How we review

1. Official sources only

Facts come from the publisher’s own site: homepage, features, rules, help pages, changelogs, terms and press kits. We keep a list of the pages we read for every game and show the key ones at the bottom of each review. Store listings and fan sites can point us somewhere, but they don’t count as confirmation.

2. Is it alive?

A game enters the grid only if, on the day we check, the official site shows signs of current activity: a season in progress, a countdown to the next race, recent changelog entries or journal posts, and open registration. Games that have closed or no longer answer are left out, however good they once were.

3. Platform, said plainly

We state whether a game runs in a browser, has apps, or both — and if something is desktop-oriented or has a technical quirk, we say so.

4. Money, in neutral words

We describe the business model as the publisher does: free to start, and what optional purchases, subscriptions or supporter programmes exist. We don’t quote prices we couldn’t see without an account, and we don’t speculate about what isn’t published.

5. Time, as a rhythm

We describe how a game uses your week — fixed race nights, live sessions, daily check-ins — using the publisher’s own figures where they exist. Where they don’t, our view is labelled as our read, never presented as a measurement.

6. What we leave out

• Player numbers, even when a site displays them: they change daily and prove little.
• Ratings, scores and stars, in the text and in structured data.
• Quotes or testimonials from players.
• Anything we couldn’t confirm on an official page.

7. Corrections

Games change. If a schedule, platform or business model has moved on since our check, tell us and we will re-check the official pages and update the review. Each review shows the month it was last checked.