PDA

View Full Version : Inconsistancies between reviews and ratings



memnarch
January 30th, 2006, 07:38 PM
I've noticed a certain inconsistancy between the reviews made by staffers and fans and the polls fans answer and the actual ratings of the episodes. For instance, Atlantis episode 213 Critical Mass. The review made by a staffer rated it three stars. The fans voted a sizable percent that it was Outstanding or Good. Why then is the rating in the guide a MERE STAR AND A HALF? What is this about? Why are perfectly good episodes being given poor ratings? I don't know if this has been brought up in another thread somewhere, but I'd like an answer all the same.

Darren
January 30th, 2006, 08:21 PM
The overall GW rating comes from yours truly, the site owner. Reviews writers get to assign their own rating in their review, and we list the Fan Poll results alongside the GW rating on the main episode page for comparison.

Read more at:

http://www.gateworld.net/ratings.shtml

Skydiver
January 31st, 2006, 04:40 AM
another contributing factor, Good is a subjective term. Find 10 people and ask them to rate an episode independantly of each other and you'll get about 4-5 different answers.

even amongst my tiny group of friends, i'll enjoy part of an eps and someone else will hate it

prion
January 31st, 2006, 05:01 AM
I've noticed a certain inconsistancy between the reviews made by staffers and fans and the polls fans answer and the actual ratings of the episodes. For instance, Atlantis episode 213 Critical Mass. The review made by a staffer rated it three stars. The fans voted a sizable percent that it was Outstanding or Good. Why then is the rating in the guide a MERE STAR AND A HALF? What is this about? Why are perfectly good episodes being given poor ratings? I don't know if this has been brought up in another thread somewhere, but I'd like an answer all the same.

It's all subjective. Reivews and ratings both. I honestly don't bother to read fan reviews as there's too much 'faction' stuff tied up in them. In other words, most fans tend to review or like an episode because of a certain charcter or genre. Professional reviews, which I take with a grain of salt, just tend to go "sheesh, this episode was boring" and base it as they do with other shows. Plus fans can easily 'stuff' a poll by sitting there and voting non-stop (yes, fans will do that, and will continue to do that).

So, watch a show yourself and see if you like it.

AGateFan
February 1st, 2006, 01:11 PM
The reviews on GW are no more or less accurate then the reviews on the episode thread... although they are better written usually :). The poll results appear to be especially inaccurate with people rating every show as Outstanding even if they thought it was just great or good. If the poll really was acurate you should have a nice bell curve with the truely Outstanding shows being few and far between, as well as have one or two hated stinkers in there. As it is all the shows are Outstanding which pretty much invalidates it as an objective data gathering tool IMHO.

Reveiws whether by GW staffer or fan on the ep thread are at least a little more thought out. You will have someone who is just loving S9 but will be honest if they come up on an ep or so that they thought was just OK... yet somehow it still gets an Outstanding on the poll.

LORD MONK
February 9th, 2006, 04:12 PM
GW ratings I think are right on. We are all die hard fans and when I go good or bad what ever I pick is usually the majority.
Now, the review people for GW have to go. Espially the Review for the Tower. There was a lot of nonsense going on. Stuff that nobody I know things or seen. And their is always one person in the bunch that can agree with a bad review but this one was just a done by a show hater or someone that got to into the sproilers it was nothing like they wanted in their head.

Darren
February 9th, 2006, 05:22 PM
I must disagree. Sharon simply gave her opinion.

What is an episode review? It is one person's take on an episode. The better reviews are those that are well thought-out, well reasoned, and well evidenced, but it will always come down to what that one single person thought. Some people will like an episode, others will dislike it. I enjoy reading reviews that are well-written and make me think about an episode in a way I hadn't considered, even if I happen to disagree with the conclusions.

Our reviews writers are not panning the shows week in and week out. As a matter of fact, she gave "Critical Mass" a very strong three stars -- an episode that I thought was just a mess, and gave only one and a half stars.

Your mileage may vary. That doesn't mean the reviewer hates the show or doesn't know how to critically evaluate an episode.

Here's a fun exercise:
What is your least favorite episode in Stargate history? "Wormhole X-Treme?" "Emancipation?" You try sitting down and writing a balanced, articulate, 800-word review of it, then putting it up for 50,000 people to read. (Then do it again every week for 10 weeks in a row.)