is game evaluation really necessary? Why is CF still so NB?

Now the game score seems to have become the player is willing to enter the only standard, after all, if spent hundreds of of the ocean to buy back a piece of slag is a very uncomfortable thing. When it comes to game scoring, we have to mention Ign,ign as one of the world's most influential game media, its evaluation has been the industry's benchmark, they give high scores and low points to the game manufacturers and players, the impact of the gold can not be too much. As the game type increases, IGN faces the tangled proposition that the low score should be called.

IGN's score has always been gold.

The attitude of design concept is difficult to unify

We take the recent controversial "Church Corps 1886" for example, 6.5 points of evaluation is not like a recognition of the attitude. But carefully read each line of text, this review is not a novice editor without brain blind spray, superb language expression in as far as possible to tell the player, play game is missing strongly game is so not inflow. If this theory is established, then the asura of the tide of sowing the "wrath of the" why give 7.5 points. However, from these two east and West works, IGN to the 6-hour short process of contempt. In Asura's anger, the editor gives the same attitude: "A mere 6-hour process is hard to call good, even if it's wonderful." ”

It's another film of Original sin.

This view, also let "church 1886" into the quagmire of not high, developers CEO Ruweerasuriya in an interview that "game length and the quality of the game should not necessarily link, like the film is the same." A movie has three hours, is it a good movie? Not really. "In the face of the confrontation between the developers and the media, I tried to issue two kinds of questioning, first, the game is playing games culture is not the mainstream." Second, the game can not be film to develop into a play game?

Unfortunately, when you try to bias one side, you will find a reason to overthrow yourself. Whether the play should be given high score is like trying to pick up freshly baked potato, who touches who hot. For me, IGN's outspoken stance is much better than the 36-point Platinum Palace in a Japanese media.

Scoring criteria are difficult to define

I do not know whether we remember the "Ninja Gaiden 3" was how the IGN pain, 3.0 points means that this is far less than the previous production level, really let the entire team disgraced. But the thin dead camel bigger than the horse, the work still has the same kind of game difficult to imitate the production foundation. The following year, a cartoon adaptation of the action game "dead Waiter" by IGN to mediocre to give 6.0 low score. We all know that the comic book adaptation of the game is mostly mediocre, there is no need to overly demanding its quality, so IGN gave can ignore and not excessive passing points. If change dimension, take "Ninja Gaiden 3" and "dead Waiter" to compare, 3.0 points and 6.0 points whether there is absolute rationality? Who can explain.

The requirements for top games are often very stringent

In this case, the game score is faced with a product horizontal contrast vs. vertical contrast. The so-called tune, game evaluation is also the same as game products, no matter how you use the architecture you will face challenges. The more sad is that the game evaluation to reproduce the film scoring mechanism is even more difficult, because the film in the final analysis of the core purpose is in the narrative, can tell a good story is the essence of the movie soul. As to how the box office does not affect the subjective desire to score. But games play a whole new art of entertainment in different types. The Japanese and American have run for more than 30 years on two tracks, even if they have a powerful historical RPG.

Perhaps you do not want to admit that the game media is difficult to develop a standard to constrain the game product right and wrong. Solving such problems usually requires editing your own experience to judge, but it's hard to make sure that editors ' instincts are always right, such as the continued decline in Word-of-mouth after the game of the Assassin's Creed: Revolution, the editor-in-chief of Psxextreme's website, Ben. Dutka under pressure admit to play 9 points too unreasonable and delete the article.

So if the game only publishes the first chapter, how does the game editor give a rating? Apparently the recent release of the "Biochemical Crisis: Revelation 2" and "Strange Life" will lie down. We all know that the first chapter of the game is only a foreplay, and premature evaluation is obviously unfair. However, in today's only fast-growing internet age, this first impression of the report who can be handed over. Players need to listen, the media naturally need to review.

IGN a little sentimental about Revelation 2.

Many of these problems are like a mountain in front of a review editor, not always safe to turn over.

is game evaluation really necessary?

Any evaluation editor tries to look at every game with God's vision. Unfortunately, this industry is never born to God. But you can not deny that the game evaluation of the game industry has a positive role in promoting. Players also need several gods to evaluate the game's products. It means something like a game product exchange. We can always see the different in the media, peering at the ebb and flow of the game products, a controversial review, more to arouse the player to the game needs further interpretation, which greatly promote the developer of the game experience improvement. The premise is that the media really want to make the industry smarter.

So the question is, why is CF so NB?