During our reviews, we used to give a product a 1-5 rating in blue screens. We don’t do this much at all anymore. Since relaunching the show, we have switched to a more narrative approach as opposed to a simple numerical breakdown. This also includes a discussion of the value proposition or, basically, is it worth buying/investing time in it.

When rating products we first try to compare the product to similar offerings (ie. adventure games to adventure games, speakers to speakers). Then we take into account how the product performs compared to its peers. We then decide where it fits on our scale of greatness, or GPFaulted-ness… I guess, and if it is worth your time or money.

We match products with a reviewer who has experience in that specific area. For example: we don’t have a platform-only gamer review a CAD program, or an RPG hater review an RPG. The right person gets the right product. This way they can continue the compare-the-product-to-a-similar-offering-approach, and decide if the asking price is worth it.

You may also notice our reviews aren’t exactly the hottest on the block. We actually prefer it that way because it gives us time for patches to filter in, or for major kinks to get worked out (which seems to be happening more and more these days). Our reviews also have the benefit of really delving into the product and coming up with a more rounded discussion… not as colored by emotional day-one expectations or undue hype.

Basically, if you want an honest review that considers everything and isn’t bleeding edge, that is exactly what we do.