# What's your criteria for giving a book a great rating?



## cheeto (Apr 1, 2011)

Inspired by people like myself who post that they are tired/disappointed with the HH series...

The Horus Heresy is epic... no if's ands or butts... :laugh:

So why such greatly mixed reviews? I think it's because we all have different criteria and expectations. Because the HH is so epic, I feel like some of the writers of the HH books got lazy and rather than make it feel epic just decided it is epic so the fact that it's a HH book makes it epic without the effort.

Probably my greatest criteria is the authors ability to channel his story into my psyche and make me feel like I am experiencing part of a much larger story. On a macro level, I think some authors can achieve this by simply hearing news about what else is going on in the imperium while the people being written about are enroute to somewhere else... while our guys are gearing up for a mission, the seventh legion passed by on a war footing... blah blah blah... There are lots of ways of doing this. edit: On a micro level, a character dealing with his own personal battles, his fears and his own agenda that keeps getting in the way. Even a small character encountering a large character. Personally, I think that the best way to encounter a primarch is through the eyes of a smaller character, but that's just me.

Then of course, how well can we identify with the characters? It is something I have noticed with Graham McNiell in his Ultra Marine series. He tells us that the Chapter Master is great, but somehow he never makes me feel like he is... whereas Abnett can make a small player feel large. ABD writes about the Night Lords, and while I always hope that they get their asses handed to them by the loyalists, I can't help but to think that they are noble in their own way, that while I root against them, I still kinda like them. They aren't just Chaos Marines, they are characters overcome by deep seated resentments, guided by their own conflicted agendas that I can relate to which makes me feel bad even when one of their number gets wasted. Most of the HH series books just failed to make me care who lives and who dies. 

I just wanted to ask the question and then say a couple things without writing a book on it... I suppose part of this could be who is your favorite author and why...


----------



## TooNu (May 4, 2011)

If it wasn't 00:49 right now I'd be all over this thread. As it stands I will wait until tomorrow afternoon during lunch


----------



## cheeto (Apr 1, 2011)

For example...

A great moment in Titanicus... When the primarch and his crew are linking into their engine. In that moment the Titan goes from being an engine driven by it's crew to a God Machine! The crew links in, a second consciousness overcomes it's crew, the machine is waking from a long slumber while in transit as it flexes it's weaponized limbs and instantly desires destruction...

That moment before the legio went into battle fired me up for the battle to come!

An example of a character link I'm thinking is Gaunt taking on the mousey mortician. The guy lost his dad in the battle Balhaut , and he tells Gaunt under the belief that he was just a small soldier and that Gaunt wouldn't know him. Then the book ends with a scene from that battle where Gaunt is charging the Oligarchy Gate and he meets up with a random pdf officer at that critical moment. Faced with the weapons Asphodel, mounted on the Plutocrat tower the young PDF officer cheerfully suggests taking the tower down. Impressed, the later famous Gaunt introduces himself and the man turns out to be the morticians father. It's barely a page and a half, and yet it pulled mah heart strings...


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

8-10 is great.

My criteria for putting any novel in this category is a combination of character development and great plot I would also put "relevance" in there too. But to be fair I guess anyone can say if you have the first two, you can pull off a "great" novel. The lack of any of the two really makes me look down on a book. I think the reason for mixed reviews is because some can ignore one aspect of the two.


----------



## cheeto (Apr 1, 2011)

ckcrawford said:


> 8-10 is great.
> 
> My criteria for putting any novel in this category is a combination of character development and great plot I would also put "relevance" in there too. But to be fair I guess anyone can say if you have the first two, you can pull off a "great" novel. The lack of any of the two really makes me look down on a book. I think the reason for mixed reviews is because some can ignore one aspect of the two.


Without a doubt... but that's part of the problem. Not everyone is very good with character development or plot. In my experience, Graham McNeill can be good with character development, but he really suffers with developing secondary characters. My example about the Ultra Marine Chapter Commander. We are told directly he is a great warrior and leader, but he doesn't take the time to let us find these things out for ourselves. At the end of the series, Calgar comes across to me like a toon in a video game. He has stats, but no depth of character. The reason I believe is because we were told how great he was without his leadership telling the story instead.


----------



## Bane_of_Kings (Oct 28, 2009)

Many people have different grading criteria. There's already a thread about it here.

