My Rating System Explainer
What's the difference between a 1.5 and a 2.0, anyway? An attempt to quantify and explain my personal rating system.
10 Games
0.5 ★ - Repugnant
Games that go beyond being bad and into being reprehensible. Dislike for these is often amplified on moral, ideological, or ethical grounds. Prolonged exposure is toxic. Be very, very wary of any individual or group who claims to love these.
Games that go beyond being bad and into being reprehensible. Dislike for these is often amplified on moral, ideological, or ethical grounds. Prolonged exposure is toxic. Be very, very wary of any individual or group who claims to love these.
1.0 ★ - Terrible
Bad elements vastly outnumber and overpower the good. Usually still some entertainment value to be had, though expect it to be purely at the expense of the game in question.
Bad elements vastly outnumber and overpower the good. Usually still some entertainment value to be had, though expect it to be purely at the expense of the game in question.
1.5 ★ - Bad
Sparks of something good that are ultimately unable to save the greater experience. There's some core element that's impressive, and the rest is not.
Sparks of something good that are ultimately unable to save the greater experience. There's some core element that's impressive, and the rest is not.
2.0 ★ - Subpar
Games that leave a sour taste in the mouth after completion. This is the disappointment zone. There are no elements here that can't theoretically be fixed, but they're currently lacking.
Games that leave a sour taste in the mouth after completion. This is the disappointment zone. There are no elements here that can't theoretically be fixed, but they're currently lacking.
2.5 ★ - Average
The baseline standard. An unexciting score. Serviceable, but never a first choice.
The baseline standard. An unexciting score. Serviceable, but never a first choice.
3.0 ★ - Fine
Average games with a little extra "oomph". Competently-developed games that manage to do at least one truly interesting thing before the credits roll.
Average games with a little extra "oomph". Competently-developed games that manage to do at least one truly interesting thing before the credits roll.
3.5 ★ - Good
It gets easier to start making broad recommendations of anything here and above. The kind of game that most people could pick up, play, and be satisfied with.
It gets easier to start making broad recommendations of anything here and above. The kind of game that most people could pick up, play, and be satisfied with.
4.0 ★ - Great
Impressive titles. Good elements greatly outnumber and overpower the bad. Usually the point where I'm willing to start making excuses for elements I dislike.
Impressive titles. Good elements greatly outnumber and overpower the bad. Usually the point where I'm willing to start making excuses for elements I dislike.
4.5 ★ - Excellent
All-timers. Wonderful games that just barely can't make it into the highest category, usually for a singular gripe that I can't get over.
All-timers. Wonderful games that just barely can't make it into the highest category, usually for a singular gripe that I can't get over.
5.0 ★ - Hall of Fame
The greatest games ever made. Each title has at least one of: an incredibly unique element, an impeccably-executed idea, or no detracting flaws. Medium-defining games that are universal recommendations.
The greatest games ever made. Each title has at least one of: an incredibly unique element, an impeccably-executed idea, or no detracting flaws. Medium-defining games that are universal recommendations.
Dalaamclouds
1 year ago