The annual 2K roster, along with the ratings thereof, have finally been confirmed in full, and WWE fans are - as ever - scratching their heads and wondering how it is their favourite is rated below this or that wrestler (this or that wrestler usually being Roman Reigns).
There is no shortage of comments from prospective players questioning why Shane McMahon of all people has been put in the mid-80s, or why Finn Bálor - with the addition of some face paint - suddenly becomes stronger than the likes of AJ Styles and The Undertaker.
But what about those whose ratings are too low?
We know that the methodology used to calculate scores probably has more to do with kayfabe performances - coupled, perhaps, with who Vince McMahon has earmarked as his next franchise player - than it does technical ability or favour with the audience.
But, even within that context, some of the ratings still seem a little on the low side. You wonder, for example, how a former world champion can be rated only one or two points higher than the SmackDown commissioner (and then you remember: he's the chairman's only son).