Reader feedback
What readers make of our coverage
Messages sent to the desk, reproduced with permission and lightly edited for length. Names and cities are published only where the sender agreed.
4.5
Average reader rating
6
Published messages
100%
Unpaid, unsolicited
★★★★★
"The comparison notes are the part I use most. It is rare to find a write-up that tells you what a portal is weak at, not just what it advertises."
★★★★★
"I appreciated that the mobile testing was described in detail. Most of my browsing happens on a five-year-old phone and that is usually ignored."
★★★★★
"Clear language, no hype, and the entries actually say when something was last checked. That alone puts it ahead of most listings."
★★★★★
"I sent a correction about an outdated link and it was fixed within a couple of days, with a note on the entry. That is how it should work."
★★★★★
"The criteria page made it obvious how the ratings are formed. I could disagree with a score and still see exactly how it was reached."
★★★★★
"Useful for picking something to play with my kids. The tone stays factual and the age guidance is stated plainly."
First session clarity
How quickly a new visitor understands what the portal offers, and whether the first ten minutes require any outside guidance.
Interface discipline
Navigation depth, readability at small sizes, and how much of the screen is given to content rather than promotion.
Technical behaviour
Load times on an average New Zealand connection, stability across sessions, and behaviour on mid-range mobile hardware.
Content depth
Whether the catalogue holds up beyond the first weeks: variety, update cadence and the presence of long-form progression.
Transparency
How clearly the operator states its terms, account rules, age limits and what it does with the data it collects.
Support and recourse
Documented contact routes, published response expectations and the quality of the help material a player can reach unaided.
Reader messages do not change a published score. They are used to decide which portals we re-check first, and to catch factual errors quickly.