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 (3 tracked)
- 87
“But trying to separate myself from how much fun the game is and looking at it objectively reminds me that the game is still technically flawed, and thus far from perfect.”
read full review ↗ - 84
“The environment also effects the difficulty of combat, and the developers have used the engine to it’s fullest in this regard, giving you plenty of crazy battle sites which definitely add to the playability and fun factor of the game.”
read full review ↗ - 82
“A nicely done title that delivers a unique experience, both visually and gameplay wise.”
read full review ↗