Strange reviews

[Banemus]

Some people do weird things in the review section.

When I look at some of these reviews, these players have played the game for 20+ hours. Give a long explanation about not finding this a good game ... that you played for 20+ HOURS??

You pay 15+ euro for a movie in the cinema that lasts for 2 hours but here you play the game for 20+ HOURS for 16 € and than have the gall to say that this is a bad game.

My definition of a bad game, is when i play it for 10 minutes, I STOP PLAYING! The fact that you played for more than 20+ hours ... you liked the game, period! Give these developers the recognisation they deserve. They were able to keep you entertained for 20+hours. Which most movies or other entertainment things can't even do.

If after playing 20+ hours you grow tired of a game, that is completly normal! But don't punish the developer for you getting bored after 20 ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ HOURS of gameplay. They lose customers because of this.

What a joke.

[Sierain]

From what I've seen, no one has hated Chasm or thought it's a terrible game. The top negative reviews say that it's actually a decent game but they just wouldn't recommend it.

[ElectroRanger]

Originally posted by Banemus:

Some people do weird things in the review section.

When I look at some of these reviews, these players have played the game for 20+ hours. Give a long explanation about not finding this a good game ... that you played for 20+ HOURS??

You pay 15+ euro for a movie in the cinema that lasts for 2 hours but here you play the game for 20+ HOURS for 16 € and than have the gall to say that this is a bad game.

My definition of a bad game, is when i play it for 10 minutes, I STOP PLAYING! The fact that you played for more than 20+ hours ... you liked the game, period! Give these developers the recognisation they deserve. They were able to keep you entertained for 20+hours. Which most movies or other entertainment things can't even do.

If after playing 20+ hours you grow tired of a game, that is completly normal! But don't punish the developer for you getting bored after 20 ♥♥♥♥ING HOURS of gameplay. They lose customers because of this.

What a joke.

Oh hey y'know what's even more strange? A review of someone who played for only 10 minutes and already determined its a good game!

Come on, actually read some of the reviews and see why after 20 hours they don't like it. Many have a crap ton of hours on a game but would still admit games is not recommended likely because they realised the game has no redeeming point at any of it's 20 hour moments or simply isn't for any and all gamers and only specific people.

Thats sadly the main problem of steam reviews really. Some people actually give some decent reasons as to why they can't recommend a game after fully checking it out. Maybe ending is a downer or something of that sort. However on the internet judgement is seen as black or white for just about anything so it's easy to be confused.

Besides that, your definition of a bad game is not a rule of thumb. I can play a game for a thousand hours like Skyrim and only realise later the game doesn't age well ans is still a bugfest after multiple rereleases that I do not support in buying that. Or when I buy an indie game and 100% only to receive a cliffhanger ending that devs never return to. Those are just abit of my definitons of a bad game.

Does this mean my definition is correct? Probably not because some gamers likely don't fully complete games like i do and might not care as much for the story. As they stand, most reviews on steam should be taken with a grain of salt, and it would be better if people were informed that just because say something like fallout 4 has mixed reviews shouldn't mean that they should avoid the game like the plague, and they should do the most that they can to figure out if they want to buy the game, i.e. screenshots, letsplays, verified reviewes etc.

Honestly now, you help no one by basically insulting people for their methods of judging a game. Want to support the devs in gaining customers? Stop yelling at other people who are likely not convinced for ♥♥♥♥ and actually give a valid reason as to why they should buy the game.

Yknow, like how your treasure loot is somewhat random for certain runs which means gaining unique items or at least save some of the enemy farming, even if it's not the best way its done and means you can't get every item drop in the game.

[Enoby]

hmm thats the thing

if you play a game for 50 hours and hate it some might say you can't have hated it if you played that long. Although really, if you've played a single player game for like 3000 hours yet you claim it's garbage.............come on dude

but is it okay to say a game is amazing after just 1 hour?

