These are interesting categories that seem (at least to me) to neatly describe the vast majority of games out there. Would you also consider the existence of a "Garfield" category? Games such as Garfield Kart (2012) and Lasagnator (1991) are sufficiently complex and multifaceted that I don't feel comfortable sorting them into any of the existing categories.
IFuckingLoveGarfield!!!!!
Recent community posts
I take issue with this game's use of a rubric. First off, I think outlining such a specific rubric decreases the quality of the reviews people write. I am reminded of Goodhart's law: "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure." Because you prescriptively outlined what makes reviews "good" or "bad", you have incentivized people to withhold their authentic opinions in favor of optimizing for your criteria. As an example, if Garfield creator Jim Davis was given a rubric for success while creating Garfield in the 1950s, it is unlikely that he would have come up with Garfield's charmingly cynical personality.
The categories in the rubric also seem frivolous - a review doesn't need to be tearjerking or even funny to be helpful. All that matters is that the user gains enough information about the game - such as its gameplay, story, or amount of Garfield content - so that they can make an informed decision about playing the game.
My main suggestion would be to turn this game into an MMORPG with dating sim elements, and also all the characters are from the beloved hit comic series Garfield, which has also been adapted into TV series, video games, films, and a stage musical. If that is too much work, I would also begrudgingly accept the addition of a "Garfield" category to the rubric, which rates how much the review incorporates references to Garfield.