It ain’t review bombing if the game’s not working properly. That’s just called an accurate review. Of course the gaming journalism industry has to make sure all of its headlines are anti-consumers possible though.
The problem is that you have some weird conception of what “review bombing” means. You seem to be under the misconception that it has something to do with somehow illegitimate reviews.
All that it means is massive amounts of negative reviews in a short time. It’s pretty self-explanatory, really.
That’s the sterilized, literal definition, but it’s very common for “review bombing” to be framed as immature gamers throwing a temper tantrum. It’s denotation vs. connotation.
I’m not understanding what you’re confused about here. The suggestion here isn’t that they’re using the phrase wrong out of some kind of bumbling incompetence. I’m very clearly suggesting they’re using the phrase wrong in an Insidious effort to denigrate consumers. I’ve not hidden that at all. They are intentionally using it to make criticism of game companies sound irrational. That is the goal. That is the point.
I don’t understand. These reviews seem accurate to people who have yet to buy the game, so the score properly reflecting the current state of the game warning potential buyers to not buy it.
Reviews would be useless if they didn’t change and people buying the game because reviews reflecting game is fine.
It would be true if gamers wouldn’t be OBSESSED with bashing Ubisoft for any fucking reason they can find.
A Ubisoft guy says something about people not owning their games, it gets taken out of context and people are basically sending death threat to their office. Steam publish an update to make it clear you never owned your games, people jerk them harder.
In the end, both are filthy capitalist business, but one has 12k employees and get shit on all the time because black samurai in a fantasy world or women not fuckable enough, the other has around 80 employees, take 30% on every games they did nothing for, and every gamers kisses their asses.
This is just another reason for low life gamers to hate on ubisoft, the fact that windows broke compatibility with the game makes it even more stupid. How the fuck could they have prevent this from happening exactly? They will publish a patch within 24 hours but the bad reviews will stick.
Reviews are more relevant to customers who are buying the game than people who own the game.
It’s no different than people putting in a bad review because a product they got broke on them.
When it comes to digital PC games on changing hardware and OS what the game was at launch is not the same years later. Who’s ever fault it is for the game being in a broken state doesn’t change it is broken, so reviews being updated to reflect the change is helpful for people actually buying games.
There’s been issues raised for a while. Fixes don’t always happen that quickly if ever.
24 hour fix was mentioned by you, but review bombs happening after issues having popped up all the way back in October in the article is indicative of current owners being fed up and now resorting to public pressure for fixes while also serving as a disclaimer to potential buyers who don’t keep up with gaming news.
This is the exact reason why Steam had a separate “recent reviews” statistic. A well-reviewed game with negative recent reviews is a good indicator that something broke (three exact reason should be spelled out in the reviews).
The only issue is that such reviews are not “self-cleaning” once the issue gets fixed, and not every negative reviewer will remove or correct their review manually.
lol, isn’t their fault? Multi billion dollar company can’t bother to make their game work while thousands+ of other AAA and indie titles continue to work without a hitch?
It’s not their fault, because they were blindsided by the update to Windows, just like everyone else. They are working on a patch, but this takes time.
To me “review bomb” implies giving a rating based on external or irrelevant factors. Giving a game a bad review because it doesn’t run correctly on your computer is perfectly valid and helpful to other users.
Star Wars Outlaws in particular received a temporary fix for crashing issues back in November. While Microsoft and Ubisoft have been working on a fix, issues with games like Assassin’s Creed Origins still remain.
If a fix exists for other games and not this one and you’ve been negatively affected, that’s a 100% acceptable reason to give a “Not Recommend” review.
Yeah, the billion dollar game developer doesn’t have the resources to test preview editions of the only PC OS their game is designed for. They’re just a small startup of ~20k employees. How are they supposed to allocated anyone to patching a game from their most popular franchise?
You’re right, it’s the consumers fault for being biased.
If they’re selling the game somewhere right now (like GOG) and it doesn’t run on your computer then it’s perfectly acceptable to give it a review rating of “Not Recommended”
I didn’t want to discredit the reviews, just give more context to the situation. I don’t think that there is any AAA dev that has 8 year old games at such a high priority level that they would fix any “posthumous” issues immediately.
