Aaron Keller pledged to improve the game for “players who are playing now.”

  • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    If real people hate your game because of the changes you made from the last one (that you took away from them), that’s not a review bomb.

    It’s just a review.

    • CraigeryTheKid@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      the game/steam release definitely deserved bad reviews - but it’d be hard to deny that it wasn’t also a bombing run.

      • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        A review bomb is when people start jumping down the game’s throat with negative reviews for shit unrelated/peripheral to the game. If they’re triggered by the actual core design choices of the game it isn’t a review bomb.

        These reviews are because the game is a money grubbing downgrade from the game people bought and had taken away from them, and this is the first opportunity they had to publish a review on a storefront. The motivation being the actual game means it can’t be a review bomb.

          • hook@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, it’s still a review because you’re still actively dealing with whatever it is you’re complaining about.

            "Hey, I really like/liked the core game play loop of this game but I think that it’s gotten significantly worse than it was previously. It’d be nice if they changed it back?

            4/10."

          • 520@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Plenty of people leave negative reviews for games they otherwise play. Especially where big changes are put into effect

              • 520@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s depends on the business model. For one-off payment games, it still does considerable damage, whereas they don’t gain much by you continuing to play.

                For subscription games, your point stands much stronger.

                • ampersandrew@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s a free to play multiplayer game. If you continue playing it, you’re providing value for some other player who might spend money, so just by being in the matchmaking pool, they’ve got you where they want you, and they won’t care about your review.

          • cre0@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            So overwatch 2 is objectively terrible, but putting that aside for a moment…

            Can you seriously not envision a scenario where you personally do a thing (maybe even enjoy that thing), but still wouldn’t recommend it to others?

              • cre0@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Ah okay I see you’re the kind of kid who answers a question with a question. 🤦‍♂️

                Enjoy picking petty fights over… who likes which video game better. Not really my dig kiddo

                • ampersandrew@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes, I answered your question with a question because your scenario was as absurd as you perceived mine to be. So I’ll answer yours directly: “yes, but not at that scale”. Because at that scale, it’s a review bomb.

        • crossmr@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          So if General motors was using slave labour to build their cars and feeding said labour with baby kittens, would you consider it a review bomb for someone to say ‘You shouldn’t buy the latest vehicle from General motors because of the way it is made’?

          What if general motors came out and said that they think a great start to the day is to wake up and punch a dutchman in the face?

          A review is, ultimately, a recommendation of whether or not you think other people should buy this product. If you can’t recommend it because of something the company who made it did, to me, it’s still a review. Because recommending that product is recommending financial support of that company. Not recommending it, is not supporting them.

          For me a real review bomb would occur generally only in a case where a site like 4chan might suddenly spin a wheel of mayhem and pick a random game to just go shit on or something like that.

          • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            By definition, yes, that’s a review bomb. It has no connection in any way to the quality of the product, which is what a review is.

    • Primarily0617@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re entirely disconnected to reality if you think Overwatch 2 deserves to be the worst-reviewed game on Steam.

      • TwilightVulpine@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        On Steam being reviewed poorly is not a matter of rating from 1 to 10, but how many people would recommend it or not. It’s completely valid that the vast majority of people would not recommend this game even if it’s not a 0/10.

        • Primarily0617@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          yes obviously, and none of that changes anything about the fact that very clearly OW2 isn’t bad enough to deserve the title of worst rated game on steam

          • TwilightVulpine@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            You tried to argue with someone else over this, but the fact that more people played it, being F2P, means that more people can agree that they wouldn’t recommend it. Given how Steam ratings work, that makes it the worst rated. There’s no arguing how it is. You seem to take an issue with it as if it meant Gabe Newell personally stamped it with a 0/10, which is not how it works.

            In Steam, being 4/10 for thousands of people is worse than being 0/10 for a couple people.

      • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Based on what?

        The negatives are extremely bad, and people are legitimately reviewing the game negatively because they legitimately think it’s a pile of shit.

        It is literally unconditionally impossible for it to be a review bomb if the reviews are motivated by the core design decisions of the game.

        • Primarily0617@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Today’s concurrent player peak is ~47k.

          Why would 47k people choose to play the game when it’s the worst game on Steam? Literally worse than a game like Bad Rats: the Rats’ Revenge that fundamentally doesn’t function correctly. For reference, its peak today was about 20 players.

          Before you reply with something like “marketing”, you seriously think that if Bad Rats launched today, and with the same marketing budget as OW2, that it would achieve anywhere close to 47k players peak 10 months after its release?

          Like I said: you’re disconnected from reality if you think OW2 is the worst game on Steam.

            • Primarily0617@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              deliberately steal a game people liked to replace it with an addiction machine

              what the actual fuck are you talking about

              • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                The reason Overwatch 2 is the worst reviewed game Steam has ever had?

                A bad game does a lot less harm than a game that seems good on the surface then tries to rob you blind.

