History Main / EightPointEight

'''8.8''' is a {{fan speak}} term that describes the stir created in the video game community when a high profile game receives an unexpected review score by a major reviewer, especially when it significantly differs from the general consensus. This is especially jarring because professional video game reviewers tend to give out [[FourPointScale very similar scores]].

%% Please do not remove or replace without staring a new thread.

8.8 is a {{fan speak}} term that describes the stir created in the video game community when a high profile game receives an unexpected review score by a major reviewer, especially when it significantly differs from the general consensus. This is especially jarring because professional video game reviewers tend to give out [[FourPointScale very similar scores]].

The name comes from the unimaginable havoc created by [=GameSpot's=] review of the UsefulNotes/{{Wii}} version of ''VideoGame/TheLegendOfZeldaTwilightPrincess'' in November 2006, which awarded the game a great-but-not-amazing score of 8.8 out of 10. The Internet erupted in anger and chaos, as the game was one of the most anticipated games of all time and near-perfect/perfect scores were expected. Ironically, [=GameSpot=] gave the [[UsefulNotes/NintendoGameCube GameCube]] version of the game a score of 8.9, despite claiming the Wii version was superior. [[note]]The reason for the score discrepancy is that the Wii was theoretically a more powerful console than the [=GameCube=], so the Wii version's score was adjusted downward as a result.[[/note]]

The name comes from the unimaginable havoc created by [=GameSpot's=] review of the UsefulNotes/{{Wii}} version of ''[[VideoGame/TheLegendOfZeldaTwilightPrincess The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess]]'' in November 2006, which awarded the game a great-but-not-amazing score of 8.8 out of 10. The Internet erupted in anger and chaos, as the game was one of the most anticipated games of all time and near-perfect/perfect scores were expected. Ironically, [=GameSpot=] gave the [[NintendoGameCube GameCube]] version of the game a score of 8.9, despite claiming the Wii version was superior.

See {{four point scale}} for an explanation of why 8.8 out of 10 would be considered a low score. See also {{critical dissonance}}.

The name comes from the unimaginable havoc created by [=GameSpot's=] review of the UsefulNotes/{{Wii}} version of ''[[VideoGame/TheLegendOfZeldaTwilightPrincess The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess]]'' in November 2006, which awarded the game a great-but-not-amazing score of 8.8 out of 10. The Internet erupted in anger and chaos, as the game was one of the most anticipated games of all time and near-perfect/perfect scores were expected. Ironically, [=GameSpot=] gave the [[NintendoGameCube GameCube]] version of the game a score of 8.9.

''[[center:This defines a fan speak term. No examples, please.]]''

Another issue has arisen in which publishers would not give bonuses if a game did not achieve a certain arbitrary Metacritic score, and some classifieds for videogame industry professionals have now included requirements that applicants should have worked on games that achieved at least some high arbitrary Metacritic score.

The name comes from the unimaginable havoc created by [=GameSpot's=] review of the UsefulNotes/{{Wii}} version of ''[[VideoGame/TheLegendOfZeldaTwilightPrincess The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess]]'' in November 2006, which awarded the game a great-but-not-amazing score of 8.8 out of 10. The Internet erupted in anger and chaos, as the game was one of the most anticipated games of all time, and near-perfect/perfect scores were expected. Ironically, [=GameSpot=] gave the [[NintendoGameCube GameCube]] version of the game a score of 8.9.

Whether or not an 8.8 furor is justified is up for debate. On the one hand, a reviewer shouldn't just automatically go along with the crowd, even for nigh-universally-loved games. On the other hand, sometimes you get the feeling that they're doing it [[{{Troll}} intentionally to create controversy]] [[NoSuchThingAsBadPublicity and attract attention]] or forgot to do their research on the subject.

