rating systems used by major critics

>>72656947
1 through 10

Why is this so hard for people

File: 1372381486173.jpg (138KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 800x600px

>>72656947
>n/100 where n is an integer between 0 and 100

So a perfect album is a 1?

best way is 1-4 with 0 being the fifth option. 4's and 0's should be hard to accomplish, most things would be a 2.

>>72656973
10*
:)

>>72656947
Fantano's where 5 is when the good ad the bad about equally balance each other out and both a 0 and a 10 are achievable is the best. I don't often agree with his scores or how he implements his system, but he has my preferred rating system.

but Fantano rates out of 100 if you think about it.

no one will watch a movie, play a video game or listen to an album if it's a 6 or below.

>>72656976
is the only way

>>72657069
that is to say 60%

1-5
1: bad
2:average/meh
3:pretty good
4:I'd buy it, probably
5:I need to own it

Ratings were a mistake.

do you guys still jerk off marcel

>>72657801
this is retarded

Worded ratings are the best --

Good: Phenomenal > Amazing > Great > Alright
Bad: Atrocious < Horrid < Terrible < Lacking
Neutral: neutral / neither good nor bad

>1-2
it sucks
>3-4
it's mediocre/average
>5-6
it's pretty good/recommended
>7-8
among my favorites/recommended
>9-10
same as 7-8 but I personally enjoyed it more

>>72657916
also retarded.

cmon mu pick it up

1: Worst albums of all time
2: Absolutely horrible, no redeeming factors
3: Terrible
4: Pretty bad
5: Average, decent albums.

Anything above this is worth a listen

6: Good albums but lacking in some areas
7: Really good albums
8: Albums that are amazing in almost all aspects. A must listen
9: Future classics / most current classics
10: Perfect albums

Fantano reviews don't really tell you anything tangible about the album. I have no idea how he got so popular.

The objectively best rating system for any type of media is the 1-4 rating scale. The more numbers you have the harder it is to truly bring meaning to numbers. 3 is too few, 5 is too many (Gives too much arbitration to how bad a movie is. If it's bad I don't need to know it's worse than average this many times; I just need to know it's bad.), 4 is just right.

1
>this sucks
2
>it's average
3
>it's worth at least $20 dollars.
4
>it moved me on a personal level

See how simple that is? Very streamlined, and very consumer friendly. Tip: if you're explaining a movie to your friend, explain why it's good, not some stupid number. People will respect you more. The only reason these scales exist are for people to get a quick look at what respected critics think without having to spend too much time.

>>72657849
no

>>72657069
Nah he rates 1-50
First he gives his numerical rating (1-10)
And then theres 5 different ratings for each numerical rating. (Light, light to decent, decent, decent to strong and lastly strong.

>>72658671
this is the equivalent of people on /v/ removing panels from comics. please control your autism

>>72658744
Good to know you go on /v/, brainlet.

>>72658698
Found the guy with a small vocabulary.

>>72658815
Do you find other people difficult to understand?

>>72656947
Fantano's system makes most sense desu