Post by wamphari on Oct 10, 2014 16:26:11 GMT -5
There is a phenomenon I've noticed, primarily in the realms of comic books and video games, of rating being a tad on the overzealous side. In my reckoning on a one-to-ten scale a five should denote a book which is basically average, ordinary, or run of the mill. In other words if one were to break down all the reviews of all the comic books on a long enough time scale the average should end up right around five, or average. Here I use a brief look at comicvine's reviews of the books coming out this week to see how close that is to reality. On their front page of reviews are 40 of the latest comics scoring an average of 4.25 out of 5, or, on a 10 scale an 8.5. To me this seems to render reviews almost moot. When I see something receiving a score of 7 what does that mean? I don't write this post to call out any one reviewer or to seriously suggest that all reviews are BS, what I AM saying is that reviewers should make a distinct effort to be more objective in their review numbers, or perhaps do away with a number system all together.
Now, one criticism of my criticism that I anticipate, and is valid, is that many will simply review the things they already like, thus bumping up their average score to account for the statistical anomaly. I'm certain this is the case, however, my answer is that if the only thing someone reviews is something they like, they cannot apply the critical eye necessary to give a truly objective review that will help someone considering a new story? I think the answer to this is perhaps yes, perhaps no. I, for example, am a sufferer of generalized wet blanket disorder and have a tendency to be harsher when judging books, movies and games than others. My criticism may often be an over-reaction, but I feel that there are so many positive reviews out there that many consumers aren't getting a clear picture that a great deal of this industry is very mediocre. As with any art form comic book quality forms a bell curve with a vast amount of ho-hum books in the middle with a very few disastrously bad books and a very few fantastic books on either end to balance them out. The most important negative effect of these universally high reviews is that we do not get a chance to recognize the truly great and the truly shitty books out there. How can we recognize how great Ms Marvel is when people are giving amazing spider-man a 9?
I don't direct this negativity towards any one reviewer or website, just more as food for thought. I think that if we treat mediocre books as they should be treated, not badly, but fairly, then the best books will be allowed to shine so much brighter by comparison.
Now, one criticism of my criticism that I anticipate, and is valid, is that many will simply review the things they already like, thus bumping up their average score to account for the statistical anomaly. I'm certain this is the case, however, my answer is that if the only thing someone reviews is something they like, they cannot apply the critical eye necessary to give a truly objective review that will help someone considering a new story? I think the answer to this is perhaps yes, perhaps no. I, for example, am a sufferer of generalized wet blanket disorder and have a tendency to be harsher when judging books, movies and games than others. My criticism may often be an over-reaction, but I feel that there are so many positive reviews out there that many consumers aren't getting a clear picture that a great deal of this industry is very mediocre. As with any art form comic book quality forms a bell curve with a vast amount of ho-hum books in the middle with a very few disastrously bad books and a very few fantastic books on either end to balance them out. The most important negative effect of these universally high reviews is that we do not get a chance to recognize the truly great and the truly shitty books out there. How can we recognize how great Ms Marvel is when people are giving amazing spider-man a 9?
I don't direct this negativity towards any one reviewer or website, just more as food for thought. I think that if we treat mediocre books as they should be treated, not badly, but fairly, then the best books will be allowed to shine so much brighter by comparison.
