Well this in regards to scores but not in the usual scores are wrong topic.
My question is do you think the amount of fun you had in a game should dictate the score, or should it's presentation/graphics/design decide it?
For example let's say you had incredible fun with Raccoon City (haven't played it but I've seen everyone's reactions to it) would you give it a 10 because you couldn't have had any more reasonable amount of fun with it or would you give it a lower score because of it's (what I've heard) poor design/story/characters?
What comes first in your opinion for game review scores?
Or technical achievement/design?
Thanks for any replies given. I'm a bit of a novice games reviewer so I'm wondering what everyone's opinion on this is...