After over 1,000 hours in that game, I left my negative review a couple years ago and quit forever. The predatory monetization eats away at the fun. Slowly at first, but building up over time. It’s just been bad decision after bad decision since the game came out. You slowly start to realize the game you’ve been playing isn’t even fun anymore and you only play for the new cosmetics for fear of missing out. Daily challenges, weekly challenges, seasons, events, limited time game modes, premium skins, loot boxes, special legendary cosmetics for those that spend the most, vaulting content for a false sense of scarcity and slow progression. And now after all this, the one thing people could get from a one time purchase (if they grind hard enough) is gone. Honestly, I’d leave another negative review if I could.
I left when I realized people weren’t aimbotting… they’re just using a controller and my keyboard/mouse ass is being auto-aimed at from medium and short distances.
That’s not inherently true, though. What if 99 people out of 100 who play 1000 hours are fine, but the 100th has his brain broken and is addicted to giving the owner their rent and food money? The people who escape can still see the things that the game did to their brain and not suggest anyone else go down that path.
And yes, they’re literally designed with that intention in mind, to create addicts. Escaping doesn’t mean the experience was worth it.
It’s just unfortunate that this is the only avenue for players to make their disagreement felt. Game reviews should focus on the game as a whole and not one single aspect, the more these happen the less steam reviews become reliable to gauge the game’s quality.
“One single aspect”, especially cash grubbing, completely and absolutely removes any capacity to enjoy the game from most users.
They’re not recommending that game because of that “one aspect” because that “one aspect” makes the game unplayable as far as they’re concerned.
Ignoring massive deal breaking flaws to try to do some average of individual features is a far less honest or accurate review. A single issue, if it’s big enough, can change a game from the best thing anyone’s ever made into a complete and utter pile of shit. Games are not a sum of parts.
This isn’t massive flaws that suddenly appeared overnight, or the straw that broke the camel’s back, it’s purely because they want to get back at the developer. So yes, I think “review bombing” is accurate.
Don’t get me wrong, i dislike enshittification as much as the next guy; but I don’t think a game’s review should be about what the devs posted on twitter yesterday.
It absolutely is a massive flaw that fundamentally changes their ability to enjoy the game.
They changed the amount of cash they demand after the fact to take advantage of people addicted. Not giving it a negative review for such open abuse would be the unethical behavior. You have an obligation to do so. The ethics of monetization is what defines free to play games.
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.
“There hasn’t actually been an immediate dip in Apex’s player count”
Well then
I didn’t realize they took away the apex coin option. That sucks.
I used to top up to unlock the next pass and bridge the gap when I play casually with friends.
Not sure I’m gonna be paying anymore towards this.
Well from looking at steamdb, they have an additional 1500ish negative reviews today.
But it isn’t a meaningful amount to actually catch the attention of the corpo meat suits yet.
It takes a few days for these things to pick uo steam.
impressive use of an idiom in a literal way appropriate to context.
The term “Review bomb” has lost it’s original meaning at this point.
Every negative criticism of me must be a coordinated attack by 4chan! There’s no other option.
Last time I saw an Apex article was when some hacker installed cheats on someone else’s PC during the championships.
THIS IS WHAT THEY TOOK FROM YOU
After over 1,000 hours in that game, I left my negative review a couple years ago and quit forever. The predatory monetization eats away at the fun. Slowly at first, but building up over time. It’s just been bad decision after bad decision since the game came out. You slowly start to realize the game you’ve been playing isn’t even fun anymore and you only play for the new cosmetics for fear of missing out. Daily challenges, weekly challenges, seasons, events, limited time game modes, premium skins, loot boxes, special legendary cosmetics for those that spend the most, vaulting content for a false sense of scarcity and slow progression. And now after all this, the one thing people could get from a one time purchase (if they grind hard enough) is gone. Honestly, I’d leave another negative review if I could.
I left when I realized people weren’t aimbotting… they’re just using a controller and my keyboard/mouse ass is being auto-aimed at from medium and short distances.
Yeah, the fact that all the pro player switched to joypad was so sad
See that’s insane to me, your spent 1000!! Hours. It was obviously a good game
Used to be. Hence why I don’t play it anymore.
Is still a good game for people who had never played it. Even though you have seen and done everything and is done with the game
That’s not inherently true, though. What if 99 people out of 100 who play 1000 hours are fine, but the 100th has his brain broken and is addicted to giving the owner their rent and food money? The people who escape can still see the things that the game did to their brain and not suggest anyone else go down that path.
And yes, they’re literally designed with that intention in mind, to create addicts. Escaping doesn’t mean the experience was worth it.
I would have happily bought the game. I’m still having a ton of fun playing with friends.
But I have never, and will never, spend even a cent on it.
The problem is the game was developed by a (for the most part) loving studio with a vision and then EA started milking it dry.
“Review Bombing” is a terrible term that attempts to discredit when consumers are not happy with the product.
It’s just unfortunate that this is the only avenue for players to make their disagreement felt. Game reviews should focus on the game as a whole and not one single aspect, the more these happen the less steam reviews become reliable to gauge the game’s quality.
“One single aspect”, especially cash grubbing, completely and absolutely removes any capacity to enjoy the game from most users.
They’re not recommending that game because of that “one aspect” because that “one aspect” makes the game unplayable as far as they’re concerned.
Ignoring massive deal breaking flaws to try to do some average of individual features is a far less honest or accurate review. A single issue, if it’s big enough, can change a game from the best thing anyone’s ever made into a complete and utter pile of shit. Games are not a sum of parts.
This isn’t massive flaws that suddenly appeared overnight, or the straw that broke the camel’s back, it’s purely because they want to get back at the developer. So yes, I think “review bombing” is accurate.
Don’t get me wrong, i dislike enshittification as much as the next guy; but I don’t think a game’s review should be about what the devs posted on twitter yesterday.
It absolutely is a massive flaw that fundamentally changes their ability to enjoy the game.
They changed the amount of cash they demand after the fact to take advantage of people addicted. Not giving it a negative review for such open abuse would be the unethical behavior. You have an obligation to do so. The ethics of monetization is what defines free to play games.