rioshin's Scoring System for 2008

Well, since Merk put his scoring system on here, maybe I should do the same…

The last few years, my scoring system has been way too technical, so I’ve toned it down quite a bit. It’s actually quite like Merk’s - I actually based it a bit on his for this year. :mrgreen:

Technical Implementation i[/i]
This measures the technical aspects of the game: are there bugs, missing commands, etc.

0 - A very buggy game showing no or almost no technical competence
1 - A buggy game, minor technical competence
2 - Some bugs, the game shows technical competence
3 - Very few bugs, excellent technical competence
4 - Excels at technical competence, no bugs found, responsive

System of Choice i[/i]
Yes, I do take away a few points for games using homebrew systems or other rare systems.

0 - Homebrew system or single-platform game
1 - A rare system, available for a few platforms only (eg. Alan and Adrift)
2 - A common system, available for multiple platforms (eg. Zcode, Tads)

Puzzles and Interactivity i[/i]
Measuring the easiness/hardness of the puzzles, how well they’re clued and how original they are. For games without puzzles, measures the level of interactivity.

0 - No puzzles; lacks any interactivity
1 - Unoriginal puzzles, puzzles very poorly clued, unfair or very easy puzzles; almost no interactivity
2 - Puzzles are somewhat original, occasionally unclued, hard or easy; some interactivity
3 - Quite original puzzles that are well-clued and of a suitable difficulty; good interactivity
4 - Very original puzzles, extremely well-clued and of a suitable difficulty; excellent interactivity

Story and Purpose i[/i]
This category measures the feel of the story, or for story-less games, the level of purpose felt during the game.

0 - No plot or discernable purpose
1 - A generic, throw-away plot; almost no purpose
2 - A non-generic but unoriginal story; some purpose
3 - An original story that doesn’t raise much interest; good level of purpose
4 - An original story that’s hard to stop reading/playing; excellent level of purpose

Writing i[/i]
Since IF is dependent upon language, it’s just right to try to measure the level of accomplishment in it.

0 - Poorly composed text, unintentionally choppy, grammatically error-ridden
1 - Successfull writing with little problems, but is uninspiring
2 - Immersive, vivid, expressive, entertaining, exciting - you find more superlatives

Length i[/i]
How well does the length of the game match with the story it tells?

0 - Way too short or long for its story
1 - Too short or long
2 - Game length fits the story to the mark

Subtotal i[/i]
SUB = ((TECH + SYS + PUZZ + STOR + WRI + LEN) / 3) + 1 (rounded to the nearest integer)

This formula gives a score between 1 and 7 for any game.

Reviewer’s Bonus i[/i]
Well, this tells how much I liked the game; nothing more, nothing less.

0 - I didn’t like this game
1 - Nice game, although I wouldn’t play it again
2 - I’ll be returning to this game, as it caught my interest
3 - Well, I just couldn’t stop playing this until it was finished

Final Score i[/i]

Since the subtotal is between 1 and 7, inclusive, and the bonus between 0 and 3 (again inclusive), the final range is 1 to 10.

TECH:2, SYS:2, PUZZ:1, STOR:1, WRI:1, LEN:0, BON:1
SUB: 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 0 = 7; 7 / 3 + 1 = 3; SCO: 3 + 1 = 4

Heh – cool. And even more complicated than mine!! :slight_smile:

Well, thankfully not that much more complicated - you should see what I used last year, where the score ranged between 0 and 100… :slight_smile:

Basically, this one is almost like yours, compared to what I’ve used previously - some areas with a bit more detail in the scoring and a few more areas I look at while playing, but it all converts to a reasonable score. And I managed to get more space for my own opinion on the game, as the bonus ranges from 0 points to 3 points, instead of your 0 to 1. :slight_smile:

I’m curious about the reasoning about subtracting points for homebrew or single-platform games…are you saying a homebrew game that was multi-platform would still get 0 there?

It’s there to award games that as many people as possible can play - a homebrew system is most likely single-platform, but not always, as it depends on what technology is used. Thus, the more platforms a game runs on, the higher a score it will get in this department.

Homebrews, which I have marked for 0, are basically because of that single-platform limitation. Of course, if the technology used is Java, for example, I’ll have to revise my score somewhat, since it runs on quite a few different platforms.

What I wanted with this score is to reward those games that are accessible to most users - which means, that no matter how good a e.g. windows-only game is, it can’t get a full 10, as it’s not accessible enough. Adrift games, for example, can get a 10 if they get full scores in every other department, but scoring a 10 is hard even for a game written in Zcode.