How We Rate Games
Every editorial score on Arcade Spot comes from a person playing the game, scoring it against five fixed criteria, and signing their name to the result. This page explains the scale, the criteria, the weightings, who does the scoring, and what can and cannot change a score. If you disagree with one of our ratings, this is the page that tells you exactly what you’re disagreeing with.
The scale
Editorial scores run from 1.0 to 5.0, in half-point steps. A score is a judgement about the game as it plays on this site, in a browser, today — not about its historical importance, its budget, or what it was like on original hardware.
| Score | What it means |
|---|---|
| 4.5 – 5.0 | Outstanding. Among the best of its genre on the site. We’d put it in front of anyone. |
| 4.0 – 4.4 | Great. Well made, plays cleanly, worth going out of your way for. |
| 3.0 – 3.9 | Good. Enjoyable with real flaws — a rough control scheme, thin content, dated presentation. |
| 2.0 – 2.9 | Mixed. Playable, but we’d point you somewhere else first. |
| 1.0 – 1.9 | Poor. Works, but there is little reason to spend time on it. |
| Unscored | The game does not run reliably. It is fixed or removed — not given a low score. See broken games. |
We don’t grade on a curve and we don’t reserve 5.0 for special occasions. A simple game that does exactly what it sets out to do can score higher than an ambitious one that doesn’t.
The five criteria
Each criterion is scored 1–5 by the reviewing editor. The final score is the weighted average, rounded to the nearest half point.
| Criterion | Weight | What we’re judging |
|---|---|---|
| Gameplay | 30% | Is it fun, is the core loop satisfying, is difficulty fair, does it hold up past the first few minutes? |
| Controls & feel | 20% | Responsiveness, input lag, sensible key mapping, whether it’s genuinely playable on touch if we list it as mobile-friendly. |
| Performance & stability | 20% | Load time, frame rate, crashes, audio sync, whether saves and progress survive a reload. |
| Replay value | 15% | Depth, variety, levels or modes, whether there’s a reason to come back tomorrow. |
| Presentation | 15% | Art, audio, clarity of UI, readability of text at browser size. Judged against what the game is trying to be, not against modern budgets. |
How a game gets tested
- Minimum play time: at least 20 minutes, or to a meaningful milestone — a completed level, a full round, a first loss — whichever is longer. Longer for games with depth.
- Desktop: tested in current Chrome and Firefox on a mid-range machine, not a high-end one, because that’s what most of you are using.
- Mobile: if we list a game as playable on phones, an editor has played it on a phone. If touch controls don’t work, we say so and we remove the mobile tag.
- Fresh session: tested with an empty cache and no saved progress, so the first-time experience is what we’re judging.
- One editor, one name: the score is assigned by the editor named on the page — Mason Reed or Tyler Hayes — who is accountable for it.
Retro and emulated games
A large part of our catalog runs through browser emulation. We score the version you can actually play here, which means emulation quality is part of the judgement: input lag, audio accuracy, save and load reliability, and whether the control mapping makes sense on a keyboard.
We also try to keep nostalgia out of the number. A landmark console game that emulates badly in a browser gets the score its browser version earns, and we explain the gap in the review rather than hiding it behind the reputation of the original.
Casino and slot games
Our free casino games — roulette, baccarat, poker, blackjack and slots — are scored on the same five criteria, with the emphasis adjusted to what matters in that genre: clarity of rules, whether the game states plainly that play is with play-money credits, absence of dark patterns pushing you toward purchases or external sites, and how well it handles a losing streak without nagging.
Broken games are not scored
If a game doesn’t load, loses progress, or fails in a way that makes it unplayable, that isn’t a 1.0 — it’s a defect on our side. The page is flagged, the source is repaired or replaced, and the game is re-tested before any score is published. Where a game can’t be restored, we say so on the page or retire it. You can report a broken game from any game page, and those reports are reviewed by an editor.
Editorial scores vs. player ratings
You’ll see two numbers on a game page and they measure different things. The editorial score is one editor’s assessment against the criteria above. The player rating is the aggregate of likes from everyone who’s played it.
We keep them separate and we never merge them. Player ratings are not moderated for agreeing with us, and we don’t adjust an editorial score because the crowd disagrees — though a large gap is a good reason for us to go back and re-play the game.
When we re-score
Scores are not permanent. We re-test and, if warranted, re-score when:
- the game receives a substantial update from its developer;
- its source or embed changes, which can alter performance;
- browser changes affect how it runs;
- players report a problem we can reproduce;
- or on our routine cycle, at least every 24 months.
When a score changes materially, the game page shows the new score, the date, and a one-line note explaining why. We don’t quietly overwrite history.
What cannot change a score
- Money. Not advertising, not distributor revenue share, not affiliate commissions. See our Affiliate Disclosure.
- Requests. No developer, distributor, advertiser or partner can request a score change, and none sees a review before publication.
- Popularity. Traffic tells us what to prioritise reviewing. It has no input into the number.
- Our own catalog. Games we host ourselves are scored by the same criteria as everything else, and we say on the page where we have a commercial interest.
The wider framework sits in our Editorial Policy.
If you think a score is wrong
Tell us. Use the contact form with the game URL and what you think we got wrong. Developers can request a re-review on the same basis. We re-play the game, and we either change the score and say why, or we explain why we’re keeping it. What we won’t do is change a number without publishing the reason.