GOG says "we will not tolerate review bombing" after Hitman release sparks online DRM backlash

[AcidityLiquidity]

The only thing good about GoG is https://gog-games.com, that has most of their stuff not just DRM free, but regular free as well!

I've become so lazy thanks to that site I don't even bother with cracks, emus and all that shit. If it ain't on there I don't bother.

Although I still creamapi my legit games, because fuck $200 worth if DLC in some games.

 

[Stasi]

I wonder how much of this is the developer giving them shit in the background.

Hitman is still IO/Eidos/Square Enix whatever the fuck?

A stink being raise about one of their games being poorly reviewed? After they got a guy fired from GameSpot for giving Kane and lynch a shit review? I am shocked, shocked I tell you.

 

[Thiletonomics]

I wonder how much of this is the developer giving them shit in the background.

Hitman is still IO/Eidos/Square Enix whatever the fuck?

A stink being raise about one of their games being poorly reviewed? After they got a guy fired from GameSpot for giving Kane and lynch a shit review? I am shocked, shocked I tell you.

Hitman is under IO-Interactive solely now, as they parted ways with Square Enix sometime after Hitman 2016 came out. WB Games was the publisher for Hitman 2 (the 2018 game), and IOI is now self-publishing now, for Hitman 3.

 

[Jazz never died!]

Yar Har fiddle di dee!

 

[Thiletonomics]

Another thing that I wonder about GOG's statement, is how will they determine negative reviews to be "review bombing", instead of if a game is legitimately that awful. Let's say somehow, The Last of Us Part 2 gets put onto GOG's store, because Naughty Dog decided to make a PC port for the game, because Neil Druckmann wanted to show his masterpiece Over 200 Award Winning game to more people in the World. Would GOG lockdown negative reviews for TLOU2, because they anticipate a lot of people giving it negative reviews?

Also, would they include the same clause for games that get review raised, where people (or bots) spam positive reviews for the game, like what happened with Balan Wonderworld?

 

[The tired cat]

Another thing that I wonder about GOG's statement, is how will they determine negative reviews to be "review bombing", instead of if a game is legitimately that awful. Let's say somehow, The Last of Us Part 2 gets put onto GOG's store, because Naughty Dog decided to make a PC port for the game, because Neil Druckmann wanted to show his masterpiece Over 200 Award Winning game to more people in the World. Would GOG lockdown negative reviews for TLOU2, because they anticipate a lot of people giving it negative reviews?

Also, would they include the same clause for games that get review raised, where people (or bots) spam positive reviews for the game, like what happened with Balan Wonderworld?

I think the review bombing part boils down when it's not reviewing the game itself, but bitching about the whole "Y MUST I BE ONLINE TO PWAY!!! REEE!!! DIS GOES AGAINST MUH GoG USER VIEWS!!!" or some outside shit that has nothing to do with the game.

 

[Pissmaster]

GOG is a complete joke. They cut corners like crazy. They make it sound like they're rescuing and restoring old games, but tons of their releases are just slapped-together shit packed in with DOS emulators, widescreen mods, CPU fixes, or other third-party/freeware software to nigger-rig it into running on modern OS's. Stuff that anyone could do with a ripped ISO of an old retail disc and 5 minutes of Googling.

Steam tends to have the same sort of things anyway, and everything on Steam that runs through DOSBOX is a no-DRM version, just without the fancy installer.

Because it’s literally just DOSBOX and game files copied off of a retail disc

and if you care about DRM for newer games, just get the fitgirl repacks instead

 

[Lone MacReady]

man, i have not used GOG since playing the witcher 3. i cant even remember my password i think.

Got BladeRunner and the 3Drealms boomer shooters from them recently, while sailing the Caribbean.

 

[PetrifiedTom]

GOG is a complete joke. They cut corners like crazy. They make it sound like they're rescuing and restoring old games, but tons of their releases are just slapped-together shit packed in with DOS emulators, widescreen mods, CPU fixes, or other third-party/freeware software to nigger-rig it into running on modern OS's. Stuff that anyone could do with a ripped ISO of an old retail disc and 5 minutes of Googling.

Why didn't you do it then?

 

[Solid Snek]

View attachment 2572992

She even looks like the kind of person who would fuck up a customer service job by being too egotistical. Bet she took it as a personal slight they were upset.

Having a name like 'Semencowicz' probably doesn't help.

