Do you agree with reviewbombing games?

[DeadeyeNull]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Review_bomb

I'm not surprised people have such a warped perception of reviewbombing. I'd be pretty interested to know if somoene regerualy leaves reviews and doesn't support reviewbombing and vice versa.

Click to shrink...

Reading this article most of those cases seem pretty valid, such Mass effect 3 were it was because of a legitimate issue with the game, or pard mods in Skyrim were they made something people already had worse. Also I think it's better for product to be review bombed then Dev getting doxxed, and with the recent reviews part on steam it easy to see if the reviews are for the product as a whole or something specific.

Saying it is childish, or immature across the board is a really close minded view to take. People bring up a few examples when it was used for hate speech, but it could be just as effective at exposing a games bigotry, and I don't know why it isn't used that way more.

 

[Morrigan]

Well I don't agree for the freedom of speech either but that's something americans and english people like so much they allow nazis to talk in front of everybody without punching them in the face.
Review bombing is freedom of speech abuse but freedom of speech nonetheless.

Click to shrink...

I'm in a country with hate speech laws, actually... but I'm not sure this analogy works.

I'd compare it more to swearing at someone. In some cases, it's rude. In other cases, such as throwing expletives at someone who is harassing you or who already insulted you, it's not "wrong". So, if you were to ask "is swearing right or wrong", I think "it depends on the reason" would be a perfectly valid response, and "if you think swearing is OK in some cases you must agree that swearing is OK in ALL circumstances" would be quite fallacious.

 

[LordBaztion]

One can criticise a game based on whatever foolishnes they want, that's what reviews are at the end. On the contrary, people should be encouraged to read reviews and discern when a review has valid points for him and avoid looking at scores or tendencies.

 

[XNihili]

That's a fucking awful analogy.

I also want to point out that the UK does not have the same freedom of speech laws as the US. Here, "hate speech" has zero legal protection.

Click to shrink...

Point taken. Because there were always the same news about Islamic hate preacher in some english park, I thought it was lenient.
My point is using a wrong way to promote rightful way is wrong nonetheless and I'm not so arrogant to believe my view is always right so I'm allowed to do something but people I disagree with aren't.

 

[Deleted member 28523]

Reading this article most of those cases seem pretty valid, such Mass effect 3 were it was because of a legitimate issue with the game, or pard mods in Skyrim were they made something people already had worse. Also I think it's better for product to be review bombed then Dev getting doxxed, and with the recent reviews part on steam it easy to see if the reviews are for the product as a whole or something specific.

Saying it is childish, or immature across the board is a really close minded view to take. People bring up a few examples when it was used for hate speech, but it could be just as effective at exposing a games bigotry, and I don't know why it isn't used that way more.

Click to shrink...

You reminded me of other incident with Dota 2 with gamers exposing bigotry. Chinese players reviewbombed it after a pro player typed "ching chong" while playing against a team of chinese players. And this was just 2 months ago. It got him docked pay, banned from playing, and a couple Valve responses. Seems pretty useful.

https://kotaku.com/after-dota-2-team-fails-to-ban-one-of-its-players-valv-1830863539

 

[XNihili]

I'm in a country with hate speech laws, actually... but I'm not sure this analogy works.

I'd compare it more to swearing at someone. In some cases, it's rude. In other cases, such as throwing expletives at someone who is harassing you or who already insulted you, it's not "wrong". So, if you were to ask "is swearing right or wrong", I think "it depends on the reason" would be a perfectly valid response, and "if you think swearing is OK in some cases you must agree that swearing is OK in ALL circumstances" would be quite fallacious.

Click to shrink...

I'm not sure a product that you don't like, that could even not be directed to you, can be equated to insulting you directly.
There are lot of music I don't like, products I feel stupid, but people are enjoying. I won't wage a war on windmills in the name of my personal opinion.

