Review bombing is utterly stupid.

[Tealius Maximus]

Good games are good games. Review bombing good games because of Epic Games just being a bit scummy isn't doing anything. I don't think companies give a damn about what reviews they get on Steam like 3 years after the games got publish and became successful.

[Crashed]

引用自 Ness_and_Sonic|Bye Reviews.：

引用自 Start_Running：

Could actr as a rootkit, and it could act as a neural node for an AI... that's the problem with 'coulds' once you start applying it, you can't keep the sillies out. As for DRM potentially locking people out. That only happens where drm is improperly implemented or perhaps when the game changes its requirement. Remember. all games are a long term gamble since there's not guarantee you'll be able to run or play it indefinately.

I found a suspicious folder with a time stamp coinciding to when I removed Sonic Mania. It was called "Boost_Interprocesses." When I pointed it out, I was told it was from Malware.

Which had nothing to do with Denuvo, which only saves a hexadecimal file with a random number in the Steam userdata folder for the game.

[Crashed]

引用自 Ness_and_Sonic|Bye Reviews.：

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.

It didn't, but it did have an "Adults only" tag posted by the Steam Store. ESRB isn't required for Valve, perhaps in part because Valve is not a member of either the Entertainment Software Association or the ESRB Web Council. It isn't required for the torrent site the author dumped it on either.

[Ness_and_Sonic]

引用自 Crashed：

You mean caving in to the misinformation spread by the "scene"?

I had my suspicions, but I assure you I did not know for sure. If I did, I would have canceled during the delay and told everyone else to do the same. Also, I don't know what scene you're talking about. Do you mean like one from the Scottish play?

引用自 Crashed：

Which had nothing to do with Denuvo, which only saves a hexadecimal file with a random number in the Steam userdata folder for the game.

Only game I've had with Denuvo and haven't seen it since. Could be a coincidence, but you said it was from a virus/malware or something like that. I'm starting to think you shouldn't be trusted.

[Crashed]

引用自 Ness_and_Sonic|Bye Reviews.：

引用自 Crashed：

You mean caving in to the misinformation spread by the "scene"?

I had my suspicions, but I assure you I did not know for sure. If I did, I would have canceled during the delay and told everyone else to do the same. Also, I don't know what scene you're talking about. Do you mean like one from the Scottish play?

So you admit to running boycott campaigns over irrational fears.

Seeing as discussing it is no longer a permanent ban per a change in rules this January, I meant the piracy scene.

引用自 Ness_and_Sonic|Bye Reviews.：

引用自 Crashed：

Which had nothing to do with Denuvo, which only saves a hexadecimal file with a random number in the Steam userdata folder for the game.

Only game I've had with Denuvo and haven't seen it since. Could be a coincidence, but you said it was from a virus/malware or something like that. I'm starting to think you shouldn't be trusted.

I searched for boost_interprocess and found the same Technet forum thread that suggested it is commonly found in malware. Your activities elsewhere suggested to me that you may not be fully honest as to what software is on your PC and how said software was acquired.

[Ness_and_Sonic]

引用自 Crashed：

So you admit to running boycott campaigns over irrational fears.

...

I searched for boost_interprocess and found the same Technet forum thread that suggested it is commonly found in malware. Your activities elsewhere suggest you may not be fully honest as to what software is on your PC and how said software was acquired.

Better to air on the side of caution and avoid it rather than trust it and have a game that could be described sort of like the drill from a Payday 2 Christmas song parody. Not going to actually describe the drill as it is described in the song because I have a family to think of and I'm trying to avoid swearing to set a better example for my cousins. Actually, that's why I discussed the issue in the review I wrote up. I thought it was important for consumers to be informed about the matter unlike I was when I bought the game. If Sega had consulted gamers, let us voice our opinions on the matter, and actually took people's feedback into consideration instead of disregarding it, the situation could likely have been avoided. Same with other games like Borderlands 3, Metro Exodus, etc.

I'm not involved with that stuff, so I wouldn't know. However, what I've seen from that guide and some checking on the rules of this site lead me to believe that the rules haven't changed. As such, you really shouldn't risk it.

Unless you're on GameFAQs, you're probably thinking of someone else.

[Jackie Daytona]

There's a lot going on here. I'm just going to leave my thoughts on the subject without direct replies.

引用自 UwU_Marijuana：

Review bombing is utterly stupid.

Good games are good games. Review bombing good games because of Epic Games just being a bit scummy isn't doing anything. I don't think companies give a damn about what reviews they get on Steam like 3 years after the games got publish and became successful.

I have a somewhat controversial opinion on this matter. Review bombing is not a real thing.

Why? Well, define it for me. What is it? Besides a large number of people leaving reviews on the same day. What is wrong with that? Where's the harm? Why does this need to be regulated?

You can only leave a review for a game on Steam if you own it, or it's free-to-play. That itself, is enough to prevent abuse.

Anyone that purchases a game can form an opinion of that game. An opinion isn't invalid simply because it is shared with others. Even if the opinion is based on politics, or the actions of the developers/publishers.

I prefer reviews that focus on the gameplay. However, I think it's wrong to tell someone their review doesn't count due to mentioning DRM or EULA. Because these are things directly related to the game, and therefore, on-topic.

Meanwhile... joke/meme reviews still all over Steam. Getting upvotes as helpful. As well as the one-line reviews like: "Crash on load", "I didn't like it.", and "it gud".

These reviews? Steam thinks these are okay. Steam will happily count these in the aggregate score. Because they don't mention things companies don't want you to know about. Like DRM.

The people upvoting them still having their upvotes count. The people making the joke reviews aren't banned from making reviews. These are actual problems with the review system.

Review bombing is simply consumers using their voice. It's Orwellian to think intervention is needed.

