If a game is rated 10 out of 10 that means it could not be any better, 10 is the highest mark, if a game receives a score that can't be bettered then surely that game is perfect as it couldn't be any better than it is. So giving a game 9.5 out of 10 means you think it's very nearly a perfect game as it could only be a little bit better than it is. People who throw high ratings around willy nilly are silly, unless he truly does think that game is nearly perfect and therefore one of the best games ever made. That's my logic anyway.
If a game is rated 10 out of 10 it means it's an outstanding game up there with some of the greatest games ever made; it doesn't mean that it's particularly better than other games that have scored highly just that it is up there with them. Think of such scores as tiers or levels rather than actual values being rigidly applied. This is one reason why I think reviews should use school grades instead of numbers: F being an utterly shitty game and A+ reserved only for the best of the best.
I actually don't find numerical scores all that helpful. I'd rather see something qualitative that helps me make a purchasing decision. Something like: -Buy now -Wait for price drop -Rental or Bargain Bin -Avoid I have no idea what the difference is between a 9.0 and a 9.5. Your 9.5 could be totally different from my 9.5. I have pretty high standards, and there are only a few games that I think deserve a 9 or above, and I can count on one hand the number of 10s I've played. I do however know what the difference is between a game that's a purchase and one that's a rental.
No, that's what review sites use. AKS just threw out his rating of what he thought it was to him personally.. and when a person throws out their own number, it's just based on what they think of that game alone to themself. Not many people go through the hoops of politics and standards of a rating system when they throw out their quick opinion on a game.
I am comparing it to the average game. Compared to most games, it's much, much better. The games that have really stood out so far this year for me have been LittleBigPlanet 2 and Portal 2. I don't think placing these games in the 9-range is unreasonable. They put most games to shame in my view.
I'm probably not the one to ask about duration. I have ICO and Gunstar Heroes ranked among my all-time favorites. My favorite single player first-person shooter is Half-Life 2: Episode 2. Yes, an episode. I evaluate almost entirely on quality. A longer game is worth nothing to me if it isn't a high quality game. I'd rate a small bag of crap and a large bag of crap similarly. I didn't actually pay full price, either. I paid $55 w/ free shipping plus $20 credit, and I got both the PS3 and PC versions. Didn't seem like a bad deal to me.
There is no perfect game, and 10/10 doesn't mean it's perfect unless you actually assign that meaning to it. I do not. The only games I can think of released this year I'd put in the 9-range are LittleBigPlanet 2 and Portal 2 so far. I suppose after that for 2011 I'd place Dead Space 2 in the 8 to 8.5 range. I didn't expect there to be this much controversy about my rating. It was just a general metric I used to share what I thought of it so far. I really enjoyed the original, and the sequel has much more depth and variety.
The PC version is the best regarding graphics, especially if you install the mod which enables for even better graphics. PS3 version is better then the 360's. http://www.gamespot.com/features/6310007/index.html?tag=topslot;thumb;3
I seem to be getting sound out of my rear surround speakers in the PS3 version of Portal 2. So it looks like the PC and PS3 versions have 7.1 audio. I am a bit frustrated that I still can't access the free Steam version because the PSN is still down. I beat the campaign today. I really enjoyed this game. I still have a second campaign to play through, too. I'm looking forward to the co-op mode whenever the PSN gets sorted and I can access the online components.
I've been playing this. I think $7.50 was a good price for it. It has some pretty good humor, and the Source engine is nice as always, but the puzzles have been really easy so far.
are you playing co-op? ppl say the single player experience is just the same old same old and co-op is where it shines brightest.
Just the campaign. It's good, but it's really just more of the same, and the puzzles seem easier than the first game. I'll have to try coop at some point.