Since the establishment of the gaming section in August 2015, Wccftech has quickly set out to provide its readers with professional, thorough, and objective game reviews so that our audience may be able to make informed choices on how to spend their hard-earned money and precious free time. These reviews are conducted by our dedicated team of experienced gaming journalists, whose credentials and areas of expertise are available for all our readers to see.
It did not take long at all for our work to be recognized by game developers, publishers, and industry aggregators like Metacritic and OpenCritic. Ten years later, over 1584 of our reviews have been aggregated on Metacritic, and an even greater number (1664) on OpenCritic, with the latter aggregator also underscoring our authority with the ‘Top Critic’ label. These figures keep growing each week as we publish new articles.
Disclaimer
All our reviews highlight, at the end of the body text, whether the game code was provided to Wccftech by its maker, and which platform the game was tested on.
To provide readers with game reviews as soon as possible (e.g., when the developer or publisher’s embargo expires), we, like all press and content creators, must adhere to their embargo guidelines, which may include things like not mentioning story specifics to avoid spoilers. However, under no circumstances would Wccftech agree to any sort of provisions that limit our freedom to evaluate the game however we see fit, such as (but not limited to) a minimum score or any undue praise. Should that ever be asked of us, we would refuse the code, and seek to purchase the game ourselves to be free of such limitations. Notably, to this date, this has yet to happen. You can read our detailed ethics and editorial guidelines for more information.
The Review Process
Our Commitment to Experience (Proof of Play) A credible review can only come from genuine, hands-on experience. Our process ensures every game is given the time and attention it deserves.
- Time Investment: For most single-player games, our goal is to play through the main story to its conclusion. For expansive open-world titles, multiplayer games, or live-service games, our reviewers are required to spend a significant amount of time—typically no less than 30 hours—engaging with the core gameplay loops and community features to form a comprehensive opinion. We will always endeavor to include our playtime in our reviews to give readers full transparency.
- Proof of Play: All our reviews feature a gallery of original, high-quality screenshots and video clips captured directly by the reviewer during their playthrough. This provides our readers with tangible, transparent proof of our hands-on experience.
Our Evaluation Criteria To ensure a thorough and balanced analysis, we evaluate games based on a consistent set of criteria. While every game is unique, our reviews will generally assess the following pillars:
- Gameplay & Mechanics: How does the game feel to play? Are the core systems intuitive, engaging, and well-executed?
- Story & Narrative: Is the plot compelling? Are the characters well-developed and the world-building immersive?
- Presentation: This covers art direction, sound design, and music. Does the aesthetic serve the experience and create a memorable atmosphere?
- Performance & Technical Stability: How well does the game run on its target platform(s)? We report on frame rates, bugs, and any technical issues that impact the player experience.
Upon receiving a game code for review purposes, our authors will endeavor to play it as much as possible before writing the article, delving deeply into all of its aspects, from the narrative to the gameplay, as well as the technical aspects like visuals, sound, AI, possible bugs, et cetera. Whenever possible, authors with expertise in the genre are picked to ensure they can properly assess the game’s quality while also taking into account how it fares against similar titles.
Sometimes, game developers and publishers only share a game code very close to its public launch. This can happen for various reasons, and it could lead to a later publication of our review. Alternatively, we may decide to publish a work-in-progress review (a format recognized by Metacritic, for instance), which would be unscored until such time as we feel comfortable with completing the article and assigning a final score.
As a general rule, our authors will try to complete at least the game’s main path before getting to writing, though again, that may not always be possible depending on how large it is and how early we receive access.
Our reviews will endeavor to include our playtime, thus giving readers information of how much time we spent in the review process.
Our Scoring Process
Wccftech’s scoring system follows the 1-10 scale including decimals to give us a wide spectrum of scores to assign. Historically, video game scores have always skewed towards the latter half of the scale, and we do not seek to change that standard.
As such, here’s what you can expect at a very general level from our ratings:
5.9 or lower score: a mediocre game that includes plainly dated elements (technical and/or design) and may also feature many bugs.
6-6.9: a game that does the bare minimum it is expected of a title in its genre in the year it releases on. It may still offer some fun here and there, but is certainly lacking in multiple areas.
7-7.9: a solid game that does not particularly shine compared to its peers, but is also crafted well enough in most respects to make itself interesting to its intended audience.
8-8.9: a very well-made game that probably excels at least in one area and is sure to provide plenty of fun to many players.
9-9.9: an excellent, Game-of-the-Year worthy game that will be remembered for years to come.
10: a rare game that becomes the new benchmark against which future titles will be compared. Often, it also marks a historical turning point in the genre due to its game design and/or technical elements.
Questions about our reviews or review process or want to submit your indie game for a review? Contact us!
You can reach the editorial staff at [email protected]
Last Updated:
September 17, 2025
