Scoring criteria

paulpaterson on 2014/10/18 05:05
— edited on 2014/10/18 05:05

I just finished playing through and scoring all the games. I had a lot of fun. There are lots of really great games in there.

I am continually amazed at what people are able to come up with in just a week. There are some really inventive games and ideas!

I thought that I would share the system I have been using for scoring the games. I use the criteria below to give the scores. This helps me try to be consistent, particularly across different play sessions. What systems or approaches are others using?



Fun

  • Not at all:
      • No gameplay in current state or gameplay would not support more than 5 mins
  • Below average
      • Interesting enough for 5-15 minutes or to run again a second time
  • Average
      • 15-30 minutes of gameplay in current form or could easily imagine it when filled in more
  • Above average
      • Considerable fun or charm for 15 mins
      More than 30 mins current gameplay
      Or could imagine an hour or more playing it
  • Exceptional
      • Would not be out of place in a purchased game


    Innovation

  • Not at all
      • Have seen this idea implemented many times and nothing new
  • Below average
      • Core idea may be implemented in other places but there is some new thematic element
  • Average
      • Significant new angle or new aspect
  • Above average
      • Some significant element or point of view that I have not seen before
  • Exceptional
      • Feels like a completely new take
      Multiple new elements
      Could imagine the game being replicated by others


    Presentation

  • Not at all
      • Barely a tech demo
  • Below average
      • Some elements feel finished but many are not
  • Average
      • Most elements feel finished
  • Above average
      • Elements work together to support the game theme
  • Exceptional
      • Would not be out of place in a purchased game