Just a quite note.

It's sort of neat that a lot of the games on the site are rated by editor 4 or 5 and recieve a 3 by public ratings. Is it because some vote more than once? Is it because editors enjoy abandonware more, and they are reviewing it? Is it because the average of votes are off? Well, your guess is probably as good as mine but it's sort of interesting to see.

I think that whoever is reviewing the game would have to like it cause to do a review you would have to go through most of the game and probably even complete it. And most people wouldn't really be bothered to finish a game they don't like to play just to do a review. I think that is why most reviewers rating are 4 or 5. Then when you come to the public votes you'll get people who do like the game and those who don't like the game, therefore the lower average rating. Everyone has different tastes in games.

The more people vote, The more different opinions come into play. You always have the occasional ''1'' posters also, which I really don't understand but that's me.

A 3 is also anything between a 5 and a 6,9. It's a area which you'll see a lot of games in when many votes are counted.

I think that the person that reviews the game just really get into the game and love all what he see...but the vote`s on the internet are really based on what people know about the game and what they see on the screenshots...

Most people vote before they play the game...

Not true, I finish every game I review, and yes most of my games were rated by 3. I play strategic games and some of them can be pretty dry for some, or some people don't have enough patience which is why I think most of people give it 3.


Examples: Hidden Agenda, Floor 13

I think some reviewers are too kind to games they review. Not every game is a classic and even games that would deserve a "3" rating are good enough to play in my book. I would like reviewers to be more conservative when rating games.

I use this system for rating games.

5] Absolute classic, You are not worthy of the name human being unless you played this game.
4] Great game, everyone will enjoy this one but it falls short of a true classic for some reason.
3] Good but not great, there is something wrong here that will annoy some but despite that your not wasting your time with this game.
2] So so, true fans of the genre might take a passing interrest but in all honesty even they will agree this game is seriously flawed.
1] DUNG HOLE, this game is not even worth the small amount of space it takes up on your harddrive. It's the reason there is no world peace and why Cherr still makes records.

I hope future reviewers will take note of this.

Well I reviewed Future Wars. Still isnt up by the looks of it. But I gave it a 5. It doesn't fit into your interpretation of what a 5 should be. But I gave it a 5 cause it had a good story, pretty good graphics, I liked the sounds, and there was nothing about the game that irritated me or made me frustrated. I think your standards of a 5 is just a little too high.

Nope..

A game like that deservers a 4 in my opinion!!

When it`s not frustrating it can be a 4

But it needs something special to get a 5!

Something special????!!!! I think you people are looking for something that just doesnt exist. Or come across that often.

But I saw that 7 Days a Skeptic got a 5, and 5 Days a Stranger didn't. Both should get a 5 in my opinion, even by your standards.

That's what we call : opinions. It's all a matter of your own opinion. That's why people have the option to give their own opinion aside of the one of the reviewer.

And when a lot of opinions collide they are taken in account at the end score

Lot's of people give 1 and 2's + lot's of people giving 4 and 5's results in the 3 area..