making of a video game poll/rating system

[Shannon]

Looking for input on this. I got this idea when I realized I was too lazy to go thru ten million GOOD labeled roms to sift out the diamond from the black coal.

 

Anyways I'm just ironing out an idea. Just not really sure if I have the time to commit to such a big project. I posted in here first because this forum has the most activity.

 

Most likely though I would start off small and do something like the 7800, 5200, and LYNX first.

 

Time to brush of those carts/roms and get that 'ol console/emu going.

 

I wanna create a rating system for console games. By the fans for the fans, but I wanted to make it simple enough that anyone could participate but complicated enough to make it possible to gauge the overall quality of a title.

 

What I would do is weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, or whatever is the most practical list all titles for a system that start with a certain letter. 0-Z. Then you, the gamer, would give your ratings on listed games based on the rating system I created. I would then create an average of all the ratings received to come up with a final rating.

 

If you dont have the original feel free to crank up an emu and check it out. If at all possible try to look at the title in perspective of the time, in relation to what it was getting out of the system, and compared to similar consoles released at the time. I'd prefer input from more experienced gamers, or at least someone that has had enough exposure to these systems to be a little more objective about it.

 

Ratings are 1,3,5,7 and 10. 1 being the lowest 10 being the highest. No in-between ratings, just those 5.

 

Two rating system descriptions I was contemplating (wish I woulda wrote this when it was fresh in my mind).

 

1 - complete dung. Total waste of time, not worth the cost of the materials used to distribute this pile of sh*t. What cretin created this? Definite coaster, paperweight, or other equivalent.

 

3 - practically useless. Not a complete waste of your time, but close enough. This is the kind of title you are made fun of for even liking.

 

5 - Middle of the road. Good enough to keep you playing it, but comes up a few cards short of a full deck.

 

7 - Memoriable. Does not approach the worthiness of being labelled a classic, but a good solid title non-the-less.

 

10 - Classic! This is the kind of title that makes you all warm and fuzzy inside when you think about it. Unlike rating number 1 which is something else warm and fuzzy. The cream of the crop! The best of the best! This is a title that defined the system.

 

I expect alot of titles to hit somewhere between 5 and 10. Don't be afraid to use a 10 for a game that you feel rates around 8 or 9. There are alot of good solid titles that although not classic, come pretty close to it.

 

Rating system number 2

 

1- Just plain lame. Whoever created this oughta be shot! What were these guys thinking?

 

3- Mediocre. Hardly worth the effort put into making it, much less playing it.

 

5- Average. Good enough to make you play it. Bad enough to make you stop.

 

7- Good. Good solid title.. consistently stays at the top of the game pile.

 

10- Great! This one keeps you coming back for more, keeps you up late at night, pisses of your significant other, made you fail whatever course you were taking.

 

I like the first one (it was better when I first thought of it but, sadly, I do not remember it) but I figured it might be a little vague and the second might be more appealing to the less (verbally creative) types out there.

[Shannon]

What!@@!??

 

No opinions or comments on this?

[Rob Mitchell]

Well I think it is something that should be done .. everyone's top favorite lists do not do me any good ..

 

For many years I have referenced the VGR List for 2600 games. It has both a graphics and a gameplay rating each from 1-5. That works for me.

 

Rob Mitchell, Atlanta, GA

[ATARIPITBULL]

Lets give it a try and see how it works out!!

 

[Gregory DG]

I've done something similar to this with The Atari Times reviews. They're an average of multiple scores.

 

http://www.ataritimes.com/reviews

[Shannon]

Yeah that's pretty cool to average out the reviews. I was kinda thinking something :by the players for the playerrs", so to speak.

 

I was just wondering if anyone had any comments on the rating descriptions, or a preference of one over the other. Whether the descriptions are clear enough to get accurate submissions.

 

And finally I still have to figure out how my averaging system would work. LOL.

 

I'll try to drum something up.

 

To be honest I wanted to do this for system I do not know as well like sms, nes, snes, gamegear, colecovision, intellivision, etc. But I figured I'd start with a couple atari systems so I can gauge (Based on what I know of the games) how well it is working.

 

If course I would highly encourage those that like stinkers like e.t., pacman, etc to rate them according to how they feel about them. I just dont like it when people rate something bad because they dont like it, not because it is a bad game.

 

For example I don't care much for fighting games so although they may be well designed it would be hard for me to objectively rate them.