Mine, following the Goodreads rating system:

1 - I didn't Like it
2 - OK 
3 - I Liked it 
4 - I really liked it
5 - It was Amazing


----------



## Lupe (Jan 3, 2011)

I use a 10 point scale that is based on the grading system for college papers / essays in my country. I start out at a 10 and subtract from there.

10 is for an excellent read. I believe this should be a perfectly achievable score, and should not be reserved for Nobel prize material. Ten is the standard BL should strive to keep to. (Legion of the Damned, Void Stalker, The Emperor's Gift, Horus Rising, Thousand Sons, Helsreach)

9 is for a great read with a few major screw-ups (False Gods, Know No Fear), or multiple smaller ones (Legion)

6 - 8 are either good books with a lot of problems (Fear to Tread), or average books that make up for that by covering interesting topics (Angel of Fire, Mechanicum) or expanding background by a great deal (Nemesis, Outcast Dead)

5 is completely mediocre This is usually the lowest grade you could score and still pass the exam, so any book scoring this will at least have some sort of redeeming quality. (Battle for the Abyss, Descent of Angels, Rynn's World, Hunt for Voldorius)

2 - 4 is simply a bad book that doesn't justify the time or money spent reading it. (Sons of Dorn)

1 is the disqualification grade (outright plagiarism, blatantly ignoring guidelines established by the background, failing to respect the bare minimum concepts of writing a book, etc) and you shouldn't be seeing that very often. The Dawn of War books as contained by the omnibus would be this, if I ever bothered to review them. They'd otherwise qualify for a 5, but I simply cannot reconcile the existing background with things such as Dark Reapers dueling terminators in melee, and storing their soulstones on their own ship rather than the Infinity circuit of their craftworld.


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Lupe said:


> 10 is for an excellent read. I believe this should be a perfectly achievable score, and should not be reserved for Nobel prize material. Ten is the standard BL should strive to keep to. (Legion of the Damned, Void Stalker, The Emperor's Gift, Horus Rising, Thousand Sons, Helsreach)


Yes oh yes. 10 is an attainable score people!


As for the criteria I use this is it.

1 - Terrible. Not worth buying or reading. (Haven't read one yet, hope I never do.)

2 - Poor. A book that is not worth reading unless you are morbidly curious. (_Warrior Coven_)

3 - Bad. A book that is just bad, it's interesting subject matter that has been let down by a poor telling of the story, flat characters, etc. (_Sword of Caledor_)

4 - Below average. A book that falls short of being average by having one too many flaws. (_Warrior Brood_)

5 - Average. Meh. Simply that. A book that is not good or bad. (_Faith and Fire_)

6 - Above average. A book that surpasses being average but not by enough to be considered good. (_Malediction_)

7 - Good. A book that has its flaw but on the whole is a book you can enjoy reading and not regret reading. (_Nightbringer_)

8 - Great. A book that is a damn enjoyable read and one that will stick with you. (_Salamander_)

9 - Excellent. A book that you should read, one that is worth talking about whenever you get the chance and that is something you will remember. (_Legion of the Damned_)

10 - Flawless (Figuratively). A book that ticks every box, that has the characters, plot, action and everything that you wanted from the novel and that is just so awesome that you find it hard to put it down, and when it's over you want more and more. (_Void Stalker, A Thousand Sons, The Siege of Castellax_.)


And of course I use a .0 system to show how far along a book is along each of those points and how close it is to the next point.


LotN


----------



## TooNu (May 4, 2011)

I don't tend to grade the HH books with a score, I still know which ones are worth reading and what ones are not and it's been 5 long years of reading.

A good HH book is..

- One that progresses the story and keeps moving it forward. 

- One that has Marine characters that symbolize their legions personality. So Garro, Loken, Ventanus, Argel Tal, even super arrogant jerk Lucius.

- One that has human characters or near enough humans that give us mere humans, IE the reader, a POV into how it is to be a human in those times. Great examples IMO are Ignace Karkasy, Hurtado Bronzi, Koriel Zeth.

- One that doesn't leave even more questions at the end. I like endings that convey the happenings of an event and then stop and don't stretch the damn thing out.

A bad HH book has..

- Nothing but Brother Generic marine in every role that isn't the main Marine role. Nor do I like generic stereotype marines that EVERY legion seems to have, Brother overly abrasive, Brother light hearted, Brother whiny, Brother red shirt, and so forth. 

