disagree with you Longo, multiple reviews by one magazine does a disservice to both the reader and the voice of the magazine. How can I trust the reviews of a publication if they're always contradicting each other? Reviews are, in the end, opinions and everybody has them. The reason review publications work is that readers come to trust the opinion of that source.

GR has a distinct voice, and we're harder (and more honest) on our reviews than most other publications. But there have been battles internally. Editors make sure any review written follows that voice and justifies the grade given. Sometimes writers disagree, but in the end, there is one review that is the opinion of GR. Hopefully you agree.

- C!

I think having multiple reviews gives differing view-points on a game. Like you reviewers always say, you dont want us to take your word as god, just get a persons perspective on the game. If two reviewers disagree on something it actually lets someone have a better early idea of a game.

 

[TheNesMan]

But if there's two competing opinions on a game, how do you know which one to trust? It makes the publication look bad if they simultaneously state a game is good and bad.