Our Scoring

So, one of the things this site is about, is getting an unbiased scoop on the latest in entertainment from power users. When Tim and I first started kicking this idea around, one of the impetuses for our desire to throw our hats in the ring was the overall lack of quality reviews on the web.

This isn’t meant to be a slam to anyone, there is a fine line that most review sites have to walk. On the one hand, they want to give games a fair shakedown, putting the teeth to them when necessary, but on the other hand, sites need to be careful not to alienate the developers they rely on for previews and early builds by obliterating their latest progeny.

Why are we different? For one thing, we’ve developed a scoring system which has both objective and subjective components. More about that below… for another, we’re starting this site off on the right foot by stating from day 1, that this site is not about 98% scores for games, we’ll be clear about why we score how we do, and aim for reviews that are constructive and tough. This won’t be a place where a 70% essentially means: “I don’t know how I feel about the game.” In fact, a 70% might be a highly recommended game, a damn good score.

Will this mean we won’t get previews, early builds, or flashy scoops? I can only say we hope not. If you’re reading this, then the chances are developers would like you to know about they’re latest games, and our reporting on previews and early builds will always be more forgiving than a review. We will also always come back to our reviews and update them as patches and fixes become available. One of the reasons for reviewing games is to help them become what they should be. We’re not out to get into bed with anybody (mostly), but we’re not trying to kick mud in anyone’s faces either (mostly).

With that out of the way, let me tell you a little about our three-tiered 100 point scoring system.

The system is broken into three consecutive tiers, each dealing with a particular aspect of a game’s design. The first tier has a total of 40 points, and deals with a game’s presentation.

Presentation: 40

Presentation includes graphics and sound. In presentation we’ll discuss the art direction, graphical performance (for PC titles, we’ll review on varied hardware and sum up accessibility and perform our own little cost benefit analysis on the engine, etc…), audio design, voice acting, and anything else that effects the overall polish of the title. This will probably be the most objective of the three tiers.

The second tier is called Gameplay, and actually deals with a little more than that.

Gameplay: 40

Gameplay includes the actual game play, including controller layout (a longtime gripe for us in console gaming is the absolute lack of controller customization, a developer should have the right to dictate a single control schematic for their title, but if they do, there should be no question that it’s exactly how the game should be controlled, if not, we’ll definitely stomp our feet and yell about it). In addition, menu navigation, features, game modes including online play, and storyline will all be addressed in the Gameplay section. While slightly less objective than presentation, and certainly more subject to personal preference, we won’t shrink away from stating the obvious, and will certainly come back to, and update this section as additional content is dropped, and even post links to cutting edge mods that substantially add to a game’s value, though we may not change our initial score for third party additions.

So, that’s a total of 80 points. Now, if a game gets an 80 from these two sections, you should probably buy it, or at the very least, buy whatever we were smoking when we played it, as that will probably never happen. But what about the last 20? Well, that’s where the magic happens.

The final 20 points are up for grabs in a section called Synergism.

Synergism: 20

This is where a game really comes together and becomes a cohesive experience. If a game brings something truly innovative, unique, or just plain magical to the industry, then it will pick up some of these points. Mind you, this section is the most subjective, but that’s also why it’s only worth half of the other two sections, so while we welcome the flame wars we’ll cause here, we’ll always be clear on why we are or aren’t awarding synergism points. It should also be noted (certain franchises take heed) that we won’t score points for the same thing twice so the “Huge fully explorable sandbox environment” score boost that Vice City got, will not be revisited in San Andreas, but you know, if we really like bicycles, then maybe they’d get a boost there. And please don’t ask us to give up 20 for the ability to deck out your crib in a game that isn’t actually about decking out your crib.

Alright, so then to top it all off, we’ll sum it all up with some conclusory statement such as: “recommended,” “highly recommended,” “go buy it now,” “not recommended,” “run away,” or shrug if we have no idea what you should d. Any of this may or may not be directly related to our numerical score. (Again, like a good relationship, we’ll always make sure we communicate how we’re feeling, and why we’re feeling that way, and all we ask of you is some active listening; really, we just want to feel like you’re paying attention).

Oh, and we’ll probably have some spicy graphics for our different tiers and scores, you know, like stars, or thumbs, or jelly donuts, because you know you want a jelly donut.

So, that’s about it, our completely unbiased absolutely fool proof scoring system. Well, almost. We’ll try to get down to the business of it shortly. As always will be the case, let us know what you think.

Cheers,

~Rich