Perhaps I'm not doing this right...

When I start up a new game, I consider it a three-star game.

If I complete the game, never noticing anything outstanding, but still interested enough to play through, it is a three-star game.

If I notice a lot of poor spelling and/or grammar, or if the author made a crazy font and/or color choice, etc...

Yeah. It's a two-star game, but I probably won't review it, unless I think my criticism may be constructive.

(I won't give a game one star. I'll just leave it be. No unkind words from me.)

If I am entertained by something or other frequently, it gets four stars.

If I laugh and/or curse the author nearly every time I enter a command, it's a FIVE-STAR game.

Sound about right to everyone?

Or should I start 'em off with 5 stars, then deduct appropriately?

Sounds perfect. That’s basically what I do but I put a little more emphasis on ‘find it interesting’, especially early on. I place weight on uniqueness too.

Nice rating system! I agree with it as well! :D But why did this come up in the first place?

I was just making sure I wouldn't be messing up the "curve" before I started reviewing some stuff.

I plan to stop coding for a couple of days and get to playing some games!

(Nawmean, Jellybean?)