Is it worth your time?

At Islandgamer, we prioritize fun while also taking reviews seriously. Our reviews play a crucial role in helping you make informed decisions about how to spend your money. Our primary objectives are to provide a critical assessment of media's successes and failures and to offer you comprehensive information to determine if something is worth your time and hard-earned money. Our ultimate aim is to assist you in making informed decisions and ensuring that you have an enjoyable experience with the media you choose to engage with.

We understand that not everyone has the time to read a full written review, which typically ranges from 2,000 to 3,000 words (converted to a 10-15 mins review video) on Islandgamer. You may be short on time or prefer to avoid spoilers by seeking a concise summary. To cater to these needs, we offer a brief, one-paragraph Verdict section that captures the main praises and criticisms, accompanied by an overall score. While the Verdict and score do not replace the detailed review, they still provide a snapshot of our impressions.

The Islandgamer Review Scale

Critiquing art, whether it's games, movies, TV shows, or comic books, is not a scientific process. When it comes to games, for example, technical specifications like pixel count or frame rate don't determine if a game is good or not. A game could have flawless technical performance at 4K and 144Hz but still be incredibly dull. On the other hand, a game running at 900p and 30 frames per second, with occasional dips, can still be considered a masterpiece.

The truth is, unlike measurable quantities such as temperature or speed, you can't objectively measure the quality or enjoyment of a game, movie, TV show, or comic book. These mediums are forms of art, and their goal is to evoke emotional responses from the audience. So when we write reviews at Islandgamer, we are discussing how a particular work emotionally affects us when we engage with it, offering our subjective perspective as individual critics. When we assign a score to summarize the review, it's not the result of a mathematical calculation. There's no predetermined score that we add or subtract to arrive at the final number, and no specific qualities or features are assigned a fixed number of points. Scores are a representation of our opinion, with each number corresponding to a description on our scale.

We have used a 10-point scale for games while retaining the scores of our previous reviews. We believe this scale effectively communicates the reviewer's decisive opinion without getting lost in the minutiae of incremental scores.

Scores are just a starting point for our opinion. All reviews undergo a rigorous editing process to ensure fairness, transparency, and accuracy before being published on Islandgamer as the official Islandgamer Review. However, each review is written by an individual with their own unique perspective, and we encourage you to follow our writers on platforms like Facebook, explore their profiles on Islandgamer, and understand their tastes based on their recommended games. With a diverse range of voices at Islandgamer, it's inevitable that not every opinion will align perfectly. For instance, a reviewer of a sequel to a game released a decade ago shouldn't be bound by the score given to the original, as that was the viewpoint of a different person in a different time and context. Essentially, we don't want review scores to end the discussion but rather to spark further conversation, and we invite you to engage with our reviewers throughout the entire process in a thoughtful, respectful, and enthusiastic manner.

Our Score System

  • In short, this is our highest recommendation. Although no game can be absolutely flawless, those that secure Pha Dao's Masterpiece designation come incredibly close to that ideal. These are budding classics that we anticipate will shape the future of game design, as other game makers learn from their outstanding examples.

  • We strongly urge you to include these games in your gaming queue. If we label a game as 'Fantastic', it signifies that the game has genuinely astonished us, either through its innovative concepts or its superb reinterpretation of existing ones. We anticipate that these games will be remembered as standout examples in their respective time and genre.

  • These games etch an indelible impression in our minds, typically due to innovative gameplay elements for either single-player or multiplayer modes, imaginative characters and narratives, remarkable visuals and audio, or a blend of these factors. Even if we have significant criticisms, the plethora of superior attributes effectively compensates for them.

  • Engaging with a Good game is time well invested. Can it be improved? Definitely. Perhaps it lacks innovation, falls into monotonous patterns, experiences occasional technical hitches, or becomes repetitive, but we still found enjoyment in it. We believe you'll also find it pleasing.

  • These suggestions come with a lot of conditions. There's a promising game lurking within, but discovering it requires knowing where to look, and perhaps ignoring a few substantial flaws.

