It’s just unfortunate that this is the only avenue for players to make their disagreement felt. Game reviews should focus on the game as a whole and not one single aspect, the more these happen the less steam reviews become reliable to gauge the game’s quality.
“One single aspect”, especially cash grubbing, completely and absolutely removes any capacity to enjoy the game from most users.
They’re not recommending that game because of that “one aspect” because that “one aspect” makes the game unplayable as far as they’re concerned.
Ignoring massive deal breaking flaws to try to do some average of individual features is a far less honest or accurate review. A single issue, if it’s big enough, can change a game from the best thing anyone’s ever made into a complete and utter pile of shit. Games are not a sum of parts.
This isn’t massive flaws that suddenly appeared overnight, or the straw that broke the camel’s back, it’s purely because they want to get back at the developer. So yes, I think “review bombing” is accurate.
Don’t get me wrong, i dislike enshittification as much as the next guy; but I don’t think a game’s review should be about what the devs posted on twitter yesterday.
It absolutely is a massive flaw that fundamentally changes their ability to enjoy the game.
They changed the amount of cash they demand after the fact to take advantage of people addicted. Not giving it a negative review for such open abuse would be the unethical behavior. You have an obligation to do so. The ethics of monetization is what defines free to play games.
“Review Bombing” is a terrible term that attempts to discredit when consumers are not happy with the product.
It’s just unfortunate that this is the only avenue for players to make their disagreement felt. Game reviews should focus on the game as a whole and not one single aspect, the more these happen the less steam reviews become reliable to gauge the game’s quality.
“One single aspect”, especially cash grubbing, completely and absolutely removes any capacity to enjoy the game from most users.
They’re not recommending that game because of that “one aspect” because that “one aspect” makes the game unplayable as far as they’re concerned.
Ignoring massive deal breaking flaws to try to do some average of individual features is a far less honest or accurate review. A single issue, if it’s big enough, can change a game from the best thing anyone’s ever made into a complete and utter pile of shit. Games are not a sum of parts.
This isn’t massive flaws that suddenly appeared overnight, or the straw that broke the camel’s back, it’s purely because they want to get back at the developer. So yes, I think “review bombing” is accurate.
Don’t get me wrong, i dislike enshittification as much as the next guy; but I don’t think a game’s review should be about what the devs posted on twitter yesterday.
It absolutely is a massive flaw that fundamentally changes their ability to enjoy the game.
They changed the amount of cash they demand after the fact to take advantage of people addicted. Not giving it a negative review for such open abuse would be the unethical behavior. You have an obligation to do so. The ethics of monetization is what defines free to play games.