The first-ever issue of Games for Windows: The Official Magazine (formerly Computer Gaming World) hit newsstands Friday. Weighing in at 134 pages, the magazine's new focus on games for Windows allows the editorial staff to focus on the PC as a platform to rival consoles "minus the annoying Linux and Mac noise" according to the magazine's editor.
A few highlights from issue 01:
- Nice, light design. Most game magazines have a heavy, dark feel to them. GFW's art and layout are lighter and easier on the eyes, though almost all of the advertising is still annoyingly black.
- GFW's editor (Jeff Green) promises that Microsoft has no say in anything that his staff prints between the covers of the magazine. It's still an independent editorial venture, "despite that big honkin' Windows logo on the front cover." That's important.
- If you didn't care for the magazine before, it's unlikely that the renaming and new design will change your mind. The magazine's contents are still the same because it's still staffed by the same staff sitting in the same seats at the same desks covering the same games. This is the same book with a different cover.
- The most exciting change is GFW's new scoring system. In a ballsy move, GFW has recalibrated their score system: a score of 5 out of 10 is "average." Anything above a five is "above average" and anything below five is "below average." Games that previously might have earned 8 or 9 might now be earning scores of 6 or 7! Let's see how long they'll stick to their guns on this one, as they're sure to catch a lot of heat from game publishers. Stay strong, guys! You're on the side of the gamer with this change.
(Page 1) Reader Comments
Reply
Reply
I am sure quite a few of you also have a similer heavy tilt against scores. If GFW's 5 is worth a 7 in my books, thats going to cause a lot of confusion. Would other readers share a similar sense of confusion?
Seriously, a %50 is barely passing in any other context. %60-74% isn't much better in terms of something I want to drop $60+ on.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Personally, when people ask me to rate X on a scale of 1-10 (whether it be a game, book, or a guy's body), I always explain that I'm using 5 as the average and that I feel free to use any number within the bounds set by the scale.
I also have a complaint about people who refuse to give games a 10, but instead insist on giving 9.9s (or 9s if no fractions of points are used in the ratings). If you're never going to give out a 10, then in reality your 9.9 is your 10.
To get even more off topic,... You shouldn't go just by the scores anyway. For example, I'd personally give almost every single title in the Grand Theft Auto series a 5 or lower, but if I wrote a very thorough review giving my reasons for the score, you'd know whether you agreed with my fundamental ideas concerning gaming and thus whether or not to ignore my take on the game.
OK, enough about ratings for now. Bottom line is that I like this kind of rating system better and even those who don't shouldn't be too upset because it's the content of the review, not the score, to which you should be paying the most attention.
Reply
Reply
Good! Maybe then people will start paying attention to things like the content of the review, the credibility of the critic, past reviews the critic has authored, etc.
Reply
The 10 point scale is just an extension of the 5-star system with a little more leeway. Do you guys think of 3/5 stars as equivalent to a 60% grade? I didn't think so.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
A schools' system is completely different as they are not rating your QUALITY but your QUANTITY! See, in school, when you take a test and get on 5 out of 10 questions right, and everyone else averaged 7 out of 10 right, the average QUANTITY of questions correct is 70%, thus you scored below the average quantity.
When measuring QUALITY, it is best to used a 1-5 or 0-10 scale with 3 or 5 being average and very few things scoring on the extremities of the scale.
Reply
#4 - CGW hasn't reviewed Apple games since the 80's and I don't even remmeber them doing a peice on Linux gaming so nothing's change in that aspect.
As for the scoring system; the numbering system didn't change. They were just pointing out that this was how they always graded games in their reviews. I think the reason they were pointing this out was because with this issue they returned to giving games a pont score which they weren't doing for the past 1/2 year or so.
Reply
Reply