History Main / EightPointEight

You may be looking for one of the following:

!This trope is [[https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=16642965620.35215000 under discussion]] in the Administrivia/TropeRepairShop.

%% Image added per Image Pickin' thread: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=1391492619013929400
%% Additionally, there have been two previous threads:
%% https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=1306254254006846100
%% https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=1371175265091459700
%% Please do not remove or replace without staring a new thread that has an actual suggestion for a replacement image.
%%
[[quoteright:350:[[Webcomic/{{Hejibits}} https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/9_5_game_534.png]]]]
[[caption-width-right:350:Could have been worse. There could have been [[VideoGame/PokemonRubyAndSapphire too much water]].]]

->''"Literally, we've got a half dozen perfect scores and I've also gotten the lowest scores I've ever gotten on any game I've ever worked on. Of course you want everybody to think you made the best game ever, but if we were trending at something like an 8 out of 10? I'd probably have to kill myself."''
-->-- '''Creator/WarrenSpector''' on ''VideoGame/EpicMickey'''s reception.

8.8 is a FanSpeak 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 can be especially jarring, because professional video game reviewers tend to give out [[FourPointScale very similar scores]].

The [[TropeNamers 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 ''Twilight Princess'' was one of the most highly anticipated games of all time and near-perfect/perfect scores were expected. Strangely, [=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]]

Whether or not an 8.8 furor is justified is up for debate. On one hand, a reviewer shouldn't just automatically go along with the crowd, even for nigh-universally-loved games, and they don't represent the opinion of the entire company they work for. On the other hand, sometimes you get the feeling that they're doing it intentionally to [[{{Troll}} create controversy]] and [[NoSuchThingAsBadPublicity attract attention]], forgot to do their research on the subject, or were downgrading the game for the wrong reasons.[[note]]Such as by driving a BiasSteamroller.[[/note]]

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 strip themselves of all credibility in the process. ''NGC Magazine'' once gave ''VideoGame/StarFoxAdventures'' a mediocre score. [[CriticalBacklash They received so much backlash]] that they jokingly included [[TakeThatAudience a perfect score sticker for readers to apply over the original score if it upset them that much]]. [[HilariousInHindsight Ironically]], ''Star Fox Adventures'' ended up being one of the ''most hated'' ''Star Fox'' games as time passed. In some cases, the right reviewer isn't available, such as when [=GameSpot=] assigned an editor who normally covers sports games to review ''VideoGame/RatchetAndClankFutureToolsOfDestruction'', an action-platformer with much more variety than most sports games.

Reviewers in the past have casually handed out perfect 10/10 scores like they were nothing, praising a video game endlessly and giving their readers a false sense of expectation. Publishers apply external pressures on journalists to give their games excellent 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 making [[SeriousBusiness a mountain out of a 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]]''. Naturally, this is caused by the fact that many gamers believe ReviewsAreTheGospel. Might lead to [[HePannedItNowHeSucks fans disliking the reviewer]]. Indeed, it's extremely common for controversial reviews to be VindicatedByHistory once the hype dies down.[[note]]The trope namer itself being a good example, as many would now agree that 8.8 is a perfectly reasonable score for ''Twilight Princess''.[[/note]]

Often, the score may be controversial because it adversely affects the game's averaged score on review compendium sites such as [[https://www.metacritic.com Metacritic]] and the late [=GameRankings=] (now redirects to the former). If the review itself is largely positive, it can appear that the few minor complaints account for a fairly significant drop in the rating. Alternatively, animosity can be generated from [[BiasSteamroller detractors of the game who all act as if the low score is the only "correct" one]], [[ConfirmationBias using it as "proof" that the game is rubbish no matter how many good reviews it got]].

Another issue has arisen in which publishers would not give bonuses to employees if a game did not achieve a certain metascore, and some classifieds for video game industry professionals have included requirements that applicants should have worked on games that achieved at least some specific metascore.

There is some internal logic to this 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, [[http://www.gamesradar.com/study-professional-game-reviews-strongly-affect-consumer-behavior/ three groups of people were to read a]] (fake) review of ''VideoGame/PlantsVsZombies'' and then play the game for 20 minutes. At the end of the session, they would be given the choice of taking either 10 bucks or a free copy of the game. The group that was given reviews that were positive (a score of 90) tended to take the free copy. Those that were given reviews that were negative/unflattering (a score of 61) tended to take the 10 bucks instead. So, in essence, an expected KillerApp getting TheBGrade may ''[[TruthInTelevision indeed]]'' make its publisher nervous.

On the other hand, film critic Creator/RogerEbert [[http://www.rogerebert.com/answer-man/why-did-the-chicken-cross-the-genders once pointed out]] that even such acclaimed movies as ''Film/{{Casablanca}}'' and ''[[Film/ANewHope Star Wars]]'' have ratings ''lower'' than 8.8 on Website/IMDb. All things considered, a less-than-perfect score doesn't necessarily mean a ''bad'' score.

