If you're wondering how GameSpot's review scores work, you've come to the right place. Hopefully, this page can answer any specific questions you might have. Basically, GameSpot uses a scale--ranging from 1 to 10--for its reviews, with 10 being the best (a perfect game) and one being the absolute worst.
When we review a game, we consider it at the exact time when it was released and compare it to standards around that time. So, for instance, let's say a game get a review score of 8.0. And the sequel is released a year later, but is almost exactly the same game (similar gameplay, same engine, similar graphics, and so on). That sequel will usually end up with a lower score, since the design is pretty much the same and since the game engine is older and probably doesn't look or sound as good a year later. In general, GameSpot doesn't favor rehashes; instead, we give priority to original designs and ideas that are executed well.
Every gaming platform is different. PC, PlayStation 2, GameCube, Xbox, Game Boy Advance--they're all different platforms with their own different standards for graphics, sound, animation, and so on. So GameSpot reviews games for each platform--comparing them to other games on that same platform and, to a lesser extent, to other games in that genre. In other words, our reviews of games on different platforms aren't intended to be compared to each other, and they're definitely not an indication of one platform being better than another.
Here's an example: A game might come out for a both a regular home video game console and a handheld console. The handheld version is probably going to look worse than the regular version if you compare the two games directly--but the handheld version might make better use of the hardware and just have a better visual design overall. To reflect this, the handheld version might actually get a higher graphics score than the regular console version.
Games come out for different platforms all the time; some games come out for every single platform, including the PC, GameCube, Xbox, PS2, Game Boy Advance, and others. When GameSpot reviews a game that's on multiple platforms, sometimes you'll see references to other versions of the same game on a different platform. We do this to add some context to our reviews. GameSpot reserves the right to reuse review text for multiplatform games, especially if the game has the same exact features on different platforms.
Again, GameSpot reviews every game specifically for each platform. First and foremost, we compare each game to other games on the same platform, not all other games on all other platforms. So if you want to find the best version of a game that's on multiple platforms, don't just look at the review scores. The score tells only part of the story--you should read the full reviews to get all the details. Our scores of multiplatform games are not intended to rank multiplatform versions relative to each other, since our rating system works by platform.
For the convenience of multiplatform gamers, some GameSpot reviews of multiplatform games provide an at-a-glance graphical designation for the best available version of a multiplatform game. The "best" graphical designation (which looks like this: 
) implies that, if you own every system, one particular version of the game should provide the best experience, even if the experience is only marginally better. We determine "best" status based on any major or minor differences we identify across the respective versions of a given multiplatform game, and assume, for the case of PC versions of games, that you own a high-end system. "Best" status defaults to the original version of a game if it is ported to other platforms much later and with only marginal changes. Typically, and notwithstanding any technical problems in translation, the most powerful platform that a game is available on will be awarded "best" status. "Best" status typically will only be awarded to games that we recommend to our users in the first place. We will not designate a "best" version of a multiplatform game that scores poorly on all platforms.
We here at GameSpot build our reviews around these guidelines, but keep in mind that we also have different reviewers with different opinions and writing styles. Writers aren't expected to strictly follow the reviews and scores of games that they didn't review themselves. Sometimes this leads to noticeable differences between reviews and scores of different games, especially when one game is a lot older than the other.
But the bottom line is that our reviews consider each game on its own merits. This means that even for a series of similar games, we review each individual game by itself on its own terms, instead of just trying to keep our scores of these games in line with each other. So even though GameSpot's reviews will ideally be written with the same exact standards, different people write for GameSpot--so not every review will follow every other review 100 percent of the time.
The final score for every game we review is generated automatically from the individual scores that our reviewers give it. Note: The final score is not an average of these five scores; each of these things is weighted differently to come up with the final overall score.
This includes technical use of graphics, as well as the aesthetic quality of a game's appearance and presentation.
This includes the quality and use of sound effects and music in the game.
This includes everything from the game's interface to its control and how well balanced it is--basically, how well a game plays and how enjoyable it is to play.
This reflects the game's longevity--how long you'll be able to play and enjoy the game and also how much replay value you'll get out of it. The retail price of a game can also figure into the value score. Note: Games with bad gameplay often have low value scores. On the other hand, a game can have great gameplay (and get a high gameplay score) but can be very short (and get a low value score).
This score basically lets a reviewer sway the final score--either higher or lower--based on the reviewer's experience with a game. Here's an example: A game might have really good graphics but really bad gameplay--so it gets a low tilt score to keep the overall score low, since the game ultimately isn't fun. Or a game might have poor graphics and sound but have a really good story--so it might get a high tilt to boost the overall score a bit.
These five scores are used to generate the final GameSpot review score. Gameplay and reviewer's tilt are weighted more heavily than the others. Here's how the scores break down:
This exceedingly rare score refers to a game that is as perfect as a game can ever aspire to be. A game that receives this rating could not reasonably be improved upon in any meaningful way.
We absolutely recommend any game in this range, especially to fans of that particular genre. However, games that score in the 9 range are also well suited for new players. Games that score in this range are highly uncommon, and automatically earn GameSpot's Editors' Choice Award.
This score range refers to great games that are excellent in most every way and whose few setbacks probably aren't too important. We highly recommend games in the upper half of this range, as they tend to be good enough to provide an enjoyable experience to fans of the game's particular genre and to new players alike.
A game within this range is good and likely worth playing by fans of its particular genre or by those otherwise interested. While its strengths outweigh its weaknesses, a game that falls in this range tends to have noticeable faults. A low 7 represents the average score on GameSpot, which is suggestive of the fact that the typical game found on store shelves is actually pretty good.
A game within this range has certain good qualities but significant problems as well. Games that score in the 6 range may well be worth playing, but you should approach them with caution.
A 5-range score refers to a game that's "merely average" in the negative sense--in other words, mediocre. Mediocre games tend to have enough weaknesses to thoroughly dampen their strengths. A much better game probably exists--one that you should sooner try.
Games that just don't work right and maybe didn't spend enough time in production tend to fall into this category. They simply lack the cohesion quality that makes other games fun.
You probably shouldn't get too close to a game in this range. Any of its positive qualities most likely serve only to make the rest of it seem even more disappointing.
Beware, a game within this range is almost entirely devoid of any effective or fully functional features.
Ouch. The rare game that falls in this lowest of the low ranges has no redeeming qualities at all.
GameSpot's ratings go directly hand in hand with the opinion expressed in the full review. While review scores are designed to provide an at-a-glance reflection of the quality of a game and of the opinion expressed in the review, we encourage our readers to read the full reviews to get all the details.
Home
News