 

[juventino13]

No, its the most ridiculous and childish way of handling it. Its incredibly dumb in my opinion, no matter the reason

 

[Morrigan]

I'm not sure a product that you don't like, that could even not be directed to you, can be equated to insulting you directly.
There are lot of music I don't like, products I feel stupid, but people are enjoying. I won't wage a war on windmills in the name of my personal opinion.

Click to shrink...

It was an example to rebut your "if you agree with X in some cases you agree with X in all cases" fallacy.

In any case, review-bombers don't usually review-bomb simply because a game isn't to their taste.

 

[cakely]

No.

I'll also go one step farther and say that all user reviews are useless, in part because of morons writing reviews that have absolutely nothing to do with a game's merits.

 

[Deleted member 1849]

No.

I'll also go one step farther and say that all user reviews are useless, in part because of morons writing reviews that have absolutely nothing to do with a game's merits.

Click to shrink...

Another one...

I'll just make a quick post from the things I posted in another thread.

User reviews are invaluable when trying to figure out the quality of the port, or when trying to figure out if a small unknown indie game is worth looking at.

I would never have tried Heartbeat if the user reviews weren't amazing. I wouldn't have tried Monolith, Bytepath, Linelight, or a bunch of other games on https://steam250.com/hidden_gems if it wasn't for the glowing user reviews either. I ended up enjoying all of them. My top games of 2018 list even had multiple games which don't even have enough reviews for a score on MC and would need to rely on user reviews. All PC exclusive indies. For example:

BallisticNG - 0 reviews
ZeroRanger - 2 reviews
EXAPUNKS - 1 review

As BernardoOne points out, Parkitect also has similar numbers, as do a lot PC exclusive indies. It's fairly normal in this space. EXAPUNKS is even fairly well known and by an established developer in Zachtronics! The mainstream gaming media doesn't really care about PC representation. User reviews are needed to pick up the slack and get good word out to people.

For other example. This guy (in german) goes through and writes reviews based on his work figuring out what games track what user data, where that data gets sent to, and what consumers can do to block it: https://steamcommunity.com/id/pen-chan/recommended/. This is data which would be pretty much unavailable otherwise in an easy to find important place, especially since no mainstream gaming media would ever cover something like that. What would otherwise be lost in the mess of gaming forums and Twitter gets put right on the games page, where consumers can read it and make an informed decision. His reviews are often really highly rated, and on Steam the highly rated reviews get pushed to the top.

People currently interested in Ace Combat 7 - HOTAS isn't supported, it isn't mentioned anywhere on the Steam page, yet the user reviews are filled with people commenting on it. If someone wanted to buy it, they would get information they wouldn't have otherwise, again showing how useful it is. You could argue "well you should research before you buy anyway!", and sure, but user reviews are already one of the best and most convenient ways of researching, why get rid of it for an inferior solution?

As Stone Ocean mentions, Dark Void Zero is still available on the Steam store. The page does not mention anything about how if you'll buy it, the game will straight up not work because of broken Securom. The page doesn't mention this anywhere. You know where it is mentioned though?

The highest voted user review. Right on the games page where any interested customer would be likely to see it. Anyone who says user reviews are pointless doesn't know what they are talking about.

 

[XNihili]

It was an example to rebut your "if you agree with X in some cases you agree with X in all cases" fallacy.

In any case, review-bombers don't usually review-bomb simply because a game isn't to their taste.

Click to shrink...

As I'm against review bombing in general, my example was probably wrong as I don't think you need to review bomb to make your voice heard in the age of social network. And I have a problem with the "some cases" when people believed it justified in the name of righthousness.
I can see your point, I just can't seem to agree with it.

 

[StereoVSN]

Absolutely it's a valid reason to get developer/publisher attention quickly as sometimes it's the only way to demonstrate a seriousness of a problem.

It's been successful in Skyrim mod fiasco and in Paradox DLC pricing shenanigans. Of course say Epic store won't allow customers to voice their dissatisfaction with things that the publisher/dev is pulling.

