| Runa216 said: This is generally how I rate my games, and the 20 different categories I factor in and consider. you'll notice the "Gameplay" aspect is 50% of the total, the Video, Audio, and Story categories add up to 50%. I find I generally consider a lot more than most people I know. Here's my scale, which is similar to yours but elaborated a bit more. 100% - Perfection: Unfathomable that anyone could dislike it 95-99 - Masterpiece: virtually flawless and excells in every way 90-94 - Exemplary: cream of the crop, game of the year type stuff 85-89 - Fantastic: very fun and well done, top of its genre 80-84 - Amazing: also quite fun but has a few imperfections 75-79 - great: well done and balanced in every way, but is missing something 70-74 - good: overall well done but some flaws keep it from greatness 65-69 - enjoyable: but no special recommendations 60-65 - decent: worth playing in spite of its flaws. 55-59 - playable: perhaps worth your time, but has flaws that keep it from being recommendable 51-54 - tolerable: but nothing special at all. 50% - neutral: has good but is balanced out by the bad. not really recommended 45-49 - forgettable: has some good but is overwhelmed by the bad 40-44 - poor: unrefined but may still have something worth checking out 35-39 - bad: may have a thing or two that doesn't suck, but definitely not worth it 30-34 - horrible: should certainly avoid 25-29 - terrible: avoid at all costs 20-24 - broken: hardly worth calling a game 15-19 - unplayable: so glitchy and poorly made it's practically impossible 10-14 - irredeemable: absolutely nothing is done right 05-09 - atrocious: just fails epically on every level 01-04 - Worst: absolute trash with no redeemable factors 00% - Painful: can't possibly be for playing, a physically detrimental experience Audio: Score - The background music, made to set the mood Sound Effects - All the clicks, footsteps, explosions or noises that are relevant to context Voice Acting - character dialogue, narrative Visual: Art Direction - the game's chosen visual style, be it realistic or stylized,as well as the atmosphere Technical - the quality of the graphics, framerate, and performance Animation - character movements and lip sync, where applicable Interface - the menus, written text, and HUD Story: Plot - the narrative and writing of the events that transpire Characters - heroes, villains, and everyone in between, focussing on their depth World - the environment, and how fleshed out/believeable it is Gameplay: Controls - namely the precision and intuitiveness of them Difficulty - focussing mostly on how fair it is and how manageable the curve is Innovation - bonus points for doing something new or original Replay - Whether or not the campaign is worth playing again to get another ending or play with a different build Fun Factor - comparing the mundane with the gleeful Variety - the number of gameplay styles that you can utilize throughout the game Content - the amount of things to do in the campaign, such as sidequests and minigames Level Design - the creativity involved in the levels Multiplayer - the different dynamics that are involved with competitive or cooperative play Value - the price/overall content ratio If I was to do my own reviews, I would do it by those four headings (audio, visual, story, gameplay), and likely do it in that order. I'd also have an introductory and concluding paragraph. does that sound/look like a method that'd work for you? |
Your rubric looks very detailed and cover most of the bases I can think of. I have two real suggestions. First, I would factor in dialog when talking about story (this might fall under characters). I've actually had some games where I think the characters and story are pretty good, but the dialog is noticeably sub-par. To explain better, I think some characters are strong on a conceptual level and represent important themes or points of view, but the importance of the characters often gets buried under bad or frustrating dialog (personally, I think Final Fantasy X and XIII both fall prey to this).
The other suggestion is to include replayability as its own section. I think it is important enough to gets its own section and be considered separtely from gameplay. For example, I consider God of War III to be about a 9.8/10 in the gameplay department but only consider it to be about a 7/10 in the replayability department (things like no level select, inability to skip cutscenes, and no rating system detracting from its score).
Also, where would you address things like glitches and camera issues? I usually consider it in the gameplay department, but I didn't see it on your list. Some glitchy camera issues are the reaon why I actually knock God of War III down to a 9.8 in terms of gameplay.
