Steam - Review System Changes

[Voqar]

Better yet would be to not let people with five minutes of play time post reviews.

I agree in general. Even games that don't require a ton of time to learn would still benefit from requiring a bit of experience before a review happens.

This also doesn't do anything about the idiotic "reviews" (things like "I farted, would play again 10/10") that aren't really reviews and aren't helpful in any way. I'd like to see people who post this kind of thing have their ability to post reviews removed (at least for a while, til the "reviewer" finds a cure for stupidity). Unfortunately letting the community self police this kind of thing thru up/down voting doesn't work since there are apparently huge amounts of failed parents who spawn and raise complete idiots.

Valve makes ridiculous amounts of money pimping games and it would be nice to see them moderate their reviews and forums a bit more - much more so than seeing them piss away money on VR toys and/or consoles nobody wants.

 

[wolfgrimdark]

Sounds pretty good to me since they are not removing the data - just changing the order in how it is presented. People can still look at old reviews if they want to.

In the last half dozen years I have yet to buy a single game that didn't work fine overall. Install, start-up, and play all fine. A few bugs here and there but nothing too overwhelming. I don't buy a lot of games though - probably on average 2-3 a year - more or less depending on how long a game holds my attention. But I never do alpha/early-release or beta. Have no desire to spoil the experience once released. At most I might try a demo if there is one.

Course the point is mute for me. I haven't brought a single game in the last decade based mainly on reviews. I have pretty specific tastes and pretty much know what I like based on features in a game. I may use a review for information but not to decide if the game is good or bad based on some one else's opinion especially knowing how different my view points are from many. Only if a game is consistently rated bad across all party lines do I give it some weight.

Those times where I may be considering a game from an unknown developer or something I don't really know a lot about - then I do read reviews, Wiki, watch trailers, chat on forums and talk to friends. But in the end base my decision on the information about the game itself unless its obvious that it is a total failure.

 

[joxer]

Maybe the new system is not bad.
A few examples?

Neptunia: http://store.steampowered.com/app/282900/
Recent score lowered, I bet due to controls idiocy and insulting UI.

Skyrim: http://store.steampowered.com/app/72850/
Recent score upped most probably because of unofficial fixes on Beth's mess.

FinalFantasy13: http://store.steampowered.com/app/292120/
Recent score dropped to "mediocre" because let's face it, it sux.

 

[you]

For your first example both the new and old score are 95% so I'm not sure I would agree with your commentary on why it fell from 95% to 95%

Second game score went from 92% to 97%; who knows why.

Third game fell from 72% 69%. Given the reduce population size I would hardly consider those big jumps (esp the first and third game) so I would say that I find your commetns over blown.

Maybe the new system is not bad.
A few examples?

Neptunia: http://store.steampowered.com/app/282900/
Recent score lowered, I bet due to controls idiocy and insulting UI.

Skyrim: http://store.steampowered.com/app/72850/
Recent score upped most probably because of unofficial fixes on Beth's mess.

FinalFantasy13: http://store.steampowered.com/app/292120/
Recent score dropped to "mediocre" because let's face it, it sux.

 

[joxer]

What percentage?
On Store page of Neptunia says:
Recent: Very positive
Overall: Overwhelmingly positive

To me it's a drop.

Overblown comments? I think I wrote maybe. Lemme grab my glasses and check it.

 

[fadedc]

If I'm not mistaken, overwhelmingly positive is not actually a higher percentage. It just means that the percentage is out of a larger number of reviews.

So if a game had 95 out of 100 positive reviews it would be very positive. If it had 9500 positive reviews out of 10,000, if would be overwhelmingly positive.

What percentage?
On Store page of Neptunia says:
Recent: Very positive
Overall: Overwhelmingly positive

 

[joxer]

If it means total number of reviews then it's bad.

 

[you]

If you place your mouse over the text it gives you the % which i provided in my post above.

What percentage?
On Store page of Neptunia says:
Recent: Very positive
Overall: Overwhelmingly positive

To me it's a drop.

Overblown comments? I think I wrote maybe. Lemme grab my glasses and check it.

 

[sea]

.

 

[Archangel]

One thing I wonder is how older titles will hold up this way. Some games review very well on release but may not hold up well a few years down the line. I like the recent/total distinction but treating recent reviews as the "most important" seems like it could potentially create some weird situations.

Additionally, like Steam's refund system (with its two hour limit), this feels like it primarily pushes developers to play by Steam's rules, but it doesn't necessarily lead to better games or happier customers in the long run. You can make the argument it just erects more barriers for smaller developers who might not have the resources to keep patching their games years after release.

It only shows recent review if games gets enough new reviews in the long run. The smaller games that are not patched will probably not get many sales or reviews anyways.

 

[sea]

.

 

[Zloth]

The smaller games that only get a few dozen reviews a month are going to jump around pretty wildly just from randomness.

Here's a big one for you - X Rebirth. Overall 35% positive (5432 reviews), recent 70% positive (110 reviews). Egosoft has been putting a lot of time into the game even years after release plus all the people who enjoyed X3 then went into Rebirth expecting it to be X4 have faded away.

Metal Gear Solid 5 stayed about the same. That surprises me given that Metal Gear Online got added to the game. I figured the audience would change quite a bit when they tossed an online shooter into it months after release.

I wonder if games will tend downward over the years as their graphics get more and more dated?

Overall, I like it.

 

[KaosWarMonk]

Here's a big one for you - X Rebirth. Overall 35% positive (5432 reviews), recent 70% positive (110 reviews). Egosoft has been putting a lot of time into the game even years after release plus all the people who enjoyed X3 then went into Rebirth expecting it to be X4 have faded away.

This is a good example. I didn't pre-order because I'm a cagey bastige. Then on release I saw it get pretty much panned for many and varied reasons - some even quite valid but others more whining because it wasn't just an update to what they were already used to. Still it's a space sim so I have a passing interest and I know Egosoft has been releasing big updates every 6 months or so. I like that I can get a relatively good idea of the 'state of game' as it stands now as opposed to what happened at launch.


-kwm

 

[utergatuk]

Both old and new system are flawed.

Facepalm. "Duh!"

Thought this was obvious, since a standardized review system which is created allowing user content is impossible. You just have to understand the limits of what you are dealing with and move on. Sheesh.

 

[joxer]

I've stated 5 or 6 points you, or some reason, didn't quote.
Usually I'd add - oddly. But am suspecting codexwork.

 

[utergatuk]

I've stated 5 or 6 points you, or some reason, didn't quote.
Usually I'd add - oddly. But am suspecting codexwork.

Just agreeing with you regardless of your points. Because however anyone improves a review system, it will be flawed as long as user content is involved.

 

[utergatuk]

but if you want to get specific, i really didn't want to go over all your suggestions, and i stopped reading after the first line. sure the improvements steam made are flawed, and by default, so are yours. i really don't think you just one upped the company with a quick thought.