  • This type of game is unexciting and forgettable, often fading from our memory a day after we're done playing. A mediocre game isn't worth your time or money if you value them highly, but it can serve as a way to kill time if there's nothing more compelling at hand.

  • For various reasons, these games left us regretting the time spent on them. Even if there might be a hint of a good concept hidden within, it's overwhelmingly overshadowed by numerous flawed ideas and subpar execution. We strongly advise against investing your time in such games.

  • You can thank us later. We've just prevented you from making a disastrous decision by purchasing this assortment of ill-conceived, dreadful, or unoriginal concepts - or even giving it a try for free. While even a Bad game usually has some redeeming qualities, a Terrible one is invariably displeasurable.

  • Let's be straightforward: any game that ranks lower than 'Bad' is simply catastrophic. Descending below 'Terrible'? That's notably noteworthy, though negatively. Not only do these games lack any element of enjoyment, but they also provoke frustration or indignation.

  • The only consolation with such disheartening games is that they're usually so badly crafted that they malfunction after a certain stage (if they functioned at all to begin with), saving us from any lasting impact that exposure to such dreadful gameplay could have on our cognitive abilities. We don't always pen reviews for games that are blatantly awful, but rest assured, they exist.

Review Scale Questions & Answers

  • As mentioned previously, our aim is twofold: to provide a critical assessment of a game's strengths and weaknesses, and to furnish readers with the necessary information to determine if a game is worth their time and money. Our reviews include recommendations regarding whether to play or purchase the game, and we endeavor to evaluate its quality based on our critics' perspectives. We seek out games that offer enjoyable gameplay experiences while also valuing those that surprise us, challenge conventions, and venture into new territories.

    However, scoring a game is not a precise science that can be distilled into an algorithm to cater to every gamer's preferences. It is an iterative process that involves the reviewer playing the game, discussing the experience with senior staff, undergoing multiple rounds of edits and revisions to ensure a solid argument, and considering how it compares to similar games, among other factors. In essence, we strive to provide a score that serves as a reliable recommendation, one way or another. It's important to note that a review score does not start at 0 or 10 and then have points added or subtracted until a final score is determined; it is a direct reflection of the description associated with the corresponding word on our rating scale.

  • Our aim is to match games with reviewers who have a deep understanding and passion for the genre, series, or style of the game being reviewed. We prioritize assigning games to reviewers who already have an interest in playing them whenever possible. While we strive for a well-rounded staff, we also ensure that the game reaches a critic who can provide an informed perspective on the genre and platform, ultimately benefiting our audience.

    Occasionally, reviewers may eagerly anticipate playing games that ultimately turn out to be disappointing. This is an inherent part of the process, as not every game lives up to its marketing promises. It is through honest evaluations that reviewers fulfill their role of providing valuable insights to audiences.

  • Because reviews are inherently subjective opinions, there is no definitive "right" or "wrong" assessment (as long as the review is based on accurate factual information). The official Islandgamer review represents the chosen critic's viewpoint and serves as the authoritative statement on a game's quality. However, it is important to recognize that no opinion can universally represent all gamers. Just as individuals and their friends may have differing opinions on whether a game is amazing or just good, similar disagreements exist within the Islandgamer team. We believe in fostering an environment where the voices and opinions of our editors are respected and valued. Everyone is encouraged to engage in discussions about games through follow-up articles and other platforms. At Islandgamer, we cherish the fact that our team consists of passionate individuals who love playing and discussing games. We want our editors to continue these discussions, even when their opinions may differ from our official review.

  • Revisiting a game for a second review is an exceptional occurrence that happens very rarely. For a game to warrant a second review, it must undergo significant changes that render the original review no longer accurate. Additionally, the game must still maintain a level of popularity where many gamers actively seek reviews for it. However, meeting these conditions is infrequent, so it is uncommon to see Pha Dao revisiting and updating scores for games.