Should you really trust reviews?

[シャドウ]

So I decided to post this to share my opinion and maybe make a point to other people. The question is, should you trust reviews on here?

Allow me to elaborate, steam has this great way of allowing the community to give honest reviews of games, provided you have played them. However, there are a few things you should take into consideration if you are someone who looks at reviews to decide if you want to try a game or buy a game for yourself. Luckily, some games are free; however, not all are, and many require buying them to play them. In this case, if you are required to purchase a game, this is when you may want to read through reviews. But can you trust reviews? The answer is yes, and no.

For starters, some of the games that need to be purchased, their reviews are what I call "Bandwagon Advertising". What is "Bandwagon Advertising"? How I usually use that term means that they are mostly younger kids who are just giving positive reviews because they don't acknowledge where the game or community is flawed. These types of people also provide negative reviews based on bias.

A few good examples of negative bandwagon advertising are as follows:

"This game is a rip off of (insert another popular game name here)!"
This one is found mostly in sandbox-style games that follow a formula similar to Minecraft. Kids will give a negative review because they think Minecraft is the only good sandbox game, thanks to bias from what is popular and well known within their age group.

Other ways reviews may not be the best thing to go by here is that they are not always constructive. Steam doesn't have a required character count for reviews long enough to force reviewers to write more than just "It's a good game I like it! You should try it!" as their review. Someone could write a random comment whether or not it is constructive or meaningful. People aren't required to write a paragraph. Thus they can give pretty lazy reviews but still boost the game's review count and tip scales of "Mostly positive" and "Mostly Negative."

How can you help with this? Simple, don't write reviews unless you want to give constructive criticism or list all the game pros and cons in your review.

How do I propose that Steam does something about this to avoid a bandwagon tipping the scales by giving pretty lazy reviews? Well, for starters, they can require more than a paragraph of text when posting reviews. They could also require a person to have at least 24 hours of playtime to write a review about the game. Yes, there will be those trolls who may spam As Bs and Cs in their review to make up for the character count requirement, but these suggestions would be a step in the right direction.

[Gin]

24 hours of playtime? There are plenty of games which are easily finished in under 10 hours - what about these?

[シャドウ]

Messaggio originale di 「 ᵍᶤᶰ 」:

24 hours of playtime? There are plenty of games which are easily finished in under 10 hours - what about these?

It doesn't really change the fact that people don't really give constructive reviews. This is more suggestions for the general requirement of things. Have you even looked at some of the reviews on various games available on here. I am not sure if I am allowed, but if I am I would link you a good number of lazy reviews on games with large communities that are available on Steam.

Not sure about you, but if I am to pay real money on a game, I would want to make sure I sift through all the reviews. I usually prefer the longer reviews since they are more detailed and can give a better idea to help with making the choice to buy a game and try it yourself. The short reviews that aren't really detailed are more numerous than the longer more detailed reviews.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Down vote reviews you don't like an move on.

The first example is called a fanboy.

[Crazy Tiger]

I've proposed that they stop using the word "reviews", as that implies a heavier weight to it. They're peoples opinions, nothing more and nothing less.

People who post asci art or don't put in much of a text, I skip those reviews. It doesn't make them any less valid, though. Not everybody is a writer and not everybody wants to put in a lot of text. For many people only the rating counts anyway.
I also skip the essays, as I don't need a wall of text. Heck, I don't even check positive reviews anymore, they bring me nothing.

A time limit is pointless, idling is a thing. There is also the fact that people play in offline mode, which isn't reflected in the playtime on Steam. Friend of mine has about 1 hour on most reviews because he mostly plays in offline mode. He knows his stuff about those games, though. Or they're games he played before (non-Steam version) or on a different platform.
Playtime is not a metric to put emphasis on, in my opinion.

A 24 hour limit also would mean that people who have technical issues cannot leave a review, which would be highly anti-consumer.

Word count is also pointless. Easily circumvented.

There is a filter on the reviews for playtime. You can adjust that to your liking.

