Our Style

Now that I have expressed how I feel about the way other critics rate games, and now that we have posted a few new reviews, I feel the time is right to explain to our dear fans how we go about rating games.

I have already described the bell curve I will be planting my ratings on, but just in case you missed it, here it is again:

9.5-10 : Best of its kind. Changes gaming. Revolutionary. These are the games EVERY SINGLE GAMER should possess, or at least experience at some point, preferably immediately.
8.5-9.5: Outstanding. Minor imperfections. "Must-buy."
7.5-8.5: Great. Games in this range are well above average and deserve your money. They will make you happy.
6.5-7.5: Solid. These are games that are enjoyable and well-made. They may not push the envelope, but they make a good showing right there within it.
5.5-6.5: Slightly above average. Looking past a few flaws will serve to find a good time with these games.
4.5-5.5: Mediocre. Playable, but not offering anything especially interesting.
3.5-4.5: Below average. Maybe rent it. Maybe not. There are lots of better games out there.
2.5-3.5: Not fun. Possibly frustrating. Various states of BROKEN.
1.5-2.5: Crap. Better off used for some alternative form of entertainment, like frisbee.
0.0-1.5: Why was this ever made? ET. Superman 64. BARF!

Due to the nature of my distribution, readers will find that my scores are likely lower than one might have come to expect reading internet reviews. This is simply a function of the normal distribution, and not a result of my intense cynicism (that part is up to Brian). Additionally, in each of my reviews I break games down into 8 constituent parts. The reason for this is that although I believe that a game should be judged as a whole rather than the sum of its parts, there are certain qualities that are integral to all video games, in some capacity. These parameters are as follows:

Game Design - level design, innovation, execution, polish, pacing, balance, challenge
Visuals - aesthetics, textures, lighting, technical, framerate, output options
Audio - voice acting, Music, SFX, Separation, output options
Control - layout, function, responsiveness, intuitiveness, variety, camera
Story - concept, plotline, captivation, character development, originality
Fun Factor - enjoyment, addictiveness, engrossment
Value - longevity, replayability, bargain, extras, options, modes, multiplayer, etc
Style - Eddie's "tilt" This is where I rate the overall feel of the game, based on my personal experience with it

Using this breakdown allows me to really determine the overall caliber of each game by looking at every aspect, from every angle. It also allows me the best capability to compare ALL games. This becomes tricky when one considers genres, however. Games in multiple genres may be very good, but to stand them side by side can be an apples-oranges situation. Also, I've found that ratings become inaccurate if all parameters are considered equally, because frankly, some of the parameters listed above are not quite as important as others.

This is where what I call genre/component weighting comes into play. Because certain elements in the list are more important than others, the individual scores in each category are weighted accordingly. Depending on the game's genre, these weights vary to most accurately describe its quality, based on the factors that are most important to that particular type of game. For example, the "story" parameter will carry a very heavy weight when looking at an RPG, but a very low one when examining a puzzle game. This weighting creates a more accurate scale for cross-genre comparison, all within the larger framework of the entire video game library.

After the parameter scores have been weighted, the weighted scores are then added up, with a maximum total of 200. Simply dividing by 20 achieves the standard format every reader looks for. The scores line up neatly in the 1-10 range, expanding out to one decimal place.

This is an example of how my ratings charts look. In the first column are the parameters, followed by the game's score in those parameters. The next column contains the multiplier denoting the value of each parameter, and the final column shows the results of multiplying the parameter scores by the weight multipliers. At the bottom right is the total of all weighted scores, and in huge red numbers it the overall score on a 10 point scale. That number is the bottom line. I also list the genre below the weighting column, so that a reader may bear in mind what type of game he is looking at.

Having always been dissatisfied with the way games are rated, I have toyed with ratings systems for a long time, and found that this formulaic approach is the most precise way of determining a game's total value. It allows accurate placement in the rankings for games of similar, as well as completely different types.

Brian, on the other hand, not having as great a penchant for numbers (or anything 100% concrete, for that matter), has opted to go with a much simpler system. He will basically offer up a recommendation with each review - a two star system. One star is his "lowest score" and two stars are his "highest score." Ostensibly these mean "not worth playing" and "worth playing," respectively.

Yes, the differences between our ratings are extreme, but each presents its own unique perspective on things. In cases where both Brian and I have some experience with a game, and one of us writes a review, the other will add his own brief take, generally in the form of an appended rating chart or star value. Hopefully this will give our readers a complete view of each game, and will make for well-rounded reviews.


EDIT: I have since changed my approach to reviews, and like to sum them up with a little image like this one:


Whichever face most accurately represents how playing this game made me feel is the rating that I will give it. X out of :-D is the proper way to read these scores. Pictured above is a :-| out of :-D, just in case that wasn't obvious enough already.