                • Primarily0617@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  by “tries to rob you blind” you mean a game with entirely optional additional purchases?

                  wow you’re right they really get you with that “you can pay if you want” model

                  it’s practically criminal definitely worthy of being the worst ranked game on steam

              • 520@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                The original Overwatch, which had none of this shit and was a one-off payment, was killed off in favour of OW2

                • Primarily0617@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  leaving a negative review because of that would by definition be review bombing, because at that point you’re not reviewing the game, but external context that surrounds it

          • TwilightVulpine@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            You are really trying to downplay the power of marketing, but you seem to realize that gets people playing. Not only that but live service design is very effective at keeping people playing even when they are not having any fun whatsoever. Because they gotta grind the battle pass and such. Extrinsic rewards and habit-forming conditioning making up for a lack of intrinsic enjoyment.

            Still, I would agree with you that it’s not the worst game on Steam, but like I mentioned in the other comment, that’s not what steam ratings mean. It means that the vast majority people would not recommend it, and that seems pretty reasonable.

            • Primarily0617@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              bf2042 had a playercount in the high 1000s 2 months after its launch

              ow2 released 10 months ago

              are you saying bf2042 didn’t have marketing?

              which is more likely:

              • 50k people have been brainwashed into playing the game every day, and similar numbers into watching it on twitch
              • there is review bombing
                • Primarily0617@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  i mean i ignored the second part because it was irrelevant

                  “You’re entirely disconnected to reality if you think Overwatch 2 deserves to be the worst-reviewed game on Steam.” doesn’t say “deserves to be the worst game”, so if we’re playing the reading game maybe you should take the first turn

  • shiveyarbles@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s not a review bomb, you guys aren’t victims. That’s gamers telling you to fuck off with lies, under delivering, treating your employees like shit, micro transactions and battle passes

    • snooggums@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Playing the matches is fun, since it is just Overwatch. Literally the same gameplay as Overwatch, but with 5 per team instead of 6.

      In between is an assault of micro transaction manipulation bullshit that ruins the experience. PvE is hidden behind a paywall, except for the free stuff that is a retread of the seasonal PvE from Overwatch. I know this because I gave it some hours to see if it was as bad as people were saying.

      People hate it because it was supposed to be an improvement but instead it was just another attempt to bleed the players dry. It might be the only game I have reviewed negatively on steam because the monetization really is that bad that it ruins the whole game.

  • HuddaBudda@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    "Aaron Keller gets that (people are upset). “That announcement was about an ambitious project that we ultimately couldn’t deliver.”

    On one end, he could be lying, after all it’s not like they didn’t have working prototypes and cinematic for the new game mode that wasn’t deliverable

    Or.

    He is telling the truth. Then making people return to the office impacted blizzard’s bottom line more then they thought and was a stupid decision that they should end ASAP.

    • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      You understand that the game isn’t new, just new to Steam, right? Having zero hours on Steam doesn’t mean anything when they forced all the people who genuinely wanted to play it to figure out that it was dogshit on their own launcher first.

    • wolfshadowheart@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Reposting from another thread:

      Review bombing is when a game gets poorly rated for something, mostly completely unrelated to the game, but due to something surrounding it - be that a publisher decision like deciding to ban and not give Blitzchung his prize money for saying support Hong Kong, or some perceived language/political/regional slights like with Nier Automata. Tons of examples out here in this category, where legitimately good games are being affected by somewhat legitimate but not relevant reasons.

      Overwatch 2 being poorly rated on Steam isn’t review bombing. It’s gamers saying how shit the game is, like the false promises for Cyberpunk 2077, the addition of denuovo to games, or horrendously egregious microtransactions added to games, like with horse armor or the entirety of everything thst happened leading up to Star Wars Battlefront II (the second). These may be legitimately good games severely affected by terrible decisions from the developers, publishers, or marketing team. Being poorly rated for having egregious microtransactions isn’t being review bombed, it’s highlighting a serious problem in the games design.

      I understand why the latter is so easily mixed up with the former, but it’s something that happens as users and media outlets erode the meaning of these words. It’s disingenuous to say that something is review-bombed when it’s poorly rated for legitimate reasons but as you said it’s something that is now interpreted that way.

      There’s also something to be said about Valve’s internal metric for review bombing which is the increased number of reviews leaning in a particular direction due to some external force. For example, Assassins Creed Unity being given for free led to positive reviews but was excluded from being counted as a review bombing, compared to something negative like being completely unable to leave reviews at all on the Epic Games store, leading players to leave reviews on Steam.

      In regards to the reviewson Steam, given that the game has been out but just released on this platform, it’s still not review bombing. Are there joke reviews? Always in basically every game since before steam points awards. That doesn’t mean they were being review bombed, that’s just any other joke reviews.

      Tl;Dr is overwatch 2 being poorly rated for something that doesn’t have anything to do with the game? Did Blizzard not give prize winnings out? Did the developer make a racy tweet 10 years ago? Are non-localised players upset about something not culturally localized?

      No? It’s being poorly reviewed due to changes, removals, minimal upgrades, and increased microtransactions?

      Poorly reviewed for bad decisions. Not review bombed.

  • Zellith@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Review bombs generally dont last the entire release of a game. Perhaps you just made a shit game.

  • Syo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you’re the game director and had so little sway to the producers /publishers, then you’re nothing but a “yes man” figure head. Maybe go back to dev, the executive role isn’t for you.

    Otherwise, the only excuse is you initiated all these changes and you are completely out of touch with your customers.