Rate the game

The day when i saw Planetary Annihilation on Kickstarter i got the feeling i've only experienced once before in my life, the ultimate hype, (only previously been reached by Minecraft) i couldn't wait to get it!
It is so amazing, i couldn't even think clear when i first started it up.
The graphics, the gameplay, everything is just amazing!
Everytime i haven't played PA for a while, i start it up and play a small match with ais (or a friend) on a small system, and every time i get the same feeling when i first started playing.
Uber, i don't know how you managed this, you guys are truly game wizards.
9/10

No one rated it a 2? Guess a 2 is actually worse than a 1, you can play the game but it would be literally sh*t.

No, the lack of a 2 is the visible display for all the intellegent, that polls are pure shart. They are the internet equivalent to a scrawny kid hamboning you.

If someone gave it a 2, it would show they thought the game was terrible and graded it against it. People give it a 1, because they dumb as they are, think giving it the lowest score sinks it the worst.

Like squishy said, take those 1s and 10s, and throw them straight in the garbage can, that is where they pretty much belong. And 1s especially, think about it, it is farther away from a 6 than a 10 is so it is more exaggerated?

Everyone who voted a 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.... I am sorry all you guys, the other voters are the reason the internet can't have nice things. 4chan ftl...

The ideal rating system:

(0-5)
6
7
8
9
10

Players who like a game are more likely to rate it reasonably (i.e. not a 10/0/1) than those who don't like it and oftentimes gravitate towards extremes simply to counter the negative ratings of 1s/0s when the game deserves at least 4s.

What number the 0-5 is assigned could change based on the ratio of positive reviews to negative reviews. If there are more negative reviews than positive, then the product probably actually is crap and should have a 1 or 2. If there are more positive reviews than negative, then the negative reviews are more likely to be trolls and the rating should probably be higher.

Well, if you throw away the one's and ten's the two's would be worst Which means that almost no one rated it extremely badly and was legitemate. Except for maybe some people who just can't play the game.

8 because I'm addicted to is as much as FA. (I only play 6+ player games)
But its missing the same dept as FA.
Can't wait for the player limit to crank up and server lag to go away again.

better would be

10
9-8
7-6
5-1

or

top
good
average
weak

however i still would refuse for the reasons mentioned before

The poll has closed with 200 votes. The mean score is 6.77, the median and modal scores are both 7.

I think the best way to do the poll was the way it was done, aka discrete options with a fixed step (people can possibly argue about the omission of a zero option). Averaging works well then, which accounts for different interpretations of the scale and rating. You can also average when using your options.

If people voted in the same way as this poll, the mean score would be 6.63. If we took the first option as "1-5" instead of "0-5" for better comparison, the mean score would be 6.71.

The mean score would be 6.72.

Removing the top and bottom 5% of votes gives a mean score of 6.88.

The result is similar regardless of the way the numbers are massaged. I think letting them speak for themselves is the best way to go.

I´ve been giving the game an 84 as an "games as art"-rating and an 88-Rating as the "fun to play" -rating.
I´d proberbly would have selected 8 or 9 in this poll. (It´s generally hard to transferr 0-100 in 1-10, as there aren´t games in the 100-skale that actually reach 100 points at all)
It´s clearly not a perfect game, but it´s a revolutionary experience, proberbly just as revolutionary as Homeworld was back in its days!

even then they don´t say much ... one may give a low rating because he can´t play the game for technical reasons, another gives a low rating because he doesn´t like either the gameplay or the visual presentation ... 2 of those 3 aren´t realy helpfull to one who cares about how the game realy plays and if it is realy entertaining to play or not ...
because still what does it help me when the game runs on my rig from 2000 like butter, looks jawdroppingly gorgeous
but is gameplaywise pong were you can´t even move the paddles ...

Actually, you just make me wish more that 9+ and 2- were the top and bottom. Because it really really doesn't make sense to tally over-high and over-low votes like they mean anything, so forcing them to all group with a reasonable high and low at least makes sense.