Topic: Should Nintendolife adopt a half point review system.

I know, but visually it looks better and is more indicative of how good the game is. For example, when you look at four and a half stars out of five, it's only half a star away from being perfect. Your eye can instantly see that it's a shade away from getting there. Using numbers and a bunch of tiny stars (which looks more like a decoration than part of the score) doesn't convey that as well, IMHO.

Another example. If you see a movie on the channel guide that's 3 out of 5 stars, it looks better than a 6/10 score looks. This is because you can visually see the halfway point on the 5 star scale, so it LOOKS better than average. People have been having issues with 5/10 and 6/10 scores because sites like IGN have been misusing the system, so I think that would help to solve that issue.

Like dragon, though, if number scores are used I prefer half points. To me, raw numbers should be used with as much accuracy as possible -- within reason of course, lol.

I like 5 points with half points though only because the 1-10 scale is too wide. Most people don't even use 1-5 in the 1-10 scale or at least it's really rare. A 1-5 system has only 1 & 2 which are under the 50% mark. The 1-10 scale has so many underutilized numbers it almost seems like a waste. Go green, go 1-5.

@JonWahlgren Question! If you had a chance would you have given Goldeneye an 8.5 instead of an 8.

If it aint broke....

Nah, I felt pretty good about the 8 flat. B+ and 4/5 while we're at it.

Now see B+ to me is an 8.5!

Why dose this matter?

The Scoring is just find how it is,
I don't Need a Score of 8.1 to think the game is Great.

No, no, no - 1 to 10 and decimals gives you more options to fully express the PWNage skills of the game. If there are any. :-3

What I mean is, it gives you more of a chance. Some games are between 8 and 9. Some games deserve more than a 0, but a heck of a lot less than 1. Get me? So yeah, it's a good idea, I suppose. Not necessary, but okay.

I can see how that can be construed, but to me it just means a really strong 8. An 8+, if you will, not necessarily 8.5-9.

B+ is an 87 in Grade school. Then again, anything below 65 is failing. Why do they even bother with the other 64?

Because someone who gets only half (or less) of the answers correct clearly didn't learn very much.

...I suppose. The again, I always got B+ in school, and I didn't learn a thing.

Clearly you retained enough to pass!

I like the 1-10 system. If we're going to use numerical scores, it's the one I prefer. The 1-5 we used on VC-Reviews just had too wide a gap in between numbered scores.

I always liked the system we have now. 1-10. But it certainly wouldn't hurt to add 1/2 values.
A 9.5 is very different from a 9 or a 10.
But I don't want it going further than that. Giving games 9.9's and 7.1's. That's just too specific.

I'd like to see a 1-1000 scale to 3 decimal places.Its the only way to sort the Wheat from the chaff. Come on NL,you know it makes sense.

NintendoLife should adopt an n-dimensional manifold to best represent their reviews.

We could score games via latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates on the face of the earth. Which game scored closest to my house?

I learned everything from the Discovery Channel, National Geographics, The History Channel, Penny Arcade, The Garfield Dictionary, Jogurt the Yogurt, and the 30+ books I read in elementary school. I kinda stopped learning after that. I only memorized enough to pass the tests.

Lol luigi I second that!
_{how have ya been dood?}

I think we should rate games on level of Navi annoyance.

It either annoying, or not.