Video Game Rankings & Analysis

I rank video game elements — bosses, levels, mechanics, and full releases — from worst to best and easiest to hardest.

This isn’t about scores, sales or Metacritic averages. It’s about comparison. How one encounter stacks up against another. Why one game sticks with you, while another fades away — across franchises, series, and standalone releases.

I love the decisions a ranking forces.

“Art is a mirror, and our opinions are its reflections—each perspective unique, each reaction a proof of our individuality”

Why Rankings, Not Reviews?

A review asks whether something is “good.”

A ranking asks how good it is relative to everything else.

Most games aren’t experienced in isolation. We compare bosses to earlier fights. Sequels to their predecessors. Rankings reflect how players actually think about games — in hindsight, in context, and over time.

And, it allows elements that are all excellent to be parsed out through intricate, detailed discussion. How do you rank two games that are a 10/10? That’s where I come in.

How I Rank Video Games

Every ranking on this site follows the same core philosophy: subjective, but consistent.

I’m not pretending objectivity. I am applying the same lens across every entry.

When ranking games or game elements, I consider:

– Design clarity – how readable mechanics, patterns, and systems are
– Fair challenge – is the contest too punishingly difficult or too easy?
– Mechanical depth – how much room there is for mastery and expression
– Memorability – moments that stick long after you turn the game off
– Execution – how well the game delivers on its own ideas
– X-Factor – are there any jaw-dropping moments that will go down in history?

Not every ranking weighs these equally. A boss list values different things than a full game ranking. But the underlying question is always the same:

How well does this actually work compared to the rest?

red fantasy landscape heroes and knights

Franchises & Series Rankings

Most games aren’t isolated experiences. They exist inside a lineage.

A trilogy refines mechanics, tone, and difficulty over time. Entire franchises evolve — sometimes improving, sometimes losing something essential along the way.

That’s why many of my rankings focus on full game series, not just individual entries.

Ranking a franchise means asking bigger questions:

How did the combat evolve from game to game?
Did the atmosphere deepen — or dilute?

Looking at a series as a whole reveals patterns you don’t see in isolation.

knight approaching irithyll of the boreal valley

Subjective by Design

These rankings reflect my experience: how I played, what challenged me, what frustrated me, and what impressed me.

That means:

Solo runs where applicable
No obligation to agree with consensus

Disagreement isn’t a flaw here — it’s the point. Rankings invite comparison, discussion, and re-evaluation over time. I even disagree with myself over time. Years after an initial ranking, an opinion can change.

I hope to hear from you, and how wrong you think I am, in the comments!