okay, so if you're quoting two people at once and mixing the quotes together then my bad.    Pretty confusing way to do it though.

hmmm what?

you have no i-deer

heeheehee

lmao.

No eye deer! (No idea!)...haha...


So it seems there are two types of grading scales out there that people use (very general).

1) Sealed, from factory to grader = perfect. There is no handling, no circulation, no finger prints, no drool. This means if the game came from the factory with shrink wrap, and then opened, it can never have a perfect score. The shrink wrap is torn, there is a crease in the flap, etc. So CIBs can never have a perfect grading. So then by using this scale, a freshly removed shrink wrap CIB can have a "perfect" score of a 9 based on its "class" as a CIB. Sealed games are in a higher "class" and thus have an opportunity at a perfect score.

2) The other grading scheme would be based on a CIB perspective. Where a perfect score would be from factory to the owner, opened extremely carefully not to make any unnecessary bends or creases. This, in my opinion, would be the scale to use when selling the the general public. I believe most people assume that an item would be handled by at least one owner and used. With this said, this scale does not segregate the sealed and the CIB. They are one equal class since both a sealed and a CIB have the opportunity to be graded perfectly.

With this said, VGA would use the first grading scale. This makes sense to be because in my opinion, there should be a class difference between CIB and sealed games. I think its safe to say that those who collect sealed games would also agree to using a class system when grading. Those who collect CIBs would use the classless system when grading.

When selling to the public on eBay, you need to assume that everyone does know about different grading schemes. Therefore, a wise man once said to invest in a high quality camera and let the buyer do their own grading!

Ok, so if the highest grade VGA will give a CIB is 85+ I'm assuming 90 is perfection. Therefore it would seem to me that they are working on a 9 point scale and not a 10. That ninja kid is probably a 9.9 to me, just because you said there could be something better. But basically it's as perfect as they come CIB.

I agree blarky that when I rate a CIB, I'm only looking at the box basically. The guts are common.

Dangevin, the 10 point scale, like I said before, is nice to have for convenience. Such as common games sales, quick price checks. I once did a price check where I saw the games at a buddys house and said, hey this guy I know has a Metroid classic series that's about a 9. What's that worth. I couldn't take pictures. Made sense to me.

Anyways, I said it before in the DK Math thread. To me the average is a 5, that ninja kid is a 9.9 cause it's as good as I've ever seen. A cut up rental box is a 0.5 because it exists. Everything else in between.

^^ See my grading scheme above. To VGA, a CIB can never get a 10, because it has creases on the box and the shrink wrap is missing. So yes, a perfect CIB is a 9 on the VGA scale. It's still a 10 point scale, but since CIBs are tainted they can't ever reach a 10.

Well good to see a new opinion in this thread, hopefully the discussion will become more productive.

But yes, quantifying the grade that a "perfect" game would receive is the entire basis of confusion. I think MoeDown even stated that an "opened" CIB takes it down at least a .5. I mean I understand that point of view (though I don't agree) because when you open a game, you'll automatically crease it behind the flap. This can be an important characteristic in spotting reseals; if there is a crease behind the flap then obviously the game is not new.

I have no interest in an unopened CIB because I'll always open it to at least examine the contents myself. Not to mention if you are never opening it then it might as well be sealed.

So my definition of perfection is basically the game pictured in this thread. Yet extremely picky CIB collectors define perfection as a brand new, case fresh game that has had plastic removed only and unopened.

That's exactly what I said above. People who collect sealed games would use a grading scale similar to VGA. If they want a "perfect" game, they're going get a sealed game since a CIB can never be "perfect" in a sense of uncirculated. If you're a CIB collector, a perfect game in your sense would be similar to the Ninja Kid in the thread, but this because your definition of perfect has changed from fresh to factory uncirculated to circulated.

^ Yup, I think that's the exact difference. Depends whether a 10 is factory fresh untouched by human hands (which can sometimes still have defects), or something slit open and played one time only. I collect used games. So the later is what I call perfection in my hobby. I also hunt/collect/buy/sell/find stuff that is beat to crap. So my scale is naturally going to include gradation from crap to mint rather than very nice to mint.

It's similar to coin collecting. You have a special grading scale for uncirculated based upon workmanship. If a coin is circulated, then you have a grading not heavily based on workmanship, but overall condition from use. I would consider all sealed games to be uncirculated in this respect. Then it gets graded based upon the cellophane condition, corner wear from packaging, print defects, printing color, etc. Whereas CIBs are circulated and are graded on overall condition from use.

The reason why I think VGA automatically marks a CIB down to a 9 is to avoid using two grading scales. Two grading scales would be confusing. What needs to happen is VGA needs to clearly explain their criteria and grading scale publicly and fully so that when people see a grade 90 CIB, it is understood that realistically it is a 100 based upon the criteria for CIBs. However due to a single grading scale for both CIBs and sealed games, they are ranked down and below sealed games.

