What are you standards for rating games?

I always struggle with rating video games because I don't have very consistent standards. I might rate a game as a 9/10 after completion, then look at my list again and think "Wait, that game was stupid" and bump it down to a 7. (in fact, I do this all the time)

Most of my completed games are rated as 8 or above and I almost never give scores less than 6/10.

So I'm wondering, how do other people judge their games? What does a 10/10 mean to you? What is an 8/10? 5/10? 1/10?

It's not a very precise system, but here are some questions I ask myself when rating:
Did I have fun?
Did I have any complaints/minor changes I would have made?
Was the game a chore?
Was I able to get through it?

This is based on a 5/5 scale. I used to use the 10/10 system but I couldn't get it to align with my way of thinking. Mostly I'm not a harsh grader for games (or I just tend to pick the ones I know I'll like), but if I liked it overall and had a few complaints that frustrated me at times it's it's a 4-4.5. If the game enamored me through the entire ride then it's a solid 5. I try to find at least a little saving grace for games I struggled with (i.e. art/graphics), but thankfully I haven't encountered a game that made me rage enough to give it a 0.

I always struggle with rating video games because I don't have very consistent standards. I might rate a game as a 9/10 after completion, then look at my list again and think "Wait, that game was stupid" and bump it down to a 7. (in fact, I do this all the time)

Most of my completed games are rated as 8 or above and I almost never give scores less than 6/10.

So I'm wondering, how do other people judge their games? What does a 10/10 mean to you? What is an 8/10? 5/10? 1/10?

Once I rate a game, it's final, regardless of how many times I'll replay it or how my view might change years later, I think it's more consistent and helps you look back on how you used to perceive games, which might differ as you grow. Since my list is mostly comprised of underdog / hidden gems, you'll see a fair amount of games with a rating below 6/10.

I'd hand out a 10 only to games I personally thought were flawless and not lacking anything, I've had candidates, but they were only fit for a 9. Maybe if I was younger and didn't look into the little things, I'd give them a 10, growing up sucks :>

An 8 is something with a decent length, engaging gameplay and at least a serviceable story, replay value helps greatly.
A 5 is the middle ground between fun and jank, might be games with a vision and potential that didn't live up in execution.
A 1 is borderline unplayable, the game would have to either run like ass, have unresponsive controls or crash every 5 minutes: I've got 40 titles with a 1 under my belt, it's the sacrifice you have to make when you explore the janky side of video games :')

I score games on a scale of God of War II (1) to Mass Effect (10). Most games are between 6-8, because I try not to play bad games, much less beat 'em. Sometimes I'll beat a 4/10, like Darksiders II. Sometimes I score games at a 9 or a 10.

Honestly it's all arbitrary and I haven't rated almost anything in months so it's a moot point.

I don't rate games, but if I did I would probably use scale 3 to 9. 3 being exception of rare shitty game which I somehow managed to complete (Max Payne 3) and 9 would be the most awesome games (Max Payne 1). 2 wouldn't exist cause I wouldn't rate uncompleted games and I would avoid to use 10 cause that would automatically lead to comparison of all amazing 9 sore games. Too many favorites to make few out of them. Scores are weird, but a bit helpful. I use metascore quite often. I don't exactly look at highest rated games cause these usually aren't the best ones.

Usually my ratings go from 5 to 10. I've retired everything that I'd rate below 5, so this would be my starting point.

5 - I wouldn't call them good. They're just not that bad/uninteresting that couldn't finish, but I would never recommend.
7 - Good games with some flaws. That'd be my average score. They're def not bad, but also not masterpieces.
10 - I can't stop playing, and when I stop I can only think of it. They also have some emotional value.

And of course 6s, 8s and 9s would be between the ones I mentioned.

