Reviews Need Two Separate Thumbs

[𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪]

One thumb for actual product quality.

Second thumb for ethics surrounding product.

You would fix the review bombs by having them funneled into the latter, and if people thumbs down the former product quality based on the latter ethics surrounding the product, then Steam would have a legitimate basis to filter those reviews out for being false.

As-is we repeat the same old issue of "yeah the product is good but I only get 1 thumb".

Let people have 2 thumbs, and review bombs can be done without them confusing people who just want to know if the product itself is good or bad, separately from if the ethics are good or bad.

This is becoming an exceedingly obnoxious repetitive issue every time a company or individual ♥♥♥♥♥ up ethically, forcing people to convey this in reviews, but reviews not allowing for the nuance of separating the product from the creator if the reviewer desires to do so.

Forcibly mixing these 2 concepts together makes reviews unreliable at a glance -in a store this big, at a glance is all a game's reviews will normally get.


Edit:

Example

Game:

LOVE this game, best shooter I have ever played! #swag

[x] (Optional: Select this box if you want to rate the ethics surrounding this game.)
Ethics:

The developers scammed their kickstarter supporters and sent a cease and desist to my favorite modder. There are also known shadowbans and inconsistent moderation policies. Please sign the change-dot-org petition and spread the word.

[Tanoomba]

Wait a second, you think if a second rating is added the people who are irrationally angry at any given game won't simply make both thumbs down for maximum punishment impact?

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Originally posted by 𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪:

Reviews Need Two Separate Thumbs

One thumb for actual product quality.

Second thumb for ethics surrounding product.

You would fix the review bombs by having them funneled into the latter, and if people thumbs down the former product quality based on the latter ethics surrounding the product, then Steam would have a legitimate basis to filter those reviews out for being false.

As-is we repeat the same old issue of "yeah the product is good but I only get 1 thumb".

Let people have 2 thumbs, and review bombs can be done without them confusing people who just want to know if the product itself is good or bad, separately from if the ethics are good or bad.

This is becoming an exceedingly obnoxious repetitive issue every time a company or individual ♥♥♥♥♥ up ethically, forcing people to convey this in reviews, but reviews not allowing for the nuance of separating the product from the creator if the reviewer desires to do so.

Forcibly mixing these 2 concepts together makes reviews unreliable at a glance -in a store this big, at a glance is all a game's reviews will normally get.


Edit:

Example

Game:

LOVE this game, best shooter I have ever played! #swag

[x] (Optional: Select this box if you want to rate the ethics surrounding this game.)
Ethics:

The developers scammed their kickstarter supporters and sent a cease and desist to my favorite modder. There are also known shadowbans and inconsistent moderation policies. Please sign the change-dot-org petition and spread the word.

That would just make the second thumb not count towards the ratings just like Off Topic reviews already do.

[rawWwRrr]

Originally posted by 𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪:

You would fix the review bombs by having them funneled into the latter, and if people thumbs down the former product quality based on the latter ethics surrounding the product, then Steam would have a legitimate basis to filter those reviews out for being false.

And how does Steam determine the users are using the correct thumbs for the intended criteria? Like, how many of us enjoy a January 1 birthday when dealing with age gates???

[Nx Machina]

Originally posted by 𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪:

One thumb for actual product quality.

Second thumb for ethics surrounding product.

You would fix the review bombs by having them funneled into the latter, and if people thumbs down the former product quality based on the latter ethics surrounding the product, then Steam would have a legitimate basis to filter those reviews out for being false.

As-is we repeat the same old issue of "yeah the product is good but I only get 1 thumb".

Let people have 2 thumbs, and review bombs can be done without them confusing people who just want to know if the product itself is good or bad, separately from if the ethics are good or bad.

This is becoming an exceedingly obnoxious repetitive issue every time a company or individual ♥♥♥♥♥ up ethically, forcing people to convey this in reviews, but reviews not allowing for the nuance of separating the product from the creator if the reviewer desires to do so.

Forcibly mixing these 2 concepts together makes reviews unreliable at a glance -in a store this big, at a glance is all a game's reviews will normally get.


Edit:

Example

Game:

LOVE this game, best shooter I have ever played! #swag

[x] (Optional: Select this box if you want to rate the ethics surrounding this game.)
Ethics:

The developers scammed their kickstarter supporters and sent a cease and desist to my favorite modder. There are also known shadowbans and inconsistent moderation policies. Please sign the change-dot-org petition and spread the word.

Your suggestion for an optional ethics IS a review bomb by definition as you are not reviewing the game which is the intent of the system, as clearly defined by the actual wording "Would you recommend this game to other players".

Recommend - to endorse hence why you have when you do not endorse a game.

The system does not ask for your moral stance against the developer, nor with alleged shadowbans (a buzzword) nor your definition of inconsistent moderation policies, nor Kickstarter, nor your favourite modder who "legally" has to comply with a cease and desist order.