 

[StereoVSN]

As I'm against review bombing in general, my example was probably wrong as I don't think you need to review bomb to make your voice heard in the age of social network. And I have a problem with the "some cases" when people believed it justified in the name of righthousness.
I can see your point, I just can't seem to agree with it.

Click to shrink...

We have multiple examples of review bombings working to push back undesirable policies by publishers and developers. People complaining on Reddit or Twitter can be ignored much more easily.

 

[cakely]

Another one...

(content edited to keep my response brief)

Anyone who says user reviews are pointless doesn't know what they are talking about.

Click to shrink...

I disagree with you. User reviews are useless, and they absolutely never factor into a decision of whether I'll buy a game or not.

As a consumer that's bought literally thousands of video games over more than thirty years, I do know what I'm talking about.

 

[Deleted member 1849]

I disagree with you. User reviews are useless, and they absolutely never factor into a decision of whether I'll buy a game or not.

As a consumer that's bought literally thousands of video games over more than thirty years, I do know what I'm talking about.

Click to shrink...

I posted a fairly substantial list of reasons showing examples of when they are useful.

All you have in return is "no".

If you don't want to use them, that's fine. Don't start spreading shit when other people have found ways they are important.

 

[Trigonometrize]

I disagree with you. User reviews are useless, and they absolutely never factor into a decision of whether I'll buy a game or not.

As a consumer that's bought literally thousands of video games over more than thirty years, I do know what I'm talking about.

Click to shrink...

If they're so useless I don't know why you advocate against review bombing. You lose nothing.

 

[FranktheRabbit]

No, it's moronic and in the aggregate it degrades the value and credibility of user reviews.

Fortunately, there always reviews from professional critics that I can rely on when something gets review bombed.

 

[cakely]

I posted a fairly substantial list of reasons showing examples of when they are useful.

All you have in return is "no".

If you don't want to use them, that's fine. Don't start spreading shit when other people have found ways they are important.

Click to shrink...

I disagree with you. Can you please keep this polite? I will.

If they're so useless I don't know why you advocate against review bombing. You lose nothing.

Click to shrink...

User reviews are useless in part because a large number of them are written without any regards to the merits of the game itself. That's the essence of review bombing.

 

[Trigonometrize]

No, it's moronic and in the aggregate it degrades the value and credibility of user reviews.

Fortunately, there always reviews from professional critics that I can rely on when something gets review bombed.

Click to shrink...

I read the first line and was literally ready to respond with "but you already have a slew of professional critics typically that give you plenty of less one-track-minded reviews."

User reviews are made for this sort of thing and nothing is lost when consumers resort to it. People that want holistic reviews still get them in the way of critics, and the consumers have a better chance at the product becoming closer to want they want. It's not like they're taking the game itself hostage or anything. EVERYBODY wins.

 

[FranktheRabbit]

If they're so useless I don't know why you advocate against review bombing. You lose nothing.

Click to shrink...

I can't speak for this poster.

However, I advocate against it because user reviews COULD be useful . . . If it wasn't for the practice review bombing.

I can't think of a single example of productive review bombing. I'm open minded though. If someone can point to an actual example and explain how it helped in some substantive way, I'll definitely consider their opinion.

 

[Ikarus]

Absolutely terrible behavior. No don't support.

 

[XNihili]

We have multiple examples of review bombings working to push back undesirable policies by publishers and developers. People complaining on Reddit or Twitter can be ignored much more easily.

Click to shrink...

I'm on the fence about the "undesirable policies".
I'm hating lootboxes and F2P. But Fortnite is making a killing so it should not be so undesirable.

 

[Deleted member 1849]

I can't speak for this poster.

However, I advocate against it because user reviews COULD be useful . . . If it wasn't for the practice review bombing.

I can't think of a single example of productive review bombing. I'm open minded though. If someone can point to an actual example and explain how it helped in some substantive way, I'll definitely consider their opinion.

Click to shrink...