- Human Space Marines and/or assassins. If you have emotions that affect your judgement, you shouldn't be in the uniform. You shouldn't be having feelings and emotions that jeopardize battle's, reports, even making tea. Writers that do this have missed the point of what it means to be Astartes or a super highly skilled assassin.

- An area of the HH that is not important enough to warrant a book so early in the series. Or is of an event that has no hugely significant impact on the story and is (or at least feels like) pure stocking filler.

- Pages and pages of Bolter porn. We get it, marines roll in, things die, marines do amazing things. Does it help visualize how marines perform war? Yes a little, but as the HH is more of a mature story rather than comic book I expect the HH books to know when to put the toys away. 

- Moments of Primarch emo crap. Super beings with great wisdom and martial prowess turning into unsure, unconfident teenagers and with the onset of world of warcraft social outcast syndrome can leave their baggage at the door thanks.


I'm sure this is not all of my reasoning but for the moment that will do


----------



## Roninman (Jul 23, 2010)

Ive yet read anything from BL that would make me give it perfect 10. I can maybe think of maybe 4-5 books ever released that would warrant score this high.

Some reviewers just put ten to every third or fourth book and lots of nines along aswell. Numerical review system quickly loses its true meaning, many seem to be just so excited after reading something they really liked, but give it straight 10 only just after read it aint good. To give some book 10, you gotta read it few times and really think about it. Safest way is to go for a 8-9 scale. Same way has been with movies. I would walk out of theater and think wow this movie was about perfect 10 but seeing it second time, can see many flaws in it. 

I think invidual HH books so far has gone from 4-9 scale. As series its among my top 5 ive ever read, but i would propably give it an 7 or most likely 8.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I agree a 10 after one read is redicolous. If a novel is that great you should be able to quote any relevant page like a bible. Sorry but that's bullshit. I don't want to be mean but seriously. A 10 out of 10 is saying something is literally a literay master piece. And to be serious nothing comes close to that. If opinion... Then to grade several novels 10 out if 10 is even more absurd


----------



## Xisor (Oct 1, 2011)

ckcrawford said:


> I agree a 10 after one read is redicolous. If a novel is that great you should be able to quote any relevant page like a bible. Sorry but that's bullshit. I don't want to be mean but seriously. A 10 out of 10 is saying something is literally a literay master piece. And to be serious nothing comes close to that. If opinion... Then to grade several novels 10 out if 10 is even more absurd


Given the qualifications folks are giving for their rating systems, not understanding the impact and limit of their rating systems is, if you'll forgive me for being mean, absurd and idiotic in equal measure.

"10", for some of the examples given, is merely no complaints. The fact that you're predisposed to call 10s for only the ineffable achievements of literary perfection, or whatever, is really neither here nor there, given the thread. That means a massive host of novels, worldwide and from any and every genre, could be tens. 

But that's really just being unwilling or unable to (or uninterested in the) interface with other's descriptions of their systems and schemas - which, realistically, and in a much friendlier way should be neither here nor there. 

For me, a 'ten' is one of the best novels you'll read. An eight, for me, is a 'no complaints' novel. Well, strictly, a seven might be a 'no complaints' novel, but similarly one that just doesn't particularly tick my own obsessive or lusty boxes. (I do love a good & thorough conspiracy, for example.)

As others have noted, poorer novels can be adjusted by their content and subject matter, whilst excellent novels can be reduced by being away from your tastes.

A five or a six, for me, should be about average. Three or a four is a novel with serious complaints, (e.g. _The Outcast Dead_) one or two is... well, something near unreadable.

Picking apart our 'objective thoughts on quality' and our more personal 'enjoyment of topic and style' is probably a damn interesting exercise, it'd certainly clear up (or put in perspective) a lot of our interpersonal tiffs when discussing things.


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Xisor said:


> "10", for some of the examples given, is merely no complaints. The fact that you're predisposed to call 10s for only the ineffable achievements of literary perfection, or whatever, is really neither here nor there, given the thread. That means a massive host of novels, worldwide and from any and every genre, could be tens.
> 
> But that's really just being unwilling or unable to (or uninterested in the) interface with other's descriptions of their systems and schemas - which, realistically, and in a much friendlier way should be neither here nor there.
> 
> For me, a 'ten' is one of the best novels you'll read. An eight, for me, is a 'no complaints' novel. Well, strictly, a seven might be a 'no complaints' novel, but similarly one that just doesn't particularly tick my own obsessive or lusty boxes. (I do love a good & thorough conspiracy, for example.)