Well, one of the things I look for in a game is the basics. Story, Graphics, Gameplay, Music, Characters, Length, Is It Fun? If it's a classic (like Halo 3) does it hold up and is it worthy of the praise? If it's a mostly hated game (Say for example Prospekt, a mod for Half-Life 2) does it deserve that hate or are there actual fun things about it? There are many things that go into my mind but my rating system is like this:

100%: Perfect/Masterpiece
90%: Awesome/Excellent
80%: Great/Really Good
70%: Good/Decent
60%: Has Potential/Okay
50%: Mediocre
40%: Poorly Made
30%: Bad/Really Bad
20%: Awful/One of the Worst
10%: Black Ops III Levels of Abysmal

I think characters are one of my top things I look for in a game. Take Half-Life 2, great characters, very likable and you'll want to route for them throughout. But in a abysmal game like Black Ops III, everyone is screaming their heads off being pissed off and attacking each other. I say this: If there are no likable characters, than what's the point of playing? You need someone to root for in a game and it's a bad idea to make all your characters a bunch of assholes. So characters are a HUGE thing I look for.

Well, that's mainly my rating system but mostly the big things I look for is characters, gameplay, story, graphics, music, that kind of stuff. Just the basics.

My ratings tend to look a little skewed because I only rate games I finish, and I never finish broken-ass or just completely terrible games. So really I only use 5 to 10 star ratings. Anything less than that gets dumped in the retired category.

I got a rating scale fron some guy that rates anime in the internet and shared his. It made so much sense to me that I've been using it ever since.

10 - Masterpiece
9 - Amazing!
8 - Very Good
7 - Good
6 - Above Average
5 - Completely Average or "meh"
4 - Bad
3 - Really Bad
2 - Burn it with fire
1 - The fire is not working, nuke this b*tch

I don't remember giving away any 1s... yet.

This seems like as good a time as any to reiterate: please let us rate games by fives so I can rate games 85%, et al. Everdred. Please. For fans. 🙏🙏🙏

To make a long story short: that was absolutely terrible, that wasn't that great, that was pretty good, and that was amazing. That pretty much sums it up.

I usually start at a 7 and move it up or down depending on my enjoyment of the game. I have also decided to retire everything I would rate below a 5 from now on.

A game only gets a 10 if I´m either really addicted to it, it makes me smile like a lunatic or I keep thinking about it constantly even if I´m not playing. Most of the time it´s combination of all three things.

That reminds me that I need to get back to playing Persona 5 Royal. That´s a 10 in the making just like the original.

Ahh, a person with exquisite and refined tastes, I see! 🧐 I'm also a big proponent of the vastly superior 5-point rating system.

Mine goes something like this:

5 - Excellent
4 - Good
3 - Okay
2 - Meh
1 - Pure Crap

I used to rate the game's graphics/sound/gameplay/etc. to determine a final score. But now I just have a moment of candid introspection to pull a number out of the ether.

This seems like as good a time as any to reiterate: please let us rate games by fives so I can rate games 85%, et al. Everdred. Please. For fans. 🙏🙏🙏

Ah yes, a man of exquisite tastes.

Ah yes, a man of exquisite tastes.

You accidentally quoted mockturtle instead of me, but fear not, I got the message. 😜

You accidentally quoted mockturtle instead of me, but fear not, I got the message. 😜

I considered switching to a 5-point scale but decided against it because it turns out HLTB just converted 10-point scores to half-point.

I actually write a bit for a review site (save or quit if anyone wonders), and we have slightly fancy names for things, but it's at the end of the day not very different from the normal. The ratings there are:
Autosave: It's an amazing game. GOTY material!
Save: It's very good. The kind of game you can confidently recommend to people
Save for later: It's fine. Might be worth waiting for a discount, unless you're a big fan of the genre, but it's still a good game
Pause: the game is either really flawed, or kind of mediocre.
Quit: The game is bad.
Rave Quit: The game is utter trash!

On a 1-10 scale I would rate things as following:
10: One of the greatest games of its genre. Not many games will ever get this high
9: It's great. Would feel confident recommending this even to people who don't normally like the genre.
8: It's really good. Well worth playing
7: It's good. If you're a fan of the genre, it's probably worth playing, or the game is great in some regards, but kind of flawed
6: It's fine. Game won't bore you, but here it starts getting hard to justify getting it, because there are enough better games in almost any genre.
5: It's alright, I guess... If you have nothing else to do, it passes the time, but it's probably not worth playing.
4: It's not very good. Simply put, not worth playing
3: It's bad. Not many games will actually get this score, because games actually turning out this bad usually means that something went seriously wrong during deploment
2: It's really bad.
1: It's a broken mess with no redeeming qualities.Think 75% of all games on steam.

