Do you use Steam Reviews to buy games?

dreamers75

A massive No from me but from reading this:

http://www.pcgamer.com/garry-newman-asks-bored-rust-players-to-just-stop-playing/

As silly as it sounds, it's actually very easy to find players with more than 1000 hours in Rust giving it negative reviews on Steam.

This is the new standard for players who feel entitled to be entertained for life I guess. Some examples below:

Found this on Elite Dangerous:

Not Recommended
2.2 hrs last two weeks / 1,715.5 hrs on record
Posted: 24 Nov @ 10:03pm

This on on Planetside 2 (Steam buddy and I abused him over this)

Not Recommended
0.5 hrs on record

How can anyone with over a 1000 hours on any game postg a review to "hurt" the developer, if its to get an update to make the game better is hurting future sales a good idea?

Personally I think these people are idiots if they believe that playing over 1000 hours in a game is a reason to negatively review it.

ScumLord

I don't think I've ever looked at a steam review. Generally I buy games a year after they're released so they've been well reviewed by lots of different people at that stage.

At this stage after 20+ years of gaming I feel like I've seen it all. Most games are only a slight variation on the other games in their genre. So I never really feel like I'm missing out by waiting.

Mr E

I look at the sentiment more than the reviews (Overwhelmingly Positive, Positive, Mixed etc.)

I like the distinction between recent reviews and overall reviews.

riffmongous

Mr E wrote: »

I look at the sentiment more than the reviews (Overwhelmingly Positive, Positive, Mixed etc.)

I like the distinction between recent reviews and overall reviews.

I'd be more or less the same, and if something was only mixed then I might start reading the reviews in more detail to see what the themes are.

But when I see something like the OP described, which is actually relatively common I take it with a pinch of salt

Raging_Ninja

I take a look at the aggregates and then read many of them. If, like you, I see a negative review with several hundred hours, then I count that as a positive. But it also depends on the context of the review, such as a patch that broke the game, similar as what happened to LA Noir, which meant I had to go into the registry to unfúck it.

pablomakaveli

I will read them if I'm undecided. Most of them are memey crap but there are quite a few well written informative ones and thats what I look for. Those ones can be useful for helping to sway me.

Robert ninja

Steam reviews are just one of the many places I go to get an idea about the game. It's unlikely a single review will make/break a sale for me unless it has staggering information that nobody else talks about. Usually it'll just get me to investigate and discuss further in other places, which in turn might make me buy/not buy. Overall I think they're a lot better than they used to be but they're still just one place to go.

dreamers75 wrote: »

This on on Planetside 2 (Steam buddy and I abused him over this)

Why? Does it matter? He's not obliged to give a positive, negative or any feedback. I mean you're also free to comment on it but 'abuse' by teaming up with another person seems a little much. Meh, maybe it's just the wording but why be on such a crusade for companies you don't know? You don't owe them anything. They have their business model.

dreamers75 wrote: »

Personally I think these people are idiots if they believe that playing over 1000 hours in a game is a reason to negatively review it.

It's simply players letting others know in if they think anyone else should get into the game like they did.

Thinking that you have to review a game positively because of X hours is crazy. At what hour do you lose the right to express that the game isn't worth investing time/money into it? Feedback with 0.5 hours and others with 1000s are useful in different ways honestly, as is feedback with no clear time investment. You can see why people were instantly satisfied/dissatisfied in the first hour and why others might feel satisfied/dissatisfaction after 1000. Two very different perspectives and both of which can serve you depending on your tastes and how you'll be approaching the game.

Calhoun

I use it as one of my last checks if im interested in a game ill use a combination of meta critic and other sites and fill finally check steam.

If i see a game with mixed reviews i will read into it and look for the serious reviewer. Sure there are trolls ect but there are allot who write up decent reviews.

degrassinoel

I review stuff fairly often on steam, and i use others reviews to gauge something i'm interested in. A lot of it is just a popularity contest, but ye can generally tell the decent reviews from protest reviews and trolling, i just don't see the point of abusing anyone who has a different opinion to me in their reviews. Just move on..

ShaneU

No because they're prone to complaining about one small thing that annoys them and not reviewing the game overall. E.g. Thousands of negative reviews for Football Manager 2017 for not having Chinese language support.

dreamers75

degrassinoel wrote: »

I review stuff fairly often on steam, and i use others reviews to gauge something i'm interested in. A lot of it is just a popularity contest, but ye can generally tell the decent reviews from protest reviews and trolling, i just don't see the point of abusing anyone who has a different opinion to me in their reviews. Just move on..

I have bought games based on your reviews. But thats based on your reviews appearing in the activity log, I never click on the games actual reviews.