GTAV - OpenIV, a common mod tool received a C&D from Take-Two. It was review bombed and efforts were made immediately to take it back, and allow OpenIV to be distributed again.

Dota 2 - A competitive player started saying "Ching Chong" when playing against a competitive team with Chinese players. It got review bombed from a bunch of Chinese players after his team refused to take action against him. This made Valve aware of the issue, which then resulted in him being docked pay, and banned: https://kotaku.com/after-dota-2-team-fails-to-ban-one-of-its-players-valv-1830863539 This example is particularly important, because a lot of "official channels" which people bring up in this thread do not even work in China.

Arkham Knight - It was an awful port, it got review bombed, removed from Steam, and the port was re-done and uploaded again a couple of months later in much better condition

 

[Dullahan]

No, it's pretty dumb IMO. MC userscores are a huge joke in general thanks to the hate brigades. I don't think there's ever a good reason to reviewbomb any game. Even crappy microtransaction heavy games, like Battlefront 2.

 

[astro]

I disagree with you. User reviews are useless, and they absolutely never factor into a decision of whether I'll buy a game or not.

As a consumer that's bought literally thousands of video games over more than thirty years, I do know what I'm talking about.

Click to shrink...

That user literally just proved they're not useless, so you making the proclamation after their well articulated post with evidence is pretty much "fingers in ears lalalalala!"

 

[Gelf]

I find it hard in this topic to distinguish between what's a "bomb" which sounds like an organised attack and what's just "many individuals didn't like this game and reviewed it as such at a similar time". I feel like these things are being conflated to make an argument that we must never complain about anything.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

yeah, it's a pretty great way to express consumer discontent without actually affecting anything material

 

[FranktheRabbit]

I read the first line and was literally ready to respond with "but you already have a slew of professional critics typically that give you plenty of less one-track-minded reviews."

User reviews are made for this sort of thing and nothing is lost when consumers resort to it. People that want holistic reviews still get them in the way of critics, and the consumers have a better chance at the product becoming closer to want they want. It's not like they're taking the game itself hostage or anything. EVERYBODY wins.

Click to shrink...

I like the concept of user reviews, because sometimes they'll focus on specific issues with a game that professional critics overlook in an attempt to give you a more robust review of the game.

However, I absolutely hate wading through a sea of user reviews deriding a game for (for example) having Day 1 DLC that everyone already knows about. Those reviews tend to be from people who I assume haven't even touched the game, but feel so strongly about a (usually scummy but relatively benign) business practice to send out fake reviews and user scores.

That sort of thing buries legit criticism, and it degrades the overall value and reputation of user reviews (imo).

 

[chrisypoo]

Fuck no.

 

[Qwark]

I find it hard in this topic to distinguish between what's a "bomb" which sounds like an organised attack and what's just "many individuals didn't like this game and reviewed it as such at a similar time". I feel like these things are being conflated to make an argument that we must never complain about anything.

Click to shrink...

Same.

Arkham Knight - It was an awful port, it got review bombed, removed from Steam, and the port was re-done and uploaded again a couple of months later in much better condition

Click to shrink...

Like this one, it's a bad review for a bad game... not exactly shocking. I don't consider negative, accurate reviews to be review bombing.

 

[cakely]

That user literally just proved they're not useless, so you making the proclamation after their well articulated post with evidence is pretty much "fingers in ears lalalalala!"

Click to shrink...

There's no evidence that will make me regard user reviews as useful.

I have actually tried. There are a few examples of useful reviews but I'm not going sift through the overwhelming amount of garbage user reviews to find them.

If others want to go through that procedure, that's completely fine.

I like the concept of user reviews, because sometimes they'll focus on specific issues with a game that professional critics overlook in an attempt to give you a more robust review of the game.

However, I absolutely hate wading through a sea of user reviews deriding a game for (for example) having Day 1 DLC that everyone already knows about. Those reviews tend to be from people who I assume haven't even touched the game, but feel so strongly about a (usually scummy but relatively benign) business practice to send out fake reviews and user scores.

