My Quest to Rate Every Game I’ve Ever Played
Every game in this archive has been personally played, rated, and obsessed over. This is not a review site in the traditional sense. There are no review scores handed out the week a game launches, no embargo-driven hot takes. This is a living record built on direct experience: games from childhood, games that changed how the medium is understood, games worth arguing about, and everything in between.
▶ How the ratings work — the full methodology · updated May 2026
The Philosophy
Most review scores collapse everything into a single number and call it a day. That works fine for a quick purchasing decision, but it hides the story. A 9.0 could be a flawless action game with a terrible story, or a deeply emotional narrative experience with clunky controls. Those are not the same game and they shouldn't share a number without explanation.
This framework rates games across nine dimensions, each weighted to reflect how much it typically determines whether a game is genuinely great — not just impressive. The composite score is a weighted average of whichever dimensions were relevant and scored for that game.
The Nine Dimensions
| Dimension | Weight | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 🎮 Gameplay | 18% | The core mechanics, controls, responsiveness, and feel. Does moving through this game feel good? This is the biggest single weight because a game that isn't fun to play fails at the most fundamental level, regardless of everything else. |
| ⚔️ Challenge | 14% | Not just difficulty — it's whether the difficulty curve keeps you engaged. A game can be "hard" and boring. A game can be "easy" and deeply satisfying. This dimension asks: did the challenge make you better? Did it reward persistence? Or was it just friction? |
| 🌍 Depth | 13% | World-building, content richness, systems complexity. How much is there to discover, master, or inhabit? A paper-thin game with no room to explore loses here. This is what separates games that feel like full worlds from games that feel like level packs. |
| 📖 Story | 13% | Narrative quality, writing, characters, and plot. For games where story is irrelevant (Tetris, fighting games), this dimension may be skipped or scored neutrally — it shouldn't penalize a game for being something it was never trying to be. But when story is central and executed brilliantly, it elevates everything. |
| 🎨 Presentation | 11% | Art direction, visual design, animation, and how a game looks and feels aesthetically. Crucially, this is rated relative to its era — an NES game from 1987 can score a 9 in presentation if it was stunning for its time. Technical fidelity is less important than visual identity and artistic cohesion. |
| 🎵 Music | 11% | Soundtrack, score, sound design, and whether the music made the game more than it was. Some of the most memorable moments in gaming history happen because of music — a boss theme, a world map, that one melody you still hum 30 years later. Music matters more than most people consciously realize. |
| 💥 Impact | 7% | How significant was this game to the broader culture and the gaming industry? Did it define a genre? Did it change the conversation? Doom, Final Fantasy VII, Minecraft, and Fortnite all score high here regardless of personal preference — their cultural footprint is undeniable. Obscure gems score lower not because they're lesser games, but because impact is measured externally. |
| 🕹️ Nostalgia | 7% | The warm-blanket factor. How important was this game to me personally? This is the most subjective dimension and it's intentional — it earns its 7% because this is a personal archive, not a publication. Chrono Trigger gets a nostalgia bump because it has lived rent-free for decades. It's being honest about the score rather than pretending personal history doesn't influence judgment. A high nostalgia score isn't a bias warning; it's part of the data. |
| 👥 Multiplayer | 6% | The quality of the multiplayer experience — matchmaking, balance, design, and longevity. Skipped entirely for single-player-only games (the weight redistributes proportionally). For multiplayer-focused titles like Halo or Street Fighter, this dimension carries more narrative weight even at the same percentage. |
Why Does BotW Score Below Cyberpunk?
This is exactly the kind of question this system is built to answer transparently. Breath of the Wild is a masterpiece of exploration and gameplay feel — but it scores modestly in Story and Challenge (the combat rarely demands much from you), and Nostalgia scores lower because it was encountered later in life. Cyberpunk 2077, post-patches, is an extraordinary Story + Depth experience with a killer soundtrack and one of the most visually realized worlds in gaming.
The composite score isn't a judgment of which game is "objectively better." It's a weighted statement of what a game excels at across the dimensions that matter most to a fully-formed gaming experience. BotW wins on gameplay feel. Cyberpunk wins on narrative depth and presentation. Both are excellent. The number tells you how they're excellent, not just whether they are.
