Mr. Turtle Mar 10 @ 8:58pm
Five hours of playtime, minimum, for creating reviews?
I see people with like 0.2 hours of gameplay creating reviews, what gives?
I think you need more time with a product to figure out whether or not it's worth it, some games I feel need some time spent before you appreciate the product.

I haven't bought this game, but I think that this is a problem and I see a few examples.
20 minutes of playtime allows you enough experience to critique a game?
I think not, I never take reviews with five hours or less of game time seriously.

I'm not saying that this game is great, as I have never played it.
So please understand....
Showing 1-6 of 6 comments
< >
Reel Big Kris Mar 11 @ 9:45am 
We've had some negative reviews on our games from someone who has only played 0.1 hours of the game. I think the community have a good grip on when to call out reviews by looking at playtime and reading the text of the review. Developers should also aim to respond to negative reviews to address some concerns that the player has. It's important as a developer to know exactly why they stopped playing 2 hours in, what happened at that time and how can we improve it.

INS Shalindra Mar 12 @ 3:14pm 
Unfortunatly with UIG involved, I have no reason to play the game to give it a review. I have played a few games released by them. They release a broken buggy game. Then if you are lucky you might get 1 patch. After that, you will hear nothing from these developers. The dump it, re-skin and re tittle it and sell it again as another product with the same bugs and sometimes more than you had in the original.

Here are a few examples - Farming simulator, Agricultural simulator, Farming Titan. I believe thare are actually a few more. all are buggy and almost unplayable. Save your money when it comes to this publisher.
radioman970us May 23 @ 11:39am 
yep, playtime is the FIRST thing I look at now. Totally agree with the OP... 5 hours is a great number. You play less than an hour and post a review then you had your mind made up before you started playing.

There are MANY reviews on yourtube that I just call "Entertainment Reviews" since they are jus tthere to play, trash the game and make everybody laugh. Not to be taken seriously. Even a game that seems like a bad idea and even gives an awful first impression can surprise you after some hours of play. In fact, if it doesn't do that after about 5 hours then it really is a crap game and should be evaluated as such. I can think of many games that I didn't like at first, after an hour or so, then I came back and found that I had missed some thihngs about the game that made it more fun than I expected it would be....

the sim genre is something many don't quite understand (including some developers! lol).
Last edited by radioman970us; May 23 @ 11:41am
AJ May 26 @ 11:48am 
There's also the possibility some of those 0.1 hour folks re-bought the game on here after owning a non-Steam copy, either by choice or they ended up with it in a bundle and felt the need to warn others about it. Such was the case with the negative review I used to have up for Dawn of Fantasy: Kingdom Wars...which I took down after getting sick of having to clean up the "WAHHHH! You only played for 3 hours! You know nothing!" spam that became a daily occurrence from the fanboys.

I only look at negative reviews now, and only ones a vast majority of people downvote, since quite a few of those go into better detail than the high-vote salivating-fanboy positive ones with little helpful info beyond "I like it so buy it!".
Mr. Turtle May 26 @ 11:02pm 
Originally posted by Gypsy Horse:
There's also the possibility some of those 0.1 hour folks re-bought the game on here after owning a non-Steam copy, either by choice or they ended up with it in a bundle and felt the need to warn others about it. Such was the case with the negative review I used to have up for Dawn of Fantasy: Kingdom Wars...which I took down after getting sick of having to clean up the "WAHHHH! You only played for 3 hours! You know nothing!" spam that became a daily occurrence from the fanboys.

I only look at negative reviews now, and only ones a vast majority of people downvote, since quite a few of those go into better detail than the high-vote salivating-fanboy positive ones with little helpful info beyond "I like it so buy it!".

Those cases may exist where people rebuy a game for whatever reason and then feel compelled to write a review, but they're probably too small in number to matter for the nullification of such a community policy as I have proposed.

No I think it is a good idea to have a minimum amount of play-time allotted for there to be a review. Perhaps unless if it is an early-access title, due to the flexable nature of those titles making them more of a buyers gamble than some other complete products.
BillyR Dec 14 @ 9:08am 
I do agree with the 'several hrs' rule but in some cases the game may not fuction long enough to allow that. I think this game may be the latter. I was interested in this game but will hold off till it's been fixed. I don't think that this should be a community policy because 'bad' games that do not work the required amount of time will just get a 'pass' because the community will NOT be able to warn perspectib\ve buyers with a review.
Showing 1-6 of 6 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50