-

[07]

-

[Hat8]

How representative a review is important to a consumer. Why shouldn't it be included?

The fact that reviewers can delete comments is concerning as people that point out lies in reviews can be silenced. Of course,having reviewers moderate their comments sections is kinda necessary considering the sheer number of reviews. Ratings can't be censored and that's why they're good.

[Ludus Aurea]

Your reponse would be fine if this was fantasy land.

How "representative" a review is, is not something displayed by the thumbs up/down score system for reviews. It is nothing but a popularity contest. It is a way for idiots to show you they disagree with your opinion.

It's blatant that the Steam review system is meaningless. Since the beginning, absolutely useless trash reviews like "11/10 would ride horse again" have been upvoted 100% and shown on the "Most helpful reviews" section.

Those reviews are GARBAGE. They are pure ♥♥♥♥ and the person who "wrote" them needs to be physically injured.

I delete comments from my reviews all the time because they are from an absolute piece of trash jackwagon. You can look at my "Social Justice Warriors" review and see if the comments from this pathetic troll are still there. He called me a misogynstic basement dwelling neckbeard because I pointed out, accurately, that the game misrepresents the issues intentionally and was sold entirely on a wave of anti-gamergate hurrdurr pomposity in the gaming community. On top of that, it's a simplistic RNG game with bad gameplay and a lack of cohesiveness or immersion, of which the only positive aspect is the occasional ridiculousness of the whole thing.

What you should be worried about isn't people pointing out lies in reviews being silenced. You should worry about the lying jackwagon who wrote the review in the first place, being allowed to write reviews.

There is no other ratings system. The "rating" is an aggregate of all reviews. It has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of a game. You can look through the steam store and see that plenty actual stellar games do have "Overwhelmingly positive" scores, and that is ONLY because the only people reviewing them are fans. The vast majority of games have a mixed review, because idiots are buying them without knowing what they bought, and trashing them.

[76561198001062896]

Originally posted by Grenadeh:

Your reponse would be fine if this was fantasy land.

How "representative" a review is, is not something displayed by the thumbs up/down score system for reviews. It is nothing but a popularity contest. It is a way for idiots to show you they disagree with your opinion.

It's blatant that the Steam review system is meaningless. Since the beginning, absolutely useless trash reviews like "11/10 would ride horse again" have been upvoted 100% and shown on the "Most helpful reviews" section.

Those reviews are GARBAGE. They are pure ♥♥♥♥ and the person who "wrote" them needs to be physically injured.

I delete comments from my reviews all the time because they are from an absolute piece of trash jackwagon. You can look at my "Social Justice Warriors" review and see if the comments from this pathetic troll are still there. He called me a misogynstic basement dwelling neckbeard because I pointed out, accurately, that the game misrepresents the issues intentionally and was sold entirely on a wave of anti-gamergate hurrdurr pomposity in the gaming community. On top of that, it's a simplistic RNG game with bad gameplay and a lack of cohesiveness or immersion, of which the only positive aspect is the occasional ridiculousness of the whole thing.

What you should be worried about isn't people pointing out lies in reviews being silenced. You should worry about the lying jackwagon who wrote the review in the first place, being allowed to write reviews.

There is no other ratings system. The "rating" is an aggregate of all reviews. It has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of a game. You can look through the steam store and see that plenty actual stellar games do have "Overwhelmingly positive" scores, and that is ONLY because the only people reviewing them are fans. The vast majority of games have a mixed review, because idiots are buying them without knowing what they bought, and trashing them.

So you are saying that many overly positively rated games are only having that highly rated due to fanboys?

Okay, thats new information to me.

[xaxazak]

Originally posted by Wyvyrias:

Btw since I wrote a negative review about "Zup!" mentioned above, it seems all my reviews are getting unreasonable downvotes (well, just 1 or 2, tho) the moment I make them public.
Taking into account that positive reviews for this game are getting at least 2 upvotes for every "positive" review the shortly after it goes live, it seems either the developer or some fanboy is using bots to manipulate the ratings. Valve really needs to rework that system even further.

Weight it partly on money spent, up to say $100, plus use of phone or authenticator.
Also have a maximum total vote weight, also based on the above factors. Once that weight is exceeded, vote weights are further scaled.

[Hat8]

Originally posted by Grenadeh:

Your reponse would be fine if this was fantasy land.

