ติดตั้ง Steam
เข้าสู่ระบบ
|
ภาษา
简体中文 (จีนตัวย่อ)
繁體中文 (จีนตัวเต็ม)
日本語 (ญี่ปุ่น)
한국어 (เกาหลี)
български (บัลแกเรีย)
Čeština (เช็ก)
Dansk (เดนมาร์ก)
Deutsch (เยอรมัน)
English (อังกฤษ)
Español - España (สเปน)
Español - Latinoamérica (สเปน - ลาตินอเมริกา)
Ελληνικά (กรีก)
Français (ฝรั่งเศส)
Italiano (อิตาลี)
Bahasa Indonesia (อินโดนีเซีย)
Magyar (ฮังการี)
Nederlands (ดัตช์)
Norsk (นอร์เวย์)
Polski (โปแลนด์)
Português (โปรตุเกส - โปรตุเกส)
Português - Brasil (โปรตุเกส - บราซิล)
Română (โรมาเนีย)
Русский (รัสเซีย)
Suomi (ฟินแลนด์)
Svenska (สวีเดน)
Türkçe (ตุรกี)
Tiếng Việt (เวียดนาม)
Українська (ยูเครน)
รายงานปัญหาเกี่ยวกับการแปลภาษา
กฎและแนวทางปฏิบัติในกระดานสนทนา
รายงานโพสต์นี้
JayCihns is talking about the actual content of the review, the text.
a neutral review to me is both you don't hate or love it. you're just in the middle. could some things be done to sway in either direction sure. i think it sucks there is either a you like it or don't. so anyone who wants to read real reviews need to look at both good and bad. anyways. we can agree if some of the bad reviews like the ones to get awards were to go away then yes we could get better stuff.
its the same reason when you look at any other product/service you have bad average and good like hotels, food, movies music etc. all 3 can be present. hotel you don't want a bad one or an expensive good one there are more moderate affordable hotels out there. its why they're 3 star and not 4/5.
More generally though the steam rating system is completely flawed. The thumbs up/down buttons have a label next to them "Would you recommend this game?"
This is a nonsensical question to assign to a binary choice. For example I would recommend Factorio to people who have a logical, logistical, organisational, programming background, but I would not recommend it to probably a majority of gamers.
Anyway, the vast majority of people are not saying "yes I do recommend this game" or "no I don not recommend this game" they are simply saying "I liked this game" "I didn't like this game". So it makes complete sense to just abandon the idea of recommending a game, and add a "I somewhat liked this game but it has issues" as a neutral option.
Neutral is non-committal and you yourself cannot decided whether is to be recommended or not and hence why neutral is pointless. Neutral reviews are "make your mind up, i cannot".
Now the Steam review system is very simple - do you recommend this game or not and in the body of the text you can state the positive and the negatives of said game and make a decision because you are engaging with the review system Valve implemented.
Secondly if Valve had seen value in a negative rating they would have included it but they did not and just because you believe the current system is flawed does not mean it should be included, it is Valve's system after all to implement as they see fit.
And finally reviews on Steam are optional not mandatory and you do not need to engage with the system you believe should change to fit a criteria you set.
And when you can provide any evidence to that assertion I'll take it seriously. Evidence shows that they are no less likely to put low effort in than anyone else. Heck the fact that they can't even put in enough thought to make uup their own minds kinda gives a perfect example of this.
You seem to be reading more of your own biases into things. Which is ironic.
And if youu haven't put enough thouught into that idea to see how useless it would be, then you again illustrate my point.
So basically it's just a second no. We have a NO. And news flash all games are flawed to some degree.
And yeat you easily show how it works. Conditionals. if x then y else z
Yes most people don't delve beyond the impulsive surface level. Youu can dislike a game and still recommend it, and you can like a game but still decline to recommend it.
That already exists. It's the Yes option.
So there's this one crowd of strangers that says "go buy this game". There's this other crowd of strangers that says "don't buy this game". Who're you gonna listen to? Adding one more crowd of strangers saying "meh it was okay" doesn't really change anything either.
But there's an important part of reviews that this viewpoint neglects -- namely, the reviews (i.e. the text) themselves.