Exactly. Thanks Xisor.

10/10 = Perfection?? No. No. No.

A 10/10 does not mean perfect, flawless, or anything of the sort. What Xisor says is entirely accurate by my rating system. A 10/10 is a book on which I have zero complaints, one that I could barely put down, one that was just so good that it's impossible to not be glued to the pages. Books like _Void Stalker, The Emperor's Gift, A Thousand Sons_.

For me a 10 is exactly what Xisor said. One of the best books you could read, one that I couldn't stop reading and could find absolutely nothing wrong with it in my reading of it.

Who doesn't Xisor. Who doesn't.


LotN


----------



## cheeto (Apr 1, 2011)

Ha! I think my thread was a little misunderstood. I'm not really asking about a rating system, but what makes a book great in your opinion. Some people are just interested in action scenes, others want a nice story, some just care about character development and some demand it all. The question arises out of the discrepancies in the rating of the HH books which I personally find to be very disappointing.

Edit: For example, I read the book Malekith by Gav Thorp and thought it was so bad I never bothered reading another of his books. Then I saw someone recently mention how much they liked that book. This is more of a personal question.


----------



## forkmaster (Jan 2, 2010)

I'm most interested (speaking HH now only) in Legion and Primarchs during the HH. The side-tracks about other fractions of the Imperium havent really hyped my inner 13-year old nerdy self. Humans should be a part of the story or it will lack (kinda like FtT did) but they shouldnt be in the point. Often its the characters I want most, but a good story and a twist at the end is never bad.

I like tragic stories and as well tragic characters.  That is what float my boat.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Xisor said:


> Given the qualifications folks are giving for their rating systems, not understanding the impact and limit of their rating systems is, if you'll forgive me for being mean, absurd and idiotic in equal measure.
> 
> "10", for some of the examples given, is merely no complaints. The fact that you're predisposed to call 10s for only the ineffable achievements of literary perfection, or whatever, is really neither here nor there, given the thread. That means a massive host of novels, worldwide and from any and every genre, could be tens.
> 
> ...


You see this type of reasoning destroys the integrity of having a grading system. Essentially by avoiding the problem of outliered grading system every scale is different and doesn't really make it a grading scale. for example I have yet to see any reviews under five if that's really true. What does that mean? Is one saying there are no heresy or warhammer books that are plain average? Or better yet, there are no warhammer books that were below average? Wow! It's just that damn great.


----------



## cheeto (Apr 1, 2011)

forkmaster said:


> I'm most interested (speaking HH now only) in Legion and Primarchs during the HH. The side-tracks about other fractions of the Imperium havent really hyped my inner 13-year old nerdy self. Humans should be a part of the story or it will lack (kinda like FtT did) but they shouldnt be in the point. Often its the characters I want most, but a good story and a twist at the end is never bad.
> 
> I like tragic stories and as well tragic characters.  That is what float my boat.


That's what I'm talking about. For me, I like big plots. I don't like linear stories where we follow one character through the entire story and that's about it. My biggest issue with the HH books is really that they are epic, but just don't feel epic, and as I read them I find that I generally don't even care about the characters... 

Some people like action and mostly action only. Others like the linear plot. I was just wondering who liked what because the reviews are pretty mixed.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

ckcrawford said:


> for example I have yet to see any reviews under five if that's really true. What does that mean?


Challenge accepted:

Daemonworld reviewed by Child-of-the-Emperor
Tales of Heresy reviewed by Child-of-the-Emperor
FAllen Angels reviewed by Bane_of_Kings
Rynn's World reviewed by Bane_of_Kings
Warrior Brood reviewed by me
The Chapters Due reviewed by Bane_of_Kings
Descent of Angels reviewed by Bane_of_Kings
Fifteen Hours 'reviewed' by Big_Chedders
Imperial Glory reviewed by Shepherd492

And one scathing review/look at Soul Hunter that was on Heresy but was removed (which should not have been done if you ask me, but wasn't my decision so meh.)
http://novaimmaterium.yuku.com/topi...k-review--people--don-t-read-boo#.Tp4Cj-xPjF8




Lord of the Night said:


> A 10/10 is a book on which I have zero complaints, one that I could barely put down, one that was just so good that it's impossible to not be glued to the pages. Books like _Void Stalker, The Emperor's Gift, A Thousand Sons_.


