this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
63 points (94.4% liked)
Games
16785 readers
850 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
"Review bomb" aka getting bad reviews.
Yeah, I wanted to ask about that. Is it "review bombing" if the complaints are legitimate? I thought review bombing was mass downvoting a game for reasons unrelated to the game, or for otherwise unreasonable reasons.
Who decides if reasons are legitimate or unreasonable? You may like something about a game that other won't and vice versa. Every customer has the right to complain and give a bad review just as to praise and give good review. It's up to the individual. There's no such thing as "review bombing", it's a game/movie/whatever simply getting bad reviews and producer/media trying to discredit those reviews.
I am tempted to agree with you. I could see some theoretical scenario where some influencer with a large following convinces them to all review something poorly just because they say so. If that happened, I think it would be legitimate to call it review bombing. I don't think it's likely, mind you, that someone could convince a large enough group of people to do that without a valid reason. But it could theoretically happen.
Genuinely curious, what makes this a legitimate complaint? Because the next complaint will be that it doesn't have cross play. Since Epic provides this service for free, that's why games implement EOS. I get the sense it's a kneejerk reaction to the word "Epic" rather than something like Sony not being available in their country.
Hm, fair point. I personally hate external accounts because it makes your ownership of your purchase that little bit more tenuous. Your continued access is now contingent on Valve remaining extant and good, Epic remaining extant and… tolerable, and the game's servers, assuming EFD has those and offers no local / P2P option. Admittedly if that last is the case, you would hope if things fell through with Epic that the publishers would come up with some other solution, but I know it took a LONG time for most games that straddled the Steam+GFWL boundary to become playable again after GFLW died. And I'm not sure if they all did.
Yeah, I think the real thing worthy of review bombing is no local or direct IP substitute, but that's also unfortunately most multiplayer games these days. No matter what, if you want cross play, someone has to pay for it, and Epic is willing to foot the bill. Plus, Valve's multiplayer servers, if I had to bet, have less uptime, so Epic might be an improvement.
I definitely agree on the lack of local / direct connection options.