Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
Hozzászólási szabályok és irányelvek
Hozzászólás jelentése
I've also played games that were well made, but didn't have many good ideas.
I'd decribe both of these as "Mostly bad"
compared to "Bad", where a game just fails at both.
Maybe instead of two middle options, it'd be better if they added extreme options.
Keep all of the current "good" and "bad" votes, but then add in a way for users to say "very good" and "very bad", to be used only for the games that are pretty much flawless or incredibly horrid. I mean, it'd be a minor distinction, but perhaps it'd be easier to understand that way.
For anyone who actually wants to get to know a game, they get a basic idea of what the game is meant to be from the store page, and if they're interested in this gaming experience, they look to the reviews to find whether there are issues that prevent them from getting this experience. Not to have other people tell them "go buy this game!".
Furthermore, Steam's review system did start off as a recommendation system, and in fact originally only had positive recommendations...only later were negative recommendations added, then the system's name was changed from recommendations to reviews. And more recently, the curator system has been added too. This is a pattern of slow and gradual change.
This is about how there's more than just "yes" and "no" when it comes to people's opinions about game, and how that should be reflected in the reviews.
I get where you're coming from, but I still think it'd be more useful to see how many people gave it a middling rating to determine if I should buy something. It'd be much more useful than the slew of reviews that say "reccomended" where they're like "yeah, I mean, I guess this game is alright, but, I dunno, it's kind of lame, but I liked some parts of it."
Honestly, I feel like a lack of a middle option tends to skew reviews towards the positive side, since any presence of something good about a game will lead most reviewers to vote "reccomend", while people will only vote "not reccomended" if there's a whole slew of things bad about a game.
Thus, the positive reviews become kind of pointless when it comes to purchasing decisions, because they're not all a similar level of positive.
It's the difference between saying
"You totally gotta play this!"
or
"Yeah, it's worth a shot."
Both are positive reccomendations, but on a different level, and all I'm saying is, Steam should allow us to give slightly more nuanced reccomendations like this, while not making the review system overly complex.
It's really that simple. There are more than yes and no but everything between yes and no can be boiled down to yes or no. The question you are asked. Would you recommend this game to someone else?
Any non-yes answer is no. Whether it's maybe, sorta, not sure, whatever. You're not saying yes. So you are in effect saying no.
And how useful is a bucnhc of people doing the equivalent of a shoulder shrug?
Then by the same token these people would still vote yes . Look. As said. Anyone who takes the time to think as opposed to just wanting to unleash a torrent of unfocused words will always go with the position of their net experience. I have been able to recommend games I didn't personally like and I have denied recommending games I've liked.
A maybe option wouldn't have changed my opinion since I am quite sure about them.
Also by your own logic you're saying that there's an even chance this happens for negative reviews as well so in effect your hgypothetical scenario is self-defeating.
Both are Yes,
The degree of trhat yes is indicated with the commentary.
Nuance should , in communication, take a back seat to clarity.
You mean the thesis people should just post on Facebook rather than bother Steam users with?
Nuance and clarity are intertwined.
Trying to draw a false dichotomy between the two does not serve either purpose -- especially not clarity, when one forces misrepresentations of information in the name of what one thinks as clarity.
I can't imagine many scenarios where a game would get a negative review unless they're completely broken, which is why most game's reviews skew towards positive.
Because many games aren't completely broken or completely flawless, and instead fall somewhere in the middle. Users wouldn't be shrugging their shoulders, they would be letting people know the game falls somewhere in the middle. They should be able to voice their opinion on this more accurately, that way the overall results are more accurate, and therefore more useful to consumers.
Yes, currently, with just "yes", and "no", a certain percentage of votes go to both camps. However, I wouldn't say it's an "even chance". Logically, it would make sense that more middling reviews would go positive than go negative, but I suppose it really just depends on how harsh the reviewer is. Still, I don't think there's many reviewers out there that are harsh enough to give every game except very good ones negative reviews.
In any case, which side the middling reviews go to is a minor point. The bigger issue is the inaccuracy of what is being said in the text vs. what the rating says. At a glance, looking at "posivie" and "negative" review counts currently essentially means... almost nothing to me.
I'm not sure how many of those reviews are ACTUALLY positive or negative, because many of them would actually fall in the middle, and could go to either side depending on a few factors, such as the reviewer's interpretation of the review system, as well as how harsh the reviewer was.
What I'm saying, though, is that currently there's no nuance at all, and that is what's making things unclear. With just "positive" and "negative" being the only two options, I won't know what somebody is actually saying unless I go through and read all of the reviews, which I'm not going to do.
I might read a few when I'm looking at the store page, but in theory it'd be much more useful to simply look at the numbers... however, as I described above, currently those numbers don't actually mean much, because they don't reflect what people are actually saying.
What does "Maybe" tell you that you still don't need to go and read the review?
If someone tells me "Yes" i know that they like it, they'd recommend it. If they say "no" i know they didn't like it, they dont recommend it. If someone tells me "maybe" i don't know anything. What does that mean?
Praxis now is: Curator has an informative review option - and reviews self as standalone for users have only bad or good, that doesn't fit.
For myself i try to write informative reviews and i vote all games as not recommned, because often there're essential things wrong with games i test. It's not the best way for my opinion
But if some customers - even most customers! - are only interested in reading the 'yes' and 'no' reviews, that's fine! There are already options in place around what reviews you want to see, surely this would just be one more option in that section, no big deal.
Even "yes" or "no" doesn't mean so much, because you read text in first place and make decision based on review contents, not on the review color.
But if there are people who consider binary choice "yes" or "no" not reflecting their opinion and don't want to post their review under either of them, don't know which harm "informational" choice can make. They simply will not be counted in the game rating. There are already many reviews that not counted in this rating (keys, gifts), one review less, one more, what's the difference?
well maybe is just as useless as far as Im concerned
do you like the game, yes or no. Thats the only thing I care about when reading a review
* the set of people who use the review score/recommendation as a way to nudge themselves toward or away from buying something.
* the set of people who don't use the review score/recommendation but just want to get more information about the game.
The first group argues against adding a third option, as they feel it'd dilute up their experience, while the second group wants a third option because it would encourage more people to share their thoughts and thus provide more information. Such as explained here:
I am definitely in the second group. I wouldn't trust anyone else to tell me whether to make a purchase, without knowing me first, and I'm not sure anyone should trust someone else to tell them a recommendation like that. People's tastes differ quite frequently.