Looks like you forgot a few of your tens there. Like _Helsreach_, _The First Heretic_, _Blood Reaver_, _Defenders of Ulthuan_, and _Sons of Ellyrion_. 

In fact, in your 'review' of _The First Heretic_ you even said that you were taking back your ten for _A Thousand Sons_; guess not huh?


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Was referring to LotN's grading scale with the five being average and anything bad under 5. That's why his grading scale wasn't consistent. Then following up to xisors comment as though I had a baseless argument. Point being the questions I brought up. No "average" or "below average" novels?

By the way I'm impressed you found any Darkreever but there it is.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Well I knew there was at least three (my review of Warrior Brood, Big_Chedders hate for Fifteen Hours, and that review of Soul Hunter.)


----------



## Xisor (Oct 1, 2011)

ckcrawford said:


> You see this type of reasoning destroys the integrity of having a grading system. Essentially by avoiding the problem of outliered grading system every scale is different and doesn't really make it a grading scale.


I see what you're getting at (including the discussion beyond the above quote), but I really should be clearer:
1- It doesn't destroy integrity. It merely reduces resolution. 
2- 10s are the top-tier, but 6-9s (and their decimal in-betweeners) are still valid and retain integrity. Differentiating between them's still do-able. Just not to the degree that you seem to wish*.
3- Optimal value? Perhaps not. By my ideal reckoning you'd (and I too would) want a continually updating, normalised scheme with a few benchmarks to calibrate to.

The real complaint, I'd contend, is that LotN's inconsistent in his ratings and that his description of how he intends-to-be/thinks-he-is rating doesn't really map onto how he actually is rating.

(Frankly, I'd be astounded if any reviewers could maintain decent internal consistency. There's a good argument for _not bothering to give ratings_ - they're of limited use.)

That complaint certainly applies to me. I started my Goodreads account with the intention of the vast bulk of books I rated being 2s or 3s. 4s was supposed to be reserved for 'really good', 5s for 'Wow, unbelievable!' or thereabouts. That didn't last very long (as anyone who's one there'll recognise - it's hard not to get drawn in by the social side of the ratings).


* This is the thrust of my earlier post. Just because a rating system doesn't correspond to one's desired scheme for telling the difference and capturing all possible measures, it doesn't suddenly become completely worthless.


----------



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

Lord of the Night said:


> 10/10 = Perfection?? No. No. No.
> 
> A 10/10 does not mean perfect, flawless, or anything of the sort


If 10/10 is not perfect, that means it has flaws. If it has flaws, you should have a few complaints...


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

ckcrawford said:


> What does that mean? Is one saying there are no heresy or warhammer books that are plain average? Or better yet, there are no warhammer books that were below average? Wow! It's just that damn great.


For me more so yes. I put out more positive reviews because I don't dislike any of the major BL authors like Nick Kyme, Graham McNeill or James Swallow. Its some of the minor BL authors whose work just doesn't do it for me, but these people have not put out as much and so I don't get a chance to review them.



darkreever said:


> Looks like you forgot a few of your tens there. Like _Helsreach_, _The First Heretic_, _Blood Reaver_, _Defenders of Ulthuan_, and _Sons of Ellyrion_.
> 
> In fact, in your 'review' of _The First Heretic_ you even said that you were taking back your ten for _A Thousand Sons_; guess not huh?


These are the books I consider to be worth a 10/10, BL wise.

_Void Stalker
Blood Reaver
The Emperor's Gift
The First Heretic
Helsreach
The Siege of Castellax
Know No Fear
Fear to Tread
A Thousand Sons_

_Defenders of Ulthuan/Sons of Ellyrion_ is a 10 as one whole piece. Alone they are more of a low 9.something. But together they are much better, a case of potentiatium really. I intend to re-read them soon and my score for them may change, but I don't think it will. And I considered it but after a re-read of _A Thousand Sons_ I couldn't lower the score, the book is just that damn good.

