Reviews on steam makes me wonder :/

[Agony_Aunt]

There are some good reviews out there. This is a recent positive one which i thought was quite fair: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198000892417/recommended/359320/

There have even been some negative ones that i've upvoted where someone has fairly pointed out faults with the game and said maybe its a good game for other people, just they can't recommend because its not for them.

One thing you will note if you read enough Steam reviews, especially the negative ones. They say things like "You won't like this game." or "Do not buy this game." rather than "I don't like the game because <xyz>". If there was some way of filtering reviews where you could filter out those where other people try and tell you what you will and will not like, then I think the whole review landscape would look better.

And of course, Steam itself doesn't help, especially with sales and limited information space for Steam users, who will impulse buy games on sale without really investigating what they are buying and then write negative reviews because it wasn't what they imagined. I guess many games suffer from this on Steam after sales.

Having said that, ED has a bigger problem than most, and I do place the blame for that at least partially at the feet of FD.

Look at their store page on Steam. Where is it clearly stated the game has a 10 year plan? Nowhere. Its sold as a finished product. Yeeesss... well, it is, in terms of Season one. But nowhere is it made clear that every year for X years there will be a new DLC? That the game is going to be in heavily development for many years?

Nope, its just filled 100% with marketing male cow doo-doo. Stuff they gets potential purchasers excited but doesn't truly convey what people are buying.

Basically there is plenty of blame to go around for the negative reivews from the purchasers themselves, to the mentality Steam fosters, to FD themselves.

 

[InMemoriamSirocco]

Guy writes a negative review after 1 hour of play, he gets slammed for not giving it more time.
Guy writes a negative review after 300 hours of play, he gets slammed for being a hipocrit, coz surely he must have enjoyed it, or he hadn't played that long.
(Perhaps he just waited for all those promised improvements like you all advised him to ?)
Make up your minds, you can't have it both ways.
And if those negative reviews are invalid, then surely all the positive ones are too ?
Afterall, they are written by the same steam crowd many of you seem to despise so much.
Reviews only ever matter before you buy a game. After you bought it you form your own opinion.
That so many get their panties into a knot over bad reviews only proves how insecure they really feel.

Guy does the same thing over and over and over again for 300 hours, writes a review about how "there's not enough to do in the game" and complains about "grind".

I bet ya.

 

[Godtron]

Guy does the same thing over and over and over again for 300 hours, writes a review about how "there's not enough to do in the game" and complains about "grind".

I bet ya.

That's like complaining about <censored> being a grind.

For me, watching ships explode makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. And I keep having to change my underpants.

 

[InMemoriamSirocco]

That's like complaining about <censored> being a grind.

For me, watching ships explode makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. And I keep having to change my underpants.

TMI, good Sir! But thanks for the intimate details, anyway

 

[lysan]

There are some good reviews out there. This is a recent positive one which i thought was quite fair: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198000892417/recommended/359320/

There have even been some negative ones that i've upvoted where someone has fairly pointed out faults with the game and said maybe its a good game for other people, just they can't recommend because its not for them.

One thing you will note if you read enough Steam reviews, especially the negative ones. They say things like "You won't like this game." or "Do not buy this game." rather than "I don't like the game because <xyz>". If there was some way of filtering reviews where you could filter out those where other people try and tell you what you will and will not like, then I think the whole review landscape would look better.

And of course, Steam itself doesn't help, especially with sales and limited information space for Steam users, who will impulse buy games on sale without really investigating what they are buying and then write negative reviews because it wasn't what they imagined. I guess many games suffer from this on Steam after sales.

Having said that, ED has a bigger problem than most, and I do place the blame for that at least partially at the feet of FD.

Look at their store page on Steam. Where is it clearly stated the game has a 10 year plan? Nowhere. Its sold as a finished product. Yeeesss... well, it is, in terms of Season one. But nowhere is it made clear that every year for X years there will be a new DLC? That the game is going to be in heavily development for many years?

Nope, its just filled 100% with marketing male cow doo-doo. Stuff they gets potential purchasers excited but doesn't truly convey what people are buying.

Basically there is plenty of blame to go around for the negative reivews from the purchasers themselves, to the mentality Steam fosters, to FD themselves.

Yes, and THAT is my whole point here, FD need to communicate what the game really is, if the communication are done right the rest will follow. The label on the product do not explain that this game will be in development for a long time, it doesn't explain that "pew pew" is only a small part of the game, however all the promotion material are "pew pew" related.

When you buy Euro truck simulator you know what you get! a truck simulator, when you buy Farm simulator you are darn sure it is not a FPS. When someone who never have heard of ED or the old Elite series buy ED, they expect to get a fast past shooter because that is all they can see the game is about.

