Game rating/discussion on store page

[alpatr0s]

I got an idea for an addition to Steam which will make the store page more user friendly. Whenever I look at a game I go instantly to the reviews but all the information about a game isn't always there, and if it is you have to search through every single review to find it. I'm thinking add a section on the store page of all games where people can ask questions about the game or where players can rate aspects of the game such as optimisation, compability, graphics, user friendly, etc etc. I think this would greatly help people decide wether or not to buy a game and stop people from becoming dissapointed when they find out they can't use a controller in the game or that they can't have the game on their second monitor or that playing multiplayer with friends is really complicated etc. Then make the ratings be based on update, so ratings would be displayed for the game and for the current update. Also make people able to add their own rating category just like with tags, so if there's something you want to rate such as multiplayer or the community of the game, you can just add it and rate it yourself and then others get the option to choose that category aswell and rate it.

[alpatr0s]

Escrito originalmente por Start_Running:

Escrito originalmente por Alptraum:

I really don't understand what you guys are not getting. Troll reviews are ALWAYS gonna exist, with or without this system so why even take that into account?
How would it encourage people to troll? You guys seem to be the kind of cynical people who always think the worst about others.

It would be nice if we were proven wrong more times than we are proven right.

You really think trolls are that extremely childish and have so much time on their hands they would all sit and upvote every single aspect of a game just to troll?

See how many negative votes and reviews skyrim got after paid mods. Did you seem how many troll reviews popped up on the DLC. and that was just within a week. So yeah. People be like that. Secondly if you make your system laborious enough to disuade a troll then you are invariably making a system where only the die hard fan will bother with leaving a review.

Are you actually serious? Why aren't they doing that currently then if I may ask, if they are so evil minded and childish?

COnsidering you're the one who complains how much time it takes to filter through the nonsense, oneline and joke reviews to find an informative one.

With this new system, you wouldn't really have to go through all the reviews, you could just read the sidebar and if you are correct and like 5000 people sit there and write incorrect ratings about a game only to troll people then why does the rating system even exist overall?

Read the sidebar. so again basically you're just looking for numbers without bothering to see how they are contextualized? WHich will basically mislead you since there is no standard for gauging these things a person's 5 is another person's 3 or 2.. Hence why the binary system is effective here. There's a clear boundary between yes and no.. There is no clear boundary between 4 and 5 or 1 and 3.

If that's really what you think of people then there's no reason whatsoever to even include community feedback about a game because according to you, every single person writing reviews is gonna troll. Maybe 1-5% of all reviews are and would be troll reviews, the rest are serious. That 1-5% isn't gonna impact at all.

It's why the intelligent reader reads both the positive and the negative reviews and reads more than one. EVen the short one liners can be very informative if you know how to read them. You pick out the common threads and points of contention and where someone complains about the interface being too cluttered andother will praise it for being concise and informative. SOme may say a game is too hard and that the difficulty curve is poorly managed anotherwill praise it for the challenging and rewarding difficulty curve. I have acrtually seen examples of that. Between the two you get a better whole picture of the game. You don't rely on one review.

You also have missed the point entirely about rating individual aspects of the game. You wouldn't be able to rate features that don't exist in the game, obviously, because what use would there be in that?

So the system would be inconsistent on top of everything else with a different list of aggregates for every game thusly increasing the parse time.

I have been told that it wouldn't offer much, that's basically what I've been told, not why it wouldn't offer anything, except the troll argument which is pretty invalid.

You have been told. You're just blotting them out.

If I could find the useful reviews I wanted easily, I wouldn't be making these posts. They're not that easy to find as you seem to think. I dare you to find one single game where the top 15 reviews are well-made, solid and all-around informative on all/most aspects of the game, on both negative and positive. I'm looking forward to it because then we wouldn't need the system I'm suggesting.

So you can't find a review that meets your needs. here's the thing. Many people can. So maybe the problem is internal rather than external. For any game I've ever looked at i can usually find at least 3 very helpful reviews in the top 15 positive and another 3 in the top 15 negative.. So for any game I can find 6 helpful reviews. Granted I don't equate helpfulness with teh volume of data, which you seem to. I equate helpfulmness with just how informative it is and sometimes 3 lines can be more informative than 20 lines.