I know that you disagree with my scoring Reever and fair enough. But I do put honest thought into each and every score I give, and my review style has evolved over time so that now I give more reflective scores and focus on things that I did not before. And as I said above, the fact that I like all of the major BL authors means that a lot of the books that are hit and miss for the audience, like _Salamanders, Ultramarines, Blood Angels_, I actually like them.



ckcrawford said:


> Was referring to LotN's grading scale with the five being average and anything bad under 5. That's why his grading scale wasn't consistent. Then following up to xisors comment as though I had a baseless argument. Point being the questions I brought up. No "average" or "below average" novels?


Again I have put some lower reviews up recently as more authors have been reviewed. But since I like the major authors there is not as much average or below average work in my eyes. I'm not gonna say I dislike a book just to get a bad review up there, and i'm pleased that I get to honestly say I really like all these books. It means the quality of them is good for me and that reading them was time well spent.



MontytheMighty said:


> If 10/10 is not perfect, that means it has flaws. If it has flaws, you should have a few complaints...


Or they are flaws that do not matter. Such things do exist. A 10/10 is a book that checks all the boxes for me, not a perfect one. A book does not need to be perfect to receive a 10/10 score.


LotN

Edit button, you still have one - darkreever


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Lord of the Night said:


> I put out more positive reviews because I don't dislike any of the major BL authors like Nick Kyme, Graham McNeill or James Swallow.


That would be great if it truly was 'more'; but all you've ever put out is positive. Of all the 'reviews' you have up here on Heresy your average low score is around nine. You have some eights, you went as low as seven and a half once, but I don't think I have ever seen a review from you below that.

Mind, I know you put all your stuff up on Dave's Founding Fields but I'm only interested in reading what the members are gonna put up here.



Lord of the Night said:


> Its some of the minor BL authors whose work just doesn't do it for me,


Like?



Lord of the Night said:


> I know that you disagree with my scoring Reever and fair enough.


Because it comes off as wholeheartedly biased, and inconsistent as Xisor pointed out.



Lord of the Night said:


> and my review style has evolved over time so that now I give more reflective scores and focus on things that I did not before.


Wouldnt know, you don't give us 'reviews' anymore, merely links.



Lord of the Night said:


> I'm not gonna say I dislike a book just to get a bad review up there, and i'm pleased that I get to honestly say I really like all these books. It means the quality of them is good for me and that reading them was time well spent.


Don't take this the wrong way (or do, your choice) but that just reads as maintaining just above rock bottom when it comes to standards. How would you rate things like _Wolfblade, Warrior Brood, Redemption Corps_?


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

darkreever said:


> That would be great if it truly was 'more'; but all you've ever put out is positive. Of all the 'reviews' you have up here on Heresy your average low score is around nine. You have some eights, you went as low as seven and a half once, but I don't think I have ever seen a review from you below that.
> 
> Mind, I know you put all your stuff up on Dave's Founding Fields but I'm only interested in reading what the members are gonna put up here.


You don't read my TFF reviews?? Well no wonder your saying they are all 9s 8s and 10s. My reviews on TFF are different to the reviews I did here a year ago. I'd like to think i've gotten better at it and fairer. Yes I admit my earlier reviews here were too high, but now I try to be more critical of a novel and work out what score it really deserves.



darkreever said:


> Like?


Andy Smillie, Andy Hoare, C.S Goto, Steve Lyons, Chris Roberson, Jonathan Green are all authors whose work has not yet done it for me, and William King has proven to be hit or miss for me with his Macharius trilogy being great and his Tyrion and Teclis trilogy being awful. 

The major authors, Dan Abnett, Graham McNeill, Nick Kyme, Gav Thorpe, Aaron Dembski-Bowden, James Swallow, C.L Werner, Sarah Cawkwell; I like all of them.



darkreever said:


> Because it comes off as wholeheartedly biased, and inconsistent as Xisor pointed out.


Well as I've said I try to be fair, and I don't think i'm inconsistent, but if you think i'm biased well so be it. I don't see what I can do to change that that I don't feel i'm already doing.



darkreever said:


> Wouldnt know, you don't give us 'reviews' anymore, merely links.


Well the Commissar did ask me to post on TFF, so I feel that I should be doing my reviewing there. I suppose I could post some of my more recent reviews here if people actually want to read them.



darkreever said:


> Don't take this the wrong way (or do, your choice) but that just reads as maintaining just above rock bottom when it comes to standards. How would you rate things like _Wolfblade, Warrior Brood, Redemption Corps_?


Ok here we go,

_Wolfblade_: Haven't read it so I can't comment.

