Every tier list you've watched was stale the day it was posted. This one is recomputed from data that updates daily — review aggregates, update cadence, and monetization fairness — and every placement explains itself. One tier list is a lie, so pick your lens.
Live data refreshed 2026-09-12 · refreshes daily · formula published below · no editorial thumb on the scale
Review quality, update cadence, and monetization fairness — the all-rounder view.
S
A
B
C
D
Tap a game to see why it sits where it sits. 12 playable games are excluded from this lens (not enough data, or the lens doesn't apply).
Each playable game gets a 0–100 composite score per lens (formula v2), from three inputs the site already tracks: review aggregate (Steam / user / critic, weighted), update cadence, and monetization fairness (inverted pay-to-win perception). Lenses re-weight the mix — for casuals, casual-friendliness and low grind carry as much as review quality; for PvP, fairness weighs double because pay-to-win ruins PvP fastest. Population activity is deliberately not an input: it is observational evidence, not a quality signal, and never moves a placement.
Tiers: S ≥ 80 · A ≥ 69 · B ≥ 56 · C ≥ 44 · D below. Absolute thresholds — a weak year means a thin S tier, not a curved one.
Early Access costs 4 points — unfinished is a risk no score should hide.
Unreleased games are never tiered. Hype is not a tier.
Games without enough sourced review data are excluded rather than guessed at.
Disagree with a placement? Good — the inputs are on every game's page. If our data is wrong, tell us and we fix the data, not the tier.