FD need to add more to the game so that "shoot first, ask later" will be one option among many options. I would like to see a lot more options in the explore field, also more science related stuff to do. Maybe just maybe when we get the ship crew we can do more science stuff with our ships. AND I really hope FD add the NPC crew to the game, to rule that out will be a big mistake.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Yes, and THAT is my whole point here, FD need to communicate what the game really is, if the communication are done right the rest will follow. The label on the product do not explain that this game will be in development for a long time, it doesn't explain that "pew pew" is only a small part of the game, however all the promotion material are "pew pew" related.

When you buy Euro truck simulator you know what you get! a truck simulator, when you buy Farm simulator you are darn sure it is not a FPS. When someone who never have heard of ED or the old Elite series buy ED, they expect to get a fast past shooter because that is all they can see the game is about.

FD need to add more to the game so that "shoot first, ask later" will be one option among many options. I would like to see a lot more options in the explore field, also more science related stuff to do. Maybe just maybe when we get the ship crew we can do more science stuff with our ships. AND I really hope FD add the NPC crew to the game, to rule that out will be a big mistake.

That's a fairly tall order, especially since we are waiting longer now for the next release. They could at least fix the current situation by changing the marketing.

They need to take a tip from these guys:

 

[Jex =TE=]

The average gamer out there is a 17yr old student

You couldn't be more wrong if you had just made that figure up and wrote it in a forum posts....oooops. Here, let me google that for you...

Gaming advocacy group: The average gamer is 31, and most play on a console
http://venturebeat.com/2014/04/29/g...erage-gamer-is-31-and-most-play-on-a-console/

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Whatever. Steam reviews are still worth what you pay for them. Nothing. Anyone can write one. And then engage in a mutual backslapping frenzy with anyone else sharing the same opinion. And since getting your review to the top of the pile requires people agreeing with your review, merely parroting the same opinion as anyone else is the optimum strategy. It isn't a 'reviewing' process at all, in any meaningful sense. Just another way to post random internet commentary.

Real reviewers are paid to do it.

Why on earth would someone buy a game only to write a negative review? Of course, for this nonsense to hold any weight you would, of course, be able to give us a list of other games this happens for.

 

[peteuplink]

I do think that FD need to stop misrepresenting the game in the trailers.

The original trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwvjElmFCfE gives the impression that this is some sort of shoot-em-up space game, like a sort of COD in space, which is isn't.

I think the trailers should be much more along the style of this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BgvGLptN18 which I think gives a much clearer image of the style of the gameplay.

 

[Jex =TE=]

That's DayZ's hook. The reason why people stay is because you are competing against other players for the same resources (I'm assuming here as I never played the game so correct me if I'm wrong) which is why people stay.

The game has a hook(s) to bring people in it needs something for gamers to strive for to keep most engaged, the next big ship is generally not enough.

It sounds like you enjoy the game and that's great, so do I. But FD needs a something to keep gamers gaming and buying the expansions. Especially when other games are eventually released.

No, the reason people like DayZ so much is because it's one of the only FPS's to get your adrenaline pumping. After having spent a few hours finding gear, the thought of losing it to another player has a strange but good effect on people. DayZ was loved because it was brutal and in your face - it's nothing like ED.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Two weeks is better than the 0.2 hours of gameplay one Steam user thought was sufficient to review a game (not Elite). A Steam user sharing the same username and avatar as one of the contributors to this thread.

And? You keep coming up with anecdotal examples that are meaningless. Was that game pacman? Did it need more that 12 minutes of gameplay to decide if it was good or not?

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I disagree that 0.2 hours is not long enough to write a review. A review is subjective, if 0.2 hours is all that they could stand to play 0.2 hours could offer an honest review. It doesn't make them a "hater", a hater would need no hours or seconds to be hating it.

I have played games for less than 30 seconds where I instantly knew the game would be bad. I have games in my Steam Library where their playtime is <20 minutes because the boredom was causing me suffering - literally giving me a headache. My review of these games would not be the same, only similar in the communication of my dissatisfaction. Writing a review of my experiences with some of these games could be far more interesting, witty and useful than many of the essay-long critiques of modern titles GoogleAds tries to force on me daily and it would be as much a review as any other persons documented opinion on something.

Likewise there is nothing wrong with short reviews, necessarily. I think a lot of people get riled because they pair the word "Review" with some expectancy of professionalism and integrity. They expect a documented list of features with explanations and impressions and even if that list amounts to a diatribe they are happy, provided it was comprehensible and the person took effort to write it. Review is an internet buzz-word for an opinion that makes people feel good about themselves, almost like they are doing someone a service. You get them on pretty much every webstore you go to, which Steam is.

