Инсталирайте Steam
вход
|
език
Опростен китайски (简体中文)
Традиционен китайски (繁體中文)
Японски (日本語)
Корейски (한국어)
Тайландски (ไทย)
Чешки (Čeština)
Датски (Dansk)
Немски (Deutsch)
Английски (English)
Испански — Испания (Español — España)
Испански — Латинска Америка (Español — Latinoamérica)
Гръцки (Ελληνικά)
Френски (Français)
Италиански (Italiano)
Индонезийски (Bahasa Indonesia)
Унгарски (Magyar)
Холандски (Nederlands)
Норвежки (Norsk)
Полски (Polski)
Португалски (Português)
Бразилски португалски (Português — Brasil)
Румънски (Română)
Руски (Русский)
Финландски (Suomi)
Шведски (Svenska)
Турски (Türkçe)
Виетнамски (Tiếng Việt)
Украински (Українська)
Докладване на проблем с превода
Правила и насоки за дискусии
Докладване на публикацията
Not allowed to leave a negative review is just silly. If you like the game awesome, leave a positive review, if you don't like or have problems with and leave a negative review awesome. by the end of the day it comes down to what you think of the game, as it is you the user experience with the game.
But then again i have seen more, people who have issues with people giving a game positive reviews then the negative reviews
Games can change along the way. For example Stellaris has changed quite a bit over time. People who have lots of hours in that game but leave a negative review do so because the game changed in a way they didn't like.
Which is perfectly fine. After all, it's only peoples opinions and nothing more.
The problem with judging game time is where the more time someone puts into the game the more he knows about it but people will just claim the "But you played for XXX amount of hours, if it was bad you would have quit at X amount of hours!"
Even though when the person knows the game far better than those who have less hours.
The system is built on licenses. Because of this, some companies inject unwanted features, aka 3rd party launchers, or patch the game as much as 10 years or more after the game's release. The game you really loved to play has be changed, it's no longer the game you enjoyed. Thus, even after thousands of hours of game play, a player could decide they've had enough with the changes and want to warn others of these changes. The game may have been a great game, but due to company policies and/or politics, it's no longer the game it was.
As an example, 2K has been adding a launcher to their older games. XCOM2, Civ5, and the Bioshock Remasters. They know how bad it is, because there are announcements in my news feed about addressing the problems players have with the launcher. This is because the launcher makes the games unplayable. It requires that your online, so if your offline your game randomly crashes. It so bad, they announced that Civ7 will not have the launcher at launch, lol. I suspect its because they can't get it to work with their new game. After a year or two, they will subtly inject the launcher into Civ7; When the sales go down, and they need to start selling your personal data. I have over 1000+ hours in Civ5 and I cannot recommend the game currently, due to the launcher. It's a fun game, the data stealing adware injected at the beginning is not.
Another example, a recent patch that broke Fallout 4 modding community.
Let's use the C&C Remaster as an example; one day EA decided to push an update out, and they never patched the fault they introduced in the update; ore trucks would begin running to the opposite side of the map to mine resources rather than use the closest mining area. That meant you had to keep micromanaging them unlike the original games. People didn't like that update, so positive reviews changed to negative. The fact people made them aware and they didn't fix it made it more infuriating to long term customers.
So high hours and a negative review usually means you should read it and see what they have an issue with.
I have over 3600 hours in it now.
I will *never* change that review. I do NOT recommend that game to anyone, especially new players.
Get over it.
That's actually really interesting, what game if I may ask?
And I am not arguing for one way or the other... I don't care. I noticed a pattern and wanted to ask others about their thoughts
Dead by Daylight.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clustering_illusion
Also, Steam putting an upper limit on negative opinions would be stupid. First, it would mean they are trying to shift the review score towards the positive side, which makes reviews pretty much a fake. Second, I might even be able to post my review anyway, if it weren't for the first point to abandon reviews entirely: I *think* you can leave a review after having played the game through familiy sharing. So, I could just share with another account, idle the game for whatever time is needed to leave a review, then post my review there. But, as I said, it's probably too much work for a system that doesn't really want reviews unless they are positive.
Games aren't static things anymore m8. and you should know this if you've gamed at all in the last 20 years. A game can be great fun, until a certain patch/update and then you hate it.
Also people can./.gasp change their minds.
See above. AlsoI suspect if they had only 1 hour you'd be talking about "it's unfair that you can't properly judge a game witth that small a play time"
Games change over time.
People change over time.
And sometimes the games you spend hours in isn't really so much enjoyment as that you've become habitualized to the game. WoW is a perfect example of that. Annd most people when they finally break out of the loop they look back and realize. that for most of that.. they weren't really having fun.
Yes but noticing patterns are basically the reason we have intelligence. I wouldn't want to live in a life where I assumed every pattern I noticed was connecting dots that were not there, that being said "correlation does not equal causation" or whatever
So if you are dismissing it outright because humans often see patterns that are not there or not complete, then I don't think that's fair
Yea an upper limit on negative reviews would defeat the entire purpose and integrity of the system
I don't have a dog in this race. Alot of people are addressing the question or attacking it like I do.
I literally don't have a finalized opinion on it, which is why I wanted to ask for others.
I saw someone leave a negative review with like 1600 hours on a game and then someone replied to him "You have 1600 hours, you are not allowed to leave a negative review"
Which I found interesting, I assumed he was implying that because someone got 1600 hours out of a game and got more out of it then the 60$ he put into it, then no matter his opinion of the game, by default he likes it so therefore his gripes are over ruled.
It's a unique way of looking at it and I understand the logic being applied, though I do not agree with someone telling someone else what their position has to be.
IT's like me. I grew up a liberal but now because I don't agree with all of the talking points in 2024 people try and tell me that means I am a far right bigot or that i HAVE TO BE a right winger. In their brain there was no other possibility. Which scares me that people can think like that.
So once again, I wanted people thoughts on the matter, I didn't want people to assume I took a stance one way or another and then responded to me based on that... but I apologize because I could have communicated that more effectively.
That being said, I posted this a few days ago and kind of am over it now. Respond if you want or let the thread fade into obscurity