_Warrior Brood_: Actually reviewed that today. http://thefoundingfields.com/2012/12/warrior-brood-c-s-goto-review-lord-night/

On the whole I think it's a below average novel, it has a decent enough story if you can look past the one or two logic bumps and the fast and loose lore that Goto uses. But the characters feel either wooden or carichatures of their groups and the action isn't written very well. I gave it a 4.0/10 which to me is Below Average and just barely stopping from sliding into Bad. I'll be reviewing _Warrior Coven_ tomorrow, preview: it's a bad novel.

_Redemption Corps_: Haven't read it so I can't comment.


I don't take offense at that but that is not what I meant. Admittedly I try to look for the good parts in a story but I do have standards and novels have failed to meet them in the past. But most of the recent Black Library releases have met and surpassed my expectations for them. But I am more critical than I was, most of my reviews now range from 7s-8s in the Good or Very Good categories, with some 9s for Excellent in there and the occasional 10 for Superb (Or whatever word you want to use.)

But really if you don't read my TFF reviews I don't see how you can criticise my reviewing since I haven't put a review on Heresy in nearly a year, and my review style has changed since then. Perhaps consider reading a few of my more recent reviews and then commenting on them, because if your going to criticise me over reviews that are fairly old and no longer in keeping with how I review, then I can't say it's constructive criticism.


LotN


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

I just really can't go with 10/10 not being perfect and so easily handed out. To me a 10/10 should be perfect, with no flaws at all, not even flaws that you can dismiss and go 'ahhhh I don't mind really' none at all. Like others have said, 10/10 should in large be almost impossible to attain, I'm all for point systems so you can have 9.7 or something crazy, but 10/10? Not a chance, especially not on so many novels(and we all know how much I disagree with _Fear to Tread_, which if I was to make a scoring system, it would probably sit somewhere around 1/10, maybe stretching to 1.5).

I've read your reviews on FF, but I just end up having to ignore the score tbh, as like others have said, everything seems to be so high, like really, really high.


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Angel of Blood said:


> I just really can't go with 10/10 not being perfect and so easily handed out. To me a 10/10 should be perfect, with no flaws at all, not even flaws that you can dismiss and go 'ahhhh I don't mind really' none at all. Like others have said, 10/10 should in large be almost impossible to attain, I'm all for point systems so you can have 9.7 or something crazy, but 10/10? Not a chance, especially not on so many novels(and we all know how much I disagree with _Fear to Tread_, which if I was to make a scoring system, it would probably sit somewhere around 1/10, maybe stretching to 1.5).
> 
> I've read your reviews on FF, but I just end up having to ignore the score tbh, as like others have said, everything seems to be so high, like really, really high.


Well that is simply a point of disagreement for all of us here. I and some others think that 10/10 is an attainable score, if it wasn't then there would be no such thing as a 10/10 and we wouldn't be talking about anything. But you and others think that it represents perfection, a novel that has no flaws and is awesome in every way. I think that there is no such thing as a novel with no flaws but that like artwork, flaws don't have to be a bad thing, they can be a part of the novel and not detract from it, or they can just not bother you in the slightest. For me that is how I have viewed each of the books i've given a 10/10 too, not as a pefect book but as one that I enjoyed like few others, one that I didn't want to end, one that actually appealed to my emotions (Some scenes in _Void Stalker_ and _A Thousand Sons_ made me genuinely sad, the former even had me tearing up near the end), one that was so vivid I could picture myself in it, one whose characters I could enjoy the hell out of no matter their faction or alignment, one with really visceral action scenes that feel powerful but can be understand and even mentally played out (_Know No Fear_ has so far been the novel that was the easiest for me to picture the battle scenes), and with an ending that can really surprise me or make me smile or grin with anticipation or have me laughing. That is a 10/10 book for me. Not some perfect tome written on golden leaf paper with diamond coloured ink handed down to us from some writing god that can do no wrong.

Fair enough, the scores are only a part of the review.


LotN


----------



## Brother Subtle (May 24, 2009)

I've noticed some reviewers hand out '10s' fairly regularly to certain authors or story arcs. Stinks of favouritism to me.


----------



## Vivia (Sep 5, 2011)

It's important to actually _read_ the reviews on TFF, not just stare blindly on the rating, the rating doesn't say anything of how the books are. The reviewers give extensive explanations to why they feel the way they do about the stories, that's good enough for me. It's isn't just 'it's good, nau I wantz army'.

