Steam legit needs a better review system, mediocre and average games are appearing as well reviewed because of their thumbs up/down system. Pic rel has a metacritic score of 59 and I'd consider it like a 3/10 game. Shit like this is why vampire survivor and milk inside a bag of milk sold so well despite being shovelware.
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
>Allows a mid option
>Its just negative reviews
Why bother?
Why'd they make the lamest looking skeleton the only one you could choose at game start?
the problem is (You) actually, choosing to purchase something on the consensus of random internet comments is typically a bad idea no matter the product, if you want a better understanding of what you're buying you need to be better informed, watch gameplay videos, maybe try a demo, do some research outside of thumbs up good thumbs down bad
in what way could the review system be better?
Instead of being thumbs up or down, they could allow reviews to give it a score out of 10, this way people could give an average or mediocre game a 6 instead of a thumbs up. And the reason why I use internet consensus to decided whether to try something or not is to figure out whether its worth my time trying or not to decide whether or not its worth playing. Maybe you have a lot of free time or something to waste time research games but I'm too busy in my life, I just want to play games.
Have you seen metacritic? Everyone would give either 0 or 10. It's essentially the same system we've already got
Number scores are completely fricking worthless and impossible to maintain any kind of standard for. It invites all the worst kind of moronation.
A thumbs up/down system with mandatory written reviews is hands down the best public review system possible.
>change from a binary yes/no to a scale on 1~10
>score of 1 has the same value as a no
>score of 10 has the same value as a yes
>everything else is significantly less weighted because steam almost certainly isn't going to implement an actual analysis that excludes outliers
You're also expecting the masses to have a critical eye and be able to weigh their own experience on an objective basis, taking the good with the bad in order to arrive at a score between 1~10 instead of just gravitating towards the extremes, which is hilariously naive.
the only upside of a numeric scale is that most 1 star ratings are gonna be the people who say "game crashed" or "game runs badly," while all other categories will be dedicated to describing actual issues with the game. just like israelitegle store's review system.
makes me kind of wish there was some sort of sorting for technical issues vs quality issues
>makes me kind of wish there was some sort of sorting for technical issues vs quality issues
fricking this
too many hispanics whining about their dogshit computers instead of giving valid shit to say
and add a separate category for gays who whine about shit the devs/publishers did
>Instead of being thumbs up or down, they could allow reviews to give it a score out of 10
Anyone who has worked at a customer service jobs that mandate customer satisfaction surveys knows that people spend ZERO fricking effort trying to accurately gauge things with any sort of uniformity. Some people say a 5 is average, some people say 7 is. Some people say 3 is a super shitty game, others will say that should be a 1 and that 3 shows some slight promise.
None of that shit means jack. You haven't suggested something BETTER, you just suggested something DIFFERENT.
You're too busy in life. Yet you use your free time to complain about the Steam review system on Ganker. You also must have spent some time thinking on it. I don't know what more needs to be said. Watch some gameplay next time instead of wasting time reading Steam reviews. Problem solved.
That would just run into the issue with Metacritic user scores where people just spam 0s and 10s.
Numbered scores are cancer as people are too dumb on average to try and rate their experience objectively, you'd just get flooded with 0/10 and 10/10 joke reviews. All steam needs is a "meh" score that takes a chunk of the percentage.
>0/10 and 10/10 joke reviews
And people using those scores in an attempt to undermine the overall score given by people who're trying to rate it more fairly.
Then you would just complain about people spamming 10s and 0s
People lean towards being nice. Numbered score wouldn't fix anything. People would give 0/10 to great games with meh ports and 5/10 or above to shitty indie games because they want to be nice. No matter what you do the reviews are going to be skewed.
you have enough time to type this out yet not enough time to look up like five minutes of gameplay footage? nah, you're just lazy
The only valid research is watching a no-commentary longplay. Everything else is biased bullshit.
IIRC this was a port
So the console version released, bombed, and then when it came to steam, the only ones who bought it to leave a review were people who weren't repulsed by the console release.
You see this with a lot of games, like HZD being mediocre as frick but reviewing positively on Steam because the PS4 release already took all of the heat.
Your review doesn't even count for the score if you redeemed a key from a different website
Either it's good or it's bad
if people want nuance they can actually read what the reviewers write, otherwise this is the most straightforward way for someone to tell if a game is worth their time, combined with the refund, everybody should be able to walk away happy.
>if people want nuance they can actually read what the reviewers write
Expect 90% of steam reviews in any game consist of shitty overused jokes or badge farming
Just like the rest of the world then.
