Request for game evaluation improvement.

[Tebuja]

Hello.
One user who enjoys playing games on Steam.
And I'm also a user who likes to leave reviews.
What I'd like to inquire about is that the evaluation will also be improved.

Currently, it is evaluated in two major categories: 'good' and 'bad'.
These two categories are good to do intuitively, but it's a little disappointing for someone who wants to see the assessment in detail and leave it.

Of course, you can write it in detail, but it's because each person has a different way of evaluating it.
Therefore, the current method may be good, but I hope it will help users who want to purchase by improving this part and creating items that can be evaluated in common.
For example, graphics, play, difficulty, price, etc
In that case, I think the users who want to buy can be more cautious or more sold.
Thank you for reading the long article.

[Pscht]

Originally posted by Tebuja:

Currently, it is evaluated in two major categories: 'good' and 'bad'.

No. You are asked if you RECOMMEND a game, or NOT. You have created 37 reviews and NEVER read what you actually click on? Guess what, nobody actually reads YOUR stuff either.

[Crazy Tiger]

That's just personal preference, OP. I can understand your preference, but to me those "detailed" reviews more often than not are quite useless. The more detailed it is, the more the subjectivity comes into play.

I'm mostly interested in negative reviews on Steam. I want to know why someone stopped playing, or even refunded, a game. That someone does so, however, does not mean that the game is bad.

While I'm not a fan of any rating system, I've learned that the one on Steam actually serves me best. I vastly prefer the "do you recommend this game" over any "do you think this game is good" question. And I prefer the yes/no to the various star ratings and detailed sections that other stores (not just gaming) can have. Most tend to lean on the extremes anyway, so it ultimately turns back in a binary rating.

As said, it's just personal preference what review or rating system one likes.

[Vertigo]

Why would someone even read your "review"?
You are just giving a score, not one single explanation why you think the game deserves this score.

[WhitePhantom]

That copy paste nonsense is an instant ignore for me. I'd rather read a players actual thoughts on the game.

[Pierce Dalton]

Originally posted by Pscht:

Originally posted by Tebuja:

Currently, it is evaluated in two major categories: 'good' and 'bad'.

No. You are asked if you RECOMMEND a game, or NOT. You have created 37 reviews and NEVER read what you actually click on? Guess what, nobody actually reads YOUR stuff either.

Why would you recommend someone a game that you consider bad, though?

[Crazy Tiger]

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Originally posted by Pscht:

No. You are asked if you RECOMMEND a game, or NOT. You have created 37 reviews and NEVER read what you actually click on? Guess what, nobody actually reads YOUR stuff either.

Why would you recommend someone a game that you consider bad, though?

"So bad that it's good/fun" exists. Especially in entertainment.

[Pierce Dalton]

Originally posted by Crazy Tiger:

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Why would you recommend someone a game that you consider bad, though?

"So bad that it's good/fun" exists. Especially in entertainment.

Interesting. So, how many games that you consider bad have you recommended throughout the years?

[Crazy Tiger]

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Originally posted by Crazy Tiger:

"So bad that it's good/fun" exists. Especially in entertainment.

Interesting. So, how many games that you consider bad have you recommended throughout the years?

A bunch. The Saboteur is the biggest name, I reckon.

[Pscht]

Originally posted by WhitePhantom:

That copy paste nonsense is an instant ignore for me. I'd rather read a players actual thoughts on the game.

Hah, I didn't even look further than OPs profile page. I was more correct than I thought when I said

Originally posted by Pscht:

Guess what, nobody actually reads YOUR stuff either.

[Pierce Dalton]

Originally posted by Crazy Tiger:

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Interesting. So, how many games that you consider bad have you recommended throughout the years?

A bunch. The Saboteur is the biggest name, I reckon.

Well, I can't find it on your profile so it must have been on another platform. Anyway, what do you think when someone recommends you a game? Do you think the individual recommending the game considers it bad or good, liked or disliked it?

[Pierce Dalton]

Originally posted by Pscht:

Originally posted by WhitePhantom:

That copy paste nonsense is an instant ignore for me. I'd rather read a players actual thoughts on the game.

Hah, I didn't even look further than OPs profile page. I was more correct than I thought when I said

Originally posted by Pscht:

Guess what, nobody actually reads YOUR stuff either.

Well, I guess you just did then? And so did I. One of their reviews even has 3 awards, so you're factually incorrect on that.

[Elucidator]

Originally posted by Tebuja:

Of course, you can write it in detail, but it's because each person has a different way of evaluating it.
Therefore, the current method may be good, but I hope it will help users who want to purchase by improving this part and creating items that can be evaluated in common.

The review system has a weakness in detail, yes,
but as others mentioned, there is the expectation that many will post reviews. You're not going to read all of them, only a few. The bigger they are, the more likely you'll skip over them due to them repeating content others have already mentioned and you're not quickly finding anything new in there.

It's okay the way it is currently; it just means you need to put in more effort. People will, if they dislike something, usually only just name that one aspect; which--
yes, it does cause the same problem to happen and you will scroll through reviews more and still consume the same amount of time, but now you've consulted more people. That is a difference.

You can follow certain people who write good detailed reviews (in your opinion) and just read those selectively in order to get the information you want. That would be recommended.
Yes, I get they may not play the game you are interested in. In that case you still need to read and scroll, but it makes it less likely you need to do that a lot.


Edit: One other thing I should mention is that if reviews do become more stat based, people have different ways of intepretting stats and those will be biassed based on what they are used to. Gen Alpha may for example have the expectation of Unreal 5 quality at a minimum for graphics, and will rate stuff looking less like a movie and not realistic as 2 or 1 star. As such, it is still not a good way to review. You need to look at the review's words, not their points in something, and the reviewer itself (specifically: why they came to that conclusion.)

[Pierce Dalton]

Originally posted by Elucidator:

The review system has a weakness in detail, yes,
but as others mentioned, there is the expectation that many will post reviews. You're not going to read all of them, only a few. The bigger they are, the more likely you'll skip over them due to them repeating content others have already mentioned and you're not quickly finding anything new in there.

It's okay the way it is currently; it just means you need to put in more effort. People will, if they dislike something, usually only just name that one aspect; which--
yes, it does cause the same problem to happen and you will scroll through reviews more and still consume the same amount of time, but now you've consulted more people. That is a difference.

You can follow certain people who write good detailed reviews (in your opinion) and just read those selectively in order to get the information you want. That would be recommended.
Yes, I get they may not play the game you are interested in. In that case you still need to read and scroll, but it makes it less likely you need to do that a lot.

Well, the truth of the matter is that a binary system is better for Steam. The chances of someone buying a game positively rated in a binary system are much bigger than the chances of someone buying a 3 stars game, for example.

[Elucidator]

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Well, the truth of the matter is that a binary system is better for Steam. The chances of someone buying a game positively rated in a binary system are much bigger than the chances of someone buying a 3 stars game, for example.

I don't really like star based review systems.

They tend to get gamed; cheated, etc.
they also tend to be extremely biassed.

[Pierce Dalton]

Originally posted by Elucidator:

Originally posted by Pierce Dalton:

Well, the truth of the matter is that a binary system is better for Steam. The chances of someone buying a game positively rated in a binary system are much bigger than the chances of someone buying a 3 stars game, for example.

I don't really like star based review systems.

They tend to get gamed; cheated, etc.
they also tend to be extremely biassed.

Well, you could say that all reviews are "biased", they represent a personal opinion and nothing more than that. I've seen people not recommending a game because it doesn't have controller support, for example... or because the game can't go higher than 60fps.