How We Review & Score Content
"A score is a starting point, not a verdict. Our reviews are written to give you the full picture - the score is simply a shorthand for where a piece of content lands on the spectrum from essential to avoidable."
The CoveredGeekly Review Team
Our Approach to Reviews
The principles that guide every review we publish.
Independence
Our scores are never influenced by advertisers, publishers, studios, or commercial relationships. A review copy does not guarantee a positive review - or any review at all.
Sufficient Time
We do not rush reviews. We complete games, finish series, and watch films in full before scoring. Where a review is based on a partial experience (e.g. a preview build), this is clearly stated.
Reviewer Expertise
Reviews are assigned to writers with relevant experience in the genre or medium. A horror film is reviewed by someone who watches and understands horror - not a general assignment.
Context Matters
We evaluate content within its own context - a low-budget indie film is not held to the same production standard as a major studio release. We ask: does this achieve what it sets out to do?
Read the Review
A score is a summary, not a substitute for the review itself. We always encourage readers to read the full review - the score is only meaningful in the context of the written analysis.
Transparency
We disclose how review copies were obtained, any relevant relationships, and the conditions under which a review was written. If something might affect our perspective, we tell you.
The Score Scale
What every score on our 1–10 scale actually means.
We score on a 1–10 scale using whole numbers only. Every point on the scale has a defined meaning. A score of 5 is not a failure - it means average, competent, and unremarkable. Scores of 3 or below indicate serious problems that make a product difficult to recommend.
A rare, defining work that sets a new standard for its medium or genre. Flaws are negligible or non-existent. Essential for anyone with even a passing interest in the subject matter.
Exceptional quality with only minor shortcomings. A must-experience for fans of the genre and a strong recommendation for anyone. Stands among the best of its kind.
Highly enjoyable with clear strengths that outweigh its weaknesses. Recommended without hesitation to fans of the genre, and worth considering for a broader audience.
Solid and enjoyable with more positives than negatives. Recommended for fans of the genre or those with a specific interest in the subject. Casual audiences may find it less compelling.
More good than bad, but with noticeable gaps. Worth a look for genre fans, though casual audiences may find it unremarkable. A fair but unspectacular experience.
Competent but unremarkable. Does what it sets out to do without excelling. May satisfy dedicated fans of the genre but is unlikely to win over newcomers.
More problems than positives. Fails to deliver on its potential or premise in meaningful ways. Only recommended for the most dedicated fans who know what they are getting into.
Significant and pervasive problems that undermine the experience. Hard to recommend to anyone. May have isolated moments of merit but they are not enough to redeem the whole.
Fundamentally broken or deeply flawed in almost every respect. Fails to deliver on its core premise. Not recommended under any circumstances except for curiosity.
A failure on almost every level. Not recommended under any circumstances. Reserved for content that is actively harmful, broken, offensive without purpose, or simply without any redeeming quality.
What We Evaluate
The criteria we consider when reviewing different types of content.
The specific criteria we use vary by content type. Below are the primary factors we consider for each category. Not every review will score all criteria - we use the breakdown scores where they add meaningful context.
Games
- Gameplay - mechanics, controls, feel, and moment-to-moment fun
- Story & Writing - narrative, characters, dialogue, and world-building
- Visuals - art direction, graphics, and overall presentation
- Audio - soundtrack, sound design, and voice acting
- Performance - technical stability, frame rate, and loading times
- Value - content volume relative to price and replayability
Films
- Story & Script - narrative structure, writing quality, and originality
- Direction - visual storytelling, pacing, and creative vision
- Performances - acting quality and character work
- Visuals - cinematography, production design, and effects
- Audio - score, sound design, and technical audio quality
TV Shows
- Writing - episode quality, season arc, and consistency
- Performances - lead and supporting cast work
- Direction & Visuals - production quality and visual storytelling
- Pacing - episode length, season structure, and momentum
- Rewatchability - long-term value and replay appeal
Review Copies & Relationships
How we obtain the content we review and what that means for our scores.
- Review copies do not influence scores. Receiving a review copy from a publisher, studio, or label does not guarantee a positive review, a specific score, or any review at all. We reserve the right to decline to publish a review if we feel we cannot give it a fair assessment.
- We disclose how we obtained review copies. At the bottom of each review, we note whether the content was provided by a publisher/studio/label, purchased by CoveredGeekly, or purchased personally by the reviewer.
- Embargoes are respected. Where we agree to a review embargo, we honour it. We do not accept embargoes that prevent us from publishing a negative review or that require us to omit material information.
- Conflicts of interest are disclosed. If a reviewer has a personal or professional relationship with a creator, publisher, or subject of a review, this is disclosed in the review. Where a conflict cannot be adequately disclosed, the review is reassigned.
- Sponsored content is never presented as a review. Paid partnerships and sponsored posts are clearly labelled as such and are kept entirely separate from our editorial review content. A sponsored post will never carry a score.
Score Changes & Corrections
When and how we update reviews after publication.
A published review reflects our assessment of the content at the time of review. In some circumstances, we may update a review or its score after publication. We are transparent about all such changes.
-
Factual Corrections
If a factual error is identified in a review - such as an incorrect release date, platform detail, or misattributed credit - we correct it promptly and note the correction at the bottom of the review with the date it was made.
-
Post-Launch Updates
Where a product is significantly changed after our review - such as a major game patch that fixes widespread technical issues, or a film re-cut for streaming - we may update the review to reflect the current state of the product. Any score change is clearly noted alongside the original score.
-
Review-in-Progress
For live-service games or ongoing series, we may publish a "review in progress" with an initial score that is updated as more content becomes available. This is clearly labelled at the top of the review.
-
Score Disputes
We do not change scores in response to reader disagreement or pressure from publishers. Scores may only be changed if there is a factual basis for doing so. If you believe a factual error has affected a score, contact us with the specific details.
Browse Our Reviews
Now that you know how we score, explore our latest reviews across games, films, and TV.
