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.
Controversy record: on 3 games where press consensus and players sharply disagreed, this reviewer sided with players 1 time.
Computed 17h 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.
Biggest disagreements with players
The receipts: games where this outlet's verdict landed furthest from player sentiment.
Recent reviews (25 tracked)
- 89
“It may be short, but it's a wonderful learning experience, forcing you to rethink rather base concepts of the first-person genre. [Dec 2007, p.68]”
- 93
“The perfect integration of classes, the character and level design, the visuals, and the level of accessibility. [Dec 2007, p.64]”
- 69
“There are only a handful of official maps to play , although each one is substantial in size. [Aug 2009, p.77]”
- 82
“Addictive. [July 2009, p.71]”
- 91
“While the slightly glitched real-time battles may not be all that much different from Rome's, and naval battles and new multiplayer options are still conspicuous by their absence, there's simply no way that any selfrespecting strategy fan can spend this Christmas doing anything other than rampaging across the world on a whirlwind of medieval conquest.”
read full review ↗ - 86
“Yet another love-letter from Firaxis to their fanbase, and as good a reason for living as chips. [Oct 2007, p.72]”
- 86
“If you're not a master multitasker, you may want to ditch the Red Bull and play something less intense, but until then we'll keep our bastard-massive UFO hovering right over your base.”
read full review ↗ - 78
“A technological feat mingled with a fun, yet shallow game. [May 2008, p.76]”
- 80
“Truthfully, HOMMV is better in every department than its predecessor. It's grittier, funnier, prettier, more accessible, more strategic and rammed full of multiplayer goodness.”
read full review ↗ - 92
“Warhead honestly is the finest burst of action gaming released so far this year, and if you're canny then you'll be able to pick it up for a mere £15 from online retailers. It's a five hour tour-de-force that's plugged the holes in Crysis with diamonds.”
read full review ↗ - 62
“A series of spectacularly presented levels. [Feb 2010, p.68]”
- 73
“Deserves praise for artistic flair, but when it comes to gameplay approach with caution. [Jan 2010, p.81]”
- 92
“These improvements over the previous game nailed it - I became absolutely besotted. I've lost so many hours to The Sims 3 the PC Zone team were convinced they'd have to surgically remove my mouse from my hand to get me to work. [July 2009, p.56]”
- 70
“You'll be having Duke Nukem flashbacks and shouting "I've got balls of steel" in no time. [July 2010, p.84]”
- 69
“There's not enough reason to come back after the initial wow factor from the visuals wears off. [July 2010, p.90]”