The majority of video games suck. Most every sensible player has realised this. Unfortunately, by the time it becomes clear that a game, you know, sucks, it has likely been purchased. And returning games can be dumb at times, if not frowned upon. With most reviews being "zomg it's from a certain series and therefore good", games are rarely ranked judiciously and tend to sound better than they really are.
So I propose that we create a user-based list of games that don't suck. Someone would nominate a game for not sucking, and it would either be approved or contested. This would affect the percentage of people who liked the game (approved/total), and give people an idea of which games to avoid or otherwhise. Think Rotten Tomatoes but on a smaller scale and for people who are a little more critical of games. If a game reached below a certain percent after a certain ammount of votes, it would be stricken from the list and perhaps moved to a section like "Games that Suck or are Meh on the Whole". Since this would be a list of games not that people partially enjoyed but instead of those that people had a great time playing, then the percentage for a game being considered "not sucky", would be somewhat high (something such as 80%). A suggested game might even be ranked within system or genre.
I know that this sounds ambitious and should be given low priority, but I just want to run the suggestion by. Rolken is busy so if this were to be eventually implimented into the site's layout, it would likely be forum-based.
And perhaps on a slightly less drastic scale, something along the lines of a "Gaming Reviews" section should be created.
Thoughts?
Also if I remember correctly, this is the first post in which I have used the word "suck".
