Here is the ten-point scale: 1 = Terrible, 2 = Very Poor, 3 = Poor, 4 = Below Average, 5 = Average, 6 = Good, 7 = Very Good, 8 = Excellent, 9 = Outstanding, 10 = Perfection. Ultimately, it's a question of preference, but that's the full ten-point scale. To my mind, for a game to fall between 1-3, it must fail in (almost) every way possible (the mechanics aren't engaging, the controls are extremely sluggish or unresponsive, and the performance makes it unplayable (I don't mean a few frame drops here and there, or whatever the wildly inconsistent, tech-illiterate Know Nothings at DF ramble about on their site)). It's quite rare for games to fall into that position; In most cases, they're just not fun for the reviewer. Some are praised for their story, but they aren't fun to PLAY. Sometimes "story" gets in the way of the gameplay. Sometimes reviewers fall into the trap of reviewing the story, and not the art of gameplay or thought for engaging with the ideas presented. It's just "pressing a button", and in an age of "cinematics", I find it lamentable that that element appears to have become a passive act.
Party games, for example, don't typically score highly in gaming publications, but they often function well, and it's not always understood that others might enjoy them whether for long periods, or in bursts. They sell well, and development houses continue to make them. We don't know if the reviewer played them with their friends, and if they did, we rarely get much idea of how the group felt during and after the event. They aren't seen as "cool". They aren't valued in the same way as other games. "1-2 Switch should've been bundled!!" is a common cry I hear on many a message board and social media platform. Most people who ragged on a Wii Fit or a Zumba Fitness never went to a Pilates, yoga, Body Balance or Zumba/Dance class in their lives (I do all of those most weeks, and while I sometimes look a bit silly, they're fucking ace). So, these games hardly ever score higher than a 6. It's clear that for many reviewers, the higher end of the ten-point scale can't apply because they know their readership will think "What, an 8!? It's in the same bracket as (Insert widely-praised AAA title here)!?". Clearly, people do enjoy them, and an audience exists, but if they see that the reviews place most of them in the 1-6 bracket, what can they take from them? How can those scores be reconciled with their actual experiences? Maybe, just maybe, it's possible to find something good in a game that scores a 4 (below average). The good parts can be retained and improved, and the other parts polished in a future entry or different project for better results. There's always something to appreciate, even if it's not for you personally. I really don't know how anybody can, in good faith, dispute what is being said here, tbqh.