Tbh my rating are kinda of an after thought I usually try to think of 3 pros and cons and a short overview. I then weigh my pros and cons against each other and then decide how I would score that game

I have a hard time rating games as well, as there's too many factors going into my enjoyment of it. For example, Portal is a fantastic game beginning to end, but sadly that ending comes too soon. How do I dock points for a game that was 10/10, but short? Another example would be Metal Gear Solid V Ground Zeros. Fun game, but by no means worth $40, so does price come into play as well? It's a tough one for me.

At the end of the day, my ratings are based around metrics that can be measured universally, with + or - aspects like length or price listed on the side. I also hate the 0-10 system, as I find myself rarely going below a 7 for any game. I rather like to use a more objective style of rating for each category I use:

* TERRIBLE = 1
* BAD = 3
* OKAY = 5
* GOOD = 7
* GREAT = 9
* FANTASTIC = 10

That way I can compile my scores for each category into one overall score that varies a bit more than 7-9 for 90% of games.

As far as the categories I use, some of them are simply my preference for what I look for in a game. I like games that change up the gameplay loop, so I have Gameplay Design and Variation as a category. I also like games that go out of their way to try something new, so I have Creativity as another category. Here are all the ones I use, with questions I ask myself for each one:

* Level Design and Variation
Were there uniquely different environments?
Did the level design assist or hurt the gameplay?
* Overall Quality
Did the game experience crashes or game-breaking bugs?
How competent were the mechanics? Did they feel clunky or smooth?
* Gameplay Design and Variation
Did the game get boring and repetitive?
Was there meaningful progression that changed how the game played?
* Creativity
Are there other games (at the time of release) trying similar ideas/mechanics?
Is there an art/style direction taken? Does it work in the context of the game?
* Overall Fun
Was it fun or frustrating to play?
Did the game give off a sense of accomplishment?

From there I can add positives (+) or negatives (-) for notably good or bad aspects of the game that fall outside of the categories. These then shift the score after those categories are compiled into a score. Those can be things like the games graphics, the bang for your buck, and the length.

So for an example, I just completed Assassin's Creed Odyssey:
Level Design and Variation (GOOD - 7) - the base game's world didn't provide much variation in the environments, but the DLC added 3 all new open world areas that were all very unique.
Overall Quality (OKAY - 5) - the game crashed a few times. The mechanics felt fine, but combat is a bit floaty.
Gameplay Design and Variation (BAD - 3) - objectives get repetitive, and too many are required to progress on the main questline. The DLC questlines are even worse, requiring many what-should-be side-quests to be completed before progressing.
Creativity (GOOD - 7) - most new mechanics were borrowed straight from The Witcher 3, but not executed as well. I do like the balance of staying true to history, yet having some Greek myths sprinkled thoughout. The DLC open worlds were impressively unique and original, but it never added anything new to the game.
Overall Fun (OKAY - 5) - the story was not engrossing, and the game went out of its way to make itself longer than it needed to be. Took me ~80 hours to complete what felt like a 30 hour experience. You will feel like an Assassin, but I think other Assassin's Creeds have been shorter and sweeter than this one.

When compiling those scores, they come out to a 5.4, but I can use some of the more notable positives and negatives to shift that score.
+.5 best water physics and underwater environment I've ever seen in a video game
+.3 massive open world that wasn't completely bland
-.5 unashamed online-type elements in a singleplayer game (temporary timed quests, lots of microtransactions, etc.)

That being said, the game comes out to a 5.7 out of 10 for me. Simple right? XD

10/10 - flawless, classic, exemplary of its genre, groundbreaking, must-play for all gamers
09/10 - amazing but some minor flaws, must-play for fans of the genre
08/10 - solid release, high level of polish, worth a play
07/10 - average quality, enjoyable to play, softly recommended
06/10 - significant flaws but some redeeming qualities, play if you're hungry for more in the genre
05/10 - competent but not fun, not worth your time
04/10 - poor game design, not fun, major bugs, avoid
03/10 - never used
02/10 - never used
01/10 - never used

5/5 - Outstanding Game, A Must-Play for Everyone.
4/5 - A Great Game, Has Minor Flaws in it though. Especially other great games that you play it once but have no energy for replay value
3/5 - Ok Game, I'm not too crazy about it, Has Flaws or Repetitiveness that ruins the game.
2/5 - A Bad Game that has its minor good moments. but the delivery of that game left you an impression that you are not mad, but disappointed.
1/5 - A Bad and Broken game that I recommend everyone to play something else unless you are a masochist.

