That was because of stupid account restrictions. Yes it’s not “gameplay,” but it’s something in the game that players didn’t like. The game worked fine w/o the PSN account, and then they made it mandatory. That’s a change of policy, and they 100% deserve the negative reviews.
That said, it sold extremely well, so the negative reviews don’t appear to have hurt the success of the game.
TLOU2 is closer to what you’re talking about, where people unhappy with the LGBT themes gave it a negative rating. But it was also a “hard-to-play” game due to being “emotionally raw” (dev’s words in quotes from this article), so I don’t think the “right-wing review-bombing” tells the whole story, I just think the game was not what fans of the original were expecting.
You absolutely do. I provided evidence for two of the games you mentioned (the first two), detailing how the “review bombing” wasn’t nearly the issue people (you included) claimed it to be. If you only follow things posted to gaming-enthusiast communities, you’ll get a very slanted view of how things actually work.
Yes, there are idiots everywhere, but the burden of proof is to show that those idiots actually meaningfully cause problems. Looking at sales figures and longer-term review stats, it seems they quickly get drowned out by the quiet majority.
You’re ignoring sales changes in favor of appearing to be right, and you asked for any evidence and found it yourself. In fact, you seem more concerned about being right than being correct - so I’m going to ignore you completely!
No, I’m more concerned about providing evidence so others can make their own opinion. I may absolutely be missing something, and I’m here to learn what I’m missing.
I don’t accept vague statements, I accept facts. I provided the ones I found, and they seem to show that these “review bombs” are overblown and didn’t significantly impact the actual sales of the games in question. In other words, they’re sensationalist clickbait to sell ads on game review sites.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
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.
That was because of stupid account restrictions. Yes it’s not “gameplay,” but it’s something in the game that players didn’t like. The game worked fine w/o the PSN account, and then they made it mandatory. That’s a change of policy, and they 100% deserve the negative reviews.
That said, it sold extremely well, so the negative reviews don’t appear to have hurt the success of the game.
The original was review-bombed because it was a crappy PC port.
TLOU2 is closer to what you’re talking about, where people unhappy with the LGBT themes gave it a negative rating. But it was also a “hard-to-play” game due to being “emotionally raw” (dev’s words in quotes from this article), so I don’t think the “right-wing review-bombing” tells the whole story, I just think the game was not what fans of the original were expecting.
Regardless, TLOU series has sold extremely well, including TLOU2.
You absolutely do. I provided evidence for two of the games you mentioned (the first two), detailing how the “review bombing” wasn’t nearly the issue people (you included) claimed it to be. If you only follow things posted to gaming-enthusiast communities, you’ll get a very slanted view of how things actually work.
Yes, there are idiots everywhere, but the burden of proof is to show that those idiots actually meaningfully cause problems. Looking at sales figures and longer-term review stats, it seems they quickly get drowned out by the quiet majority.
You’re ignoring sales changes in favor of appearing to be right, and you asked for any evidence and found it yourself. In fact, you seem more concerned about being right than being correct - so I’m going to ignore you completely!
No, I’m more concerned about providing evidence so others can make their own opinion. I may absolutely be missing something, and I’m here to learn what I’m missing.
I don’t accept vague statements, I accept facts. I provided the ones I found, and they seem to show that these “review bombs” are overblown and didn’t significantly impact the actual sales of the games in question. In other words, they’re sensationalist clickbait to sell ads on game review sites.