How this trust score was computed
This reviewer publishes verdicts, not numbers, so trust comes from their recommend/pan calls: call accuracy (50%): when they say buy, do players end up satisfied, and when they say skip, do players agree; alignment (25%): do their recommendations sort games the way players do; and player-side (25%): on games where press and players sharply disagreed, whose side were they on. The blend is shrunk toward a neutral prior (60) so small histories can't peg the scale, and recent verdicts weigh more (2-year half-life).
Controversy record: on 1 game where press consensus and players sharply disagreed, this reviewer sided with players 1 time.
Computed 6m ago · full methodology →
Outlet vs. players
Each dot is a game both this outlet and players scored. The dashed line is perfect agreement: dots above it mean the outlet was more generous than players, below it more harsh.
Recent reviews (3 tracked)
- 80PreyJun 1, 2017
“Prey is a solid foray into reboot territory, succeeding where so many other reincarnations of classics have failed. With a star-studded trifecta consisting of a certifiably better-than-average development team, a formidable synthwave composer, and the finishing touches of Chris Avellone, it performs as well as expected, while leaving room for improvement. It’s a mongrel, built from the ground up using hefty influence from many turn-of-the-century, revolutionary classics, but it still manages to remain its own game.”
read full review ↗ - 90Battlefield™ 1Nov 1, 2016 · James Wynne
“The missed opportunities of the of the single-player are the only criticism for a near perfect title that offers exceptional multiplayer, vivid visuals, and solid gameplay.”
read full review ↗ - 40No Man's SkySep 25, 2016 · James Wynne
“No Man's Sky is a flawed game that everyone should try to experience once, just not at $60. There's a lot to see and not much to do.”
read full review ↗