Listen to Erathoniel ranting on and on in good ol' conservative Christian fashion.
My Criteria for Reviewing Games
Published on April 20, 2008 By erathoniel In Misc

    I review games on a modified five star system. There's a list of levels below. Mind you that the ratings are contextual, not based on game quality, but game quality in genre at launch and at present day.

1 @: One of the worst games you can find. A game has to be practically broken to get one @.

2 @'s: A pretty low quality game. A game doesn't have to be broken, just painfully sub-par. Or it could be the eighteenth puzzle game with the same gameplay, and only cosmetic modifications.

3 @'s: A fair game. The kind you'd find often. Groundbreaking games that failed critically, or games that just don't live up to their promises.

4 @'s: A good game. The kind you might actually buy. A good game with solid backbone, or a game that works and has innovative new features.

5 @'s: A great game. The kind you could play for hours, depending on length, without taking a break. A game that does everything right, and introduces new features or makes them feel new.

6 @'s: A masterpiece game. The kind that gets 30+ awards. The kind that if you wouldn't buy, you are a Philistine.

7 @'s: An epic game. The kind of game that gets 90+ awards, spawns remakes, and is generally sold in stores for at least two years, has a cult folllowing of 100,000+, and is just totally awesome. It must also be considered the best game on my list for five years to achieve this rating.

No one has commented on this article. Be the first!