Gamers, reviewers and publishers, all share the blame equally for allowing these controversies to arise. Angry gamers pile the pressure on reviewers to award high profile titles higher scores, often forcing editors of video games magazines to revise their scores, and stripping themselves of all credibility in the process. ''NGC'' magazine once gave ''VideoGame/StarFoxAdventures'' a mediocre score. [[CriticalBacklash They received so much backlash]], eventually they conceded and jokingly included a [[TakeThatAudience perfect score sticker to apply over the original score, if it upset them that much]].

Reviewers in the past have casually handed out perfect 10/10 scores like they were nothing, praising a video game endlessly which gives their readers a false-sense of expectation. Publishers force journalists to award 10 out of 10, by applying external pressure to get those perfect scores. Scores that are 'fair', 'good' and 'great' are no longer acceptable. They along with any form of critique, are seen as ''undesirable''.

Sometimes you get the feeling that 8.8 situations are simply the fans are making a [[SeriousBusiness mountain]] out of a [[FanDumb molehill]]. It's worth noting that reviews tend to be published a day or two before the game is actually released, meaning that many people are decrying the score awarded to a game ''[[PraisingShowsYouDontWatch they haven't yet played themselves]]''. Such is the behavior of a console or series' [[{{Otaku}} fanboy]]: {{complaining about people not liking the show}}. Naturally caused by the fact that many gamers believe that {{reviews are the gospel}}. Might lead to [[HePannedItNowHeSucks a situation where fans will dislike the reviewer]].

Often, the score may be controversial because it adversely affects the game's overall average score on review compendium sites such as [[http://www.gamerankings.com GameRankings]] and [[http://www.metacritic.com Metacritic]]. Alternatively, animosity can be generated from detractors of the game who all act as if the low score is the only "correct" one, so no matter how many good reviews it got, if a major reviewer says it's not that great, it's officially a rubbish game.

There is some internal logic to this and related tropes, however, as far as video game developers are concerned. There is evidence of a correlation that good reviews will in fact drive sales. In one study, three groups of people were to read a (fake) review of and then play the game ''VideoGame/PlantsVsZombies'' for 45 minutes; at the end of the session, they could either take 10 bucks or a free copy of the game. The group that was given reviews that were positive tended to take the free copy. Those that were given reviews that were negative (or unflattering) tended to take the 10 bucks instead. So, in essence, an expected KillerApp getting TheBGrade may ''[[TruthInTelevision indeed]]'' make its publisher nervous.

[[http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/4966-Hate-Out-Of-Ten This video]] provides a good explanation of this and its faults.

There is some internal logic to this and related tropes, however, as far as video game developers are concerned. There is evidence of a correlation that good reviews will in fact drive sales. In one study, three groups of people were to read a (fake) review of and then play the game ''VideoGame/PlantsVsZombies'' for 45 minutes; at the end of the session, they could either take 10 bucks or a free copy of the game. The group that was given reviews that were positive tended to take the free copy. Those that were given reviews that were negative (or unflattering) tended to take the 10 bucks instead. So, in essence, an expected KillerApp getting TheBGrade may ''[[TruthInTelevision indeed]]'' its publisher nervous.

The name comes from the unimaginable havoc created by [=GameSpot's=] review of the {{Wii}} version of ''[[VideoGame/TheLegendOfZeldaTwilightPrincess The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess]]'' in November 2006, which awarded the game a great-but-not-amazing score of 8.8 out of 10. The Internet erupted in anger and chaos, as the game was one of the most anticipated games of all time, and near-perfect/perfect scores were expected. Ironically, [=GameSpot=] gave the [[NintendoGameCube GameCube]] version of the game a score of 8.9.

There is some internal logic to this and related tropes, however, as far as video game developers are concerned. There is evidence of a correlation that good reviews will in fact drive sales. In one study, three groups of people were to read a (fake) review of and then play the game ''VideoGame/PlantsVsZombies'' for 45 minutes; at the end of the session, they could either take 10 bucks or a free copy of the game. The group that was given reviews that were positive tended to take the free copy. Those that were given reviews that were negative (or unflattering) tended to take the 10 bucks instead.

