Steam Users Reviews are going to be "Revisited" - TL;DR: "They bent the knee"

[Monsieur Guillotine]

I'm for this. I made the mistake of looking up reviews for Fallout 4 during the introduction of that paid DLC workshop thing, and it was in the red from all the reviews being assmad spergs professing "hurr fuck bethesda for implementing this thing i can easily ignore". I swear these are the same chuds who post that "ADD IT VALVE CAUSE IT'S EPIC" on every Steam Workshop submission.

EDIT: I forgot that chuds hate being called out.

 

[Y2K Baby]

I made the mistake of looking up reviews for Fallout 4 during the introduction of that paid DLC workshop thing, and it was in the red from all the reviews being assmad spergs professing "hurr fuck bethesda for implementing this thing i can easily ignore".

The reviews for Fallout 4 should have been red from the start.

 

[ApatheticViewer]

Steam :: Steam Blog :: User Reviews Revisited

Some time ago we made some changes to how we presented the User Reviews for games, and their resulting Review Score. We talked about those changes in this blog post . As we describe in that post, we want to ensure that players who've played a game can voice their opinions about why other people...

steamcommunity.com

Eh just use dissenter and rate games there. Wtf are they gonna do?

 

[Neet Tokusatsu]

I guess visual novels porn games will no longer have lots of ironic positive reviews

 

[whatever I feel like]

Yeah, I somewhat agree with this. Posting negative reviews without playing the game sucks.

 

[Slap47]

I also don't care much about DRM, for all its evils and dumbassery, it's ultimately what's making PC a viable platform to begin with.

No, tearing your hair out because of GFWL is worth a mention in a review.

 

[Juan But Not Forgotten]

So all they have to do now is write "This game has nothing good to offer, terribly optimised and now they are trying to pander to SJWs" instead of ASCII art with a guy shitting game's title?

 

[Done]

No, tearing your hair out because of GFWL is worth a mention in a review.

I personally never had an issue with any DRM in any game (obviously YMMV here, but I honestly never noticed it at all).

The problem is, you get reviews that are just whining about DRM being there, without actually having anything to add to whatever technical issues people may be having with with it.

 

[Carpenter Trout]

I personally never had an issue with any DRM in any game (obviously YMMV here, but I honestly never noticed it at all).

The problem is, you get reviews that are just whining about DRM being there, without actually having anything to add to whatever technical issues people may be having with with it.

yes, but there are also many reviews that clearly states why that drm is terrible. for example: denuvo in sonic mania made it needlessly heavier (with denuvo: 117MBs, without it: 2.96MBs), and its also somewhat more cpu intensive, which in games like Monster Hunter World can make the difference between lagging and going somewhat fine.

While other DRMs are straight-up spywares. Like the Kerbal Space Program's one. They also changed their TOS so they stated that.

Although the DRM topic should be discussed in the game's forums, not in the reviews. I agree with you with that, that's hilariously stupid.

Spoiler

"get a new pc"
Not everyone can afford it, and besides, it's their problem is they want or not. So I kind-of understand why they hate denuvo. I,on the other hand, dislike denuvo not only because it's completely useless nowadays, but because the denuvo makers used pirated softwares themselves. nice hypocrisy there,m8. (that's a rumor, but seeing how jumpy they are avoiding answering the question, I can't complete rule it out.)
(Also I'm still trying to get a hold of a gti 1080, because right now my pc is bottlenecked by a 2009 GPU, a "ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series")

Eh just use dissenter and rate games there. Wtf are they gonna do?

Dissenter is quickly becoming the new meta.

edit:

Aaaand ofcourse Mr.Biggest neckbeard on the block aka the Quartering is jumping on this, cannot have a party without a drunk ass hack clown.