Customers can be so cruel. Won't somebody please think of the poor Community Management Leads?

Review bombing is review bombing, regardless of what dickweed party you aligned with.

How does one differentiate between a review bomb, and a 'legitimate' review? What even is a review bomb? And why should review bombing be a concern (for customers and normal people; mass negative reviews are obviously a concern for companies, as they want their games to have as much good press as possible)?

 

[ShoFuKan]

Yar Har fiddle di dee!

 

[The tired cat]

How does one differentiate between a review bomb, and a 'legitimate' review? What even is a review bomb? And why should review bombing be a concern (for customers and normal people; mass negative reviews are obviously a concern for companies, as they want their games to have as much good press as possible)?

I dunno, last I checked a legit review was talking about the game itself, if it works, has any issues, the gameplay/story stuff. Instead of the typical pissants whining about something a dev said on twatter, a company being bought out by another, or some other retarded shit (Example: Chinese gamers review bombing the new Life is Tumblr because it had the Tibetan flag in it). As for customers or nor people not caring much? Well, kinda, when a game gets review bombed and say a potential customer comes across it and sees all the negative scores/reviews are they gonna waste time going through each review to see if this is because the game is broken? Not really, they'll just look at the negative numbers and go "Oh, this game is probably bad" and will walk away.

 

[Solid Snek]

I dunno, last I checked a legit review was talking about the game itself, if it works, has any issues, the gameplay/story stuff. Instead of the typical pissants whining about something a dev said on twatter, a company being bought out by another, or some other retarded shit (Example: Chinese gamers review bombing the new Life is Tumblr because it had the Tibetan flag in it). As for customers or nor people not caring much? Well, kinda, when a game gets review bombed and say a potential customer comes across it and sees all the negative scores/reviews are they gonna waste time going through each review to see if this is because the game is broken? Not really, they'll just look at the negative numbers and go "Oh, this game is probably bad" and will walk away.

So if a game has DRM, would that not be "part of the game itself"? And if people are leaving negative reviews due to unwanted software and features like DRM, would that not, then, fail to qualify as "review bombing" - under the definition you found, last time you checked?
(Review bombing may be review bombing, but it's not review bombing when it's not review bombing. If that makes sense?)

And I guess I'm still not really seeing what the problem is for the customer. Yes, a lot of negative reviews may dissuade a customer from purchasing a game, but that's a problem for the company (again, companies want positive reviews to encourage sales). But it's not at all clear why this would be a problem for customers. The worst that could happen, so far as I can tell, is a casual buyer walking away and buying something else he'd enjoy.

 

[The tired cat]

So if a game has DRM, would that not be "part of the game itself"? And if people are leaving negative reviews due to unwanted software and features like DRM, would that not, then, fail to qualify as "review bombing" - under the definition you found, last time you checked?
(Review bombing may be review bombing, but it's not review bombing when it's not review bombing. If that makes sense?)

And I guess I'm still not really seeing what the problem is for the customer. Yes, a lot of negative reviews may dissuade a customer from purchasing a game, but that's a problem for the company (again, companies want positive reviews to encourage sales). But it's not at all clear why this would be a problem for customers. The worst that could happen, so far as I can tell, is a casual buyer walking away and buying something else he'd enjoy.

My issue is that I'd get if said DRM made the game run like crap or pretty much broke. It doesn't do that and people know this version of Hitman has DRM stuff, but act all shocked and betrayed by this and assume that it can be an easy fix, which I kinda doubt. I'd get it more if say they announced this version of Hitman was gonna be DRM-free, but even on the games page, they say you need an online connection. For fuck sake, when EA put their games on GoG, it still said you would need an Origin account for some of them. So again, what is the point of this screeching?

 

[Anonymus Fluhre]

Never trust the Polish, they're fuck over anyone/ thing.

 

[Solid Snek]

My issue is that I'd get if said DRM made the game run like crap or pretty much broke. It doesn't do that and people know this version of Hitman has DRM stuff, but act all shocked and betrayed by this and assume that it can be an easy fix, which I kinda doubt. I'd get it more if say they announced this version of Hitman was gonna be DRM-free, but even on the games page, they say you need an online connection. For fuck sake, when EA put their games on GoG, it still said you would need an Origin account for some of them. So again, what is the point of this screeching?

