Bring "unhelpful" ratio for the reviews.

[Jack Krauser]

Seriously Valve, don't turn steam reviews into youtube, don't make the thumbs down useless and have the stupid reviews on the top for how many likes he had and didn't deserve.

[Matt]

Did you read the article? It explains the changes and how the "thumbs down" was "useless" to begin with.

The question is, are you reviews that you see more helpful?

[Jack Krauser]

How am I supposed to know which helpful review is truly helpful? Like most of people said, if a review is considered helpful by 50 persons, but is viewed by 150 persons where 100 of them disagree with the review, then its a unhelpful review and shouldnt be trusted, but again, I can’t know, because the unhelpful ratio is gone. Censoring the unhelpful ratio is just a camouflage to overly praise a game and its dev(s) without proper critisism. If you dont want anyone to critisize a review (assuming haters don’t exist), then don’t have reviews at all! (Removing reviews as a whole shouldn’t even be considered an option, however.)

[Crystal Sharrd]

I read an article on the changes they're implementing, and I think it makes sense. After all, if people are spiteful enough to review bomb a game, they're going to be spiteful enough to spam Unhelpful votes for any positive review and spam Helpful votes for any negative reviews, no matter how helpful or unhelpful a review actually is.

[Start_Running]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Barney Calhoun:

How am I supposed to know which helpful review is truly helpful?

By reading it?

[Jack Krauser]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Start_Running:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Barney Calhoun:

How am I supposed to know which helpful review is truly helpful?

By reading it?

Oh wow, thanks for that obvious statement, what would I have done without you? I’m talking about reviews that aren’t general, such as someone giving a statement or a technical issue about the game that isn’t really a problem for the majority, but in order to prevent this review from fooling the newcomers, you show the amount of people disagreeing with him, so those new potential players look for other relevant reviews.

[Start_Running]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Barney Calhoun:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Start_Running:

By reading it?

Oh wow, thanks for that obvious statement, what would I have done without you?

Smart ass questions get smart ass answers.

I’m talking about reviews that aren’t general, such as someone giving a statement or a technical issue about the game that isn’t really a problem for the majority, but in order to prevent this review from fooling the newcomers, you show the amount of people disagreeing with him, so those new potential players look for other relevant reviews.

Err have you thought the line of logic through dear?
What if the newcomer happens to fall into that minority that are likely to have the proble,./ For example it has an issue with a particular onboard chipset driver when combined with a certain AV program. Wouldn't it be better to have that review seen so that people who are likely to be affected can know in advance.

For starters what right does anyone have to disagree with such a review. If they themselves don't have the problem. You're displaying the very mindset that caused Valve to implement this.

[Star Ocean]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Barney Calhoun:

How am I supposed to know which helpful review is truly helpful? Like most of people said, if a review is considered helpful by 50 persons, but is viewed by 150 persons where 100 of them disagree with the review, then its a unhelpful review and shouldnt be trusted, but again, I can’t know, because the unhelpful ratio is gone. Censoring the unhelpful ratio is just a camouflage to overly praise a game and its dev(s) without proper critisism. If you dont want anyone to critisize a review (assuming haters don’t exist), then don’t have reviews at all! (Removing reviews as a whole shouldn’t even be considered an option, however.)

As someone who often relies on reviews to consider purchases, I totally agree with this, and beg Valve to let me see the Helpful/Unhelpful ratio.

[Radene]

It simply boils down to this:

Snowlafkes would feel really really horrible if their "smart" and "witty" review were to be voted down or in any way marked as the garbage that it tends to be.

And since we don't want riots, we prefer to keep them in the illusion of relevance.

[Tito Shivan]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Radene:

Snowlafkes would feel really really horrible if their "smart" and "witty" review were to be voted down or in any way marked as the garbage that it tends to be.

It's the other way around actually. It's to shut down the smart guys thinking that downvoting/upvoting every review or using his bots to spam votes on reviews will achieve something. Or the guy using all his alts to downvote all your reviews because he hates you...

The new changes normalise the vote ratio by ditching out statistical anomalies (1 account downvoting 10.000 reviews)

[Start_Running]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Tito Shivan:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Radene:

Snowlafkes would feel really really horrible if their "smart" and "witty" review were to be voted down or in any way marked as the garbage that it tends to be.

It's the other way around actually. It's to shut down the smart guys thinking that downvoting/upvoting every review or using his bots to spam votes on reviews will achieve something. Or the guy using all his alts to downvote all your reviews because he hates you...

The new changes normalise the vote ratio by ditching out statistical anomalies (1 account downvoting 10.000 reviews)

In short. You can still down vote.

[Jack Krauser]

The change is basically the thumbs down spam, but with thumbs up instead. In both sides, trolls will still take advantage of it, which means this change is unecessary to solving this issue, if not making it worst.

[Radene]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Tito Shivan:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Radene:

Snowlafkes would feel really really horrible if their "smart" and "witty" review were to be voted down or in any way marked as the garbage that it tends to be.

It's the other way around actually. It's to shut down the smart guys thinking that downvoting/upvoting every review or using his bots to spam votes on reviews will achieve something. Or the guy using all his alts to downvote all your reviews because he hates you...

The new changes normalise the vote ratio by ditching out statistical anomalies (1 account downvoting 10.000 reviews)

*shrug* Personally, I'd say the best way to do that were simply to not have votes on reviews in the first place.

[Tito Shivan]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Start_Running:

In short. You can still down vote.

And will still count the same...
As long as you're not a bot or massively spamming votes.

[Mergan]

What is the point of showing only positive ratings, after all, now weak and not helpful reviews look like the good.
For example, if the review has 50 helpful posts out of 300 then it is obviously bad, and now when you see the 50 itself it looks like a good review.

Valve please show the ratings the old way!

[Black Blade]

Oprindeligt skrevet af Mergan:

What is the point of showing only positive ratings, after all, now weak and not helpful reviews look like the good.
For example, if the review has 50 helpful posts out of 300 then it is obviously bad, and now when you see the 50 itself it looks like a good review.

Valve please show the ratings the old way!

What is the point of saying the same thing on all the threads on the subject? they likely get merged soon and then will have all your posts over and over the same on all the topics