"I reviewed this table lamp I bought from Amazon". "I reviewed this seller on ebay (A++!!!!)".

What's wrong with brevity anyway These are reviews, fitting snugly in our modern definition, according to our modern values and modern expectations. Would you call someone a hater because they reviewed the table lamp as 1 star, saying it was "crap because it came without a plug: 1/10 wouldn't buy again"? I wouldn't. I probably wouldn't buy the lamp either.

I challenge anyone to play Road to Hell for more than 5 minutes LMAO

 

[Jex =TE=]

I just went and read the Xcom2 reviews on Steam and only read the negative ones (I don't need to read the positive ones). All of them were perfectly reasonable as are most of the reviews I've ever read on Steam. Most of the negative reviews are because the game won't run. A lot go along the lines of "The game is lots of fun....when it works but because of all the bugs I can't recommend right now."

On ED forums, people read negative reviews of their beloved game then come here to cry about it and slag off the steam reviewers even though perfectly articulate reviews have been posted here (from Steam) that are obviously well thought out and apply to the game.

 

[bootsam]

People need to take personal responsibility to assess whether something is right/wrong for them. You cannot blame developers for trying to maximise their product. If I bought a blouse instead of a shirt, thats my fault. Even if the ad says blouses for men. Its up to me to assess whether I could get away with wearing a blouse. Not the manufacturer. They do not know whether ive the figure or the savoir faire to pull it off. But I do and no I cant.

 

[dreamer1986]

Please, OP and others, just stop insulting the Steam community, you are wrong. You can't simply generalize and call them all superficial CoD fanatics. After reading the Steam reviews, its simple to see that they do have a point and you can't expect everybody to accepts the view that the game isn't complete and be happy to wait. They paid money for a game that is very well described by many as "a mile wide, an inch deep" . Look at successful games in all categories, RPG's, strategy, sci fi and you will see even 95% Steam approval rating.

So just stop demeaning such a large community just because you don't agree with their views.

 

[nosleepdemon]

Please, OP and others, just stop insulting the Steam community, you are wrong. You can't simply generalize and call them all superficial CoD fanatics. After reading the Steam reviews, its simple to see that they do have a point and you can't expect everybody to accepts the view that the game isn't complete and be happy to wait. They paid money for a game that is very well described by many as "a mile wide, an inch deep" . Look at successful games in all categories, RPG's, strategy, sci fi and you will see even 95% Steam approval rating.

So just stop demeaning such a large community just because you don't agree with their views.

While it is unfair to generalize any group of people based on the actions of a few, come on man, these guys are Steam users! I happen to use Steam, but only on the weekends - I find that too much Steam is a lot like too much lead: It makes you dull and a wee bit loopy.

 

[Derath]

People need to take personal responsibility to assess whether something is right/wrong for them. You cannot blame developers for trying to maximise their product. If I bought a blouse instead of a shirt, thats my fault. Even if the ad says blouses for men. Its up to me to assess whether I could get away with wearing a blouse. Not the manufacturer. They do not know whether ive the figure or the savoir faire to pull it off. But I do and no I cant.

No, people have to accept that if you buy a blouse instead of a shirt you will get a response based around that. The developer chooses to sell their game as an action packed adrenaline filled adventure, this will maximise their product as you say for sure, but they also have to take responsibility for the fact that choice will alienate some customers who find out it isn't.

Anybody can lie to sell something, how big a lie you can get away with depends on who your selling to.

I also can't help but notice that a vast majority of the games I think are superb receive a great score on steam, and the very few that are too niche I almost always understand the arguments made against them. Steam really isn't that bad, someday the people with a problem with this are going to have to realize that to the world at large this games not that good, it will receive a mediocre score. They also need to realize that this really doesn't matter, If you love the game keep playing, general reviews help general people.

 

[RingoD123]

Please, OP and others, just stop insulting the Steam community, you are wrong. You can't simply generalize and call them all superficial CoD fanatics. After reading the Steam reviews, its simple to see that they do have a point and you can't expect everybody to accepts the view that the game isn't complete and be happy to wait. They paid money for a game that is very well described by many as "a mile wide, an inch deep" . Look at successful games in all categories, RPG's, strategy, sci fi and you will see even 95% Steam approval rating.

So just stop demeaning such a large community just because you don't agree with their views.

Have to agree, seems like a lot of people on these forums who owned the game before it hit Steam see themselves as "better" or have a false sense of superiority compared to the Steam users, just because you may have played longer doesn't mean you're any higher up the rung or that the newer Steam users are equivalent of the great unwashed. In fact, I would argue that they have a less bias point of view of where the game is currently at than the small % of original backers still left defending this game to the death here on the ever decreasing forums.