And making up one's mind on whether to recommend the game is absolutely not necessary for providing information about the game.
So there's no reason to force it.
This is patently untrue.
And it's also Valve's system to provide a suggestions forum for people to suggest improvements to their systems.
So instead you, Nx Machina, substitute your own "criteria" that is always exactly the same as the status quo, in order to declare other people's "criteria" to be invalid. This makes no sense.
Also, "reviews are optional" but the "option" is a false choice because the only choice other than to use the up/down rating system is to not post a review at all. This is analogous to your repeatedly suggesting that people just leave Steam only because they don't like what Steam has to offer.
It doesn't have to be this way; Steam can be more accommodating and make more people happy.
And so are neutral reviews, but you do not want those to be posted. So you aren't even applying this principle to yourself.
One doesn't need to make up one's mind on recommending a game in order to provide information about a game.
In fact, indicating a neither positive nor negative opinion of a game is still an opinion. But, you can't understand opinions that are neither positive nor negative, it seems...> alleges others' biases
> doesn't consider a neutral opinion to be an opinion
What irony.
Except it wouldn't be useless. It wouldn't absolutely prevent meaningless reviews, but it would have the effect of discouraging them.
If you already know how you want to interpret neutral reviews, then the addition of a neutral review option would not be a problem for you.
But for some reason you don't want other people to be able to enjoy themselves as long as you don't like how they're enjoying themselves.
Except that is not how Steam represents the reviews.
Steam represents the reviews as positive and negative. And review-writers are aware of this. Except maybe you since you keep misrepresenting this.
But you just said neutral is "just a second no". This shows the problem with the way you're interpreting things, and also shows how forcing people to choose either positive or negative status ends up muddying up both statuses.
They are the type of players who want to say some bad things about the game but do not want to down-vote it because they feel they harm the developers too much :)
I would rather want Early Access tag removed completely.
Also when the game has both positive and negative aspects, you can recommend it to some people and recommend others to avoid it.
But for Valve would be a bad business to allow potential customers to listen to undecided reviewers.
Valve wants to sell the games. It is a harsh world out there. Developers have to do well enough to get positive reviews.So Valve tells: do well or die.
Also Valve wants to help developers sell unfinished (early access) games. So the tag will stay too no matter what I want.
If the review is written well, it gets votes and can be found with the filter: "most helpful"
Other clues are to check how many reviews the game has or how long the player played the game.
It seems to me that the review system worked well for
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1149460/ICARUS/
I am not going to buy that game soon.
Reading forum posts is also a good source of information, especially the suggestion sub-forum. Anything mentioned there is something which is missing in the game :)
And you can specifically say whom you recommend it for if you so choose in explicit detail, or you can use subtle phrasing to indicate.
You know something like: "If you aren't into ball-bustingly difficult bullet hell shooters, you're gonna wanna give this one a pass."
Once sentence.
In the sense that people who are undecided tend to just ramble. and lets be frank. It's nearly impossible to be undecided on this. "Do you recommend?" is a query related toa specific action. Any thing that is not that action is No. Simple as that.
If you can't honestly say yes, then the honest answer is no. The question is deliberate and meant to basically require the writer to know what they want to say.
And that's basically how it works in every business. You either make the mark. or..you are a skid mark.
Well Let's be fair. There are quite a few customers who want to buy unfinished games so you know. Where there is a demand ....
best not read too much into play time. Since games can change post release. Also You can tell a bad game pretty quickly.
That's true. But after you tell all this, you still have to choose up or down-vote.
Valve say "Please describe what you liked or disliked about this game and whether you recommend it to others."
What should a honest reviewer choose if he didn't enjoyed the game but he believes that 90% of other players would enjoy it?
I think you are wrong on this one. Somehow you shifted from being undecided to being honest.
Yes. Early Access was supposed to be the phase where they get feedback to be able to make a good game in the end.
But it became a way to sell the game in advance and use players as testers. And those supporters say the game is good even when is average. They defend developer's decision blindly.
I see now the trend of showing the games in demo phase and developers updating the demo and getting feedback even earlier, to be able to have a successful early access launch. :)
Not too much. Just a little ;) And that information can have different meanings, depending on context.