According to the article, the point of the screeching is because the game is bundled with DRM. A lot of customers hate DRM on principle, many more are wary of performance issues, and given that a lack of DRM has been a major selling point for the GOG platform, an unhappy customer base makes complete sense.

Maybe you don't think the DRM feature will negatively effect your experience...? In that case, great, feel free to leave a positive review of the game. Many other people disagree with you, though, and are leaving negative reviews.

I'm still not seeing why that's an issue, or why that constitutes "review bombing".

Unhappy customers != review bombing.

Customers who dislike a feature that you yourself are not personally bothered by, != review bombing.


It sounds to me more like this is a hamfisted attempt to give preferential treatment to a modern AAA studio, and to turn customer reviews (which are supposed to be neutral, honest reflections of the general state of satisfaction felt by the customer base) into curated advertisement streams (a problem which has plagued Steam for years, and is another reason why many customers choose GOG over its competitors).

 

[The tired cat]

According to the article, the point of the screeching is because the game is bundled with DRM. A lot of customers hate DRM on principle, many more are wary of performance issues, and given that a lack of DRM has been a major selling point for the GOG platform, an unhappy customer base makes complete sense.

Maybe you don't think the DRM feature will negatively effect your experience...? In that case, great, feel free to leave a positive review of the game. Many other people disagree with you, though, and are leaving negative reviews.

I'm still not seeing why that's an issue, or why that constitutes "review bombing".

Unhappy customers != review bombing.

Customers who dislike a feature that you yourself are not personally bothered by, != review bombing.


It sounds to me more like this is a hamfisted attempt to give preferential treatment to a modern AAA studio, and to turn customer reviews (which are supposed to be neutral, honest reflections of the general state of satisfaction felt by the customer base) into curated advertisement streams (a problem which has plagued Steam for years, and is another reason why many customers choose GOG over its competitors).

But the issue is that Hitman 2016 was always with DRM. What, do these idiots just assume that when it went on GoG the devs are gonna magically remove that thing from the game? That's not how that shit works, again some EA games that went to GoG also said how you'll need an Origin account to run them, yet I didn't see people bitch up a storm over that shit. So, why is THIS suddenly any different?

Also, customer reviews being neutral? Fucking bullshit on that alone, I've seen people write negative reviews on games because a dev said something on Twitter about a group they support/don't support, I saw people write negative reviews on a game because it got bought by another company and etc. Maybe in the past, we had customers be neutral. But now, it's a whole different thing.

 

[Uncle Warren]

GOG is a complete joke. They cut corners like crazy. They make it sound like they're rescuing and restoring old games, but tons of their releases are just slapped-together shit packed in with DOS emulators, widescreen mods, CPU fixes, or other third-party/freeware software to nigger-rig it into running on modern OS's. Stuff that anyone could do with a ripped ISO of an old retail disc and 5 minutes of Googling.

You're paying for the convenience of having an old game without all the hassle of all the shit you just listed being done already so it works out of the box. GOG has their stuff set up so normal users don't have to worry about looking for patchfixes and other things they probably won't even know exist.

 

[CreamyHerman’s]

But the issue is that Hitman 2016 was always with DRM. What, do these idiots just assume that when it went on GoG the devs are gonna magically remove that thing from the game? That's not how that shit works, again some EA games that went to GoG also said how you'll need an Origin account to run them, yet I didn't see people bitch up a storm over that shit. So, why is THIS suddenly any different?

Also, customer reviews being neutral? Fucking bullshit on that alone, I've seen people write negative reviews on games because a dev said something on Twitter about a group they support/don't support, I saw people write negative reviews on a game because it got bought by another company and etc. Maybe in the past, we had customers be neutral. But now, it's a whole different thing.

The issue with Hitman 2016 is how it saves your game: you will need to start an entirely new game if you want to play offline. That is bullshit and it doesn't need to work like that. And yes devs can remove drm from games easy. Prey(2017) has one of the most notorious implementations of Denuvo I have ever seen, and you would need to crack it again if it updated.

Also as far as I can tell, there aren't any EA games on GoG that require Origin. The ones I own don't require it at least, and they're the newest ones they added.

Complaining about a lack of features and a save feature that needs to be online to function is neutral. It's literally complaining about how the game has a intrusive type of DRM at the end of the day.

 

[Articles and Nudes]

The store page for Hitman said it was DRM free, and that an online connection wasn't required for activation or play.

It neglected to mention that progression, saves and unlocks all needed a persistent connection.