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

While this trend will always be in existence as long as there are scored reviews, a few larger gaming websites have either never had or actively moved away from scores in an attempt to avoid this particular trope; ''Polygon'' moved away from scores (after having pioneered the preliminary score system to prevent Metacritic from prematurely adding their score too soon) and now puts a Recommends badge on any game it feels stands out from the crowd as being worth playing, ''Kotaku'' always avoided scored reviews in favor of a "likes/dislikes" system for years before moving away from even that system in favor of just an article and an infobox containing their specific likes and dislikes of a game (no simplistic approval/disapproval detail), and ''Rock, Paper, Shotgun'' simply has an article by one of their staff, no score attached.

Other numbers are associated with this as well. One notable example is IGN's infamous 7.8 rating of ''[[VideoGame/PokemonRubyAndSapphire Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire]]'', which listed "too much water" as one of the game's cons in the summary.[[note]]The bullet point was meant to summarize the fact that the reviewer felt that the game's map had too much water considering how shallow the water gameplay is, which is actually a major criticism even diehard fans share about the title. However, [[DontShootTheMessage it came across as being silly when summed up in three words]], and the resulting meme is one of the reasons why IGN stopping doing bullet points at the end of their reviews in lieu of encouraging readers to properly read the review text.[[/note]] As a result, this generated dozens of satirical IGN ratings revolving around "too much" of something and a 7.8 rating.

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.]]''

----
[[SelfDemonstratingArticle I give this article 9.5/10. Eh, it's okay.]]

Other numbers are associated with this as well. One notable example is IGN's infamous 7.8 rating of ''[[VideoGame/PokemonRubyAndSapphire Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire]]'', which listed "too much water" as one of the game's cons in the summary.[[note]]The bullet point was meant to summarize the fact that the reviewer felt that the game's map had too much water considering [[AtlantisIsBoring how shallow the water gameplay is]], which is actually a major criticism even diehard fans share about the title. However, [[DontShootTheMessage it came across as being silly when summed up in three words]], and the resulting meme is one of the reasons why IGN stopping doing bullet points at the end of their reviews in lieu of encouraging readers to properly read the review text.[[/note]] As a result, this generated dozens of satirical IGN ratings revolving around "too much" of something and a 7.8 rating.

Whether or not an 8.8 furor is justified is up for debate. On one hand, a reviewer shouldn't just automatically go along with the crowd, even for nigh-universally-loved games, and they don't represent the opinion of the entire company they work for. On the other hand, sometimes you get the feeling that they're doing it intentionally to [[{{Troll}} create controversy]] and [[NoSuchThingAsBadPublicity attract attention]], [[CriticalResearchFailure forgot to do their research on the subject]], or were downgrading the game for the wrong reasons.[[note]]Such as by driving a BiasSteamroller.[[/note]]

Other numbers are associated with this as well. One notable example is IGN's infamous 7.8 rating of ''[[VideoGame/PokemonRubyAndSapphire Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire]]'', which listed "too much water" as one of the game's cons.[[note]]The bullet point was meant to summarize the fact that the reviewer felt that the game's map had too much water considering [[AtlantisIsBoring how shallow the water gameplay is]], but it came across as being silly when summed up in three words. The resulting meme is one of the reasons why IGN doesn't do bullet points at the end of their reviews anymore, to encourage readers to read the review text.[[/note]] As a result, this generated dozens of satirical IGN ratings revolving around "too much" of something and a 7.8 rating.

Sometimes you get the feeling that 8.8 situations are simply the fans making [[SeriousBusiness a mountain out of a 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]]''. Naturally, this is caused by the fact that many gamers believe ReviewsAreTheGospel. Might lead to [[HePannedItNowHeSucks fans disliking the reviewer]]. Indeed, it's extremely common for controversial reviews to be VindicatedByHistory once the hype dies down.[[note]]The trope namer itself being a good example, as most would now agree that 8.8 is a more than reasonable score for ''Twilight Princess''.[[/note]]

There is some internal logic to this 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, [[http://www.gamesradar.com/study-professional-game-reviews-strongly-affect-consumer-behavior/ three groups of people were to read a]] (fake) review of ''VideoGame/PlantsVsZombies'' and then play the game for 45 minutes. At the end of the session, they would be given the choice of taking either 10 bucks or a free copy of the game. The group that was given reviews that were positive (a score of 90) tended to take the free copy. Those that were given reviews that were negative/unflattering (a score of 61) tended to take the 10 bucks instead. So, in essence, an expected KillerApp getting TheBGrade may ''[[TruthInTelevision indeed]]'' make its publisher nervous.

[[SelfDemonstratingArticle I give this article 9.5/10. Eh, it's okay.]]