----

Whether or not an 8.8 furor is {{justified|trope}} is up for debate. On the one hand, a reviewer shouldn't just automatically go along with the crowd, even for nigh-universally-loved games. On the other hand, sometimes you get the feeling that they're doing it [[{{Troll}} intentionally to create controversy]] [[NoSuchThingAsBadPublicity and attract attention]] or forgot to do their research on the subject.

Gamers, reviewers and publishers, all share the blame equally for allowing these controversies to arise. Angry gamers pile the pressure on reviewers to award high profile titles higher scores, often forcing editors of video games magazines to revise their scores, and striping themselves of all credibility in the process. ''NGC'' magazine once gave ''VideoGame/StarFoxAdventures'' a mediocre score. [[CriticalBacklash They received so much backlash]], eventually they conceded and jokingly included a [[TakeThatAudience perfect score sticker to apply over the original score, if it upset them that much]].

Whether or not an 8.8 furor is {{justified|trope}} is up for debate. On the one hand, a reviewer shouldn't just automatically go along with the crowd, even for nigh-universally-loved games. On the other, sometimes you get the feeling that they're doing it [[{{Troll}} intentionally to create controversy]] [[NoSuchThingAsBadPublicity and attract attention]] or forgot to do their research on the subject.

The name comes from the unimaginable havoc created by [=GameSpot's=] review of the {{Wii}} version of ''[[VideoGame/TheLegendOfZeldaTwilightPrincess The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess]]'' in November 2006, which awarded the game a great-but-not-amazing score of 8.8 out of 10. The Internet erupted in anger and chaos, as the game was one of the most anticipated games of all time, and near-perfect scores were expected. Ironically, [=GameSpot=] gave the [[NintendoGameCube GameCube]] version of the game a score of 8.9.

Gamers, reviewers and publishers, all share the blame equally for allowing these controversies to arise. Angry gamers pile the pressure on reviewers to award high profile titles higher scores, often forcing editors of video games magazines to revise their scores, and striping themselves of all credibility in the process. NGC magazine once gave VideoGame/StarFoxAdventures a mediocre score. [[CriticalBacklash They received so much backlash]], eventually they conceded and jokingly included a [[TakeThatAudience perfect score sticker to apply over the original score, if it upset them that much]].

Sometimes you get the feeling that 8.8 situations are simply the fans are making a [[SeriousBusiness mountain]] out of a [[FanDumb molehill]]. It's worth noting that reviews tend to be published a day or two before the game is actually released, meaning that many people are decrying the score awarded to a game ''[[PraisingShowsYouDontWatch they haven't yet played themselves]]''. Such is the behavior of a console or series' [[{{Otaku}} fanboy]]: {{complaining about people not liking the show}}. Naturally caused by the fact that many gamers believe that {{reviews are the gospel}}. Might lead to [[HePannedItNowHeSucks a situation where fans will dislike the reviewer]].

The danger here, that the fanboys and the video game industry as a whole, are stumbling straight into, is the demand for every high profile title to have a 10/10 means a review score system ''no longer works''. [[PerfectionIsImpossible There is no such thing as a perfect game]]. Every work is littered with design choices and flaws that alienate or don't appeal to another's interests. But if perfection is forced to be commonplace, why have a score system at all? Eventually, the situation will get so bad, gamers will idiotically [[UpToEleven start demanding 11 out of 10 scores]].

The danger here, that the fanboys are stumbling straight into, is the demand for every high profile title to have a 10/10 means a review score system no longer works. [[PerfectionIsImpossible There is no such thing as a perfect game]]. Every work is littered with design choices and flaws that alienate or don't appeal to another's interests. But if perfection is forced to be commonplace, why have a score system at all? Eventually, the situation will get so bad, gamers will idiotically [[UpToEleven start demanding 11 out of 10 scores]].