How "representative" a review is, is not something displayed by the thumbs up/down score system for reviews. It is nothing but a popularity contest. It is a way for idiots to show you they disagree with your opinion.

Whether or not your review was useful or not can be gauged by the thumbs up/down score. Comments can be deleted so it's useful.

You'll find games that have their overall score marked positive but their top positive reviews downvoted to hell (eg, ubisoft games). People sensible enough not to buy crappy games are given a voice in this way and that's good for the consumer.

Originally posted by Grenadeh:

It's blatant that the Steam review system is meaningless. Since the beginning, absolutely useless trash reviews like "11/10 would ride horse again" have been upvoted 100% and shown on the "Most helpful reviews" section.

Those reviews are GARBAGE. They are pure ♥♥♥♥ and the person who "wrote" them needs to be physically injured.

These reviews are a minority and it takes a simple scroll to get past them.

Originally posted by Grenadeh:

I delete comments from my reviews all the time because they are from an absolute piece of trash jackwagon. You can look at my "Social Justice Warriors" review and see if the comments from this pathetic troll are still there. He called me a misogynstic basement dwelling neckbeard because I pointed out, accurately, that the game misrepresents the issues intentionally and was sold entirely on a wave of anti-gamergate hurrdurr pomposity in the gaming community. On top of that, it's a simplistic RNG game with bad gameplay and a lack of cohesiveness or immersion, of which the only positive aspect is the occasional ridiculousness of the whole thing.

It's tragic that gamergators get just as triggered as sjws over silly comments.

Originally posted by Grenadeh:

What you should be worried about isn't people pointing out lies in reviews being silenced. You should worry about the lying jackwagon who wrote the review in the first place, being allowed to write reviews.

Every consumer should be allowed to write a review. If the review is full of lies,the reviews rating will usually indicate as such. The devs are allowed to make their own comments (which to my knowledge cannot be deleted) and this acts as another counter to lies.

Originally posted by Grenadeh:

There is no other ratings system. The "rating" is an aggregate of all reviews. It has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of a game. You can look through the steam store and see that plenty actual stellar games do have "Overwhelmingly positive" scores, and that is ONLY because the only people reviewing them are fans. The vast majority of games have a mixed review, because idiots are buying them without knowing what they bought, and trashing them.

There is no such thing as an impartial review. There is no such thing as an "objectively good" game. Everything is based on what people like and it's fine if you love a game that everybody else hates. However, whether or not other people like something or not can be a good indicator on whether or not you'll like it.

It's also fine to buy a game and find it mediocre. Games also get updated and turn to crap/fail to meet expectations.

[Tito Shivan]

Originally posted by Wyvyrias:

But tbh, people who are not using the 2 factor auth. and didn't spend at least $100 are usually not interested in those features anyway. So it would cut down troll/bot accounts even further.

Purchase power does not equate to posting or reviewing quality.

[wuddih]

thx for pointing out Zup

it was already on my wishlist because of other conditions but i didn't know what the game was about. that is definitely a buy and the first listed reviews helped alot to determine what the game is, looks like a solid game for the price that will fulfill my temporary achievement needs that i have sometimes. now i just wait for a discount to fullfill my urge to save some money.

so ... what was wrong with the review system again? you dont like that your reviews get downvoted and actually helpful short reviews are on the top, correct?

Originally posted by Wyvyrias:

That wasn't the point. The point is that trolls can't just create a dozen of accounts with little costs to invalidate the point of certain features if the costs are too high.

it is $5 per account. that is a bit too much just to downvote your reviews, don't ya think?

[Tito Shivan]

Originally posted by Wyvyrias:

That wasn't the point. The point is that trolls can't just create a dozen of accounts with little costs to invalidate the point of certain features if the costs are too high.

And you're assuming the reviewing issue comes from bot accounts made for that purpose, when actually its just normal users.

[Black Blade]

Originally posted by Wyvyrias:

Originally posted by wuddih:

thx for pointing out Zup

it was already on my wishlist because of other conditions but i didn't know what the game was about. that is definitely a buy and the first listed reviews helped alot to determine what the game is, looks like a solid game for the price that will fulfill my temporary achievement needs that i have sometimes. now i just wait for a discount to fullfill my urge to save some money.

so ... what was wrong with the review system again? you dont like that your reviews get downvoted and actually helpful short reviews are on the top, correct?

So to sum that up:

I just pointed out that this game isn't even a game, but a cheap money-grab which requires zero effort. Yet you're going to buy it? Like damn, the game is worth 10 cents at best.