From what I understand the reviewers only speak of books they _want_ to read and found interesting, not any book they are offered.

Do I buy the books they give 10/10? Maybe, maybe not, I have my own opinion.


----------



## increaso (Jun 5, 2010)

Are people who don't like Author X consistantly buying his/her books to bitch about them or did they read a book by Author X about 10 years ago and they are certain that his/her writing can't have got any better. Eitherway, it's not good.

I often disagree with LOTN's reviews of books. But it turns out there is a quite a large element of subjectivity in this sort of thing. LOTN might like super soldiers and big bangs and I might like nothing happening in a cave; that sort of thing clearly slants what we each like and consider to be good.

Oh, and Vivia is wrong. :biggrin:


----------



## Vivia (Sep 5, 2011)

Yes, I could be wrong about the reviewers. Lord of the Night had said on the Bolthole that he only reviews books he is interested in. I can respect that.

You don't want to be like that, you don't want to be like the reader who read ALL of Counters novels, and then moaned to everyone in the world (BL forums). There was one on Amazon who did the same about the Vampire Wars trilogy. 
The pain only ends when you don't buy the books.


----------



## increaso (Jun 5, 2010)

I do apologise, Vivia. I did not mean that you thoughts on LOTN's books selection process were wrong, but that your opinions were wrong.

And I loved a Ben Counter HH novel for a good while, that is until I realised that Ben Counter did not write the novel in question.

Whilst I am against reading reviews before the novel AND they do not persuade me to buy or not buy a novel AND I am against rating systems full stop, I do wonder what the problem is that people have with 10/10 systems. It's like being the champion of the non-existent duped dumbass who paid £6.99 for a book on the strength of that one review and now finds that he has mediocre toiler paper. Or Something.

Robot Devil - Sheesh


----------



## Vivia (Sep 5, 2011)

Whatever, _Increaso_.

The point of a review is to _read_ it. It saves you from years of suffering. But I can see a reader such as you doesn't bother with _intelligent_ opinions.
This discussion reminds me of another greater one in another forum.


----------



## Eroldren (Dec 13, 2012)

To the relevant tread topic… Generally I lookout for any material that’ll expand further my understanding of the universe at hand. Whether it be background mythos or the ongoing plot, small or groundbreaking, new or old, affirming ideas or being confronted with unexpected revelations, lore something that’s already has its hooks in me. I dig that stuff; I’m a lore nerd after all! :biggrin:

However another factor I do lookout for aside from a superb immersive/ disruptive experience in character development and writing is the overall relevance to plot progression. In the Horus Heresy’s case, pushing beyond past the Istvaan V/Dropsite Massacre time table period. While I understand how significant plot points are to be told such as Prospero, Calth and Signus Prime (even with their seeded details that’ll be pursued in future stories), the years of waiting can feel at time tiresome and barely has there been hardly any titles that broke away from that area. With _Betrayer_ and the _Unremembered Empire_ coming soon, Dark Age territory, the series’ advancement has renewed my spirits that’ll BL finally break new ground. 


In regards to rating books, I think I stand by on a similar stance with LotN’s ranking-wise. Its quick and easy to understand; not a overly complicated system. Nothing can be deemed 100% perfect, but nothing been decreed that a few little hiccups here-and-there can take away what was overall a most wonderful/entertaining “10/10” experience. While sure I don’t entirely agree with everything he (and whomever else) says, however, I do at least take in consideration and respect in any review that I read is that reviewers are like ourselves who have their own personal interests and preferences. And therefore those factors may or may not correspond with everyone’s own peculiar ideals universally. It’s subjective topic but just not possible to appease everyone.

Plus I think it’s best to take in account that the book scores used by whatever reviewer are for merely for quick reference; a figure that summarizes up the general idea of the product, providing that you know their ranking system. But they’re shouldn't be something taken seriously to heart or as a condemned Word of God. In any case, the written review is the meat what should really matter, not the bone. 

Although on a side note, I have just begun wondering while writing this post is how much are book scores actually relevant to the publishers at all? Sure I can imagine it can help with the buying appeal of a book, but I've don’t recollect ever seeing them used in sale marketing, other than games and movies. Review blubs yes, but not the numbered ratings. Anyone see anything like that before?


----------

