Should Campaigns And Multiplayer Get Separate Review Scores?
See Full ImageOn the surface, this seems to be an easily answered question.
After all, we're issuing an overall score for the entire product, and that product often includes both single-player and multiplayer entertainment. Hence, both must be considered, and it's up to the critic's discretion as to how heavily to weight each side; for instance, the multiplayer might be more heavily weighted in Medal of Honor: Warfighter than it was in Resident Evil 6.
On top of which, there's a general assumption that the majority of those who buy a game will play both the campaign and multiplayer. However, as time goes on, I keep running across people that almost exclusively buy titles for one reason or the other, and I've also heard of people only reading the parts of reviews that deal with either the single-player or the multiplayer. Furthermore, it really is true that the two experiences are extraordinarily different; quite separate and distinct beasts, in fact. Therefore, maybe it's not such a bad idea to split the two up and deliver two scores for certain games.
Some may say this could pose problems because readers might get confused, but it's not like we have a standardized form of reviewing games. The classic is still a 10-point scale but that's hardly the only system used by major sources, and some - like Game Informer - hand out multiple scores (from different critics). So it's not like we'd be breaking some sort of cardinal rule and besides, it could really help consumers make easier purchase decisions. It also doesn't help that reviewers approach the analysis process very differently; some spend a lot more time talking about multiplayer (or the campaign) than others.
What do you think?
Tags: game reviews, video game critics, game scores, multiplayer
10/17/2012 9:52:38 PM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (36 posts)
SmokeyPSD
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 @ 11:03:03 PM
Reply
6 up, 0 down
chilker
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 2:01:32 AM
I think you can have different scores for Single Player and Multiplayer, and then just have a final average (overall) score at the end. Something I love about psxextreme is that you have many categories in each of your reviews. By adding Single Player and Multiplayer categories, you'll just be giving more information to gamers to help us decide where our limited money supplies would be best spent.
1 up, 0 down
Jed
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 2:32:16 AM
1 up, 0 down
xenris
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 9:38:20 AM
1 up, 1 down
bigrailer19
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 @ 11:13:38 PM
Reply
2 up, 1 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 @ 11:27:14 PM
Reply
I think Ben is right that people are getting more and more divided, and what if some bad multiplayer brings down the score on a game with great SP? That's gonna hurt the sales.
Off topic but must mention: I just beat Dishonored, what an epic game all around. Awesome conclusion. Had no idea Arkane worked with Quantic Dream. If anybody knows the song that played at the end let me know, Shazam couldn't ID it.
1 up, 0 down
matt99
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 12:18:46 AM
2 up, 0 down
Qubex
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 @ 11:30:22 PM
Reply
Both theatres of play are distinctly different in game play style and approach, and therefore should be score appropriately. For example, for the Uncharted series of action adventure games; we know the multi-player component suffered initially, whilst the single player campaign theatre was far more enjoyable played as an interactive story and the score should have reflected this.
If one had a dual scoring system it would be easier to split out the strengths and weaknesses of both components that make up the whole package. It could be that people may not purchase a game if they felt part component was weaker than the other; it could be that people would make different purchasing decisions if games had a dual scoring system.
Don't know if it would have made a huge difference to popular games past that have sold well without an applied dual score; anyhow if single and multi player components were scored differently it would certainly influence the sales dynamic in some ways I think - but not drastically, not now anyway.
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
1 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 @ 11:41:15 PM
1 up, 0 down
La_Bete12
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 12:17:07 AM
1 up, 0 down
Ludicrous_Liam
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 11:59:19 AM
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 1:07:46 PM
0 up, 0 down
tes37
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 @ 11:50:36 PM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
daus26
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 12:31:39 AM
Reply
If we're talking about the other 99.9%, then no. The day we see separate scores for online/sp is probably the day when they will be sold separately, and I don't like the idea of that. Even if SP is bad, I still would like to play experience it, and vice versa.
0 up, 1 down
Temjin001
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 1:14:27 AM
Reply
It's my book and I love it ;)
0 up, 0 down
Temjin001
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 9:41:28 AM
Sega's Model 2 arcade hardware redefined the standard of arcade games(the video game tech standard bearer for the time) This hardware debuted before PSX or Saturn hit the scene and nothing on those looming consoles could come close to pushing as many texture mapped polygons or consistently as fast or high res as model 2 games. Rock solid 60fps is something I grew very found of at the time. I still do feel that way. Games running at that speed simply can control better and feel smoother(latency reasons makes this a fact) Virtua Fighter 2, Virtual On, Sega Rally, Daytona and more never saw proper release on consoles. I've been waiting for arcade code ports of Sega's model 2 games forever, hopefully soon Model 3 games too, but now the days are finally almost here and I can put on my TMNT t-shirt, pump up my Walk-man, grow a mullet and relive the golden days.
