We tell you
what to play.
No sponsors. No review embargoes that change our score. No 9/10s for everything. Just honest verdicts from someone who actually understands how games are built — and cares whether you waste your money on a bad one.
The person behind the verdicts
Kirtted is a pen name — and it stays that way. What matters isn’t who I am in real life. What matters is whether the review is honest.
I’ve been playing games since I was old enough to hold a controller. But this isn’t just a hobby — I hold a degree in Game Design, specializing in 3D modeling with a focus in 3D character art. I’ve studied the art pipeline, character rigging, game mechanics, level design, storytelling, and pacing from the inside. I know what it takes to ship a game — and I know when a studio cut corners, phoned in a story, or genuinely nailed something.
That background shapes every review here. When I call out flat animations, a broken progression curve, or lazy enemy AI, it’s not a gut feeling — it’s trained observation. When I say a game has excellent pacing or a combat system that actually respects your time, I can tell you exactly why.
But I’m still just a regular player. I buy my own games. I pay for my own subscriptions. Nobody sends me check-ins. Nobody’s money is influencing what lands on this page.
Why Next Save Point exists
Gaming media has a problem. Almost everything gets a 7 or above. Controversial games get softened scores to keep access. Sponsored content wears the costume of a review. You can’t tell whether a 9/10 means “genuinely great” or “publisher flew us to Paris for a preview.”
Next Save Point was built to be the opposite of that. Three verdicts. No middle-ground inflation. If a game isn’t worth your money right now, we say so — loudly, on the front page, in big stamped letters. A SKIP verdict costs a studio real trust. That’s the point.
Games are expensive. Your time is limited. Our job is to save you both.
The BUY / WAIT / SKIP system
Every review ends with one of three verdicts. Here’s what they actually mean:
This game earns your money at launch. The experience justifies what you’ll pay. We’re not saying it’s perfect — we’re saying it’s worth it.
Either it needs a patch or two, or it’ll hit a sale in three months and be a better purchase then. Check back. Don’t rush.
Life is short. There are too many great games for you to spend time on this one. We’ll tell you where your time is better spent instead.
Every review also includes a numerical score (0–10) broken down across categories like gameplay, story, art, and performance — so you can see exactly where a game earns or loses points, not just an averaged-out impression.
What we will never do
- Accept money for a score. No studio, publisher, or PR firm can buy a verdict here.
- Soften a score to keep review access. If a SKIP verdict gets us blacklisted, so be it.
- Review a game we haven’t finished. Every verdict is based on a complete playthrough.
- Hide an affiliate relationship. If a buy link earns us a commission, it’s disclosed.
- Bury your vote. Community scores live right next to our verdict on every page. Agree or disagree — it’s all visible.
One voice is a review. Ten thousand is a verdict.
Every review on Next Save Point has a community vote beneath it. You cast PLAY, WAIT, or SKIP — and your vote shapes the community score that sits alongside ours on the board.
We built this because we’re aware of something: one person’s taste isn’t the whole picture. Maybe you love what I hated. Maybe a game I called WAIT is a BUY for your specific taste. The community vote exists so that picture is always visible — not buried, not averaged away, right there on the front page.
Disagree with us? Good. Vote PLAY on a game I called SKIP and tell the world. That’s the point of this place.