[Gin]

Messaggio originale di Crazy Tiger:

A time limit is pointless, idling is a thing. There is also the fact that people play in offline mode, which isn't reflected in the playtime on Steam. Friend of mine has about 1 hour on most reviews because he mostly plays in offline mode. He knows his stuff about those games, though. Or they're games he played before (non-Steam version) or on a different platform.
Playtime is not a metric to put emphasis on, in my opinion.

This! One of the games where I have put the most hours in is Sims 3. Bought it as soon as it got released, put several thousand hours in it, was pretty active in one of the biggest german boards for it (several thousand comments of discussing the game, helping other users and uploading stuff for the community) and started a bit modding. But I still had everything on a disc. At the beginning of this year I finally bought the base game on Origin. Several hundred hours so far.

@OP: So my opinion wouldn't count as I didn't fulfill the 24-hour rule here on steam.

[Pendy]

Reviews don't mean much unless you're willing to do alot of research. The most important thing is the collective of negative reviews. If they're all quick to point out something wrong, then it's not something that can be ignored, nor can it be discarded as a simple preference. Positive reviews can lie to you, but a negative one will almost always be made for the sake of genuine feedback. After all, it's easier to believe that someone will make a positive review to shill a game, then a negative one to spite it. If you hate a game so much, you'd rather refund it and then forget it.

[Jackhammer (Wholf)]

When you see a game you like.
Do research, gameplays and stuff.
Then buy/download the game and try it yourself.

[Elstar]

Reviews have there value. The are a glimpse into what other persons thinks about the game and steam is better for having them. Even "bad" review are "good" as they give new perspectives.

As others have stated you as a consumer need to decide how much weight you give to the reviews and do your own research. Here steam reviews are only a part of it. The more information you get the better informed decision you can make. Also the easier it is to get the information the better. If you decide to use Steam filters you should first inform yourself about what you filter out.

[Start_Running]

Messaggio originale di Crazy Tiger:

I've proposed that they stop using the word "reviews", as that implies a heavier weight to it. They're peoples opinions, nothing more and nothing less.

Review, opinion? Is there an actual difference when it comes to an entertainment product?

I consider reviews qite helpful if taken in the right context. The better ones give overviews of the mechanics, the themes, and will make not e of issues with the stability, or the implementation of the mechanics, or the application of themes

[kitt]

why should i trust someones subjective opinion?

On Steam i might read some of them and get an overall Picture of whats good/bad and maybe make a decision on it.

[ReBoot]

There's a huge difference between opinions and reviews trying to be objective. The best reviews out there describe aspects of the game to an extent that even if they sell the game as the best ever since sliced bread, the review can still encourage you to NOT buy the game because it's got aspects you don't like.

Of course, it's not only singular people not knowing the difference between those two. The "Before you buy"-series from Gameranx for example is REALLY low on details, while GManLives reviewed several games where I had exactly this effect: he praised them, but gave enough details for me to decide against purchasing.

I hope I've met the same quality bar with some of my reviews.

[Start_Running]

Messaggio originale di ReBoot:

There's a huge difference between opinions and reviews trying to be objective.

Do tell...

The best reviews out there describe aspects of the game to an extent that even if they sell the game as the best ever since sliced bread, the review can still encourage you to NOT buy the game because it's got aspects you don't like.

The same can be said for a well worded opinion. And a poorly done review is no worse han a poorly worded opinion.

Of course, it's not only singular people not knowing the difference between those two. The "Before you buy"-series from Gameranx for example is REALLY low on details, while GManLives reviewed several games where I had exactly this effect: he praised them, but gave enough details for me to decide against purchasing.[/quuoe]
And in both cases the details are rather subjective to their own analysis of their own experience.
GGman has on quite a few instances given information contradictory to what can be experienced.

[ReBoot]

Messaggio originale di Start_Running:

The same can be said for a well worded opinion.

I disagree. In my experience, a well-worded opinion is a fantastic piece to read, but in no way does it seem like a great attemt at describing aspects objectively.

Messaggio originale di Start_Running:

And a poorly done review is no worse han a poorly worded opinion.

Here, I agree. Poor reviews are either low on content at all or don't even bother with objectivity (which is easy to tell if one's looking for it, although I am at a point where opinionated writing irks me on an intuitive level).