[SPG]

Review bombing serves a couple of purposes. It allows people to publicly vent their dissatisfaction, but it's sort of like complaining after the fact. They already have your money.

Whether it will affect future sales is nebulous. There is no way to measure that, but it does point people over to the discussion hub to see what it's all about and from there potential buyers can decide for themselves.

[Hat8]

You have to buy the game to review so how is it a problem?

Who are you to decide what is a valid complaint?

[Darren]

引用自 786543：

You have to buy the game to review so how is it a problem?

Who are you to decide what is a valid complaint?

Well complaining on Borderlands 2 that Borderlands 3 (an entirely different game) is going to have a 6 month exclusivity period on Epic Games is clearly not a valid complaint about Borderlands 2.

[Start_Running]

引用自 786543：

You have to buy the game to review so how is it a problem?

Who are you to decide what is a valid complaint?

That and some jokers justr buy the game,. bomb and refund.

引用自 SPG：

Review bombing serves a couple of purposes. It allows people to publicly vent their dissatisfaction, but it's sort of like complaining after the fact. They already have your money.

And venting is rarely helpful or healthy to a community at large. Well, kicking and screaming on the ground.

Whether it will affect future sales is nebulous. There is no way to measure that, but it does point people over to the discussion hub to see what it's all about and from there potential buyers can decide for themselves.

Buyers were generally already peeking at the hubs.

引用自 Darren：

引用自 786543：

You have to buy the game to review so how is it a problem?

Who are you to decide what is a valid complaint?

Well complaining on Borderlands 2 that Borderlands 3 (an entirely different game) is going to have a 6 month exclusivity period on Epic Games is clearly not a valid complaint about Borderlands 2.

Bingo. Which kinda illustrates the point.. Those that feel the need to review bomb, generally show the mentality that warrants the actions Valve has taken against it.

[Hat8]

引用自 Darren：

引用自 786543：

You have to buy the game to review so how is it a problem?

Who are you to decide what is a valid complaint?

Well complaining on Borderlands 2 that Borderlands 3 (an entirely different game) is going to have a 6 month exclusivity period on Epic Games is clearly not a valid complaint about Borderlands 2.

So criticizing the corporation who made the game is not halal? Why not?

The corporation has an effect on the experience, especially when it comes to online multiplayer games.

Stuff like "Hey, this company discontinued the online service and left a different game unplayable - that'll probably happen with this game, be careful"

Of course, even the merits ethical values has some value.

"This company is owned by a corporation with ties to a brutal authoritarian government".

That is the basis for ethical capitalism afterall - consumers having the information to make appropriate decisions.

[Darren]

引用自 786543：

引用自 Darren：

Well complaining on Borderlands 2 that Borderlands 3 (an entirely different game) is going to have a 6 month exclusivity period on Epic Games is clearly not a valid complaint about Borderlands 2.

So criticizing the corporation who made the game is not halal? Why not?

The corporation has nothing to do with the quality of the game. If the corporation is terrible and as a result made terrible decisions (rushing the game to production for example) you can mention the rushed feeling of the game in your review just fine that is the actual point. If they have terrible business practices but the game is good then it's not really something that impacts the game, although do feel free to write blog posts, or complain on twitter/reddit/etc about their behaviour.

引用自 786543：

The corporation has an effect on the experience, especially when it comes to online multiplayer games.

Stuff like "Hey, this company discontinued the online service and left a different game unplayable - that'll probably happen with this game, be careful"

Every online service will be discontinued eventually. The only question is going to be when, and that is impossible to determine from historical data (the new game might have a longer tail of popularity or different monetisation that keeps it alive longer).

So yeah not at all relevant.

引用自 786543：

Of course, even the merits ethical values has some value.

"This company is owned by a corporation with ties to a brutal authoritarian government".

Again doesn't have an impact on the quality of the game, although if you do have a problem with that (and you definitely can) don't buy their game, which will mean you can't review it anyway, so you'll have to register your complaints elsewhere as I said before.

引用自 786543：

That is the basis for ethical capitalism afterall - consumers having the information to make appropriate decisions.

Sure, but a Steam review isn't the place for that (after all you have to own the game, and therefore support the company to make one).

Lets be clear I dislike Epic as much as the next guy (I backed Phoenix Point and am quite angry that I'll have to wait an extra year to play it) but reviews (especially for entirely wrong games) are not the right place to complain about this. I raised my concerns with the ACCC, and posted on the Snapshot Games forums and that's all that would be reasonable to do.

[ KARR™]

引用自 786543：

引用自 Darren：

Well complaining on Borderlands 2 that Borderlands 3 (an entirely different game) is going to have a 6 month exclusivity period on Epic Games is clearly not a valid complaint about Borderlands 2.

So criticizing the corporation who made the game is not halal? Why not?

The corporation has an effect on the experience, especially when it comes to online multiplayer games.

No. No-one would buy a magazine that had reviews of "GTA 5 gets 10% from us because although the game is fantasic, Fred the person that does the artwork for the box once had a speeding ticket and that makes it bad".

Review the game. Is it a good game, worth your money, will you have a good experience? Reviews that change from "This is a great game! Best sequel ever!" to "DOWN WITH EPIC!!!!!!" isn't reviewing the game, it's not even reviewing the game makers - it's reviewing a publisher decision on a completely different product.

You may as well say "my local shop doesnt stock my favourite cheese, i bought this game from there, therefore it's rubbish - boycott my local shop!".

[76561198001062896]

you are making the mistake of assuming that angry mobs necessarily act upon logically and not driven by anger/ frustration /by the heat of the moment.

[Crashed]

引用自 Zetikla：

you are making the mistake of assuming that angry mobs necessarily act upon logically and not driven by anger/ frustration /by the heat of the moment.

And defame those who disagree?