Reviews Explained

UPDATED AS OF 2018

For blaster reviews the overall format of the reviews is going to stay the same but the rating system is going to be changed from a 1-5 scale to a 1-10 scale. I'm hoping this will eliminate some confusion with the decimals in the old scaling and broaden the amount of things the scale covers. This is a rough generalization because other factors can cause a rating to change and not all blasters perfectly fit these categories. For example, a Hornet AS-6 has the good performance of a 7 but the god awful reliability and ease of use issues of a 2. An oddity like this averages out to a 5 as a result. The Verdict section offers a generalization of the blaster's specifications.

1. Absolutely the lowest form of garbage anyone can produce. Either does not work at all or performs at extremely poor levels at less than 10 feet. Build quality is terrible, comfort is negligible. (i.e. Atomizer Slingshot, Expand-a-Blast)
2. Slightly above a 1 in terms of performance at 10 to 20 feet but still considered terrible. Build quality and reliability may be poor. Generally not be well suited for most users. (i.e. Venom Shot, Warthog)
3. Weak performance at 10 to 30 feet. Build quality and reliability may be decent but generally poor. May or may not be well suited for most users. (i.e. Deploy CS-6, Sawtooth)
4. Below average performance at 20 to 30 feet. Build quality and reliability varies between decent or poor. May or may not be well suited for most users. (i.e. Mad Hornet, Electric Eel)
5. Average performance of 20 to 40 feet. Build quality and reliability varies between average or poor. Comfort and ease of use also may vary between decent and poor. (i.e. Burstwave, Sharpfire)
6. Average performance of  30 to 40 feet. Build quality and reliability varies between decent or poor. Comfort and ease of use also may vary between good and poor. (i.e. Maverick REV-6, Recon CS-6)
7. Performs at a decent level of 30 to 50 feet, most good older blasters can fall under this category. Build quality is decent and may or may not be reliable. Decently suited for most users. (i.e. Lock n' Load, Blastfire DX-500)
8. Performs at a good level of around 40 to 50 feet. Build quality is good and holds up to use fairly well. Generally well suited for most users. (i.e. Longshot CS-6, Stryfe)
9. Performs at a very good level of around 50 to 60 feet with good accuracy. Build quality is notably good and holds up to to use well. Generally well suited for most users. (i.e. Pyragon, Apollo XV-700)
10. Performs at an excellent level of around 50 to 70+ feet with great accuracy. Build quality is strong and holds up very reliably. Is comfortable and easy to operate for all users. (i.e. Rapidstrike CS-18, Zeus MXV-1200)

Electronics and other miscellaneous reviews won't operate on a 1 to 10 scale and will instead be generalized on a "pros and cons" bullet list since there are too many factors to consider in many of these cases so it's far more easy on myself rather than trying to condense general item reviews on a 1 to 10 scale that I don't feel will work as well. The iPad for example:

• Support for one of the best styluses in the game.
• Cheaper than any iPad in Apple's whole lineup, and even some competitors.
• Signature Apple build quality.
• iOS is as butter smooth and simple to use as it's always been.
• The camera is decent, but falls short in low light.
• Higher spec'd models, including the Pencil can drive the price up.
• Feels like a very, very minor update, especially without the Pencil.
• If you already own an older model and don't plan on using the Pencil, it's not worth it.

Most reviews will receive an Is It Better Than? section that briefly compares the product with up to three similar contenders with a "Yes", "No", or "Depends" statement followed by an explanation.