Come to think of it, are low-content-or-meme-reviews maybe poorly written opinions? I've read and seen several columnists state opinions, don't be subtle about the content being opinions, yet make for fantastical entertainment. So maybe we need more well-worded opinions (albeit I'd prefer them being labeled as such, as is often done by journalists as that enforces trust in the writer).

[Spawn of Totoro]

Messaggio originale di ShadowMT13:

How do I propose that Steam does something about this to avoid a bandwagon tipping the scales by giving pretty lazy reviews? Well, for starters, they can require more than a paragraph of text when posting reviews. They could also require a person to have at least 24 hours of playtime to write a review about the game. Yes, there will be those trolls who may spam As Bs and Cs in their review to make up for the character count requirement, but these suggestions would be a step in the right direction.

A text requirement? So:

Game is bad.
alkfjhas;sd;lkj
aslfsadl;fl;sfjflkj
lkfjaslfasd;jsd;f

Would still meet that requirement as all it would look for is letter or word count, as you even acknowledge.

A time requirement would skew all reviews in the developer's favor as user would have to choose between leaving a review and getting a refund. That means fewer negative reviews by default.

These suggestions are not new and have been discussed many times. The flaws have been gone over and the benefits are not out weighed by the consequences of having them.

Messaggio originale di ShadowMT13:

For starters, some of the games that need to be purchased, their reviews are what I call "Bandwagon Advertising". What is "Bandwagon Advertising"? How I usually use that term means that they are mostly younger kids who are just giving positive reviews because they don't acknowledge where the game or community is flawed. These types of people also provide negative reviews based on bias.

A few good examples of negative bandwagon advertising are as follows:

"This game is a rip off of (insert another popular game name here)!"
This one is found mostly in sandbox-style games that follow a formula similar to Minecraft. Kids will give a negative review because they think Minecraft is the only good sandbox game, thanks to bias from what is popular and well known within their age group.

Other ways reviews may not be the best thing to go by here is that they are not always constructive. Steam doesn't have a required character count for reviews long enough to force reviewers to write more than just "It's a good game I like it! You should try it!" as their review. Someone could write a random comment whether or not it is constructive or meaningful. People aren't required to write a paragraph. Thus they can give pretty lazy reviews but still boost the game's review count and tip scales of "Mostly positive" and "Mostly Negative."

How can you help with this? Simple, don't write reviews unless you want to give constructive criticism or list all the game pros and cons in your review.

All this can be said for the reverse too. In the end, it mostly comes down to opinion vs opinion. The person saying "This game is a rip off of (insert another popular game name here)!" may actually mean it and not be in the bandwagon. You don't know their experience with the game.

Forcing in never the correct way and yes, people will often be lazy with reviews. That is to be expected.

These are not professional reviews, they are users. If you want more professional type reviews, then I suggest gaming sites or curators.

[Start_Running]

Messaggio originale di ReBoot:

Messaggio originale di Start_Running:

The same can be said for a well worded opinion.

I disagree. In my experience, a well-worded opinion is a fantastic piece to read, but in no way does it seem like a great attemt at describing aspects objectively.

For things that *can* be described objectively this is true. But games are an entertainment medium,, and as a poiont can't really be objectively ecvaluated.
Is a joke funny because a 100 people laughed at it and 1 didn't. Or is a joke unfunny because 1 person laughed and 1000 people were silent. The answer to both will depend on whether you asked the 1 or the 100. Same thing for a game.

Ergo there's no real difference beytween a well writtten opinion and a well written review in the context of games and entertainment.

Come to think of it, are low-content-or-meme-reviews maybe poorly written opinions?

The better question, are you distinguishing based on your own internal bias?

I've read and seen several columnists state opinions, don't be subtle about the content being opinions, yet make for fantastical entertainment.

Does that make the columnists thatt are more subtle any lless opinionated?

So maybe we need more well-worded opinions (albeit I'd prefer them being labeled as such, as is often done by journalists as that enforces trust in the writer).

There are plenty of well worded opinions. You just seem to call them 'reviews'