[PistolaoBR]

From what I could read everyone is disapointed in comparison to other metroidvania games with more content and less money, wich for me doesn't qualify to have a bad review... only if the game itself is bad qualifies it... but that's just my opinion...

[FreelyWillyNilly]

Originally posted by Pistolaobr:

From what I could read everyone is disapointed in comparison to other metroidvania games with more content and less money, wich for me doesn't qualify to have a bad review... only if the game itself is bad qualifies it... but that's just my opinion...

I mean it's kinda hard to give a middling review when steam's system is binary "recommend/don't recommend." If they found the game not good it's easy to not recommend a game even if the game itself wasn't all that bad.

[ElectroRanger]

Originally posted by Mediocre Dunce:

hmm thats the thing

if you play a game for 50 hours and hate it some might say you can't have hated it if you played that long. Although really, if you've played a single player game for like 3000 hours yet you claim it's garbage.............come on dude

but is it okay to say a game is amazing after just 1 hour?

Yeah i could say the game is bad after that many hours, because at this point I'd have to judge the game based on "does it feel outdated in story or gameplay", also being a reterospective.

To that example, I played Skyrim for about a thousand hours, sure. But as I went back to it in the special edition I realised I don't want to recommend something that's still broken despite so many rereleases and editions.

Same could even go for a game that's literally one hour. If that's the actual length of the game and you find it good then hey maybe you'd be inclined to suggest others to play it as well?

My point is that judging someone's opinion based on time played is always biased because the steam review system is too binary and doesn't take into account if the game even ran well on that machine, the experience of the user in that game genre over the years, prsonal skills in video games etc.

Once again, people should take steam reviews with the absolute grain of salt, leave the statistics to the supposed "cold and calculated"

[sjdswanlund]

Originally posted by Banemus:

Some people do weird things in the review section.

When I look at some of these reviews, these players have played the game for 20+ hours. Give a long explanation about not finding this a good game ... that you played for 20+ HOURS??

You pay 15+ euro for a movie in the cinema that lasts for 2 hours but here you play the game for 20+ HOURS for 16 € and than have the gall to say that this is a bad game.

My definition of a bad game, is when i play it for 10 minutes, I STOP PLAYING! The fact that you played for more than 20+ hours ... you liked the game, period! Give these developers the recognisation they deserve. They were able to keep you entertained for 20+hours. Which most movies or other entertainment things can't even do.

If after playing 20+ hours you grow tired of a game, that is completly normal! But don't punish the developer for you getting bored after 20 ♥♥♥♥ING HOURS of gameplay. They lose customers because of this.

What a joke.

First off, that analogy with the cinema is crap. Second, if they had a few hours of playtime and hated it in a review, you would be ranting about how they can't give a fair review with only playing for such a short period of time. The only way someone can evaluate a game fairly, is by playing it from beginning to end. Do you think journalists that score a long game a 3 out 10 wanted to play it so long? Hell no. I'd rather people play the game as long as possible so they can ACCURATELY evalute the game, so I get more of an understanding about its strengths and weaknesses to decide on if I want it. Go ahead and look at my playtime, and then know that I wouldn't recommend this game either, not with so many better Metroidvanias out there, and ones that are significantly better for the same price or cheaper.

[toefurkey]

Like seeing a film, I will do my best to see it to the end until completion whether I enjoyed it or not, because I paid for it. While there is an excellent point of cost per hour that is to be considered, for some of us, we may try even harder to push through a game just because we want to like it, hoping it gets better at some point. Everyone has their own way of judging a product, but for me, I cannot feel right saying a game like this os good or bad until I've seen it through to the end. If we were talking about Overwatch or something, I would have to play that enough to get a good feel of the game, which might take much longer, just to decide if I really like it or not.

[FangusKlot]

My two cents : I think the term "review" isn't just "testing it and see if it works for me". The concept of a review is the exact opposite actually, it's purposely made for others to decide whether or not they want to buy something, opinions don't really matter. An actual review is someone covering every aspect of something, and being as neutral and objective as possible.

