505
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
505 points (96.8% liked)
Games
16406 readers
1764 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
No, it's not. Review bombing is a reaction caused by an extrinsic factor. DD2 is being reviewed negatively because of what's built into the game.
Yeah, too many “journalists” chuck around the term review bombed to mean when a AAA game gets a load of (deserved) hate.
Good journalists go back, edit their original review to call out the bait and switch of hiding the microtransactions from reviewers, and adjust their score accordingly with microtransactions taken into accout.
And release a follow up "article" just letting people know what happened and that they've updated the review, so it doesn't fly under people's radar.
Seriously, reviewers need to stop softballing when this shit happens. It's one thing for review copies to maybe be missing the final coat of polish. It's something completely different to completely leave out a feature known to be contreversial in an attempt to pump up scores, then turn it on after the initial wave of buyers can no longer return their purchase. Not like they spontaneously developed this shit since review copies went out.
Too many reviewers don't want to get kicked out of getting early releases and review codes so they can earn those yummy clicks.
It's still a form of review bombing. If the game is good (I have not played it nor seen any review so I don't actually know, but the article is making it sound like the only issues are the mtx) aside from the predatory mtx, does it deserve a mostly negative rating ?
I wouldn't necessarily disagree, but I can also see reasons to if one thinks that you are not getting a much worse experience by not paying for these micro transactions.
Also, it's fucking Capcom. They have good studios but they have always been greedy bastards. So I can't say I'm surprised by any of this.
Yes. Yes I think it does. Seems like many other people agree!
Well I agree too but it's not a fucking law of physics, the journalist is allowed to have a different opinion on that
The microtransactions are one issue among many. To be frank, putting microtransactions in a $70 USD title would still warrant negative reviews in and of itself, but the the game is also having catastrophic performance issues and crashing on PC for what seems to be the majority of players, to the point of many Youtube channels covering it that did not get press copies being all but unable to play at all.
It doesn't matter if a game has a lot of good elements, if it has bad ones and people cite those bad elements in negative reviews it's not review bombing, it's consumers giving an honest review of a product.
Imagine that you're having the best dinner of your life. Everything you like, jizz-in-your-pants delicious, served by beautiful people of your preferred sex. Then dessert comes, a massive cake, but while you're enjoying it, you notice a different flavor. And a smell. You look and in the middle of the cake, there is a half-consumed turd.
Would you still rate it "9/10 great except for the turd"? Or would you remember it as the restaurant that served you a turd?
(I stole this hyperbole from the Angry Joe Show's GOT review)
Lmao, ok, downvote me for providing context. I'm not even disagreeing. Personally I don't think this is review bombing. Y'all need to chill.
You're replying to a comment where you say
Be better at lying.
Sorry, it should have been "it can still be considered a form of review bombing. However I am on my smoke break and will not spend 15 minutes writing and proofreading a message when I know I will get piled on by internet strangers regardless of how obvious I make my own opinion while trying to explain what it sounds like the writer's point of view is" but I was pressed for time
The problem is that those two things look exactly the same without the added context that you can't fit into an easy title and people won't read the details anyways.
did it for ya
I've never heard of your definition before. It was "review bombing" when Payday 2 added MTX to the game, which I think was one of the early uses of the term even.
Review bombing is when people organize and get other people to review a game poorly for something they're opposed to, rather than the product actually being bad as a whole.
This isn't to say it isn't deserved for DD2. I have seen tons of reviews of bad performance and things like that. Also one where someone got stuck in the floor and had to delete their save to be able to play the game again. The MTX stuff mostly sounds overblown from my experience with DD:DA, but it does suck it's there are all. I can't tell you if it deserves mostly negative or not because I haven't played it.