Gamorium's take

An idle collection loop where random races generate progress with minimal decisions.
the cheat-test profile
Each axis is rated on its own - how far one cheat would trivialize the game here. They don't trade off; low on all four means the game is an experience, not a contest.
cheat: Aimbot - perfect inputs
Races run automatically with no player input
cheat: Out-predict an adaptive opponent
No adaptive opponents - races are simulated RNG
cheat: See what's hidden / map the RNG
Race outcomes are random rolls you cannot influence directly
cheat: A perfect solver / coach
Marble collection and tray choices are the only lever
Each axis is named by the cheat that would break the game along it. Execution is the hands. Reads is out-thinking an adaptive opponent. Variance is hidden information & RNG. Optimization is the solvable systems layer. A game's region is the top one or two axes.
These four aren't one rating split four ways - they're independent 0-10 questions. A 9 on one axis takes nothing from the others, and a game low on all four isn't missing data: it's telling you there's no skill here to cheat.
The basis is how the majority actually plays this game - not a niche mode or a personal run. For a game with very different modes (a story campaign versus ranked multiplayer), that's the version most people mean.
Ranked by shared genre first, then by how closely the cheat-test profile matches - a cross-genre tag means a pick matched on skill profile alone.

Orwell: Keeping an Eye on You
Systems & Chaos · surveillance narrative sim

Totally Accurate Battle Simulator
Systems & Chaos · physics battle simulator
cross-genreDisco Elysium: The Final Cut
Systems & Chaos · narrative RPG