That sounds very limited at best.  Grading should be done on the assumption of perfection and then working your way down the scale, noting EVERY flaw and issue the game exhibits.  Something can't be a 7 because it is Classic Concentration but is a 9 because it is DK Jr. Math, when they are in identical condition.

Jim

I agree with T-Bird here. Consistency is a huge bust for graders. You can't have specific titles graded differently because you haven't seen a nice copy. You can't grade relative to other games. Grading must be done ideally and consistently across all titles regardless of rarity or quantity produced. By doing this you're incorporating rarity in with the grade. Grading is for quality and condition of the good, not on quantity produced. Value will automatically increase the rarity of an item by the community and the buyers bidding or purchasing the item. There is no need to inflate the grade and be deceitful to the buyer because it is hard to come by.

I'd agree with this mostly. I also see a good point in there. I think VGA gets a lot of flak (and AFA for that matter) because their grading isn't defined or understood. I've seen AFA 90 and 80s that almost look identical. In fact I've seen AFA 85s that look better than some 90s and I think, well why did this get that and that get this grade. I haven't seen many VGAs, but I'd guess it would be a similar problem.

AFA and VGA are co-companies in case someone is like WTF.

I think if we create a large enough demand, VGA may make a more publicly known grading criteria. Because...we are part of one of the best gaming collecting forums in the world...duh..

This might be the reason why some people don't like VGA.

Some great points brought up in the thread...we should email a link to a VGA person, lol. Keep it coming guys.

not from what I've seen... 80s and 90s are a world apart...

Quality of an item is hard to grade...I think if you had a sealed game with sharpie on it one person might think thats ok its in the back of the box its just sharpie no biggie, while another says no way thats not for me... meanwhile a new copy of a game has a rip on the cellophane well the same person that didn't want the sharpie may say well thats not as bad atleast I can still read everything and its all good I will just put it in a case, where the other person may say no way I don't want that its no longer sealed if its ripped a bit. so everyone would grade CIB differently also, it all depends on what jumps out from the box when someone is looking at it and if they would rather dings over rips etc. I don't think you should grade an item for sale yourself because only the buyer knows what he would grade it and that is whats important what he values it as.

^ Ok maybe in VGA world. Unfortunately my experience is AFA based. Sometimes they're not to different. And there are flaws to see on the AFA90, then you look at the AFA80 and go, hmm, I could almost take the 80 over this 90 haha. And then another 80 you'll say, geez that's ugly.

Point is, VGA should be more clear on how they're grading these things. I don't think they're scale is wrong. Finding an AFA 100 should be a once in a blue moon event. And it is. Same with VGA. But some clarification would help I think.

I've submitted 3000+ toys to AFA and 800+ games to VGA and I can fully say Dan is 100% correct. Pictures aside, if you've seen them in hand, there is no comparison between 80s and 90s.

I think the two systems work fine together as long as there's a little understanding. VGA grades based strictly on percentages. CIB collectors grade based on perceptions and givens. A flap crease, or crease along the hinge of the top flap caused by opening the box, is a given to most any collector. Unless it's severe, it isn't a determining factor in the overall grade in most cases to the seller OR the buyer. Both understand that the crease is inevitable. But when grading percentages, it is important as the crease represents a significant percent of the box's overall surface area. Thus the "automatic" downgrade on any CIB submitted. It isn't difficult to draw a parallel between the two systems once you understand the difference.

^ Well I haven't seen 3000 toys AFAed, but I have seen them in my hands, not pictures. I'm not talking about every single grade is all messed up. It's just sometimes varied and hard to understand. Could even be just the individual graders grade differently. I'm not sure.

A percentage of surface area way of grading maybe makes more sense to what I've experienced. You're right, I grade based on itemized damage. A crease 1" long and moderately deep, down to a 9, a quartre inch tear on the front corner near the flap, down to an 8.5, etc.

How do other CIB collectors establish their grade, percentage of surface area, or flaws?

You've spent upwards of $80,000 having things graded?

^ You can just imagine how crazy his grading scheme is

Probably closer to 60 over the last 6 years. You get the hook-up when you start doing volume.

The benefit and downfall of graded action figures is the sub-grade system. A vein along the back of the card, a tiny crack or dent on the bottom of the blister or a figure with a frosty leg or sloppy paint will affect the overall grade while APPEARING identical to a higher grade figure. With a game, whether it's sealed or CIB as stated before, the box is pretty much the meat & potatos of the grade.

I would have to agree w/Dan and Moedown - if you are talking specifically VGA, they really don't vary much at all with the exception of some of the very first peices they graded which "may" be a half a grade too high - for instance an 85 might get an 80+ - And as nice as the Ninja Kid is, I have A LOT of games that are very close to that example that are CIB, hence, the reason for my grading scale for CIB being a little bit tough And last but not least, I can say for sure that some of the last games that were sold in cardboard boxes (N64/GBA/etc.) are almost all in a high grade in my collection because if I did open them, I took out the game and placed the box somewhere where it wouldn't get ruined - I guess that what makes the original NES/SNES games in Gem mint so desirable...most players didn't really care about the box back then.