 

[lysan]

Please, OP and others, just stop insulting the Steam community, you are wrong. You can't simply generalize and call them all superficial CoD fanatics. After reading the Steam reviews, its simple to see that they do have a point and you can't expect everybody to accepts the view that the game isn't complete and be happy to wait. They paid money for a game that is very well described by many as "a mile wide, an inch deep" . Look at successful games in all categories, RPG's, strategy, sci fi and you will see even 95% Steam approval rating.

So just stop demeaning such a large community just because you don't agree with their views.

I'm not bashing steam users at all, I'm a steam user myself. What I do is wondering why so many people got this game so wrong? and also reading some of the reviews they just don't sound as reviews done on the current game status. Its more like an old grunt against the game from early on. (price and off-line etc.)

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

ED is a funny game...... imo there is heaps wrong with it, missions which do not work, no persistance at all, the whole thing feels victim of RNG......... and yet I am completely addicted to it partly due to it being the best VR experience i have tried, and i have tried a lot!... but even without the hmd i am still playing regularly.

I love the art style, the sound assets the best I have come accross in a game, the flight model brilliant and the technical achievement of the game framework is extraordinary imo.

I would say ED is not a game for everyone, and I would also say some of the trailers do give a false representation of the kind of game it is, I totally get *some* of the negative reviews, and others are not exactly wrong, but they are just from people who want one type of game and bought another.... so as i said, not wrong, but not ones to base whether to purchase or not.

then there are the toxic reviews which offer nothing, but you get that with all games... more so with ED I guess due to it being something a little different from other space shooters also on steam.

TLDR ED is a game I would give over 9/10 for me..... BUT I would never reccomend it to anybody without doing their homework 1st as its like marmite.... There are so many vids out there with genuine gameplayer however, not to mention the dev diaries, the FAQ, as well as the DDF for getting a feel for how the devs would like the game to go one day maybe.... so its not like anyone should feel forced to buy in ignorance

dayz is an interesting comparison..... I HATE dayZ and if i got ED expecting it to be like that game i totally get why someone would feel dissapointed.......

 

[KING5TON]

Yeah, funny how if the reviews where all positive you wouldn't have an issue with them. This thread would be about how spot on the steam reviews are and how it supports your point of view.
It's only that it has a mixed rating with negative reviews that you've got to try and undermine them.

Ask yourself why you need to do this?
Do you do this for any other products you buy (e.g. your toothpaste)?
If not why not?
Is it because complaining that someone wrote a bad review of the toothpaste you buy is a little bit mental?
Think about it. It's a game, you're acting like this and you're not 10 anymore (unless you are then fair enough).

 

[bootsam]

No, people have to accept that if you buy a blouse instead of a shirt you will get a response based around that. The developer chooses to sell their game as an action packed adrenaline filled adventure, this will maximise their product as you say for sure, but they also have to take responsibility for the fact that choice will alienate some customers who find out it isn't.

Anybody can lie to sell something, how big a lie you can get away with depends on who your selling to.

I also can't help but notice that a vast majority of the games I think are superb receive a great score on steam, and the very few that are too niche I almost always understand the arguments made against them. Steam really isn't that bad, someday the people with a problem with this are going to have to realize that to the world at large this games not that good, it will receive a mediocre score. They also need to realize that this really doesn't matter, If you love the game keep playing, general reviews help general people.

I stand by my statement as a Steam user who has purchased just about every game possible via steam since its inception. I treat steam reviews with the contempt they deserve mostly. Some may be reliable I'm sure but ive played many games with great reviews that were a pile off pooh. But I accept responsibility for buying these as I never did my research. Reviews should be taken with a pinch of salt. Theyre unreliable markers. Theres an old adage - 'Buyer Beware'. Never, ever rely upon advertising. Theyd sell you your own shoes back if they could.

Anyone want to buy a smashing blouse?

 

[Boomer Kay]

In fact, I would argue that they have a less bias point of view of where the game is currently at than the small % of original backers still left defending this game to the death here on the ever decreasing forums.

Unbias doesn't explain the 80% metacritic score from professional reviewers.
Not one negative review from people that play and rate dozens, if not hundreds of games a year.
Next tinfoil hat theory: they're all bought.

Of course user reviews are biased. That's why publishers release one carbon copy after the other of their cashcow franchises and all built around a few established engines.
Raving user reviews who expect "more of the same".
Games released each year: thousands. New games released each year .. well, some indie projects that look like they're stuck in the 90ies and some small attempts at innovation from a few publishers.
(same principle for Blockbuster movies .. seen one of the genre, seen them all)