Metal Reviews

Newest and Best Metal Reviews!
FAQ :: Search :: Members :: Groups :: Register
Login
It is currently Sun May 05, 2024 3:34 am



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Rating system scale
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:13 am 
Offline
Ist Krieg
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 8992
Location: Husker Nation
I have noticed that a lot of the non-posters that visit this website tend to think anything below a 90 is a mediocre score for an album. Actually, before I joined this forum I kind of felt the same way. Anyway, I was thinking that maybe the rating system should be posted above the reviews on the review page, instead of at the very bottom. That way it would be more visible and noticeable.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rating system scale
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:20 am 
metalNESS wrote:
I have noticed that a lot of the non-posters that visit this website tend to think anything below a 90 is a mediocre score for an album. Actually, before I joined this forum I kind of felt the same way. Anyway, I was thinking that maybe the rating system should be posted above the reviews on the review page, instead of at the very bottom. That way it would be more visible and noticeable.

It's fairly easy to figure out, I would think:

50 = Mediocre.

Go from there.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rating system scale
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:37 am 
Offline
Ist Krieg
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 8992
Location: Husker Nation
Eyesore wrote:
metalNESS wrote:
I have noticed that a lot of the non-posters that visit this website tend to think anything below a 90 is a mediocre score for an album. Actually, before I joined this forum I kind of felt the same way. Anyway, I was thinking that maybe the rating system should be posted above the reviews on the review page, instead of at the very bottom. That way it would be more visible and noticeable.

It's fairly easy to figure out, I would think:

50 = Mediocre.

Go from there.


A lot of people over rate albums. I think this is just b/c they don't understand the rating scale. One guy thought an 80/100 was a bad rating. I just think if the rating scale was in a more noticable place, people wouldn't over rate albums as much.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rating system scale
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 4:07 am 
metalNESS wrote:
Eyesore wrote:
metalNESS wrote:
I have noticed that a lot of the non-posters that visit this website tend to think anything below a 90 is a mediocre score for an album. Actually, before I joined this forum I kind of felt the same way. Anyway, I was thinking that maybe the rating system should be posted above the reviews on the review page, instead of at the very bottom. That way it would be more visible and noticeable.

It's fairly easy to figure out, I would think:

50 = Mediocre.

Go from there.


A lot of people over rate albums. I think this is just b/c they don't understand the rating scale. One guy thought an 80/100 was a bad rating. I just think if the rating scale was in a more noticable place, people wouldn't over rate albums as much.

Well, it's better to just go by the review and not the rating, really.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rating system scale
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 4:12 am 
Offline
Ist Krieg
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 8992
Location: Husker Nation
Eyesore wrote:
metalNESS wrote:
Eyesore wrote:
metalNESS wrote:
I have noticed that a lot of the non-posters that visit this website tend to think anything below a 90 is a mediocre score for an album. Actually, before I joined this forum I kind of felt the same way. Anyway, I was thinking that maybe the rating system should be posted above the reviews on the review page, instead of at the very bottom. That way it would be more visible and noticeable.

It's fairly easy to figure out, I would think:

50 = Mediocre.

Go from there.


A lot of people over rate albums. I think this is just b/c they don't understand the rating scale. One guy thought an 80/100 was a bad rating. I just think if the rating scale was in a more noticable place, people wouldn't over rate albums as much.

Well, it's better to just go by the review and not the rating, really.


True, but most people don't see it that way.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 5:56 am 
Offline
Metal Lord

Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:44 pm
Posts: 422
Location: where you are not
yeah, i think the reviewers are starting to sway with what people think are "appropriate" scores are for certain albums, insted of going by the scale. I actually gave into this, i was reading the between the buried and me review, and i was like "this should have got a higher score" but then i realized that a 69/100 isnt that bad at all. Not even close to bad. every point means somthing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:18 am 
here's the rating system I use :

00-15 : awful
20-40 : poor
45-55 : average
60-70 : fair
75-85 : very good
90-95 : outstanding
99 : masterpiece
100 : perfection (this doesn't exist)


it's based on MR ratings but simplified... since I can't make a difference between 75 & 78, I use a 5 by 5 scale... and I never rate 100/100 thus I have a 99 for 'near perfect' albums...

too many people overrate albums, it's a shame because then you can't see the really good ones from the others... :?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 6:34 am 
Offline
Ist Krieg

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 6505
Location: USoA
I have noticed a cutback on the constant 95 ratings. This is a good thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:12 pm 
emperorblackdoom wrote:
I have noticed a cutback on the constant 95 ratings. This is a good thing.


I have noticed a cutback on the albums reviewed that deserve 95 ratings.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:38 pm 
Offline
MetalReviews Staff
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 11:41 am
Posts: 3731
Location: Veldhoven - The Netherlands
T.I.E. wrote:
here's the rating system I use :

00-15 : awful
20-40 : poor
45-55 : average
60-70 : fair
75-85 : very good
90-95 : outstanding
99 : masterpiece
100 : perfection (this doesn't exist)


it's based on MR ratings but simplified... since I can't make a difference between 75 & 78, I use a 5 by 5 scale... and I never rate 100/100 thus I have a 99 for 'near perfect' albums...

too many people overrate albums, it's a shame because then you can't see the really good ones from the others... :?

I used something similar when reviewing. There is no way people can tell difference between 46 and 47, since the time and place you listened to the album can already make a 20 point difference in the first place. I used the metalreviews review scale, below 20 is rubbish, 20 and 25 are very bad, 30 and 35 are bad, 40 and 45 below average, 50 and 55 is mediocre, 60 and 65 is good, 70 and 75 is very good, 80 and 85 is outstanding, 90 and 95 is a masterpiece and 100/100 is legendary.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:03 pm 
Offline
Ist Krieg

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:07 am
Posts: 6505
Location: USoA
Quote:
I have noticed a cutback on the albums reviewed that deserve 95 ratings.


You do make a point.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group