That sort of thing buries legit criticism, and it degrades the overall value and reputation of user reviews (imo).

Click to shrink...

Yes, this.

I would like user reviews to be useful, I really would. In the past I have written long reviews, where I tried to express my legitimate opinion over games that I have both liked and disliked. The end result was finding them buried in a sea of 0/1 and 10/10 reviews that had absolutely nothing to do with the product being reviewed.

 

[astro]

There's no evidence that will make me regard user reviews as useful.

Click to shrink...

That's a really unproductive mindset to have. The person who replied to you proved they can be useful.

 

[Deleted member 176]

I like it. The user review scores are largely useless if you're comparing two games, so review bombing let's you know if some shit went down in an otherwise good game.

I picked option 3 because unfortunately for the internet "shit went down" could mean that a black person is in the game or something.

 

[Mullet2000]

I'm shocked at the yes/no percentage.

Review bombing is literally one of the only things the average person can do to make their displeasure with a game known and not just be ignored or quarantined off to a subreddit or forum or something. I rarely see it happening when there isn't a justify able reason for it, like terrible drm, missing content, terrible performance, etc.

I don't see how it hurts anyone other than the publisher who is putting out a product with issues anyway - that the customer should know about anyway. As a customer I see zero reason why you shouldn't want visible negative reviews about issues that the game you're thinking about purchasing may have.

On steam you can even see exactly when the trend of positive/negative reviews flipped so you can look up exactly when issues began/ended. If you look at the negative reviews and don't care about the things they point out, there's no harm done to you.

The influx of bad reviews can (and does) force akknowledgement of an issue and plans for a fix. As a customer I really don't see why you'd be against it.

 

[Morrigan]

I disagree with you. User reviews are useless, and they absolutely never factor into a decision of whether I'll buy a game or not.

Click to shrink...

Your insistence that because a thing is not useful for you, therefore it is useless, is frankly bizarre.

Clear you find no use for user reviews. OK, that's fine. But clearly they are useful for other people. If you acknowledge that (and why wouldn't you), then you can't very well really declare them as being inherently useless, no?

I can't think of a single example of productive review bombing. I'm open minded though. If someone can point to an actual example and explain how it helped in some substantive way, I'll definitely consider their opinion.

Click to shrink...

The thread has several examples.

 

[RadzPrower]

I'm shocked at the yes/no percentage.

Review bombing is literally one of the only things the average person can do to make their displeasure with a game known and not just be ignored or quarantined off to a subreddit or forum or something. I rarely see it happening when there isn't a justify able reason for it, like terrible drm, missing content, terrible performance, etc.

I don't see how it hurts anyone other than the publisher who is putting out a product with issues anyway - that the customer should know about anyway. As a customer I see zero reason why you shouldn't want visible negative reviews about issues that the game you're thinking about purchasing may have.

On steam you can even see exactly when the trend of positive/negative reviews flipped so you can look up exactly when issues began/ended. If you look at the negative reviews and don't care about the things they point out, there's no harm done to you.

The influx of bad reviews can (and does) force akknowledgement of an issue and plans for a fix. As a customer I really don't see why you'd be against it.

Click to shrink...

I don't think most people would disagree with you. I think the issue is that some, myself included, don't consider negative reviews for DRM, missing content, performance, etc. to be review bombing. I and others only consider review bombing to be non-gameplay related like the current Metro Exodus review bombing.

 

[astro]

I don't think most people would disagree with you. I think the issue is that some, myself included, don't consider negative reviews for DRM, missing content, performance, etc. to be review bombing. I and others only consider review bombing to be non-gameplay related like the current Metro Exodus review bombing.

Click to shrink...

The definition of review bombing is (via Wiki): A review bomb is an Internet phenomenon in which large groups of people leave negative user reviews for video games and other products in an attempt to harm their sales and popularity.

And this fits all the positive examples given ITT.

 

[cakely]

Your insistence that because a thing is not useful for you, therefore it is useless, is frankly bizarre.

