Daily Esports will occasionally publish reviews on products on a serious 10 point scale, as well as informally about a team’s performance.
In the case of teams, such as standings in the Overwatch League:
“It’s honestly just my personal opinion. We gave them 0-4 if they have 2 losses (ranging from 2 sweeps to 2 reverse sweeps), 4-7 if they get one win and one loss (based on the opponents they’ve faced), and 7-10 if they win both (also based on opponents). No team has gotten a perfect 10 so far, but Shanghai recently got my first ever 0.” – Michael Czar
In the case of products, we take a more formal stance. A score awarded by the site is the score we all stand by.
By nature, reviews are a subjective beast. They are based on our own individual opinions, and that may not reflect your exact feelings on a game. Best rest assured, we strive for accuracy, and we will do our best to convey why a game made us feel a certain way. It is also our policy to review what’s in the game, and not promises of what may come. We often may speculate on future features or facets of a game through the course of a review, but it will not affect the score.
Let me stress that although we do speak to PR on occasion to obtain advance review copies for games, we do not collude with them, any sponsors, or advertising agencies on anything regarding reviews or scores. Our review team is completely and utterly isolated from the ad team. I have no idea how they conduct their business, and I’d like to keep it that way.
Our Reviews scale
Here at Daily Esports, we use the entire scale. It does not start at “7.” Let me repeat that — if a game is less than “good,” (7) it will be scored as such. Just because a game has obtained a “6” does not mean it’s a “bad,” game — far from it, in fact.
10 — Flawless (10s aren’t perfect, since nothing is, but they come as close as you could get in a given genre. The new leader to beat in its sector, we’re talking pure ecstasy.)
9 — Superb (9s are a hallmark of excellence. There may be flaws, but they are negligible and won’t cause massive damage.)
8 — Great (8s are impressive efforts with a few noticeable problems holding them back. Won’t astound everyone, but is worth your time and cash.)
7 — Good (7s are solid and definitely have an audience. There could be some hard-to-ignore faults, but the experience is fun.)
6 — Alright (6s may be slightly above average or simply inoffensive. Fans of the genre should enjoy them a bit, but a fair few will be left unfulfilled.)
5 — Mediocre (5s are an exercise in apathy, neither Solid nor Liquid. Not exactly bad, but not very good either. Just a bit “meh,” really.)
4 — Below Average (4s have some high points, but they soon give way to glaring faults. Not the worst, but difficult to recommend.)
3 — Poor (3s went wrong somewhere along the line. The original idea might have promise, but in practice it has failed. Threatens to be interesting sometimes, but rarely.)
2 — Bad (2s are a disaster. Any good they might have had are quickly swallowed up by a plethora of issues. The desperate or the gullible may find a glimmer of fun hidden somewhere in the pit.)
1 — Failure (1s are the lowest of the low. There is no potential, no depth and no talent. These have nothing to offer the world, and will die lonely and forgotten.)
Why even publish scores, and what it means to our readers
We are very well aware that it is hip to call age-old review scores unnecessary, despite the fact that there is no doubt that they serve a basic utility of sorting. It respects people’s time.
To score a game is to take a stand. It is not open for interpretation or ambiguous in any way, nor does it attempt to soften the blow — it aims to make a mark. It draws a clear line in the sand as our bottom-line.
Ad companies have called us crazy for publishing scores. To us, it is a simple means of logically separating our favorite products apart from the junk. As a publisher, it can also be like deciding to go to war. We have lost ad campaigns because we’ve given bad review scores, and frankly my dear, we don’t give a damn.
Review scores are the shared currency amongst publications as standardized by MetaCritic and OpenCritic, both which we participate with.
“I’m sorry, but the only true reason a publication will ignore this glaring fact and not publish review scores is to sell more advertising. They’re not a church and state business, and you should treat their bottom-line opinions as safe — and suspect.” -Destructoid
Still, we understand the danger of a bad score.
For example, some publishers giving their employees pay cuts due to scores, but in that case we push it back on them. It’s not our fault you choose this method to compensate your employees. Grow a backbone, stand behind your work — and stand behind your employees regardless of what other people think of them. Stop blaming the gaming press for having an honest opinion.
Our review event policy
Publishers sometimes hold “review events,” where they invite multiple members of the press to a central session with the intention of having them score and review a game on location. While we’ve attended some of them in the past for coverage purposes, we do not score games based on review events, as we feel that the environments are too controlled. Again, a game will never be scored by way of a review event.
Our DLC review policy
As the price of DLC goes up to the point where map packs are priced higher than some digital games, it’s important to keep readers up to date. As a rule, we will score substantial add-ons that bring concepts like new game modes and levels, and simply cover smaller DLC like costume packs with impressions when applicable.
This guide is a living document. We will continue to update and refine it, with clear indications of where changes occurred, as the years go on.