[ElectroRanger]

Originally posted by FangusKlot:

My two cents : I think the term "review" isn't just "testing it and see if it works for me". The concept of a review is the exact opposite actually, it's purposely made for others to decide whether or not they want to buy something, opinions don't really matter. An actual review is someone covering every aspect of something, and being as neutral and objective as possible.

Which steam and most game critics lack of, therefore you get discussions like this about the game's ratings rather than pointing out general aspects that make a game good/terrible

[Brother PaciFist]

This is not related to this game. But it can be completely normal that games start good and tend to get worse to the end.

There is this thing called refund period. 2 hours. Developers of cause know this. So they pack all the fun and action in the first two hours, filled with unskippable cutscenes, all the good ideas and what not to keep the attention of the customer. After that period the content calms down and the excitement drops.

You can invest resources to the start of the game to impress journalists too. They seem to not play all games to the end.

Or you have games like Ubisoft, that have the same formular in every game. After 1 hour you find out that the basic gameplayloop does not change and you do the same all the time. E.G. Tower climbing, searching for points of interest on the map, clearing bases rince repeat. They start amazing but break down into repetitive boredom very fast.

Other games like action rpgs suddenly end and have no endgame or goal to grind for.

Or in pvp games you detect that the class balance in the endgame is screwed up and favors one side.

In F2p games you can have fun until maxlevel and then you detect that you have to buy items to be competetive or have fun need to spend money to progress further etc. Content blocked behind a paywall, the game starts to get pay to win, patches nerf your favorite class etc.

There are many reasons why games with long playtime can suddenly grow weary on the user or demand a bad steam review.

Just be thankful that you can read bad reviews about video games at all. Some shops on amazon start to sue people for giving bad reviews. Soon we will all live in a big brother security state where only 1 opinion is allowed. Be happy and shut your mouth.

The steam review system is not flexible at all. you can give a good or bad review. Nothing in between. So it is quite difficult to give nuanced reviews in the rating system.

On the topic. This chasm game is solid but not stellar. Good music, good grafics for a retrogame, but it brings nothing new to the table and has too much backtracking for its own good. The last level and bosses are insane in difficulty. I can see why some people give it a downvote.

Have fun.

[sjdswanlund]

Originally posted by FangusKlot:

My two cents : I think the term "review" isn't just "testing it and see if it works for me". The concept of a review is the exact opposite actually, it's purposely made for others to decide whether or not they want to buy something, opinions don't really matter. An actual review is someone covering every aspect of something, and being as neutral and objective as possible.

I've always prefered the term "evaluation" over "review".

[Wadsworth]

@OP you are just plainly wrong.

I usually try to give game some time to grow on me, try to revisit it.
Try to understand it before I recommend it or not.

Stating that "He played 20 hours, he can't dislike it" is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.

There are people that want to finish stuff they started, even if it isn't fun.
Some hope it gets better, some hope it doesn't screw up further, some just want to get it over with.

I am somewhere in the first two groups.

I find many desing decisions in this game horrible, and I mean horrible, but I can see how it can be fun to players.


And to be more open, Liking doesn't mean Recommending.
There are a bunch of things in my life I wouldn't recommend globaly, just because it would be wrong to recommend it since most people will not enjoy it.

I would comment on that in the review here or will even say to friends of mine, go grab this thing, what ever it is. But if I find it not recommend worthy, it is not recommend worthy for me.

[Uncle Mikoolo]

The game is not good or bad. It's more like a chore right now as I just want to finish it. Theres one certain area in the game that is just plain horrible. The temple. It requires pixel perfect walljump timing, a lot of going back and forth, forth and back, and is just plain exhausting.

I do recommend getting this game when it's on sale. It's not bad but I feel that it could have been so much better.