Good critical gaming theory is

• Falsifiable and verifiable
• Extensible and scalable
• Reconfigurable
• Helps design and prediction
• Does not confuse prescription with description
• Is useful (even if wrong) for finding new methods and questions
• Understands distinction between method and methodology
• Is clear and honest about its central aims objectives tasks targets/milestones
• Attempts for validity and soundness of purpose of argument
• Bridges (or at least offers something of value to) academia, the profession and the public/fans

I will have to justify (and provide examples for) each of these propositions..