安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語（日文）
한국어（韓文）
ไทย（泰文）
Български（保加利亞文）
Čeština（捷克文）
Dansk（丹麥文）
Deutsch（德文）
English（英文）
Español - España（西班牙文 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希臘文）
Français（法文）
Italiano（義大利文）
Bahasa Indonesia（印尼語）
Magyar（匈牙利文）
Nederlands（荷蘭文）
Norsk（挪威文）
Polski（波蘭文）
Português（葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙）
Português - Brasil（葡萄牙文 - 巴西）
Română（羅馬尼亞文）
Русский（俄文）
Suomi（芬蘭文）
Svenska（瑞典文）
Türkçe（土耳其文）
tiếng Việt（越南文）
Українська（烏克蘭文）
回報翻譯問題
討論區規矩與守則
檢舉此篇文章
There is no ideal time. Reviews are wholly opinion-based, and an opinion can be formed in 30 seconds, 30 minutes, or 30 hours. The "ideal time" is when you, the reviewer, feel like you have ample information to form an opinion, and reviews can be edited or deleted and reposted as necessary as you refine your opinion.
EDIT: For context: https://store.steampowered.com/app/1416130/Perfect_Vermin/
Having filters to change the display of reviews to certain play-times would be handy - even if Steam had presets - ie
Less than 1 hour
1 to 5 hours
5 to 10 hours
10 to 15 hours
20+ hours
Probably will never happen though - I'd probably make use of it if it did happen.
This already exists right by the date range tab.
Doom CLassic for example you can reasonably review after about 10 mins.
A Game like FF7, you can managege in about 20 (only by nature of the prolific cutscenes.)
Basically when you reach tthe point where you can say.. I dunna wanna play this game any more, or when you finally look up and think. I need to tell people about this game.
What point this is, will differ from person to person. and from game to game.
Remember there's no wrong time to write an account of your opinion/experience. if you change your mind. You can edit the review.
That said, I'd lean toward the opinion that the ideal playtime duration for reviewing the game is after playing the entire game. Or at least, playing to some sort of non-game-over end state, even if there's postgame stuff to be seen.
That said, at the very least, I do agree with you, not with the timing but the structure -- there's the early game when the game is introducing new stuff left and right, but you gotta get into the "meat" of the mid-game to a significant extent to be able to evaluate it.
I don't think it's about the devs "persuading" you that the game is good, though. Rather, I think it's gotta be seen as an "experience". You have to want the game to succeed, in order for it to do so. If you're playing a game and in the back of your mind you're constantly in "evaluation mode", thinking of how to write it up, that's not a good recipe for actually enjoying the game. OTOH, letting the game build you a sense of immersion, going past the boundary layer of that immersion into the thick of it, it's that later experience upon which I'd base my review.
Well, that, and the ending, for games that have definite endings. Sometimes a seemingly boring or sloggy mid-game can finally come together into something really awesome for the endgame. If so the wait may be worth it. Sometimes you can't quite have that deeper sense of awesomeness without a decent amount of setup.
Very well said.
The reviews I really hate are the ones where someone was just desperate to get a review posted, so they played for half an hour, then put up a review that says something like, "Great opening, i think this is going to be great!"
It's like WHY? At least go back and update it later, why post a review when you clearly don't have a proper opinion yet?
"Should I Buy This Game?
. . . YES"
~ 390 awards and 5000+ likes in less than 5 days..