"No" is equally acceptable. if you want to lean into the reasons why you don't like it. In which case the people reading can decide if your quibbles are something they would have problems with.
Imagine writing a negative review of a Neptunia game and complaining about the over use of anime lolis. Or a complaining about the "oh ♥♥♥♥ me sideways" difficulty of a BHS game. Or long rambling incoherent cyutscene dialogue ina Kojima game.
For some the critiqe will indeed be something they consider negative. and for others...they will see it as a ringing endorsement.
In the end you as the writer have to decide who you're writing for. The people like you, or the people unlike you.
Myself. I just use a litmus test. If I had the chance to stop my past self from buying the game...would I. If the answer is Yes, then my recommendation is No. if the answer is No, my recommendation is yes.
Other people do things like assign weighted tally points and only give yes if the score comes above a certain threshold . Game scores a 78/100, No. Game scores a 85/100. Yes.
Undecided means simply that you have not decided. If asked to decide one can either decide honestly, based on ones true feelings and opinions, or deciode based on external factors. The feelings of the devs, how other readers will react to their opinion, etc. Which is dishonest.
It's kinda like when a close lady friend asks you: "Do I look fat?". There's the honest answer. And the answer that will preserve your mental well-being. In reviews there is the honest answer, and the answer one might feel will be more acceptable/safer/popular.
Hold the horses there!
Did you see what you did?
You basically asserted that one group's subjective opinion is less valid because it contradicts your own equally subjective opinion. What is the objective difference between 'good' and 'average' in this context?
They could genuinely believe the game is good. You might consider it average, and others might consider it horrible. Lets take Half Life. A game so many are quick to bow to as one of the greatest games ever made. I consider it Average. AN I say this as an actual fan of the series.
EA does what it does and most EA games actually make it to the finish line. This is why the failures are what people remember the most. It's the proverbial white raven.
This is kinda wghy neutral really makes no real sense. Or to phrase it another way. WHat can you say with a neutral review that you couldn't say with a decisive review? Literally nothing. Well written decisive reviews will give an accounting of the perceived prios and cons. and a poorly written neutral is even less iformative than a poorly written decisive.
Ergo Neutral is an inferior category. And at best just a second option to Say No.
The question does nothing to prevent "rambling", and there are quite lengthy positive and negative reviews anyway.
Furthermore, those reviews that "ramble" tend to contain more details about the game. The reviewer doesn't need to be "decided" on whether to recommend a game in order to tell prospective customers about it. In fact, whether they recommend a game is the last thing I might ask them...because that tells me nothing about whether I would like a game. It's far more important that they tell me what's in the game itself.
And that is the real "what they want to say". Not your insistent focus on the recommendation bit. But I guess it makes sense that you think reviews with more text are "rambly", if you don't care about the review text (which you've shown repeatedly).
It's not the be-all-and-end-all of reviews that you think it is. It's merely a convenience for some people who care about that.
Sometimes those are the same answer. They're not necessarily different.
Also, people who've posted suggesting this feature have indicated over and over again that they want to write neutral reviews to express their own honest opinions, without being forced into either the positive or negative extremes that are the only choices Steam offers. If you are going to claim that they're being dishonest for social acceptability, you're creating a motive out of thin air and pinning that on them. That's very dishonest on your part.
And what can you say with a "decisive" (read: forced to pick positive or negative) review that you can't say with a "neutral" (read: neither marked positive nor negative) review? Nothing either.
The fact that you're focusing entirely on the positive/negative rating shows that you are willfully ignoring the text and only care about the rating.
But a well-written neutral review is far more informative than a poorly-written decisive review, while a well-written review with a yes/no recommendation attached to it doesn't tell me anything more than a well-written review without such a recommendation.
Even if you are slightly in favor of a game-- then you would recommend it and in the review you would list the issues you still have with the game.
A suimilar questyion could be phrased:
"Is yyour cuurrent location closer to New York than it is to LOndon?"
Theere is no position in 3D space in this universe that you need more than yes our no to answer that question.
What's great about the recommendation question Is.that where you draw thaat line is up to every person. .