Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chino tradicional)
日本語 (Japonés)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandés)
български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Danés)
Deutsch (Alemán)
English (Inglés)
Español - España
Ελληνικά (Griego)
Français (Francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandés)
Norsk (Noruego)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugués - Brasil)
Română (Rumano)
Русский (Ruso)
Suomi (Finés)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Informar de un error de traducción
Este tema ha sido cerrado 
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
Denunciar este mensaje
By your own logic the recent change to the review system could be seen as STeam applying 'tough-love' to the users to make them better people and encourage better reviews.
And how does that actually work. I mean for one it assumes the person has the console to begin with and generally if they did they wouldn't be getting it on PC. and if its a game not on console then its sorta pointless and I suspect the unhelpful downfvotes would bury such reviews quickly.
The thing is , and anyone who's been on steam long enough knows this, anything Valve implements for the greater good always incurs a backlash from the very people they're helping.
Tradeholds - Backlash
Refunds - Backlash
2FA - Backlash
Hiding DOwnvotes on reviews - Huge Backlash
Cancelling Greenligh - Backlash.
Removing a game - Backlash
Not removing a game - Backlash
The list goes on and on.
The only constant is that no matter what valve does or does not do there will be backlash, so if all actions yield backlash then backlash becomes a non issue and you do what you can to shape the platform in a way that actually promotes and helps the silent majority. You know the people that just want to find games, buy games, and not get caught up in the internet outrage of the week
Waiting to trade or sell something means you may have someone list it for a lower price than you by the time it gets listed.
Great way to cost companies money when they pull a Sonic Mania... had Sega not tried to undermine the refund period with Sonic 1 and a two week delay.
I get 2FA. We can't assume everyone has access to a phone. I don't have a smart phone, for example.
Can't blame hiding downvotes. The same thing happened with No Man's Sky. It's almost like hiding negative feedback is a bad idea. In fact, you'd draw more attention to the issue by doing so. I feel like there's a name for that, but I can't remember what it's called off hand.
Can't blame people for being upset over canceling greenlight since it allowed them to actually vote on games they want to see.
Metro Exodus had it coming as removing it to make it exclusive was just tempting fate. Deep Silver would have been better off just doing what Valve's doing with Half-Life 3.
That one from last month? The nature of the game was kind of pushing it. I will admit I don't know if it had an ESRB rating, but if it did, something tells me it would be AO. There's a reason console makers like Nintendo and Sony distance themselves from that rating. AO games should be avoided or at the very least considered on a case by case base.
They gave out a freebie and that's considered 'undermiuning' interesting. Should game companies stop giving away stuff as bonus content then?
And at this point in world history that's a matter of choice, not a lack of options. If you can afford to buy games on Steam, you can afford a smartphone.
Reverse psychology.
People will generally want to do the thing you tekll them not to do.
And they sold those votes cheap.
Are you noticing the trend that most of these things come about as a result of the gaming community essentially ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ in the milk bucket. Would any of those actions need to be taken if there weren't bad actors out there essentially weaponizing or abusing the system to the detriment of others?
No.
And the same goes true for the recent review change.
The reason for the distance is because of the stores that have to sell the games. I mean lets be honest. Nentrendo is hardly the one to call as being naughty shy given some of the games that proudly bore the nintendo seal of approval.
And as for SOny.. have you noticed that almost every time a JRPG gets ported over they have to change the ages and the outfits of some of the characters?
The reason AO games aren't so much of a thing is the same reason R movies aren't much of a thing. Because it reduces the number of places that you can deliver your product through.
The way it worked did undermine the refund period. The delay was two weeks and Sonic 1 was given on the day it was supposed to be released. The steam refund period is 2 weeks. Sonic 1 set the refund period off early. By the time it was over, Steam was declining refunds because of Sonic 1 setting it off.
I never needed one. Stuck with a landline.
And that's why it's a bad idea to try to cover stuff up. You draw more attention to the problem. Another good example would be the Fat Axl meme. I never knew about it until it was on TV.
Things like bait and swaps, adding ads and manipulating the game's rewards system to get them to view them, games becoming casinos, and not selling games on store fronts you previous agreed to at launch is a milk bucket? I don't buy that for a second. Companies are pulling as many lame stunts as think they can get away. I'm thankful review bombs are a thing as they act as a way to inform consumers. I'd prefer them to be on by default so consumers can read this stuff and do research on these issues and make up their own minds rather than take a company's word that there's no problem and that you should hand them your money just because they made a game. Letting people know about this stuff is not abuse so much as informing. Claiming games are broken garbage on a high end system instead of talking about the controversy surrounding a game would be abuse, though... Well, unless there was a situation where the game broke thanks to a Windows update like Alone in the Dark the New Nightmare did or something like that, then that's fair game as well.
I have to wonder what would happen if laws were passed where games with loot boxes had to be rated AO because of gambling. Would AO rated games become more common on consoles or would loot boxes die out?
He also complains about the refund policy because he misused that too, as part of his relationship to less savory parts of the Internet.
So I'm supposed to support bait and swaps, despite them being an illegal business practice? Do you endorse companies that commit criminal activities like bait and swaps? Is that the kind of sites you visit? The kind that endorse corporations cheating customers with illegal business practices like bait and swaps and illegal gambling?
Valve doesn't require publishers to disclose the fact that a game uses thrird-party DRM. And yes, baiting and switching is illegal, but that's not what happened. Bait and switch is "the action of advertising goods which are an apparent bargain, with the intention of substituting inferior or more expensive goods". Even if SEGA did add Denuvo at the last second, they have the right to protect their intellectual property from thieves.
Also, you forget to mention that you did make a claim that almost amounted to computer damage when you claimed a malicious folder appeared that nobody else has seen happen when playing the game.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=143962136
I've seen you imply something that you shouldn't have been implying several times. If you don't want to apologize, I suppose I could report the rule violation next time I notice it. I do have another avatar ready for a change.
Anyway, getting back on topic, I honestly see the developer/publisher's actions as a good reason not to recommend games. By purchasing stuff, you're putting trust into not just the game, but the company that made to not sabotage it in the future some how. Trust that they will stay true to their word, that they won't pull bait and swaps, that they won't break gambling laws, etc. Trust isn't something that should be given out like candy on Halloween, it's earned and can lost based on the developer/publisher's business choices. That's why it's an important factor of this.
How they do it is just as important. In fact, that lack of disclosure led me to believe it wouldn't have it when I preordered. A classic bait and switch for you.
You say I accuse you of something yet you don't say what.
I gave you a hint with that guide and saying you shouldn't even be implying it. In fact, the things you've been implying could get you perma-banned for implying them according to that guide. Does that help you figure out what I'm asking you to say you're sorry for and to stop doing?
Anyway, as I've stated, a lot of this backlash could be avoided just by consulting the fans before making controversial decisions about their opinions instead of actually doing things, then letting them know after you've done them. In fact, it makes more sense to consult fans when in doubt as they're the ones you're trying to sell the product in question to, so they're where the return on investment comes from.