The system I'm suggesting doesn't go based on helpfulness, it goes based on how many % of people upvote an aspect of the game.

So basically you're saying, excatly what exists now except atleast 5x?
FOllow that train of logic please.

as said. You're farr too entrenched in your idea to see the POV of others and I honestly I don't see any evidence that you considered the POV of anyone other than yourself when you came up with the idea. That much is clear. SO this isn't so much you looking for criticism you were likely expecting people to praise you for your brilliant idea...

The paid mods thing was not a troll, it was a stand against Steam, your argument is so invalid.

What I complain about is that it takes time to find well-made reviews, where people review everything about the game, instead of people saying "The game is good" or "The game is bad" and with this system it would be fast and easy to rate all aspects of the game, whereas it stands now you have to write and entire review to do that which most people don't care enough to do.


Yeah, you can just go ahead and leave this post right now actually. You don't read what I say, I can barely understand your writing and errors which make for inconsistent non-sensical sentences which I barely understand, and you don't seem to either understand or want to understand the system I'm talking about so there's no real reason for you to even comment on it. I've explained to you countless times now over and over what I mean, and you still don't understand it and keep stressing the same invalid arguments which have nothing to do with the discussion since I've already explained about 5 times now what I mean, and you STILL keep coming with the same arguments, even after I say "No, that is not what I mean. This is what I mean." You're very bad at arguing, my friend. I'll start answering the people who actually read and take it seriously instead.

[alpatr0s]

Escrito originalmente por Black Blade (Card idling):

Escrito originalmente por Alptraum:

Finally a comment that isn't bashing.
Yeah, I can agree that not all people know how to rate some aspects, but it's not very hard to know if your computer is good enough to run a game but it's not running well, in which case people would thumb it down. But a game that has lagspikes here and there might have a 75% optimisation review, while games that run smooth at 60 FPS at all times might have a 95% etc.
What I mean by user friendly is if it's easy to understand without having to think too much. A game might be really complex and have a steep learning curve, like Crusader Kings 2 in which case it wouldn't be very user friendly but it's still a very highly rated game.
Personally I don't think it would be necessary to rate games based on what year they're realsed because in 10 years people aren't gonna be looking at CSGO thinking that the graphics are on par with the graphics of that time because you can just look at when the game was released and judge it based on that.

Well, everyone doesn't have the same taste and that's why the bar on the side is gonna count how many % of all people think the graphics are good or not, because there's always gonna be people who have very different tastes and might think that a game that has really good graphics doesn't have good graphics at all, while the majority of people is gonna think the same thing since it's in our "gamer culture" to think that a certain type of gameplay and graphics and audio is considered good, while other types are not.

I'm not ruling out the text reviews, they are definitely an important part of making a judgement like I said if a game's price tag is really high you might want to look into a game alot before making a choice, but for a 15€ game I don't think people are gonna care enough to read text reviews. They'll look at screens, the videos on the store page, read about the game then check the side bar in this new system to see if the game is overall good or not then make their judgement.

Writing all these answers is really burning me out lmfao.

Il be honest, i am against any type of global scoring, that makes it look like one dose not need to read (that is also the global score we have now, that honestly i am against)

Games have too many parts, and have too many things to score them with simple stars..
At least if one dose not know the one that score, i mean for News sites, Star score will work well, as users that follow it, will know the one that gives the score, and there for will know what he likes, and what he dose not, that can change his score

On Steam how ever, there sooo many pepole, and if you do not follow some group of guys, each will have his own reason to give a 5, to what someone else will give a 1

By reading a review, you learn who is the guy, what he likes what he dose not (what he put in, and what he left out), and there for a score then from him will have a meaning, much more then a golbal score, that no one really know what its for, for example:
Minecraft.. how will you score it?
Graphics? 1? 2? (it clearly dose not hold for the time it was relased)
User Friendly? Not at all, you have to learn by your self (or using out side guides) how to play it
Compatibility? 5? i mean you need real weak PC not to be able to play it
Game Play? 5?

So how will that look over all? hard core game, with horrible Graphics?