Why Gameplay Gets the Most Weight
At 18%, Gameplay is the single largest dimension — larger than Story, larger than Presentation, larger than anything else. The reasoning is simple: a game with a great story and terrible gameplay is a bad game. The medium is interactive. The moment-to-moment feel of controlling a character, the responsiveness of inputs, the tactile satisfaction of a well-tuned system — that's the thing that makes games different from films and books. Everything else is context. Gameplay is the foundation.
Rating Old Games vs. New Games
Visual presentation is always rated relative to its era. An Atari 2600 game from 1980 isn't expected to look like a PlayStation title. What's evaluated is whether the game was visually impressive, coherent, and well-designed for its time. Gameplay, however, is more absolute — a game with bad controls was a game with bad controls even in 1985.
Impact is naturally skewed toward older games: if something defined a genre decades before most people had access to it, that influence is recognized here even if the game itself feels primitive now. Conversely, a technically brilliant modern game that treads completely familiar ground will score lower on Impact because the medium has moved past it.
What a 10 Means (and Why So Few Games Have One)
A 10 in any dimension means there is no meaningful room for improvement in that category. A 10 in Gameplay means the controls are essentially perfect for what the game is trying to do. A 10 in Music means the soundtrack is so iconic and well-executed that it defined the experience. These are rare. Most games, even great ones, hover between 7 and 9 in their best dimensions.
A composite score above 9.0 means a game scores extremely high across most weighted dimensions simultaneously — not just one or two. That's exceptionally hard to achieve. A 7.5 composite is a genuinely good game. A 6.0 is decent but flawed. Below 5.0 means the game failed on its own terms.
Recent Changes to This Methodology
- May 2025 — Score history tracking added: composite changes are auto-logged with timestamps and version notes. Rankings now show all games with lazy-load rather than a top-10 cap.
- Apr 2025 — Epic tier decoupled from game-count requirement — score alone (≥7.25) now qualifies.
- Mar 2025 — Tier system introduced: Legendary/Epic/Rare/Uncommon/Common/Junk thresholds by score.
- Feb 2025 — Creator rankings added: Bayesian weighted average (C=2 prior) to handle creators with few games.
- Jan 2025 — Initial nine-dimension framework launched with weighted composite scoring.
Top Games — Overall
Top games by composite score
Top Games — Story
Top games by Story score
Top Games — Gameplay
Top games by Gameplay score
Top Games — Music
Top games by Music score
Top Games — Graphics
Top games by Graphics / Art Direction score
Top Games — Depth
Top games by Depth score
Top Games — Challenge
Top games by Challenge score
Top Games — Impact
Top games by cultural Impact score
Top Games — Nostalgia
Top games by personal Nostalgia score
Top Games — Multiplayer
Top multiplayer games by multiplayer experience score
Top Composers
Ranked by Music score of their games · score = 0–9.9 Legendary ≥8.0 · Epic ≥7.0 · Rare ≥6.0
Top Writers
Ranked by Story score of their games · score = 0–9.9 Legendary ≥8.0 · Epic ≥7.0 · Rare ≥6.0
Top Directors
Ranked by overall composite score of their games · score = 0–9.9 Legendary ≥8.0 · Epic ≥7.0 · Rare ≥6.0
Top Producers
Ranked by overall composite score of their games · score = 0–9.9 Legendary ≥8.0 · Epic ≥7.0 · Rare ≥6.0
Top Artists
Ranked by Graphics / Presentation score of their games · score = 0–9.9 Legendary ≥8.0 · Epic ≥7.0 · Rare ≥6.0
Top Designers
Ranked by Gameplay score of their games · score = 0–9.9 Legendary ≥8.0 · Epic ≥7.0 · Rare ≥6.0
Top Studios
Development studios ranked by total impact — quality × volume · score = 0–9.9 Legendary ≥8.0 · Epic ≥7.0 · Rare ≥6.0
Games are ranked by raw score for that dimension. Creator score (the big number) = total career impact (quality × volume), compressed with a high-base logarithm so a major studio with several great games scores near the top even if one studio has 10× more titles. Higher rank always means a higher number. 10.0 is a singularity — nothing is perfect. Tiers are fixed: Legendary ≥8.0 · Epic ≥7.0 · Rare ≥6.0 · Uncommon ≥5.0 · Common ≥4.0.