=p
0 up, 0 down
Temjin001
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 12:18:04 PM
source: star wars wikia
=p
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 1:09:07 PM
1 up, 0 down
Jed
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 1:29:49 AM
Reply
Personally, if I am considering purchasing a game I will read through the reviews. I always want to know the reasoning behind a review score. I don't mind seeing one aggregate number for both experiences, as long as the review tells me how good (or bad) the SP is and why.
But I realize that review scores don't have as much of an influence upon me as it does others. Like I said, I read through the reviews, and I also consider their sources. I know which websites and reviewers have different tastes than me, so I tend to stay away from them. But I realize that many people just look at the number scores or meta scores to make their decision, and that can have a huge effect on how a game sells.
The way reviews are written and perceived these days, I just don't see a two number system being adopted by many reviewers.
0 up, 0 down
BikerSaint
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 1:46:21 AM
Reply
Actually IMHO, I think that a 3-way scoring system would be a much better, and the most fairest, way to score any SP/combined games....
1. Use a (big-sized) MAIN score for the combined SP/MP modes.
2. One (smaller sized) SUB-score for just SP mode.
3. One (smaller sized) SUB-score for just MP mode.
3 up, 0 down
Jed
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 2:38:29 AM
1 up, 0 down
faraga
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 7:43:16 AM
1 up, 0 down
Vitron
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 1:57:04 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Advent Child
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 2:20:05 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
___________
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 5:28:06 AM
Reply
BF3 a perfect example ended up getting much lower scores than it should of because the MP was brilliant, but the SP was craptacular.
same with COD.
why should one portion of a game be held back by another?
1 up, 0 down
berserk
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 7:36:30 AM
Reply
I think games like COD , crisis , halo ,uncharted , socom , killzone and the likes deserve se9arate review because the MP is as important as the single Player in those .
0 up, 0 down
gumbi
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 9:41:19 AM
Reply
Like many others here, I don't give a hoot about the online multiplayer portion of a game. It means nothing to me, I doubt it ever will. So the easier it is for me to ignore that portion of the review, the better.
1 up, 0 down
xenris
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 9:42:42 AM
Reply
But either way I think they should separate them.
And while they are at it, sell them separately like Starhawk is doing. I think this is the way it should be done.
I mean if I could JUST buy the zombies portion of Black ops 2 I would. But they are going to lose a sale because I'm just not going to buy it until its really cheap whether that is new or used. If zombies was 15-20 bucks digital I would be all over that.
0 up, 0 down
Rogueagent01
Friday, October 19, 2012 @ 2:57:39 AM
0 up, 0 down
TheAgingHipster
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 10:59:40 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
DjEezzy
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 11:27:20 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Temjin001
Thursday, October 18, 2012 @ 6:45:26 PM
Reply
I think there's many different ideals at play when people sit and evaluate games these days. I don't like this generalized "for every-gamer" sort of evaluation notion. The, "is it worth your money" notion. Times have changed and games can be had in so many ways and recycled or traded or happened upon more commonly than the 8 and 16 bit days. Furthermore, I think with how large the gaming market has become, and how diverse it is in markets, we can see a lot more freedom in assessing content.
For example, I really enjoy fighting games. I would consider myself a hardcore gamer who has more expertise in the area than a generalized critic. I would like to see sites have reviewers represent a rating system that is based on the epitome of that genres ideals, not the ideals of the homogeneous gamer. I pretty much don't read or care to look at fighting game reviews anymore. There's little for me to connect with.
... anyway, I have tons more to say but I gotta end it here. More home work to do ;)
1 up, 0 down
Yukian
Reply
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 @ 10:58:40 PM
First, not ALL multiplayer look as good as the single-player counterparts.
Second, the Blind Sheeps WILL bash on the reviewer if the multiplayer scores higher than the single-player and vice-versa.
Third, it may not be the same person reviewing both parts since it's so time-consuming and could be seen as flawed reviews for that exact matter (although, to be honest, it could be more thorough reviews.)