I often see people asking on forums, what criteria are used to score games? Some people say it depends on mood, some people say it depends on the recharge experience, and some people say it depends on whether the promotional video is enough. Today I just want to borrow the game "Tanks OL" to talk about my personal scoring logic, and by the way, I can give a reference to friends who haven't jumped into the game yet.
Let me talk about the conclusion first. My rating for "Tanks OL" is 7.5 points (out of 10). This score is not high, but it is definitely not low either. It falls into the category of "playable, with highlights, but don't expect it to be a masterpiece of the year". Let's take it apart below.
Picture dimension, 7 points. To be honest, I have seen a lot of military-themed browser-style mobile games. The UI of this one is clean and neat, and the details of the tank modeling are at an above-average level among similar games. The animation of the main city construction is very smooth, and when you click on it, there will be a "bang" feedback feeling, which is quite exciting. However, the particle effects and light and shadow are a bit old-school. After all, it is an old game and cannot be held to 2025 standards. People may think that the picture is not exquisite enough, but for me, it is enough to be able to clearly distinguish the various military types without irritating the eyes.
Gameplay dimension, 8 points. This is its most bragging point. "With a gentle click, a military fortress rises from the ground; with a simple drag, millions of armors roar past." This slogan is really not bragging. The operation is indeed ridiculously simple. It took me two minutes to figure out how to build troops, how to form troops, and how to go on an expedition. Five minutes later, I was already fighting an NPC base. The feeling of "dong dong dong" several rounds of volleys flattening the opponent was indeed the pleasure of being a commander. Moreover, its growth line is very smooth, and the early rewards are very generous. Almost every task completed will give you resources and acceleration, so that you will always have something to do and will not be stuck in a certain place. But don't expect too much in terms of depth. Tactical matching is basically stacking values and unit restraint. In the middle stage of the game, it will feel a bit repetitive. It is a typical "more than enough refreshing, insufficient strategy". So I give it 8 points for the gameplay, neither plus nor minus.
Krypton gold dimension, 9 points. It must be noted here that the charging mode of this game is "0", which means it is free to download, and I have confirmed after playing it that it does not have any mandatory payment points. Resources can be obtained through idle, missions and looting, and VIP can also be slowly accumulated using in-game currency. Although it certainly has places that encourage you to spend money, such as accelerated queues and advanced treasure chests, players who don't want to spend money can still play it, but the pace is slower. Compared with the "you will be killed like a pig if you don't recharge" experience in similar SLGs, "Tanks OL" is simply a clean slate. Therefore, I give the Krypton Gold Dimension a very high score, 9 points. One point is deducted because the limited-time gift packs it occasionally offers are indeed a bit annoying.
Social dimension, 6 points. It has a legion system and can support each other with friends, but the overall feeling is relatively weak. In the chat channel, apart from calling people to fight and posting battle reports, there are not many cooperative tasks or social gameplay. You can completely play it as a single player, social interaction is just the icing on the cake. However, considering that the core of this game is "torture the whole audience", it is understandable that the social skills are weak. 6 points, passing.
Adding up the four dimensions and averaging them, we actually get a score of 7.5. I know some people will say, I just play this game to have fun, why do I have to be so low-ranking? Some may also say that the picture is so old school, why is it 7.5? This is the point I want to talk about: game ratings should not be an absolute value, but a frame of reference.
For example, if you compare the graphics of "Tank Online" with those 3A masterpieces, then it will not even score 3 points. But if you put it in the categories of "mobile real-time strategy" and "lightweight military SLG", its operational smoothness and entry threshold are among the best in the same price range. For another example, some games have perfect plots but poor gameplay, and some games have top-notch graphics but high financial costs. If you use only one dimension to calculate the total score, you will definitely be biased. So I have always insisted that the rating depends on who its target users are - if you are a player who likes military themes, has a lot of spare time, doesn't want to use his brain but wants to experience the thrill of crushing, then this game is definitely worth 8 points or more. But if you're looking for in-depth strategy, social interaction, or ultimate picture quality, then it may not even be enough to pass.
Finally, let me tell you something from the bottom of my heart: "Tank Online" is not the kind of masterpiece that will blow you away, but it is very honest. It tells you clearly: Come on, click a few times, have a shot, and feel good. Not artificial, not too high-end. In this impetuous era where "immersive open world" and "revolutionary gameplay" are constantly being pursued, this kind of down-to-earth, simple and fun game makes me feel a little better.
So my final score is 7.5 points, and I recommend it to all friends who want to be a commander but are too lazy to use their brains. Give it a try and play it twice, then come back and ask yourself: Is it fun? It's enough to feel good. Ratings are for reference only, your own experience is the truth. 😄
Above, I am a game reviewer. See you in the next game.