How we actually review a game before writing about it

People assume reviews come fast. Ours don't. We install a game and one of us commits to playing it for at least a week, keeping rough notes about what stood out and what annoyed us.

We split attention across the things that matter over time: story, progression, controls, and how the game respects your schedule. A great first hour means little if hour twenty is a slog.

Scores come last, and they're arguments. We compare against games we've already covered so a 4.5 means roughly the same thing across the site. If two of us disagree strongly, that disagreement usually ends up in the text.

Nobody pays for a better score. The only thing that moves a rating is us playing more and changing our minds, which happens more often than you'd think.