Take Two, the one who owns Rockstar, 2K and more

[Senvi Holença]

If you want to do some damage and ask for answers, don't restrain yourself on just review bombing KSP2...

[Tux]

dishonest.
any review that does not review the actual game and the actual game play is a dishonest review

[Senvi Holença]

Originally posted by Tux:

dishonest.
any review that does not review the actual game and the actual game play is a dishonest review

Guess what? Promissing a zilion of features and then closing the studio and going into total silence isn't very honest too.

[Alshain]

Review bombing unrelated games isn't going to help anything. A better solution is to go to each of these pages and click the gear and hit ignore. Unfortunately Steam is pretty ignorant on this, so you will still see the games but with a banner over the top, and only on lists, sales and things won't warn you until you visit the game page. Also in the steam phone app you may have to be in landscape mode to see the gear.

https://store.steampowered.com/publisher/PrivateDivision

https://store.steampowered.com/publisher/rockstargames

https://store.steampowered.com/publisher/2K

[chollman82]

You have to be some kind of a morally bankrupt piece of $#1t to leave fraudulent reviews on other games just because you're mad at a publisher.

I VALUE reviews, I like to think they are honest. Why ruin them as a tool we all use by intentionally being dishonest?

GROW THE FCK UP.

[chollman82]

Originally posted by MangoMan:

um, that's not really true...

We are responding to OP's suggestion of giving negative reviews to OTHER GAMES from the same studio because you are mad at the studio.

[MangoMan]

Originally posted by chollman82:

Originally posted by MangoMan:

um, that's not really true...

We are responding to OP's suggestion of giving negative reviews to OTHER GAMES from the same studio because you are mad at the studio.

yeah k. I also changed my mind partially on what I was saying.

targeting other games could indeed be dishonest if those reviews do not reflect the value of those games.

and I can accept that "any review that does not review the actual game and the actual game play is a dishonest review" mostly, except it should also involve price. in other words "this game is good but not worth the price; not recommended" is a valid review. (or even "this game is mostly bad but it is worth the small pricetag; recommended"; also valid.)

but yes, "this game is good but I don't like what the publisher did with some other game"... is less so? on the other hand it is still a valid expression of recommendation to purchase. "I do not recommend this game because the publisher did something bad."

actually I'm torn whether that's valid or not. that is not strictly dishonest; that is an honest position to hold and an honest answer to the question "do you recommend purchasing this game?".

I think if the review said the equivalent of "THIS GAME SUCKS" when you really mean "I used to like this game but now I hate the publisher", ok that is dishonest because you didn't say what you mean. but if you don't like publisher and you say you don't like publisher, that is not dishonest. that is honest.

it's more like it's an unexpected or unusual criteria to use to determine your recommendation or lack thereof. but unless it states somewhere that that is not a valid criteria for recommendation, then it shouldn't be a problem.

[Zyrohex]

Originally posted by MangoMan:

Originally posted by chollman82:

We are responding to OP's suggestion of giving negative reviews to OTHER GAMES from the same studio because you are mad at the studio.

yeah k. I also changed my mind partially on what I was saying.

targeting other games could indeed be dishonest if those reviews do not reflect the value of those games.

and I can accept that "any review that does not review the actual game and the actual game play is a dishonest review" mostly, except it should also involve price. in other words "this game is good but not worth the price; not recommended" is a valid review. (or even "this game is mostly bad but it is worth the small pricetag; recommended"; also valid.)

but yes, "this game is good but I don't like what the publisher did with some other game"... is less so. on the other hand it is still a valid expression of recommendation to purchase. "I do not recommend this game because the publisher did something bad."

actually I'm torn whether that's valid or not. that is not strictly dishonest; that is an honest position to hold and an honest answer to the question "do you recommend purchasing this game?".

I think if the review said the equivalent of "THIS GAME SUCKS" when you really mean "I used to like this game but now I hate the publisher", ok that is dishonest because you didn't say what you mean. but if you don't like publisher and you say you don't like publisher, that is not dishonest. that is honest.

it's more like it's an unexpected or unusual criteria to use to determine your recommendation or lack thereof. but unless it states somewhere that that is not a valid criteria for recommendation, then it shouldn't be a problem.

