So all negative reviews....

[Sabomoth]

are because of crybabies being mad about Ubisoft and nothing related to the game at all. Steam should really clean up their review system, permanently ban people.

[Stud Muffin]

Waaahhh... please don't write negative reviews about things I like. waaahhh... Daddy Valve, ban these people permanently.

So who's the crybaby now...

[Tankfriend]

Publicado originalmente por Stud Muffin:

Waaahhh... please don't write negative reviews about things I like. waaahhh... Daddy Valve, ban these people permanently.

So who's the crybaby now...

Both sides, I guess?

[sm303030]

Reviews of any sort should not be censored. You never want a situation where only one voice positive or negative is all you see. You dang sure don't want any company, whose source of income is selling games, to control the narrative, You would never see another negative review ever. Even if the game was a complete dumpster fire.

If it ever reaches the point anyone is censoring reviews. Might as well get rid of the review section entirely.

(Example--- look no farther than amazon on they how tried to manipulate their review system on rings of power to see how easy a company can fall into trying to protect their bottom line)

[Sagi]

rarly had problems with ubisoft.
I do have a problem with the rediculess cash grabbing dlc and epic exclusive while first going on steam.

The game itself i don't know maybe it just got to big, but this is the first anno game wich i did not like (apart from 2250 wich i see as not anno name worthy).

1404 was the best and 2070 had the biggest potential.

p.s. suggestion to ban people for giving reviews and opinions is a very creepy tought.

[Corona Scurrae]

Publicado originalmente por Stylistic Sagittarius NL:

1404 was the best and 2070 had the biggest potential.

can you elaborate a bit because I also like 1404 but am currently hesitating to get this

[Eekhoorn]

Publicado originalmente por Pelopidas:

Publicado originalmente por Stylistic Sagittarius NL:

1404 was the best and 2070 had the biggest potential.

can you elaborate a bit because I also like 1404 but am currently hesitating to get this

I agree with Stylistic Sagittarius.
I've played every Anno game except for 2250. Watched a couple of let's plays and decided this was not my thing.
Missed the launch of 1800 on Steam and did not want to own the game outside my Steam lib... I just like things in one place.
I did not anticipate the return to Steam so when I saw it, I immediately jumped on the ship.

After 10 hours of playing I can't really judge 1800. But I did feel a nostalgic vibe the entire time... longing for 1404/2070.
1800 Shakes things up. The game plays very different from the previous titles and yet it feels familiar enough to recognize it as an Anno game... it's weird.

In 1404/2070 I feel more in control whereas 1800 seems to work more organically. Now this might very well be due to me still learning the ropes, but I feel kinda... like an observer.

But so many people calling this the best Anno can't be wrong and maybe I will agree with them once I played through the sandbox at least one time. (really looking forward to go to the Arctic ).

But as it stands now... I miss 1404 when playing 1800.

1404 has something to it. The atmosphere, the mechanics, the setting, the graphics, the gameplay... it's all great. I've always thought of it as a masterpiece and now that I'm playing 1800, that feeling grows even more so. 1404 is just special.

[Friels]

you're crying aswell , you're one of the reasons people hate ubisoft.

[Indianapolis Jones]

I bought the base game on Steam and now I can't save on the DLC because it won't let me buy the Year 4 Complete bundle because I "already own this game."

Many negative reviews are about that and I can totally understand where people are coming from. Ridiculous! Why should I have to spend 274$ for the DLC just because I already have the base game?

[martynas.mileikis]

Publicado originalmente por Indianapolis Jones:

I bought the base game on Steam and now I can't save on the DLC because it won't let me buy the Year 4 Complete bundle because I "already own this game."

Looks like Ubisoft is punishing you for supporting Ubisoft

[jpk6580]

In fact those negative reviews are pretty helpfull for other players.

I appreciate the warning that many people have technical issues with the game bought on Steam. So I might decide buying it directly at Uplay to avoid those problems.

I appreciate the warning that the so called "complete year 4 edition" is missing some cosmetic DLCs. The advertisment is definitifly missleading by the used words and also by the used graphics. Without further research it is not clearly shown what you get for your money and what not. A puzzle with 10 missing parts is not "complete".

I have absolut sympathy for all those players who are angry because they bought the game at release at Steam for full price and now get spit in the face by Ubisoft not being able to upgrade to other versions and are forced to buy all DLCs for several hundred bucks.

[Tankfriend]

Publicado originalmente por jpk6580:

In fact those negative reviews are pretty helpfull for other players.

Problem is that most people reviewbombing the game now will give a **** to change their review once the game actually works well and returns to be one of the best citybuilder games and the best Anno game.

[Sabomoth]

Publicado originalmente por sm303030:

Reviews of any sort should not be censored. You never want a situation where only one voice positive or negative is all you see. You dang sure don't want any company, whose source of income is selling games, to control the narrative, You would never see another negative review ever. Even if the game was a complete dumpster fire.

If it ever reaches the point anyone is censoring reviews. Might as well get rid of the review section entirely.

(Example--- look no farther than amazon on they how tried to manipulate their review system on rings of power to see how easy a company can fall into trying to protect their bottom line)

Reviews that have nothing to do with the product should be censored, i do not give this game a negative review because i couldn't find the type i beer i was looking for at the store earlier.
Completely irrelevant and only lowers the score for the game which in turns hurts the developers as it could drive people away.
So yes, they should be censored, and punished.

[Sabomoth]

Publicado originalmente por Friels:

you're crying aswell , you're one of the reasons people hate ubisoft.

To be crying the person actually has to be crying, maybe you didn't know that due to all the crying you are doing?

[Ikigai Blitz]

But if they have to do with the product, the company makes the product, the product doesn't launch. What is the part that is not of the product in which a review that talks about these two components is not part of the product?

I agree that there should be 2 sections, one for the gameplay and the other for the technical.

Also, if we limit ourselves to what can be said and not say, people would still leave their negative review, without saying anything (even knowing that it is because of one of the sections that suggest that they should not be taken into account) then we would end up in the same thing, only that We would no longer know what each review is about.

[Sabomoth]

Publicado originalmente por Tomataso:

But if they have to do with the product, the company makes the product, the product doesn't launch. What is the part that is not of the product in which a review that talks about these two components is not part of the product?

I agree that there should be 2 sections, one for the gameplay and the other for the technical.

Also, if we limit ourselves to what can be said and not say, people would still leave their negative review, without saying anything (even knowing that it is because of one of the sections that suggest that they should not be taken into account) then we would end up in the same thing, only that We would no longer know what each review is about.

Just because computer illiterate people are not able to run the game doesn't mean the game is bad, so no, the reviews have nothing to do with the game.