Gamers, reviewers and publishers, all share the blame equally for allowing these controversies to arise. Angry gamers pile the pressure on reviewers to award high profile titles higher scores, often forcing editors of video games magazines to revise their scores, and striping themselves of all credibility in the process. NGC magazine once gave VideoGame/StarFoxAdventures a mediocre score. [[CriticalBacklash They received so much backlash]], eventually they conceded and jokingly included a [[TakeThatAudience perfect score sticker to apply over the original score, if it upset them much]]. Reviewers in the past have casually handed out perfect 10/10 scores like they were nothing, praising a video game endlessly which gives their readers a false-sense of expectation. Publishers force journalists to award 10 out of 10, by applying external pressure to get those perfect scores. Scores that are 'fair', 'good' and 'great' are no longer acceptable. They along with any form of critique, are seen as ''undesirable''.

Gamers, reviewers and publishers, all share the blame equally for allowing these controversies to arise. Angry gamers pile the pressure on reviewers to award high profile titles higher scores, often forcing editors of video games magazines to revise their scores, and striping themselves of all credibility in the process. Reviewers in the past have casually handed out perfect 10/10 scores like they were nothing, praising a video game endlessly which gives their readers a false-sense of expectation. Publishers force journalists to award 10 out of 10, by applying external pressure to get those perfect scores. Scores that are 'fair', 'good' and 'great' are no longer acceptable. They along with any form of critique, are seen as ''undesirable''.

Whether or not an 8.8 furor is {{justified|Trope}} is up for debate. On the one hand, a reviewer shouldn't just automatically go along with the crowd, even for nigh-universally-loved games. On the other, sometimes you get the feeling that they're doing it [[{{Troll}} intentionally to create controversy]] [[NoSuchThingAsBadPublicity and attract attention]] or forgot to do their research on the subject.

Sometimes you get the feeling that 8.8 situations are simply the fans are making a [[SeriousBusiness mountain]] out of a [[FanDumb molehill]]. It's worth noting that reviews tend to be published a day or two before the game is actually released, meaning that many people are decrying the score awarded to a game ''[[PraisingShowsYouDontWatch they haven't yet played themselves]]''. Such is the behavior of a console or series' [[{{Otaku}} fanboy]]: {{complaining about people not liking the show}}. Naturally caused by the fact that many gamers believe that {{reviews are the gospel}}. Might lead to HePannedItNowHeSucks.

See FourPointScale for an explanation of why 8.8 out of 10 would be considered a low score. See also CriticalDissonance.

'''[[center:This defines a fan speak term. No examples, please.]]'''

The name comes from the unimaginable havoc created by [=GameSpot's=] review of the {{Wii}} version of ''[[VideoGame/TheLegendOfZeldaTwilightPrincess The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess]]'' in November 2006, which awarded the game a great-but-not-amazing score of 8.8 out of 10. The Internet erupted in anger and chaos, as the game was one of the most anticipated games of all time, and near-perfect scores were expected. Ironically, [=GameSpot=] gave the [[{{Nintendo GameCube}} GameCube]] version of the game a score of 8.9.

Whether or not an 8.8 furor is [[JustifiedTrope justified]] is up for debate. On the one hand, a reviewer shouldn't just automatically go along with the crowd, even for nigh-universally-loved games. On the other, sometimes you get the feeling that they're doing it [[{{Troll}} intentionally to create controversy]] [[NoSuchThingAsBadPublicity and attract attention]] or forgot to do their research on the subject.

Sometimes you get the feeling that 8.8 situations are simply the fans are making a [[SeriousBusiness mountain]] out of a [[FanDumb molehill]]. It's worth noting that reviews tend to be published a day or two before the game is actually released, meaning that many people are decrying the score awarded to a game ''[[PraisingShowsYouDontWatch they haven't yet played themselves]]''. Such is the behavior of a console or series' [[{{Otaku}} fanboy]]: {{complaining about people not liking the show}}. Naturally caused by the fact that many gamers believe that {{reviews are the gospel}}. Might lead to [[HePannedItNowHeSucks he panned it, now he sucks]].

''[[center:This defines a fan speak term. No examples, please.]]''

%% Image removed per Image Pickin' thread: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=1371175265091459700
%% Please start a new thread if you'd like to suggest a new image.
%%
%%