Clear you find no use for user reviews. OK, that's fine. But clearly they are useful for other people. If you acknowledge that (and why wouldn't you), then you can't very well really declare them as being inherently useless, no?

Click to shrink...

Yes, in case it wasn't clear, my opinion is that user reviews are useless for me.

I absolutely acknowledge that other people find user reviews useful, and there are examples of that in this thread.

If I share the opinion that cilantro is disgusting, it's because I personally think it's disgusting. I'm not speaking about anyone else's opinion.

Spoiler

Cilantro is not disgusting.

 

[ThreepQuest64]

Only if nothing else work to change their practices. If community posts, blog posts, and critical videos on YouTube don't change anything, get them by reviews. Clarify afterwards.

 

[RadzPrower]

The definition of review bombing is (via Wiki): A review bomb is an Internet phenomenon in which large groups of people leave negative user reviews for video games and other products in an attempt to harm their sales and popularity.

And this fits all the positive examples given ITT.

Click to shrink...

Actually, no, that doesn't fit the positive examples according to most people arguments. The idea of "positive" review bombing is that the issue gets fixed because they like something and want it to succeed...the exact opposite of "harm their sales and popularity".

 

[Morrigan]

Spoiler

Cilantro is not disgusting.

Click to shrink...

Hmmm brb I need to find a way to make this opinion bannable

 

[astro]

Yes, in case it wasn't clear, my opinion is that user reviews are useless for me.

I absolutely acknowledge that other people find user reviews useful, and there are examples of that in this thread.

If I share the opinion that cilantro is disgusting, it's because I personally think it's disgusting. I'm not speaking about anyone else's opinion.

Spoiler

Cilantro is not disgusting.

Click to shrink...

Okay, that's a little easier to stomach. :p

I guess if you'e given them a good go and still find them super frustrating etc... then there's not much more that can be done.

 

[astro]

Actually, no, that doesn't fit the positive examples according to most people arguments. The idea of "positive" review bombing is that the issue gets fixed because they like something and want it to succeed...the exact opposite of "harm their sales and popularity".

Click to shrink...

Yes it does, 100%.

The review bombs were made in order to harm sales and popularity because of an issue.

IE: AK review bombs literally called for boycott, refund, avoid.

If these result in the issue being fixed that does nothing to change the intent of the bombs: that they intended to harm sales in order to FORCE a fix.

 

[Deleted member 176]

Actually, no, that doesn't fit the positive examples according to most people arguments. The idea of "positive" review bombing is that the issue gets fixed because they like something and want it to succeed...the exact opposite of "harm their sales and popularity".

Click to shrink...

how do you think you get things fixed

why would they spend money to fix something popular and successful

 

[HarryDemeanor]

No. In fact it discourages me from looking at reviews and instead head straight to YouTube to see if a game is worth my time and money. I don't have the time to sift through pages and pages of crap to get to the actual genuine reviews.

 

[RadzPrower]

My opinion is different and pedantic, so you are wrong and an idiot.

Click to shrink...

Okay, I'll shut up and let you have your way.

 

[astro]

Okay, I'll shut up and let you have your way.

Click to shrink...

Nice evasion. The term literally fits as explained, it's not really a matter of opinion.

Not one called you an idiot, but that post was really stupid.

I don't understand why some of you are even on a forum if you can't discuss thing to a conclusion properly.

 

[Deleted member 1849]

My opinion is different and pedantic, so you are wrong and an idiot.

Click to shrink...

Okay, I'll shut up and let you have your way.

Click to shrink...

I don't think people said that but okay

 

[RadzPrower]

I don't think people said that but okay

Click to shrink...

No, those exact word were not said. Certainly seemed implied.

 

[IIFloodyII]

Depends on the reason, if they change the game for the worse, add shitty microtransactions or censor stuff I think it's a fine way to make a stink.
If it's just console wars or because EA is bad or whatever petty shit, it's just sad.