Score: 7

"GOOD"

submission: King of Buttons 3

date: July 28, 2006

-=June 2006 Benchmark=-
A game within this range is good overall, and likely worth playing by fans of the particular genre or by those otherwise interested. While its strengths outweigh its weaknesses, a game that falls in this range tends to have noticeable faults.

Score: 8

"GREAT"

submission: King of Buttons 2

date: July 28, 2006

-=January 2005 Benchmark=-
This range refers to great games that are excellent in almost every way and whose few setbacks probably aren't too important. We highly recommend games in the upper half of this range, since they tend to be good enough to provide an enjoyable experience to fans of the particular genre and to new players alike.
ADDITIONAL NOTES:
hopefully this will make up for my bad review for #1 (P.S. but the game deserved this rating anyways, good job!)

Score: 2

"TERRIBLE"

submission: King of Buttons

date: July 28, 2006

-=January 2005 Benchmark=-
Beware, for a game in this range is almost entirely devoid of any remotely decent or fully functional features.
ADDITIONAL NOTES:
sorry man, I see why many people would like this game, and its not that bad, but admit it, compared to alot of other games today, it is kinda... out of shape.. P.S. please dont flame me :'(

Score: 10

"PERFECT"

submission: Escape From Elm Street

date: July 23, 2006

-=January 2002 Benchmark=-
-=Editors' Choice Award=-
-=Games Of The Year Award=-
This exceedingly rare score refers to a game that is as perfect as a game can ever aspire to be. Such games could not reasonably be improved upon in any meaningful way.

Score: 2

"TERRIBLE"

submission: Beat up Paris Hilton!!

date: July 23, 2006

-=June 2006 Benchmark=-
Beware, for a game in this range is almost entirely devoid of any remotely decent or fully functional features.

Score: 3

"BAD"

submission: Jackass - Fight

date: July 23, 2006

-=January 2005 Benchmark=-
You probably shouldn't get too close to a game in this range. Any of its positive qualities most likely serve only to make the rest of it seem even more disappointing.

Score: 4

"POOR"

submission: Jackass - K.O Johnny.k

date: July 23, 2006

-=January 2005 Benchmark=-
Games that just don't work right and maybe didn't spend enough time in production tend to fall in to this category. They simply lack the cohesion and quality that make other games fun.

Score: 6

"FAIR"

submission: GG's Ultimate Arcade

date: July 22, 2006

-=January 2005 Benchmark=-
Games that earn 6-range ratings have certain good qualities but significant problems as well. These games may well be worth playing, but you should approach them with caution.
ADDITIONAL NOTES:
I'm Xpert_Game_Rater and I've decided to be less harsh on games.
A user named Glaiel clock makes extremely crappy games, one really crappy one saying glaiel gamer has switched to the clock crew, and many people might not look at who made the game. Just telling you this cause I know many people hate the clock crew, so it might affect your other games' reviews.

Score: 7

"GOOD"

submission: DHC Bottle Blaster 2

date: July 20, 2006

-=June 2003 Benchmark=-
A game within this range is good overall, and likely worth playing by fans of the particular genre or by those otherwise interested. While its strengths outweigh its weaknesses, a game that falls in this range tends to have noticeable faults.

Score: 0

"This game is basically non-existent."

submission: DHC Bottle Blaster

date: July 20, 2006

-=June 2003 Benchmark=-
-=Crap Of The Year Award=-
This game is basically non-existent.