And no, your entire assumption is completely wrong (as usual). What I don't like are brainless zombies who completely invalidate the point of the ratings just because they're bored. Considering how fast my reviews are getting downvoted after resetting them at random times, someone is either refreshing that page every 5min 24/7 or bots to manipulate ratings are actually a thing. Thanks to that I don't even need to consider any review with lots of "helpful" to be helpful, unless it actually is (because tbh, the majority of the Steam Community isn't exactly smart, so some meme-review easily can get several thousands of upvotes, even though it says nothing).

Originally posted by wuddih:

it is $5 per account. that is a bit too much just to downvote your reviews, don't ya think?

Thanks for not reading. As usual.

Either way, an option to disable ratings (and comments, for those who dislike them) on your own reviews is a very small feature and there is no reason to not integrate that.

I think some are not agreeing with you
a game been only 15 minutes may be bad by some and great by outers like some that dont have as much time to play a long game

there are a lot of reviews saying it was fun
So maybe some just dont find your review helpful as you point it all as nagative (even that you do say some postive stuff in the nagative zone...)

Originally posted by Wyvyrias:

We're talking about reviews that are partly weeks/months old and do not even appear in the recent reviews. And no, hardcore trolls who actually stalk other people's pages to grief them in any way can not be considered "normal users".

Your review is in the top helpful once so will be seen by not a few users

[Black Blade]

"as said, the community is pathetic"

I am sure that somethimg many will not accept much

Well cant tell why, can be many reasons for it

but that aside
Thinking a 1$ game Dev will make bots to hunt reviews of someone that vote them down is silly
its 5$ per a voting account

if at all il suspect the outher Not-Recommend reviewers
Maybe they want to be the most popler

Honstly what ever removing the system is the worng way to go
Over all the system works well

and BTW maybe someone is hunting you as of you restarting the review when you dont like the votes? i assume that seeing that i vote down the Dive one, yet says i had no votes

Also if its true that you get vote down by "funboys" dose not need to matter seeing that all the not-recommend will get it leaving your review in the same place inside the not recommend

[Black Blade]

Sorry monile is a pain :(

O going to jump over quoteing

If you have no review on the review how will it be ordred? by random?
If it will be so and there for users with rating are only to be seen, well maybe better just not making reviews or keeping them friends only?

I cant see a review that has no order beening amoung lots of joke reviews with no oreder
been anything helpful for someone coming to buy (And the review system is for them, not for the reviewer)

[xaxazak]

I'm not sure if everyone got this, so:

$50 gets you 10 downvoter bots. They can each upvote and downvote ∞ reviews. So every review for your game can get 10 fake votes in the preferred direction. If a good review score gets you lots more money that could easily be worth it.

If left alone, this could become a very big problem. Bots are hard and expensive to catch.

I don't think voluntary disabling the ratings is much of a solution, though. Not many people will bother - and nobody is punished.

[xaxazak]

Originally posted by Wyvyrias:

True. However, people who are targeted by bots or trolls won't be forced into making their reviews friends-only if no one can downvote their reviews to begin with, because that is what those people want. To have them vanish from the public view.

Well, the highest rise to the top so if you lock or reset to zero you'll still be below all the positive ones - if there's enough reviews you're still fairly well buried.

[The End]

Originally posted by Wyvyrias:

Originally posted by xaxazak:

Well, the highest rise to the top so if you lock or reset to zero you'll still be below all the positive ones - if there's enough reviews you're still fairly well buried.

I don't really care about that. I just don't want randoms to brandmark my reviews as "Not Helpful" just because they have nothing else to do.

What if your reviews actually is not helpful, take a look at this.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/Wyvyrias/recommended/274940/

Not very helpful IMO.

[The End]

Originally posted by Wyvyrias:

Originally posted by Rockon.:

What if your reviews actually is not helpful, take a look at this.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/Wyvyrias/recommended/274940/

Not very helpful IMO.

Neither is your post here. Or did you only pick a single review in order to justfity your argument?

I could take this.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/Wyvyrias/recommended/730/

You claim the game does not work, 330000 say it does.
http://steamcharts.com/app/730

Not very helpful, you blame the game and Valve for problems with your defect internet/computer.

Originally posted by Wyvyrias:

I don't see a reason in having our reviews being free to be rated

I think it's good that other users can vote bad/not helpful reviews down or good reviews up.