WTF?

In the past I haven't implemented any kind of rigid scoring system (like the 2002 and 2003 comps). While it helps keep reviews short, it also means I sometimes meander in my writing or forget certain aspects of the game that should really have been mentioned. Plus I think this new system will help prevent me from focusing too much on only the bad aspects of games that I play.

I considered Jess Knoch's WABE scoring system, but I felt that I didn't see the need to separate Appeal and Entertainment. So here's the system I'll be using: The "WTF" scoring system. Catchy, no? It stands for Writing, Technical aspect, and Fun.

11/15/04 Revision: I have removed the individual scoring for each category. Why? In my process of judging, I realized that it just didn't make sense. Each game needs to be judged as a whole, and having separate ratings for each thing and then averaging them simply did not give me the results I felt were warranted. Mostly, the "Technical" aspect just didn't fit. You can have a great game that doesn't do anything brilliant from a technical standpoint, but it's solidly built. What Technical score would that earn? What does a Technical 10 really mean? Instead, each of the 3 topics will be used for me to reflect on that aspect of the game. The final score will be for my impression of the game as a whole. High point and low point will follow.

Every review will include the following elements:

Summary

A summary of my overall impression of the game with some (hopefully) non-spoiler info on its setting and plot.

Writing

This is pretty straightforward. A big part of interactive fiction is reading. The quality of prose and appropriateness of text length. Also rates spelling, grammar, punctuation, capitalization. Story and dialog also fall under this category. Also important: motivation. This is ignored or glossed over far too often by authors and will figure prominently in the writing section.

Technical aspect

You don't just read interactive fiction, you have to play it as well. This is why the technical aspect is important. A high-rated game here would be almost completely free of bugs. It would include copious amounts of verb and noun synonyms, implement (or at the very least, understand and respond to) reasonable actions, and practice intelligent disambiguation. Multiple solutions to puzzles wouldn't hurt either.

Fun

Even with good writing and coding, how can a game be enjoyable if it's just not fun? I suppose this can be considered a catch-all for everything else that doesn't fit into the first two categories. Does the game draw me in? Is the experience immersive? If there are puzzles, are they well constructed and do their solutions make sense?

Final score

Overall impression of the game on a scale of 1 to 10. This is no longer an average of the three categories; it is a stand-alone rating.

High point

This is where I quote or recap what I felt was the high point of my game experience. If at all possible, there should be a high point for every game so I can express to the author what I think really worked.

Low point

And, conversely, this is where I mention what part of the game really didn't work out as planned or was simply a bad idea.