Secondly you can already "optionally" add your "ethics wording" to your "recommendation" of "LOVE this game, best shooter I have ever played!" and in turn it can be flagged as having no relevance to the game you are reviewing, by the developer or another user as your "recommendation" is merely added to disguise it IS a review bomb.

There are other sites where you can review a game you do not have the licence for and review bomb it, trash the developer etc. Metacritic is the defacto site for that scenario.

On Steam the system is working as "intended" by Valve hence why an "off-topic activity period" is inclusive of both "positive" and "negative" reviews.

[Odra]

Why give a platform to slacktivism?

This seems more geared to help the masses exert even more pressure on companies through a system that is not meant for such use. If there is an issue add it to the recommendation info to inform users, and if it is important enough let the courts and companies sort it out.

Otherwise use the recommendation system to judge the game by its own merits and offer why they should/n't buy it.

People already add too much nonsense and irrelevant information that the system might just be better off being a thumbs up or thumbs down and letting people write their reviews somewhere else.

[𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪]

Still seeing games with inaccurately high and low scores due to the lack of this feature. 2 scores 1 game is a good way of splitting the ethics from the game itself.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Originally posted by 𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪:

Still seeing games with inaccurately high and low scores due to the lack of this feature. 2 scores 1 game is a good way of splitting the ethics from the game itself.

You not liking the scores doesn't make them inaccurate.

[Start_Running]

Originally posted by SlowMango:

Originally posted by 𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪:

Still seeing games with inaccurately high and low scores due to the lack of this feature. 2 scores 1 game is a good way of splitting the ethics from the game itself.

You not liking the scores doesn't make them inaccurate.

People seem to have a really hard time grasping that.
Peopel generally don't give a rats arse about the latest drama. Is the game guud?, Is it fun? Is it stable? That's all the vast majority of people care about.

[Tanoomba]

Originally posted by 𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪:

Still seeing games with inaccurately high and low scores due to the lack of this feature.

They have high or low scores because a lot of or relatively few people like them, respectively. It has nothing to do with number of thumb options. We see games covering the full spectrum of player reception all the time. They are quite accurate.

[𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪]

Originally posted by Tanoomba:

Originally posted by 𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪:

Still seeing games with inaccurately high and low scores due to the lack of this feature.

They have high or low scores because a lot of or relatively few people like them, respectively. It has nothing to do with number of thumb options. We see games covering the full spectrum of player reception all the time. They are quite accurate.

When the game otherwise is a high-scoring epic masterpiece, barring the fact the players hate the company or hate some ethically nuanced aspect that does not truly reflect the quality of the game itself but the ethical leanings of individuals, yeah that undermines my ability to pick what games to buy and not buy because it doesn't truly reflect product quality. Whether or not Nestle uses slaves does not change the quality of the candy itself. I want to know about the ethical issue as its own separate score, independent of the actual product score, so I know WHY things are bad at a glance without having to read and click through things. A simple "THUMBS DOWN ETHICS SURROUNDING PRODUCT, THUMBS UP PRODUCT ITSELF" fixes this. Lumping them together just creates a confusing mess for buyers.

Misinformation caused by this vague confusion leads to lost profits and simultaneously the lack of this feature undermines ease of seeing if there is or is not an ethical problem.

Ethics:
Game:

-that is much clearer, and conveys good vs evil AND fun vs unfun, way better than

Review:

-the latter "Review" thumbs up or down, telling me astronomically less and potentially conflating ethics and game without me the consumer being aware its being rated up or down for reasons different than standard ones. A buyer can make a better informed decision at a glance with the former 2 thumbs than the latter 1 thumb, without having to read an entire review or several reviews. Realistically, the average buyers are not going to want to put in all this extra effort, and even if they do it can still be confusing comparing timings and alternating opinions, compared to just 2 simple averaged thumb scores on the Ethics and the Game. They ARE separate matters, it is extremely confusing to mix them for the average consumer. You couldn't make informed buying decisions day-to-day if all products had their reviews bent the way reviews of consumable media are -even though the production of average goods normally is far more unethical in its processes, while facing little to no review bombs comparatively.

[Mad Scientist]

Originally posted by 𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪:

I want to know about the ethical issue as its own separate score, independent of the actual product score

Reviews are solely to review the product
The system is not meant to allow or endorse accusations, rumors, or other supposed information which could taint the score especially if any supposed "ethics" reason is "got banned from the game hub" or "the game isn't as cheap as I want and the Dev wont give it to me for less or free".

"Ethics" could be anything and any claim, legally separating themselves is the best decision they make. Rate the product, anything else a user can do on any other site that allows discussions of concerns of such. If that's a concern, do research before you buy or don't buy if you're already aware of a company doing something you don't like.

Reviews are just about the product.

[𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪]

Originally posted by Start_Running:

Originally posted by SlowMango:

You not liking the scores doesn't make them inaccurate.

People seem to have a really hard time grasping that.
Peopel generally don't give a rats arse about the latest drama. Is the game guud?, Is it fun? Is it stable? That's all the vast majority of people care about.

