When we review games here at the Attack, we are bound by obligation to also provide a numerical score that represents the hard-boiled essence of that game’s enjoyability. We then throw that number out there and expect you to take our word for it, with no further need for explanation, right? Wrong. We want you to know our secrets, on the off chance that you may someday criticize us, in a polite and constructive manner, for being big fat idiot faces.

Partly because you’re dying to know, and mostly because we’d love to share, here is the be-all, end-all explanation of how we assign our game ratings. I must warn you: it’s not for the faint of heart, or for those with a low tolerance for awful jokes.

Generally, how does Delta Attack’s score draw the line between good, bad, and fugly?
Our scoring scale is the familiar 0-100 range, with 0 being the most prolific, unattainably terrible score a game can earn and 100 being the idyllic impossibility of perfection. Most games will settle between the 60-90 range, with anything lower than that being famously nasty and anything higher being pretty damn slick. Much like test scores, you can break it down like this:

59 or lower represents failure, a dubious honor bestowed only to the worst of games.
60-69 means the game is lackluster and possibly boring. Either way you wouldn’t miss it.
70-79 means the game is good, even if flawed or average.
80-89 means the game is of a high standard and represents the greater echelon of gaming.
90-99 means you have something really special, something that is truly ace in its genre.
100indicates the game’s publisher has an interest in making us very, very rich.

How does Delta Attack calculate a game’s score?
We score the game in ten individual categories, giving each category a 0-10 score, then we combine these grades into an ultimate figure. It’s a highly advanced process involving math, lab coats, and the occasional trip to the pantry to eat Nutella straight from the jar.

The categories are: originality, fun, pacing, controls, style, polish, design, story, mileage, and mood.

Mood? Pacing? Are you serious?
Yes. Yes to all of it.

For each category, we choose a score based on what best matches our evaluation:

10 = top of the line
9 = excellent
8 = good
7 = average
6 = below average
5 = bad
4 = unforgivable

0-3 are, as a general rule, not to be considered. Only in the most special circumstances will these penalizing scores be assigned, usually to fine-tune a game’s overall score to more accurately reflect its awful quality. It should be noted that this kind of score tampering is never taken lightly, and is something we have, to date, not yet invoked but we reserve the privilege to do so. We can envision a future where one of us may someday play a nightmarishly sucky game. When and if that ever happens, we will most certainly want to punish that crap accordingly.

What the categories mean to us, and our scoring guidelines
We feel that each category represents a crucial aspect of a game’s overall satisfaction. At face value, these categories may appear to overlap each other slightly, so here is an in depth explanation of what we ask ourselves when scoring each category:

Originality: How unique and innovative is this game? How much does this game stand out from others? Are the mechanics distinctive or all too familiar? If it’s a sequel, does it adequately improve upon its predecessor?
We usually do not award anything higher than 8 for sequels.

Fun: Is the game a joy to play? Does the game have addictive qualities or does it sometimes feel like a chore to fire it up?

Pacing: Does the game stay fresh and interesting throughout? Is the learning curve just right or frustratingly steep? Is the play time padded out with cheap or fun-sucking gimmicks?

Controls: Are controls intuitive or simple to commit to memory? Do the controls seem overly complex? Are controls responsive and tight? Are menus easy to navigate and toggle through?

Style: Does the art direction of the game have significant flavor? Does the presentation have a tendency to be generic or lazy? Are dialects and dialogues spoken well?

Polish: Is the game exceptionally beautiful? Are the graphics clean and technically sound? Are animations done to a high standard? Does the sound production stand out? Are menus pleasing to the eye or ugly? Is it clearly a labor of love?

Design: Are any of the mechanics frustrating or nonsensical? Are the load times long or abnormally frequent? Is the game well balanced? Does the game seem to be missing key conveniences or features? Do the mechanics innovate?

Story: Is the story engaging? Does it enrich the game and make you want to play more just to see how it unfolds? Does the story run out of steam and become boring or unimportant? Is the narrative delivered exceptionally well?
There are many games where story is either appropriately absent (most puzzle games, for example) or simply intended to be unimportant (Mega Man 10). For these games we assign an automatic ‘8’ and subtract from that only if the game’s premise is notably weak or tired.

Mileage: Is the game’s length remarkable or disappointing? Are there relevant or interesting online modes that extend gameplay? Does the game offer a variety of activities? Replayability?
In the case of a PSN, XBLA, or WiiWare game: Does the game pack good punch for its cost?

Mood: This is the category we use to catch any other aspects that we find important to gaming, like soundtrack, atmosphere, nostalgia and fan service, just to name a few. This is less of a punishment category and more an opportunity for us to reward a game for offering those special, hard-to-define “somethings” that make us happy to be gamers.

We hope that this satisfies any questions or doubts you may have of our reviewing process. Seriously. We’re not just saying that.

Related posts:

1. Contacting Delta Attack
2. You May Now Speak on Delta Attack via Facebook
3. Here We Go! Delta Attack’s 2011 E3 Predictions