I used to have a "Games" section in Carbon-izer.com, before spinning it off as Exor's Dungeon. The section featured some reviews of games (later modified to just "games I played") and some other content, like guides to some of my favorite games that weren't as well-documented on the Internet as I'd like.

Basically the main three issues that I had found was this:

- The Games section integrated poorly with the rest of the site. This was inherent.

- I was expanding out on content (beyond Yoot Tower) and figured that Yoot Tower Guides was not the place to store them.

- The "Games I Played" section was modeled after Kentie.net, but even then at its height (2012), there were only a few sentences. The last three years as documented (2013-2015) was just a list with no commentary. But no one visits Kentie.net for that anyway, they want the Deus.Exe fix.

What I wanted to do was:

After giving this a bit of thought and browsing around, I ended up deciding that Ross' Big Game List would be a good format, because he posts games he's interested in, and has some good criteria. His video (linked to it on his main page) at about six minutes in describes some of these--no asset flips, no microtransactions, single player experiences, no casual games, no "games as service", and are "real game experiences" (whatever that means).

It might be a bit rash to list games I'm only interested in; I'm not trying to make a curated Steam list, and it doesn't rank interests. Despite that, there were more than a few things that I liked about his format. The game box art was a pain to get and in the case of TeenAgent when I wrote up the review, I didn't add it because it was just that bad. I'm not aping his format as I have decided to make my own criteria:

Absolutes:
- It is an actual published game, even if it is a freeware game.
- It is not a demo.
- It is not solely played online or composed of a single file (like how some Flash games could technically be "downloaded" as single .swf files)

In addition to that, it must have one of four qualities:
- I have played this game and I have beaten it.
- I have played this game and sunk a significant amount of hours into it (for games that are either open ended or I have yet to defeat the boss)
- I have played this game and I still intend to beat it.
- I have purchased this game at some point and have played it, decided to abandon it early on, and it has gotten me enough to write about it.

There are a few games that don't actually make that criteria: Urban Yeti!, The Fish Files, and The Colonel's Bequest don't. Still, all of them will go to the new list. Indiana Jones & The Last Crusade would be a fourth and not qualify ordinarily but I'll give it another try--and grab that wine bottle this time! Even from the 2018 list, Quarterstaff: The Tomb of Setmoth is a borderline case.

Here's how the ratings work. I am not a game reviewer and thus these aren't reflective of one-to-five stars or whatever.

	GREAT	Some of the best games I've played and would put in my "top x" list.
	GOOD	Nice, good games that I liked.
	FLAWED	This game would rank very high but there was probably a major issue or two that prevented it from getting up there. Probably equivalent to "Great" if it wasn't for these issues, but may even rank closer to "Solid".
	SOLID	This game had a lot of good things I liked, and was fairly average. I could probably point out things that would've made this better.
	MEH	This game was completed but I wasn't too impressed with it, even if it had some enjoyable parts.
	REJECTED	This game was not finished or otherwise abandoned because it wasn't good, or at least, good enough for me.
	NO RATING	For some reason or another, maybe it's just too clouded by nostalgia or not really a game that CAN be rated, it gets this one.