>Shit like this is why vampire survivor and milk inside a bag of milk sold so well despite being shovelware.
So what if they're shovelware?
Do you think reviews should be based on the budget on the game or what?
>he doesn't know how to sort reviews
Underage and/or moronic
Vampires survivor and milk inside a bag of milk are both garbage and both only sold well because people saw the high reviews and low price tags. People gave them good reviews because they were entertaining enough and cost very little. If it wasn't for them breaking steams review system, they both would have sold less than 1000 copies.
Sure buddy
Vampire Survivor sold well because it is fun.
You are the exact kind of moron who would abuse review systems to review bomb games you don't like
Sounds like you bought two games based on review score without actually doing any research and came here to whine on Ganker because you didn't like the games you bought
Don't know about Vampire Survivors but I bought Milk Inside and Outside because i like schizo visual novels and i enjoyed both them
>but I bought Milk Inside and Outside because i like schizo visual novels
reddit
>everything I don't like is reddit
that game is what femcels think schizophrenia is like
Vampire Survivors is pretty enjoyable for what it is and very addictive, milk inside a bag of milk is a neat little visual novel, neither of them are "garbage". There's thousands of games on Steam you've never heard of that are ACTUAL garbage, those two don't qualify.
Yes they do
Lucius is great you fricking homosexual.
Lucius you is great fricking homosexual.
It's not, kill people in oddly specific ways, get stuck for half an hour checking all the draws and cupboards to find a bottle of whiskey hidden in one in a closet a massive mansion. Story of the game is just killing people with a detective narrator just repeating back to you the events of the game. Killing animations are cool and the stealth parts are fun but generally its not a very fun or enjoyable game for the most part. Maybe it was a good youtube viewing experience.
It's like Hitman but good
Luscious 2
He loves Italians and israelites
Milk chan's game is good tho.
The bots are becoming too obvious
When I first started PC gaming in like 2014, if a game ran well enough, didn't crash, and had more than basic settings it was basically rated very well just off that because that's what the majority of the written reviews were about and ports were a lot more shit at the time.
Frick reviews what Steam really needs is a Proton style port rating.
Gold = good port, has all the features
Silver = runs well, average set of options
Bronze = low effort (resolution setting only) but runs well
Lead = Shit port but passable
Corroded Copper = Real shitty port that has issues (think Jedi Survivor)
Plutonium = The worst of the worst, a port that should be delisted from Steam (think Deadly Premonition)
Just look at trailers and play demos to decide for yourself.
I can't think of a nice way to put this. Why did you buy a licensed game from a decade ago and expect it to be particularly good or even mediocre?
Then again, I did try to play Catwoman once, so I shouldn't criticize. And Reservoir Dogs. And Land of the Dead. I actually did beat that last one.
If you were interested enough to pay money for it, you're not likely to leave a bad review unless you felt particularly aggrieved. And if you don't have much of an opinion on the game, you're not going to leave a review at all. Steam reviews are a form of social media.
> legit
no cap fr fr
The only change I would make to Steam reviews is that if you have played the game for over a certain threshold of hours, you may rate it without needing to type a useless text review that nobody was going to read anyway.
Steam reviews are at least way better than other user scores because you actually have to play the game. It's not perfect and you should take every review aggregate in context, but it's the best we've got.
Steam reviews are most useful for technical issues, they will spam negative reviews for poorly optimized games.
Personally if there's a positively reviewed game I'm not sure about, I always go into the negative reviews and see if what they're saying seems valid or if they just have shit taste/need to git gud.
>mediocre and average games are appearing as well reviewed because of their thumbs up/down system
That's precisely why it's made like that
>OP seething so hard at VS he can't comprehend people genuinely liking it and has to make up a cope about steam reviews
Absolute dogshit gets good reviews on Steam if they are cheap. Good games can get bad reviews because third worlders can't run them on their shitty laptops.
If you use steam you should be killed. End of discussion.
Love the sensible takes on Ganker
>filtered by Lucius
>people like things i don't like!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OH NO
anyway
What's wrong with the Milk series? Frick you
The only thing you need to do to fix steam reviews is add a "so-so" yellow wiggling hand vote. There, it's done.
>top positive reviews
>"you can [verb] the [noun], 10/10"
>wacky injoke from the game
>that homosexual checklist template which tells you absolutely fricking nothing about the actual game
>top negative reviews
>thoughtful well-written multi-paragraph critiques of the game
>Negative reviews is literally "Can't run so its bad"