Why? Does it matter? He's not obliged to give a positive, negative or any feedback. I mean you're also free to comment on it but 'abuse' by teaming up with another person seems a little much. Meh, maybe it's just the wording but why be on such a crusade for companies you don't know? You don't owe them anything. They have their business model.

If anyone is reviewing anything they should base their review on the game, not 10 minutes of not knowing what the **** they are doing.

degrassinoel

that's where the popularity contest becomes an issue and this week's most popular meme's rule the highest rated reviews sad but that's the internet these days.

mordeith

I generally read the lowest rated reviews to see what the complaints are. If they're just bitching about stupid stuff I'll ignore it. They can reveal some glitches and bugs however. I tend then to check if there's a game play video on YouTube to get a feel for the game.

TerrorFirmer

I genuinely just see what people are saying about a given games on boards - I'm a fairly bog standard AAA game player, so it's never an issue to find decent discussion on titles I'm considering.

The Steam review system is pretty good the way it's set up to reflect latest reviews as well, but I do see loads of ridiculous reviews from people with hundreds of hours played giving games a negative review over nit-picky, silly things.

I pre-ordered Space Hulk: Death Wing a fair while back, but just from reading the thread of boards I've decided to wait until some time in the new year to give it a go so they've time to iron out bugs.

EoinHef

Depending on the game i dont have a problem with a negative review after a lot of hours.

Take Ark for instance,a lot of people would have 1000+ hours in the game. The devs released a DLC pack there awhile ago that allowed players to travel between arks. The problem being that the OP dino's in the new dlc ark could be brought back to the normal ark,where players without the dlc were at a disadvantage. So they broke up the player base and released dlc for a game that was still in early access that left players without the dlc at a disadvantage. A lot of people didnt like this so their reviews changed to negative.

So to generalise and say any review thats negeative after 1000 hours is whiny and entitled is a bit off for me. There can solid reasons for the negativity.

pablomakaveli

This is very true. Also helps for keeping track of the progress of early access games that I might be interested in. If someone has a lot of hours in one of those and gives a negative review it shows the devs have changed it for the worse or even abandoned it altogether.

Those reviews shouldnt be disregarded at all.

dreamers75

EoinHef wrote: »

So to generalise and say any review thats negeative after 1000 hours is whiny and entitled is a bit off for me. There can solid reasons for the negativity.

Are you buying a game for life?

It is whiny and entitled.

EoinHef

dreamers75 wrote: »

Are you buying a game for life?

It is whiny and entitled.

Not for me its not,if you want to generalise and say every single review thats negative after a lot of hours is whiny and entitled thats cool,i dont agree though.

degrassinoel

I reckon the steam review system is fundamentally alright - ye can edit and change your reviews if the game has been changed for the better or worse.

Something that i have noticed too on a few different games, is that game devs will respond to some of the negative reviews asking for it to be reconsidered in some cases, or in others they'll tell you what they're doing to improve whatever issues you had/have.

This is a good thing for early access games imo. I'd much rather skim through the reviews than read through the even more angry and obnoxious steam forums.

EoinHef

Im pretty ok with it as well,i think it does serve a purpose. While id agree the majority of reviews are worth skipping altogether ive found a lot to be pretty informative. It would never be my sole source of info on a game but i do find it useful. Especially when a game is still in development and subject to change.

Being able to edit the review is also a thing i appreciate and in modern gaming is important,i think most sites that have reviews on products should be the same.

I pay little or no attention to Steam reviews, by the time I'm on the page to buy the game I've already made up my mind to buy it.

Retr0gamer

The only ones I read are the visual novel reviews.

Maximus Alexander

Not Recommended
2.2 hrs last two weeks / 1,715.5 hrs on record
Posted: 24 Nov @ 10:03pm

I devoted an incredible amount of time to this game over the last couple of years and it is only now, in retrospect, that I realise I wasn't really enjoying myself most of that time. The game is cleverly designed to appeal to my compulsive nature, but is mechanically frustrating, generally dull, and looking back I think that my time would have been better spent on a myriad of more rewarding titles. On that basis I would not recommend this game, it is a time sink and little more. Don't allow it to get its hooks into you.

I would say the above, for example, would be a perfectly valid review. Obviously with more detail supplied. I wouldn't dismiss a review out of hand because of the number of hours played; it's not like they're asking for their money back. They're saying they don't think you should buy it.

ED E

Being brutally honest I'll usually take TBs review with an added pinch of salt and go by that.

wyrn

Yeah I tend to look at reviews for impulse purchases on small, less known games. If I see a game that catches my eye and I don't really need any more games, l'll read through the reviews to see if it'all sway me. Just like Amazon, you kind of get a second sense of what reviews are genuine.

Edit: Also some of the reviews can be hilarious. I particularly love the reviews on My Summer Car