That yes, it doesn’t bother me that Ubisoft is a consumer of Microsoft.
If Ubisoft doesn’t update their product, they should be reviews negatively. If they don’t like it they should de list it so people don’t pay money for a broken product.
Delist the game that’s been out since 2017 and already bought by 10 million people! Genius! The update point has already been clowned on by plenty of others in the thread, so I won’t relitigate that. But wow dude, delisting is so smart. Like, if 10 million people with the game can’t access what they paid for that’s way better for consumers.
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]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
It ain’t review bombing if the game’s not working properly. That’s just called an accurate review. Of course the gaming journalism industry has to make sure all of its headlines are anti-consumers possible though.
The problem is that you have some weird conception of what “review bombing” means. You seem to be under the misconception that it has something to do with somehow illegitimate reviews.
All that it means is massive amounts of negative reviews in a short time. It’s pretty self-explanatory, really.
This.
That’s the sterilized, literal definition, but it’s very common for “review bombing” to be framed as immature gamers throwing a temper tantrum. It’s denotation vs. connotation.
It’s never framed that way. I know because people complain about it literally every time it’s used in this context.
It’s always framed that way.
Then why do people complain about this every single time the phrase is used? Can you provide an example of it being used in that way?
I’m not understanding what you’re confused about here. The suggestion here isn’t that they’re using the phrase wrong out of some kind of bumbling incompetence. I’m very clearly suggesting they’re using the phrase wrong in an Insidious effort to denigrate consumers. I’ve not hidden that at all. They are intentionally using it to make criticism of game companies sound irrational. That is the goal. That is the point.
I’m not understanding what you’re confused about here. What does any of that have to do with my comment? And why would they do that?
Ubisoft = Bad, Steam = Good.
Upvote to the left.
Seriously gamers, don’t buy Ubisoft’s games and stop crying.
I don’t understand. These reviews seem accurate to people who have yet to buy the game, so the score properly reflecting the current state of the game warning potential buyers to not buy it.
Reviews would be useless if they didn’t change and people buying the game because reviews reflecting game is fine.
It would be true if gamers wouldn’t be OBSESSED with bashing Ubisoft for any fucking reason they can find.
A Ubisoft guy says something about people not owning their games, it gets taken out of context and people are basically sending death threat to their office. Steam publish an update to make it clear you never owned your games, people jerk them harder.
In the end, both are filthy capitalist business, but one has 12k employees and get shit on all the time because black samurai in a fantasy world or women not fuckable enough, the other has around 80 employees, take 30% on every games they did nothing for, and every gamers kisses their asses. This is just another reason for low life gamers to hate on ubisoft, the fact that windows broke compatibility with the game makes it even more stupid. How the fuck could they have prevent this from happening exactly? They will publish a patch within 24 hours but the bad reviews will stick.
Reviews are more relevant to customers who are buying the game than people who own the game.
It’s no different than people putting in a bad review because a product they got broke on them.
When it comes to digital PC games on changing hardware and OS what the game was at launch is not the same years later. Who’s ever fault it is for the game being in a broken state doesn’t change it is broken, so reviews being updated to reflect the change is helpful for people actually buying games.
There’s been issues raised for a while. Fixes don’t always happen that quickly if ever.
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/windows-11-24h2-update-break-ubisoft-games/d0917345-7f2a-4972-8d5b-99d2f9be1b28
https://www.techspot.com/news/105709-windows-11-24h2-update-breaks-ubisoft-games-fix.html
https://gameranx.com/updates/id/520097/article/assassins-creed-games-still-broken-due-to-windows-11-update/
24 hour fix was mentioned by you, but review bombs happening after issues having popped up all the way back in October in the article is indicative of current owners being fed up and now resorting to public pressure for fixes while also serving as a disclaimer to potential buyers who don’t keep up with gaming news.
Jesus, you’re an unpleasant person.
Also, Valve isn’t relevant towards this conversation. They’re not the ones that made Ubisoft into a dumpster fire.