Can you really express a game with a score?
Or
Let me ask it in a better way, what score will you give to THESE[uploads6.wikiart.org]

Or in other words, how will you score art? even more when these art is build out from music, and game, and looks, and desine, and so many parts, so many little bits that can make it the best thing ever, or the worst of the worst

Can you really say that, with just a number? or 5 numbers?
Let me ask these, if someone that will but a 15$ games, not read the reviews but look at the score you offer here
What will he do if there is none of the score you offer here? will he just maybe read the reviews?
And is that not a better way to go around it?

P.S. you said in some point, that someone can read why they have that score, and not higher/lower, but if someone needs to read that to understand why, what is the point of having that vote system, and not just have it in a text box review? like we have now

Once again, I changed my mind from the scoring and rating thing to only have thumbs up/down for every part/aspect of the game. Rating something 5/5 or 3/5 etc would make it all too complicated and biased.

Why would you have to read individual reviews when it already displays what the majority of the people who own the game think about it? This system is all about making it easier for the buyer and as it stands now you do have to read alot of reviews to get a good idea about the game, whereas in this system you don't have to spend too much time researching a game to find out where it excels and where it flaws. Once again, this is not a system FOR me, it's a system to help the average Steam user. The way it would do this is that it would make the system much easier than it currently is and you would be able to see what people think of the game without having to read too much. The way you rate something isn't really something that I know anything about, that would differ greatly from game to game, the point I'm trying to make is that this would make rating games easier and it would make it easier to get an understanding of the games.

Rating games which are "artsy" isn't anything I have any idea on how to do since I despise those games. You people can't expect one single person to come up with a flawless system lol.

Since your whole post was written on the idea that I still stand by the star-rating system, I don't know really what to respond since I don't think we should have a star rating anymore, I just want a thumbs up/thumb down system on all the games features.

[Start_Running]

Escrito originalmente por Alptraum:

Why would you have to read individual reviews when it already displays what the majority of the people who own the game think about it?

And that question right there tells us all we need to know about why you don't like the system. Numbers mean nothing without context. No two people have a set standard so invariably anyone smart will have to read the reviews to get an idea of how people's internal scales align with their own.

This system is all about making it easier for the buyer and as it stands now you do have to read alot of reviews to get a good idea about the game, whereas in this system you don't have to spend too much time researching a game to find out where it excels and where it flaws.

Still have to as said. because even as is, you still have to all your system is is the old one with more aggregates cluttering the screen. Seeing a lot of people liked the graphics doesn't say anything about why they liked the graphics. Same for music and sound.

Rating games which are "artsy" isn't anything I have any idea on how to do since I despise those games. You people can't expect one single person to come up with a flawless system lol.

All games are artsy on some level.

Since your whole post was written on the idea that I still stand by the star-rating system, I don't know really what to respond since I don't think we should have a star rating anymore, I just want a thumbs up/thumb down system on all the games features.

The inclusion or lack of stars wasn't the main problem with your suggestion. It's that it really just adds more blurb to the store page and realy helps no one. The savy smart shopper still has to read reviews and the gullible twitch shopper will still be easily be mislead.


All it does is literally introduce meaningless text and makes writing reviews a bit more of a chore for some. Hence why I and others have said.. just look at the meta critic score that's on most game pages. That'll give you your easy to parse rating without all that tedious reading.

[alpatr0s]

Once again, I won't even bother reading that because you don't read what I say. You misunderstand and hate on a system when it's not needed and you grasp for straws only to say the system is bad. I meet enough negative people everyday for me to deal with you.

[76561198001062896]

Escrito originalmente por Alptraum:

Once again, I won't even bother reading that because you don't read what I say. You misunderstand and hate on a system when it's not needed and you grasp for straws only to say the system is bad. I meet enough negative people everyday for me to deal with you.

you are the only one with comprehension problems here

[Crix]

a review, a thumbs up or down, a "Like" etc. are all opinions anyways.

Plenty of resources on the internet to find out for yourself. Watching gameplay videos through Twitch, YT etc. Plenty of information at your finger tips but some how people still feel the need that they need to read another persons review of a game and judge the purchase of it from their choices. Amazing. Why do we need a system anyways, it's for people who want to hear what others have to say but I've seen so much bandwagoning on games because a so called "popular guy" hates it on YT and the wildfire spreads out of someones opinion.