It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This last Tuesday Valve employee Alden Kroll published a blog article addressing the issue of review bombing and their response to the problem. The article itself is very well written with an honest and transparent tone. If you haven't read it yet you should. You can find a link to the blog post from the MMORPG news article here.
Comments
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
- MMORPG.COM Staff -
The dead know only one thing: it is better to be alive.
Lets see ... 2k and their basketball game ... that company was found manipulating unfavourable reviews, while also including invasive microtransactions into their games. The game was bombed. Sure, the review manipulation is not directly related to the actual game, but it shows how easily "game journalists" and their scores are manipulated in favor of game companies.
No, user review need not only to stay, but become the prominent qualifier for any game. Had I known that gamers gave ME:Andromeda 5.5 as opposed to "game journalists" 7.5, I would have researched further into the problems and saved myself a bad purchase.
The bottom line is that unfortunately game journalist reviews on pretty much any site (too much carbon copying happening to rush those reviews) are unreliable. While the gamer reviews do have their issues, the bigger volume statistically and lack of influence from the game developers make them a more accurate indication of a game's quality.
Id say that a simple fix would be to exclude all old reviews of a game prior to an update before the current update. Give users the opportunity to update an old review after playing the game. In this fashion the priority is on the current release instead of the entirety of the games life. In addition, maybe state the amount of people who have updated the game so that the scores sample that the scores are from is represented.
It's a tool that some players abuse. There is a difference between having issues with a game and being pissy and trying to exact revenge. Hate those people. They bring down the community.
I don't put any more credence in player reviews than I do with professional reviewers. Players can have just as much of an agenda. And the idea that some of these players are so disenfranchised because they aren't getting their way that they can go and negatively (or positively) sway reviews is just as bad as "paid reviews".
I say take away the scores.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
have reviews but just don't have scores. And make it so that players have to have purchased the game if that isn't already a thing and that the review has to come a day after purchase and on, or something like that.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
less bethesda, that fuckers are trying the paid mods again with fallout4.
The idea behind a review bomb changing a problem with a game makes sense to me. It sounds good on paper. But at this point, what ends up coming of it most of the time. Absolutely nothing. It gives users the idea that they should rate something either 1 or 10. 1 if there is one problem with the game they don't like, and 10 if it's good to them. There's no in between, save for a few users who actually take time to think out a response. The main issue in my head is, users don't actually give things a chance. THIS GAME HAS DENUVO 1 OUT OF 10 REFUSE TO BUY. Game gets review bombed with 1 out of 10's because of DRM. When they are playing it on steam a platform made to be online DRM itself. I just think there needs to be some stipulations into what constitutes a review. It seems like people flock and score it based on what else they see, and it doesn't give games actual fair reviews. No game should be a 1 out of 10 unless it was unplayable, yet you see any time a review is negative on platforms like Metacritic or steam it's always one extreme or the other.
If a game takes away a feature, I think the potential buyers should be aware of that, but it shouldn't make the game get a 20% positive review status on steam. That will just turn away anyone who doesn't know any better. I don't know how to fix the situation myself, but it just seems like I pay less and less attention to user reviews and just watch videos myself because user reviews are usually just bombs in one way or another.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I retired retroactively..Haha
Lets take a look at some reviews for a visual novel. If you go look at any of those. Half the reviews are just people laughing at the fact that the game has animated girls with breasts in it. Or they are all just joke reviews, and the games get like 95% positive reviews. For no reason whatsoever. While a game like GTA V gets 50% negative because they took out modding, when that isn't anything to do with the actual game, just one feature in said game.
When it comes to reviews sure some may be legit but anytime you see a zero on a game you can guarantee its just some loser looking for attention. Same with official game forums, forums like this and reddit. Anytime a new game comes out its full of haters crying and jumping on whatever the hot topic for that game is just so they can get upvotes and feel important for a day in their life.
Too true. They let VAC banned users keep their accounts because they generate more revenue at expense of hackers in games like CS GO, CoD, etc. Classic greed.
Sometimes it is about mods or online when I am happy with vanilla offline. I think the people who are interested in the mods and online then should have the ability to know that they will be disappointed. I don't know how others decide about games but I do try and research. It is why I don't buy many new games now. Too dangerous to get something I don't like.
In my opinion it would simply be too much work for Valve to sift through each review to determine if it was a bomb or fair criticism.
The SWG NGE update was rightfully disliked by a large amount of the community. That wouldn't qualify as a review bomb. Marvel Heroes BUE last january was extremely unpopular. Between that poorly conceived update and all the time the company let end game stagnate, it was enough to get me to write a negative review. But there are still fanboys claiming people not liking the game as of that update were review bombers.
Always online single player games or day one paid DLC is a big nono for many. For me, negatively reviewing a game you didn't buy but that has those things is review bombing. But lambasting games like No Man's Sky, Mass Effect Andromeda or Sim City launches aren't.