Why are you agreeing with me while framing what you are saying as if you disagree. You acknowledge people mainly care about the product not the ethics, so logically that means the ethics score should be allowed its own separate thumb so the people who care about the game more than the ethics can make a quick judgement and completely ignore the ethics. Conversely if the '''slactivists''' really care about the ethics, then they can go by the former ethics thumb. I am aware it is difficult to not be contrary on a Suggestion let alone one made by me, but you should consider this potential benefit you would gain if there were 2 thumbs for at-a-glance judgements rather than the current vague 1 that lumps Ethics Surrounding Product with Product Itself.

Ethics:
Game:

always gonna be clearer and more helpful at-a-glance to an average consumer than the exact same review instead being:

Review:

The current system is too vague and causes lost profits, lost ethics understanding, and lost product understanding, because we lump these 2 very distinct things together as 1 thumb that's overall becoming gradually more useless the more these ethical issues crop up, forcing people into situations where lots of research is needed and no one wants to do it so they have to either buy now hope later, or not buy now out of the hassle -both decisions leading to greater missed opportunities due to lack of consumer understanding. Consumers in this situation are not stupid -they just have time they can better spend not researching every single game's nuanced review history and ethical background. 2 thumbs saves a hell of a lot of time while improving potential profits in this regard.

[𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪]

Originally posted by Mad Scientist:

Originally posted by 𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪:

I want to know about the ethical issue as its own separate score, independent of the actual product score

Reviews are solely to review the product
The system is not meant to allow or endorse accusations, rumors, or other supposed information which could taint the score especially if any supposed "ethics" reason is "got banned from the game hub" or "the game isn't as cheap as I want and the Dev wont give it to me for less or free".

"Ethics" could be anything and any claim, legally separating themselves is the best decision they make. Rate the product, anything else a user can do on any other site that allows discussions of concerns of such. If that's a concern, do research before you buy or don't buy if you're already aware of a company doing something you don't like.

Reviews are just about the product.

Please entertain the following logic, understanding I do not disagree with the reality it is very annoying the "Ethics" reviews are lumped together with the "Game" reviews.

How the product is made ties into the product. The product is separate, but still heavily related, to the ethics surrounding it. Present reviews already include, and will indefinitely continue to include, these ethics. There is no foreseeable way to dictate to the entire reviewer demographic "You cannot include ethics in your review!" -let alone enforce that, and the userbase would sooner rebel over the ethical problems that inevitably presents in its censorship-laden logic.

So, keeping all that in mind, while still understanding I AGREE IT IS ANNOYING THE ETHICS REVIEWS ARE MIXED WITH THE PRODUCT REVIEWS,

-The best you can hope for is 2 thumbs. The present system of mixing the Product Ethics with The Product, annoys everyone, while providing clarity to no one but those with excess time. People are either just throwing their money at the game as a gamble due to not wanting to do a full background research on the game, or simply skipping games completely due to the research required to make an informed decision as a result of a lack of a clear-cut system, such as 2-thumb Ethics and Game hard-coded default review method.

In the Anonymous movement, there were originally 2 groups: Moralists who participated for moral reasons, and people who participated for "teh lulz". Similarly, we need to clearly split the reviews to cater to these types of people in the consumer market: People who buy for MORAL REASONS, and people who buy for FUN REASONS.

Thus:

Ethics:
Game:

-is far clearer at-a-glance, than the exact same review having to for ethical reasons instead give this overall thumb:

Review:

Thus, the 2-thumb method would be better, while requiring fairly straightforward code-tweaking, to enable as the default Thumbs method for all reviews.

[Mad Scientist]

Originally posted by 𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪:

(snip)

Review the product.

Originally posted by 𒐪⎝ Epylector ⎠𒐪:

The current system is too vague and causes lost profits

It does not cost profit. People either will or will not buy a game for any reason, they primarily want to know if the game is good. Anything else would require an individual to look up the information themselves to determine if arbitrary factors mean they will or will not purchase something.

Having been a part of a giant company, reviews are either "I recommend this product", "I do not recommend this product" or a 1-5 rating system. People tend to rate the product for what it's supposed to do, which in this case is to entertain a user. They should also review the product itself. Users are free to use other sites & services to speak about what they suspect may be ethics issues, though the Publisher/Developer may take action irregardless of the platform if they are committing libel or slander.

If you have an issue with how Activision has handled something in regard to Call of Duty®: Modern Warfare® II | Warzone™ where this suggestion appears to come from (Jun 2 updated review), you may contact them.

[Tito Shivan]

You're reviewing the game, not the publisher. People reading reviews are looking to buy the game, not the developer.

For the most part, people who play games don't give a penny about 'ethics' or about the many things these forums and gaming news sites constantly make a fuss about.

If there's something I hate is reading reviews at Amazon about how 'the item was delivered in time' for something I'm considering buying.