I also exclude any decimals in my ratings as well.

These are the ratings I came up with:
10- Legendary, It’s the closest thing to a perfect game. A game that you will always enjoy. A must own
9- Phenomenal, an extraordinary semi-perfect game. A game that’s so close to that Legendary rating but has 1-2 flaws that stop it from achieving that. A must play.
8- Excellent, a game with really good gameplay experience that definitely deserves a second play through. But it’ll have some moments that can lower the experience. A game you should definitely try.
7- Good, More polished goodness than Above Average that redeem the bad parts. Definitely earning that play through now.
6- Above Average, Way more better moments than the average game. It’ll still have it’s bad moments, but a single play through is more bearable and actually fun.
5- Average, A game that’s not great but it isn’t terrible. Something with it’s good parts, but those come with bad parts. Worth a single play through, but not much after. Something you shouldn’t specifically go out of your way to get.
4- Below Average, these games certainly aren’t bad but there covered in a lot of bad things. This’ll make the play through bad as it’ll hinder the few good stuff. Definitely something you shouldn’t go out your way to play.
3- Bad, a game that’s ugly side is always there, but it is mechanically better than a terrible game, but it’s still shit. Do not play at all.
2- Terrible, shit you shouldn’t play through, It’s less plagued with crabs glitches, but shits still shit. Never play this.
1- Dogshit!, Something so bad that you literally can’t play the game. A game you should never play because of the intense self harm it’ll make you inflict on yourself.

Since the review option on this site has a 10-point scale, I try to follow that. 5 is the middle ground. It isn't a school letter grade system where below a 7.5 is bad. 5 is the middle range with 6 still being a good game and 4 is where the negatives are starting to overshadow the positives. I play games I like, so most of my scores are above a 7, but that doesn't mean a 7 is "just okay." A 7 is pretty good! There is also no bell curve distribution to my grading where only a handful of games are allowed to be 10s. I'll give as many high ratings out as possible for things that truly provide me a wonderful experience.

10. Nearly perfect (no game can completely perfect in my opinion but some come close. The game is so good that you've become addicted to it).
9. Great (Very enjoyable game that you can play for hours at a time. There was a few things you didn't like but they are few and far in-between).
8. Very good (Fun and entertaining. Might replay it later).
7. Good (You like it and might buy the sequel if one is made).
6. Above average (Had some interesting and fun parts but you would have rather used your time and money on other games).
5. Average/okay (Game isn't special in any way, but you didn't hate playing it).
4. Below average (Game has some good aspects to it but the bad parts outweigh the good. Probably will not play it again)
3. Poor (Has few good parts to it. Will never play again).
2. Bad (Has maybe one or two good things you liked, but everything else you hated. Will never play again).
1. Frustratingly bad (There's nothing positive you can say about the game. Will never play again and you'll also take note of who made the game so you can avoid any future games they make).
0. Unplayable (As in the game is so poorly made that it's actually impossible to play).

Gameplay is king for me! As long as the gameplay is fun I don't mind the graphics looking a bit shit ^^

I only have 2 games that I would rate 10/10 and those would be Super Mario World and Super Metroid. They still hold up in 2020 and I usually play them once a year.
Any game I give 8+ I have to at least consider playing again.

I have given a game 0 once ^^ Strider for the PAL Master System. It was unplayable!
I had to download it and beat it on emulator because the original hardware ate all my inputs and got too full to be bothered with a playable framerate on the gravityball boss.

The only problem I have is 0-10 is probably not enough and I'm starting to think that 0-100 would be more fair. I gave Project Warlock 7 because 6 did feel a bit low and I gave Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7 too...but I think Shadow of the Tomb Raider is better than Project warlock...but it's not worthy of 8. Problem :/