This is the exact reason why Steam had a separate “recent reviews” statistic. A well-reviewed game with negative recent reviews is a good indicator that something broke (three exact reason should be spelled out in the reviews).
The only issue is that such reviews are not “self-cleaning” once the issue gets fixed, and not every negative reviewer will remove or correct their review manually.
Shit Ubisoft game gets shit reviews, news at 11
You didn’t even read the entire title, did you?
I have no clue what you’re talking about? Is AC not a Ubisoft game?
You can blame Ubisoft all you want, but 1) it’s not their fault and 2) this game isn’t considered terrible in any way.
lol, isn’t their fault? Multi billion dollar company can’t bother to make their game work while thousands+ of other AAA and indie titles continue to work without a hitch?
It’s not their fault, because they were blindsided by the update to Windows, just like everyone else. They are working on a patch, but this takes time.
That’s funny, none of the other games I play are affected, do you have any examples?
Just because you aren’t affected, this doesn’t mean the problem doesn’t exist.
https://www.windowslatest.com/2024/12/19/microsoft-confirms-windows-11-24h2-issue-is-breaking-games-yanks-update-for-more-pcs/
Reports of people having issues with various games crashing due to this update go back to August.
To me “review bomb” implies giving a rating based on external or irrelevant factors. Giving a game a bad review because it doesn’t run correctly on your computer is perfectly valid and helpful to other users.
It is due to an external factor - Microsoft
If a fix exists for other games and not this one and you’ve been negatively affected, that’s a 100% acceptable reason to give a “Not Recommend” review.
Then maybe you should revise your comment to say external factors are valid
That’s not an external factor. It’s the absence of a patch in the game.
I feel like you don’t know what an external factor is
The game was in a working state, an update by an external company for an external application (the OS) caused the issue
What state is the game currently in for these users? Not working. Why would they recommend it?
Then maybe you should revise your comment to say external factors are valid
It ran fine since 2017 and got blindsided by MS. Anyone blaming Ubisoft is biased af, or has information not included in this article.
Yeah, the billion dollar game developer doesn’t have the resources to test preview editions of the only PC OS their game is designed for. They’re just a small startup of ~20k employees. How are they supposed to allocated anyone to patching a game from their most popular franchise?
You’re right, it’s the consumers fault for being biased.
Brb gonna test those old 1995 games and if they don’t run on Windows 11 I’ll review bomb Eidos.
If they’re selling the game somewhere right now (like GOG) and it doesn’t run on your computer then it’s perfectly acceptable to give it a review rating of “Not Recommended”
The game is an eight years old single player game. I doubt they had many people working on it anymore.
So, people should leave positive reviews for games that no longer work?
Like I get what your saying. It’s not Ubisoft’s fault.
But if they’re not going to fix their old game, than it should be reviewed negatively so people don’t spend money on a game that no longer works.
If they don’t want that, than delist it.
I didn’t want to discredit the reviews, just give more context to the situation. I don’t think that there is any AAA dev that has 8 year old games at such a high priority level that they would fix any “posthumous” issues immediately.
Sure
But when people are replying to
https://lemm.ee/comment/17210238
Saying that anyone not calling out Microsoft is biased, is a bad take. And I’m not sure what your point of more context is needed?
A broken game gets negative reviews. I’m not sure what’s biased about this.
They do have the resources, they also have the expectation they won’t need to waste them on dumb shit MS breaks.
Ubisoft IS the consumer of MS products. But I guess your sympathies for consumers is only skin deep.
Companies aren’t people. So yes, my limit is “skin deep”.
(Not the person you replied to).
What a profound observation. Paperwork isn’t flesh. Amazing. What’s your point?
That yes, it doesn’t bother me that Ubisoft is a consumer of Microsoft.
If Ubisoft doesn’t update their product, they should be reviews negatively. If they don’t like it they should de list it so people don’t pay money for a broken product.
Delist the game that’s been out since 2017 and already bought by 10 million people! Genius! The update point has already been clowned on by plenty of others in the thread, so I won’t relitigate that. But wow dude, delisting is so smart. Like, if 10 million people with the game can’t access what they paid for that’s way better for consumers.