Other numbers are associated with this as well. One notable example is IGN's infamous 7.8 rating of ''[[VideoGame/PokemonRubyAndSapphire Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire]]'', which listed "too much water" as one of the game's cons.[[note]]The bullet point was meant to summarize the fact that the reviewer felt that the game's map had too much water considering how shallow the water gameplay is, but it came across as being silly when summed up in three words. The resulting meme is one of the reasons why IGN doesn't do bullet points at the end of their reviews anymore, to encourage readers to read the review text.[[/note]] As a result, this generated dozens of satirical IGN ratings revolving around "too much" of something and a 7.8 rating.

Whether or not an 8.8 furor is justified is up for debate. On one hand, a reviewer shouldn't just automatically go along with the crowd, even for nigh-universally-loved games, and they don't represent the opinion of the entire company they work for. On the other hand, sometimes you get the feeling that they're doing it intentionally to [[{{Troll}} create controversy]] and [[NoSuchThingAsBadPublicity attract attention]], forgot to do their research on the subject, or were downgrading the game for the wrong reasons.[[note]]Such as by driving a BiasSteamroller.[[/note]]

Often, the score may be controversial because it adversely affects the game's averaged score on review compendium sites such as [[http://www.gamerankings.com GameRankings]] and [[http://www.metacritic.com Metacritic]]. If the review itself is largely positive, it can appear that the few minor complaints account for a fairly significant drop in the rating. Alternatively, animosity can be generated from [[BiasSteamroller detractors of the game who all act as if the low score is the only "correct" one]], [[ConfirmationBias using it as "proof" that the game is rubbish no matter how many good reviews it got]].

While this trend will always be in existence as long as there are scored reviews, a few larger gaming websites have either never had or actively moved away from scores in an attempt to avoid this particular trope - Polygon will put a Recommends badge on any game it feels stands out from the crowd as being worth playing, Kotaku avoided scored reviews for years in favor of a "likes/dislikes" system, and Rock, Paper, Shotgun simply has an article by one of their staff, no score attached.

-->-- '''Warren Spector''' on ''VideoGame/EpicMickey'''s reception.

Whether or not an 8.8 furor is justified is up for debate. On one hand, a reviewer shouldn't just automatically go along with the crowd, even for nigh-universally-loved games, and they don't represent the opinion of the entire company they work for. On the other hand, sometimes you get the feeling that they're doing it [[{{Troll}} intentionally to create controversy]] [[NoSuchThingAsBadPublicity and attract attention]], forgot to do their research on the subject, or were downgrading the game for the wrong reasons.[[note]]Such as by driving a BiasSteamroller.[[/note]]

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 ''Twilight Princess'' was one of the most highly anticipated games of all time and near-perfect/perfect scores were expected. Strangely, [=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]]

Sometimes you get the feeling that 8.8 situations are simply the fans making [[SeriousBusiness a mountain out of a 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]]''. Naturally, this is caused by the fact that many gamers believe ReviewsAreTheGospel. Might lead to [[HePannedItNowHeSucks fans disliking the reviewer]]. Indeed, it's extremely common for controversial reviews to be VindicatedByHistory once the hype-cycle dies down - The TropeNamer itself being a good example, as most would now agree that 8.8 is a more than reasonable score for ''Twilight Princess''.

Sometimes you get the feeling that 8.8 situations are simply the fans making [[SeriousBusiness a mountain out of a 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]]''. Naturally, this is caused by the fact that many gamers believe ReviewsAreTheGospel. Might lead to [[HePannedItNowHeSucks fans disliking the reviewer]].

Reviewers in the past have casually handed out perfect 10/10 scores like they were nothing, praising a video game endlessly and giving 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''.

[[quoteright:350:[[WebComic/{{Hejibits}} https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/9_5_game_534.png]]]]

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 can be especially jarring, because professional video game reviewers tend to give out [[FourPointScale very similar 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 strip themselves of all credibility in the process. ''NGC Magazine'' once gave ''VideoGame/StarFoxAdventures'' a mediocre score. [[CriticalBacklash They received so much backlash]] that they jokingly included [[TakeThatAudience a perfect score sticker for readers to apply over the original score if it upset them that much]]. [[HilariousInHindsight Ironically]], ''Star Fox Adventures'' ended up being one of the ''most hated'' ''Star Fox'' games as time passed. In some cases the right reviewer isn't available, such as when Gamespot assigned an editor who normally covers sports games to review a ''[[VideoGame/RatchetAndClankFutureToolsOfDestruction Ratchet & Clank]]'' game, an action-platformer with much more variety than most sports games.

Other numbers are associated with this as well. One notable example is IGN's infamous 7.8 rating of ''[[VideoGame/PokemonRubyAndSapphire Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire]]'', which listed "too much water" as one of the game's cons[[note]]The bullet point was meant to summarize the fact that the reviewer felt that the game's map had too much water considering how shallow water gameplay is, but it came off as silly when summed up in three words. The resulting meme is one of the reasons why IGN doesn't do bullet points at the end of their reviews anymore, to encourage readers to read the review text[[/note]]. As a result, this generated dozens of satirical IGN ratings revolving around "too much" of something and a 7.8 rating.