PA Steam Review - Analysis

Beyond Earth was terrible?

Man, and people hate it when gamers are called entitled and childish

(maybe I just have terrible taste in vidjagames. I probably do)

Gamers, statistically AND proven by a lot of games, are entitles and childish.

I kept gaming long after i grew up, but it's hard to call the droll that the internet majority does "gaming" or "growing up".

I don’t hate this game; the only game I ever hated was Star Trek New Worlds. I believe PA has earned its negative reviews. I support the current review system on Steam. I will repeat; at launch 5.5; current state 7.2 (my personal opinion). My negative review will remain; I have no intention of changing it.

That's great but people shouldn't be reading about 1.0 when they're looking to buy 1.whateverversionPAisnow.

All fair enough, what I'm not clear on though is why now (with your own opinion rating the game at 7.2, which is actually fairly good) are you still promoting the negative reviews? Surely you should be marking accurate reviews as helpful, and given your own rating some of them must be positive. Obviously I understand you don't agree with the 'omg best game Eva' stuff however there are plenty of more considered reviews on there?

Supporting it doesn't mean the system isn't broken, see my last post. Until you can explain why a review system should promote inaccurate info, you can't say it isn't broken.

More simply, answer this:

• Given the point of a review system is to ensure potential buyers are fully informed about a game, why should a review system promote outdated, incorrect information over up-to-date accurate information?

And let's be clear: "Up-to-date" does not mean it can't mention what has happened in the past. The entire review can be about what has happened in the past. Because such a review would still be accurate. The problem is with old posts that say "X feature is not in" or even (if it occurred), "X feature is in" when it is no longer the case. People see that and take it as fact. Those people have just been lied to.

It's like saying Wikipedia shouldn't be edited to include up-to-date info on games.

Furthermore, you keep mentioning you won't change your review. I'm not saying any reviews need to be changed, and never have. The system is broken because it promotes old information, and the design of the helpful/not helpful ratings facilitates this. It's the "most helpful" listing, and the mechanism behind it, that is broken, not the fact that negative reviews exist.

I don’t reward sloppy work. The current state of the game screams; “1.0 was crap, but we will release it anyway, they have no recourse? There is no refund. We will fix it later, don’t worry the fanboys/white knights will defend us”.

Reviews aren't about rewards.

Nobody is denying the game was released too early.

Now please explain why a review of the current build is less relevant to someone looking to buy the game than a review of 1.0.

My review; is about whatever I want it to be.



My review; is about whatever I want it to be. They knowingly released an incomplete game; “we regard release as another part of development”. To the white knights and fanboys; I say “tough cookie”. The Steam review system is here to stay. I have to go, I need to like some more negative reviews of PA, Assassin Creed Unity, Civilization: Beyond Earth; my work is never done.

Lol... you *seriously* need to get some dude Whatever floats your boat though I guess?

I never liked any of the civilization games, honestly. Not a fan of turn-based anything - with the exception of Total War campaigns.

Your review can be about whatever you want. But a review system is about providing accurate information. And you have not provided any evidence or said anything to show that the way Steam is doing it is achieving that goal compared to showing more up-to-date reviews.

You only think the review system works because it matches what you want. But even a broken clock is right twice a day.

So in a nutshell, you are simply abusing the review system to attack a game you supposedly "don't hate". And claiming a system open to abuse isn't broken. And further saying that anyone against such abuse, who wants a system that actually does what it's supposed to, is a "white knight" or "fanboy". Because heaven forbid if people were actually told the truth about PA .

And once more, you refer to "liking" reviews, when there is no such thing.

He's a black knight

I used the word like, if you ever watched a you-tube video you would understand, the up votes are called likes. As for abusing the review system; I find the negative reviews to be most helpful. On a side note; check this out: http://steamcharts.com/app/233250


Was this review helpful? Yes No Funny

A huge sale just ended, reduced player counts are the expected. Your point is?

Those numbers looking quite good Over 1000 players average last couple of months is good.

They aren't up-votes either. You are supposed to be indicating that the review is a helpful review or not. Not whether it's helpful towards your cause of damaging PA (or any other purpose), but helpful as a review providing relevant and up-to-date information for buyers.

Everything you are saying is simply proving just how bad the steam review system is.

It's more players than in October. It's also only Online steam players; Offline players add another ~2.5x that amount, and then there's all those (on and offline) who play via the Uber launcher, not steam.

Please explain why a review of the current build is less relevant to someone looking to buy the game than a review of 1.0.

Steam reviews are at 70.50% positive now. Not good. (Oppps I see this has already been pointed out 2 pages ago)