What does a 4-6/10 mean to you?

[mαrkαsscoρ]

People can interpret rating scales differently, but most can agree that 7-10/10 of something is great while a 1-3/10 of something is terrible. But what about 4-6? When you hear that something is a 4/10 or a 5/10, does that mean that they're bad to you? If not, do you think it's still worth it to check out a game or show or something you see it rated as such? And do you see a 6/10 as a positive or negative rating? They're in that realm of not fantastic but not terrible, but how do you see them individually?

 

[Moblinking5000]

Honestly, I have high standards for what I consume. I stay within the 8-10 range(maybe a 7 depending on how I feel) unless if I see something I find REALLY interesting, or if it's part of a franchise/series/artist/director I like, whether it's games, movies, tv, music, etc.

 

[Farore's Chosen]

1-4 Hot garbage.

5-6 Has problems but might still have some entertainment value. Ultimately you can take it or leave it.

7-8-Some problems but otherwise great.

9-10 Pretty close to perfect.

 

[TheGreatCthulhu]

I actually treat a 1-10 scale as it should be treated, a sliding scale with 1 being absolute trash not worth anyone's time, and 10 being a masterpiece, and I do all my reviews this way.

So a 4-6/10 to me is a product or service that's differing levels of boring. It doesn't wow me, but it isn't complete garbage.

5/10 to me is what I call perfectly mediocre. In that it's so boring that I forget about it. It literally doesn't make an impression.

4/10 is a boring thing that has a few flaws that I just can't look past, and 6/10 is something that's boring, but has a few aspects about it that are interesting or entertaining.

 

[Fraxinus]

In school, a 60% is barely passing--a D--and I'm more inclined to view a rating for a form of media as a 6/10 being more negative than positive because of that. 5/10 is an F and in some ways, my scale stops at 5/10. Very seldomly would I rank something lower, I don't think. Unless it really really really screwed something (everything) up.

This might be why I tend to decimal point my ratings a lot, lots of 7.5's and 8.5's, cuz there's half of the scale I won't really touch.

 

[Dizzi]

It means more research needed before making decisions...

 

[thePlinko]

Tbh, it varies. There will be times when Ill tell you that a game is a 6/10, but Ill still find it better than the game I gave a 6/10 last week.

This is especially the case when Im talking about multiple games at the same time, like when i played the entire Master Chief collection and tried ranking it. I didn’t really want to give Combat Evolved a 4/10, but if i put it as anything higher then id have to give games like Reach something like an 8/10. I mean, I think that Reach was substantially better than CE, but it wasn’t that good.

I think that the best solution to this is to not view ratings as a way to compare games. You cant really compare a 6/10 to a 7/10 because theres simply not enough of a comparison to be made there. Ratings like that should be left as a TL;DR of sorts and nothing more.

Basically, it means literally nothing to me.

 

[ExLight]

4 - decently bad
5 - bad but bearable and had a few redeeming moments OR insanely bland
6 - decent OR bland but had a few redeeming moments

 

[Dio]

A 4 isn't worth playing even if it's got some good aspects to it, the pain that the game will cause is not worth the pleasure. An example would be Duke Nukem Forever. It's funny as **** but the gameplay is just clunky enough and not fun that I didn't bother finishing with it. A 4 makes me sad that I tried.

I would say that 5 is the lowest a game can be before its not even worth putting time in. I would give a 5 to something i just about found enough enjoyment to finish the game but perhaps considered putting it down at times. An example for me would be Crackdown which is basically a GTA style open world game where you take down criminal gangs and jump really high. Story isn't great, graphics arent great characters arent great but it's a passable game and it's got some fun to it if you've got nothing better to do with yourself.

A 6 would be just above that and on the side of enjoyment. For me an example of a 6 would be The Darkness. I found its story intriguing but the gameplay was a bit clunky at times though some enjoyment was to be gained. Graphics were bad but I still enjoyed the experience overall.

 

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

Honestly, it depends.

A 1 through 4 is usually a pass, or the sort of game you should give a shot if you're really into that sort of game like Skyward Sword. A 5 and 6 usually require further context through a review. That sort of score could indicate something with good intentions but lacking any sort of polish. There are games that I'd only give a 6 to, but that I'd still recommend playing.

I think of stuff like Dragon's Dogma or Space Hulk: Deathwing. They're games that I enjoy, but that I'd probably rate a 6/10. They're rough and unpolished, but still enjoyable if you're into what they're offering.

 

[Jimmu]

When it comes to movies, tv shows, or games I honestly don't tend to spend much time looking into ratings and just jump into whatever I think looks interesting to me. If I were to rate something a 4 that would be pretty bad, 5 would be not really worth watching in the first place, and 6 might be kind of average and potentially worth watching once but not a second time.

 

[A Link In Time]

A 6 to me is something that still has some enjoyment. A 5 is barely passable. I'll watch, read, or play it, but I'll take my sweet time with if I can. A 4 is something that barely has any redeeming qualities. I would say a 4 out of 10 and below is what I consider bad.