How this trust score was computed
Trust blends alignment (40%): does the outlet rank games the way players do; decoded accuracy (30%): after translating the outlet's own scale habits (a '7/10 means mediocre' scale is decoded, not punished), how well its reviews predict player sentiment; and player-side (30%): on games where press consensus and players sharply disagreed, whose side it took. Recent reviews weigh more (2-year half-life), and the blend is shrunk toward a neutral prior (60) so small samples can't peg the scale. Player quality is launch-window Steam sentiment, so outlets aren't punished for reviewing a launch build that later got patched.
Computed 23h 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 (4 tracked)
- 90
“Realism aside, Half-Life provides some of the best unrealistic opponents seen to date as well. The creature design here is outstanding.”
read full review ↗ - 85
“The DC controller's scheme is only adequate, and the number of pauses that occur during online play is too many.”
read full review ↗ - 90
“(The engine) not only renders huge environments and complex architectures with nary a hiccup, but can also handle massive amounts of enemies and, in general, kick your ass without a second thought. ”
read full review ↗ - 95
“But for the feel of nostalgia bolstered by the still-capable technology of the PlayStation, this game can make you feel actual delight--something that's tough to do in these cynical times. ”
read full review ↗