If you have beef with a studio/dev, you should post it somewhere like reddit. I believe every studio/publisher on Steam have a discussion board (click on the entities name from the storage page to get to it) where you can also post or leave remarks regarding those entities. Game reviews should be catered for the game in question.

Amazon applies a similar principle where product reviews are targeted for the product itself. Any feedback for the seller should be left on their store front, not the product itself.

[MangoMan]

Originally posted by Zyrohex:

If you have beef with a studio/dev, you should post it somewhere like reddit. I believe every studio/publisher on Steam have a discussion board (click on the entities name from the storage page to get to it) where you can also post or leave remarks regarding those entities. Game reviews should be catered for the game in question.

Amazon applies a similar principle where product reviews are targeted for the product itself. Any feedback for the seller should be left on their store front, not the product itself.

I guess there should be a mechanism for rating pubs/devs and absent such a feature, it makes sense that users would use the existing mechanisms to voice those opinions since they can't otherwise really be voiced here (in an official/effective way).

[Senvi Holença]

Originally posted by Zyrohex:

If you have beef with a studio/dev, you should post it somewhere like reddit.

Yeah, because the publisher isn't really busy counting money of their active and abandoned products (like KSP2), they are reading reddit posts

[Zyrohex]

Originally posted by Yoda Layheehoo:

Originally posted by Zyrohex:

If you have beef with a studio/dev, you should post it somewhere like reddit.

Yeah, because the publisher isn't really busy counting money of their active and abandoned products (like KSP2), they are reading reddit posts

What are you, 12? Nobody on this forum has any evidence to prove who all is at fault for the ksp2 catastrophe, and yet the best idea you can come up with is to review bomb every T2 game to intentionally cause harm to their company over something you have no clue about? Grow up.

[DefNotABot]

So we should make RockStar games pay for the failure of the KSP2 team? How old are you?

"T2 owns a bunch of studios and even though all those other studios make great games.. THEY ALL ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR KSP2 FAILING!!!! WOAH!!!"

Just curious... What percentage of blame do you place on the IG employees that couldn't make a game in 5 years of development? 50%? 0%?

[Senvi Holença]

Originally posted by DefNotABot:

So we should make RockStar games pay for the failure of the KSP2 team? How old are you?

Rockstar? The one owned by Take Two? Who hides its name behind many studio names? Hell yeah, until they actually listen to us and give us answers about this scam.

You talk like if Rockstar is a person and not a company which primary objective is to profit..

[Senvi Holença]

Originally posted by Zyrohex:

Nobody on this forum has any evidence to prove who all is at fault for the ksp2 catastrophe

And why is that, genius? Maybe because the company ran with our money and refuses to talk more than standard legally shielded paragraphs.

[DefNotABot]

Originally posted by Yoda Layheehoo:

Originally posted by DefNotABot:

So we should make RockStar games pay for the failure of the KSP2 team? How old are you?

Rockstar? The one owned by Take Two? Who hides its name behind many studio names? Hell yeah, until they actually listen to us and give us answers about this scam.

You talk like if Rockstar is a person and not a company which primary objective is to profit..

You talk like the people that were paid for years and couldn't even remake KSP1, the people that lied to your faces, are innocent in the whole thing lol. Couldn't even imagine how your brain works.

[DefNotABot]

Originally posted by Yoda Layheehoo:

Originally posted by Zyrohex:

Nobody on this forum has any evidence to prove who all is at fault for the ksp2 catastrophe

And why is that, genius? Maybe because the company ran with our money and refuses to talk more than standard legally shielded paragraphs.

"ran off wit your money" lol. They paid 70+ employees for 5+years and they got a broken game... Average developer salary is $108,000/year. T2 probably paid around 1.4M / year or $7M over the years on this game.. How much longer should have paid a team of clowns?

You JUST told me they are a 'for-profit' business, but here you are whining that the business wasn't willing to keep dumping money in this. The people that "ran off with free money" are the employees that got paid for years and didn't make even a decent game demo.

How many more years of development did they need? 10 years? Maybe if T2 had just increased IG annual budget to 20M, they could finish it in 5 years and like 110M, on a game they probably expected to profit around 12-18M...

It's always the guy calling others "Genius" that is lacking logic and common sense the most...