Thanks for bringing this up, it's always helpful to get feedback like this.
I see what you're saying, and to an extent it's true that in places like the Missions Depot at OFPEC where missions are reviewed, there's an unavoidable degree of subjectivity on the part of reviewers who will have a certain taste, a certain point of view when it comes to their enjoyment of a mission.
Despite our repeatedly reminding folks that the review score given to a mission is only ever a rough guide based on a broad selection of criteria, it's almost impossible to look at that big
7/10 on the page without it creating a preconception in a player's mind, even before they hit the Download button.
Then they play the mission and think "Shit what a waste of time! 7/10? Rubbish! So many cutscenes! Just gimme something to shoot at!"
That's the main reason why reviews are not just about the score: players can read the review and get a much better sense of what the mission's like. But even with that, it still comes down to them playing it themselves, and naturally they may have a very different opinion of the mission.
In order to tag missions for audience-type, we would have to start second-guessing what kind of mission suits what kind of audience, and to my mind that would get us even deeper into subjective territory: "You guys tagged this with
Action, but all I did was sit in a tank the whole time!"
This is why there's the possibility of members commenting on everything at OFPEC, either in beta threads on the forum or in the comments section of resources in the Depots. Resources can also be star-rated by members. The OFPEC staff go only so far in preparing the submitted content for download. It's then up to the members to make of it what they will, whether they're under 12 or over 50.