I liked his "ExclusivelyGames" shilling. At least there's another place to talk about games without being political about it (actually they banned politics from the forum, discord server and yt channel),and the channel itself is pretty ok. some of his videos were fairly ok (mainly the captain marvel ones),but some of them are complete nonsense (and he looks like a soyface with that beard of his.)
But yes,I agree with you that he does all this just for whytube money,that's clear as crystal. also you made me burst in a laughter, so cheers. <insert laughing emoji>

 

[Exodia_Apophis666]

So does that mean Gabe is a even bigger faggot than we ever thought for caving further to the color haired ass hats, and against Steam users? Yes. Yes it does

 

[Wake me up]

This looks OK and fair on the surface but:

1. There is no accountability. Steam can decide unilaterally what is a valid review bomb or not and they absolutely set zero guidelines. If they were serious about transparency, they'd have a feed publishing every time a "review anomaly" was detected and then what they chose to do about it and why. Otherwise, it's a cool new tool with grandiose ideals which is just going to invariably be misused in the long run.
2. DRM and EULA concerns, as they state themselves, are common motivations behind review bombing. If someone is going out of their way to warn others about their data being stolen and sold to third parties, it doesn't sit well with me that Valve is making an active effort to make sure they are all silenced. I understand their reasoning and it sounds honorable "on paper" but I cannot agree with them simply silencing thousands upon thousands of reviews that are made in good faith in an attempt to inform the potential consumer about their purchase. It's almost as if they're protecting privacy breaches ?

All of this sounds too much like institutionalized censorship for me to be comfortable when there's so little transparency in it. I can think of a dozen ways the same could be accomplished without being so blatantly defensive of developer and publishers.

 

[Tanner Glass]

Guys, this is kinda fair. I've seen people wallpaper games with a fat red thumbs down just because they're Chinese and the game isn't localized for them. A few people will repost negative reviews for kicks. Steam finally has some competition, it needs to make the publishers feel safe from the hapless bastards who can review-bomb games without actually buying them.

Jeremy/QuarterPounder just needs the clicks.

I agree with you that it's fair, but the examples you cited (someone reviewing bad because of a dumb reason, someone reviewing bad for fun) aren't actually what is being targeted here and those bad reviews will still be a thing after this change.

A review bomb is when a large group of people flood a game's review score for any reason, such as nonsense reasons "The developer said something I don't like on twitter"(Kingdom Come) or legit reasons "this game doesn't even partially resemble the demo footage and plays like garbage" (No Man's Sky).

I don't think it's a huge deal to the average game player, as if you were interested in No Man's Sky now, you likely don't care about how the game was in 2016 for anything other than trivial knowledge. As games evolve into "living products" (like NMS, Destiny, Warframe, TF2, etc) that change over time, historic reviews become less meaningful. This is further muddied by review bombs generated for nonsense, non-game reasons like political shit that the average game player could not care less about.

I think having toggle-able tools is a fair step, but Steam reviews aren't really a big thing for most people. I think a majority of people check out various YouTube videos, game demos, video game websites, and friend circles before engaging with Steam reviews. At least they're there, and at least they're trying.

 

[Stoneheart]

I don't think it's a huge deal to the average game player, as if you were interested in No Man's Sky now, you likely don't care about how the game was in 2016 for anything other than trivial knowledge. As games evolve into "living products" (like NMS, Destiny, Warframe, TF2, etc) that change over time, historic reviews become less meaningful. This is further muddied by review bombs generated for nonsense, non-game reasons like political shit that the average game player could not care less about.

They should just value play time and date of the review in their overall score and all is fine.

 

[Thiletonomics]

yes, but there are also many reviews that clearly states why that drm is terrible. for example: denuvo in sonic mania made it needlessly heavier (with denuvo: 117MBs, without it: 2.96MBs), and its also somewhat more cpu intensive, which in games like Monster Hunter World can make the difference between lagging and going somewhat fine.

While other DRMs are straight-up spywares. Like the Kerbal Space Program's one. They also changed their TOS so they stated that.

Although the DRM topic should be discussed in the game's forums, not in the reviews. I agree with you with that, that's hilariously stupid.

Don't forget about SecuROM bricking people's CD drives, and let's not even mention about the abomination that was StarForce...