Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Steam Reviews as co-designers in modern RPGs

The Wall

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck Zionist Agent
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
3,018
Location
SERPGIA
I can even make list of indie/AAA Devs who found too much success for their and their game's own good

Let's start with....They Are Billions and Darkest Dungeon. Or Bethesda with Skyrim. Yeah, democracy sucks. Games shouldn't be democratically designed

Is Digital Artist aka Game Developer DEAD?
 

Azdul

Magister
Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
3,328
Location
Langley, Virginia
Many Devs are scared as fuck of negative steam reviews (they can kill any game, indie or AAA)
People who read the reviews already want to buy the game.

The only reviews people care about talk about game being buggy, crashing, unfinished piece of shit - because marketing and store page usually fail to mention this part of 'game experience'.
 

The Wall

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck Zionist Agent
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
3,018
Location
SERPGIA
Your game's steam reviews score is directly tied to how much Steam promotes you. Also many indie Devs seem to pay way too much attention to negative reviews. That's one of reasons for this thread
 

Humbaba

Arcane
Joined
Aug 12, 2021
Messages
2,939
Location
SADAT HQ
With reviews it's the same as when consuming news media.

1. There is no such thing as a neutral view. Everyone has their standpoint and biases. It is vital that you recognise the agenda.

2. Thus, it follows that you should consult several different sources and not just go for the edgy option and only read negative reviews, which does not show that you are a discerning consumer, just that you suffer from second option bias. That's the equivalent of saying "I don't watch (((CNN))) (Clinton News Network), they're nothing but libtard propaganda. Now Russia Today THAT'S what I call unbiased news coverage!".

3. Alternatively, you could find a reviewer, who, judging from his track record, you feel best aligns with your own preferences and you can trust. If you think that the steam sheep don't represent your views then don't listen to them. If you believe the codex, then in the codex you shall trust.

This should be common sense tbh.
 

The Wall

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck Zionist Agent
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
3,018
Location
SERPGIA
I (personally) use all three of your advices. And Final Judge for me is always Me. But you're approaching the problem from consumer's standpoint. That's what this thread is less about. It's more about Devs' standpoint and how much should they listen to negative steam reviews who hate their game's identity while using neutral sounding terms like "unbalanced"

I should probably summon some of Codex Dev Legends to this, imo extremely important discussion for future of indie/AA role-playing genre
 

Humbaba

Arcane
Joined
Aug 12, 2021
Messages
2,939
Location
SADAT HQ
I (personally) use all three of your advices. And Final Judge for me is always Me. But you're approaching the problem from consumer's standpoint. That's what this thread is less about. It's more about Devs' standpoint and how much should they listen to negative steam reviews who hate their game's identity while using neutral sounding terms like "unbalanced"

I should probably summon some of Codex Dev Legends to this, imo extremely important discussion for future of indie/AA role-playing genre

I mean devs are out to make money, so they would bow to the lowest common denominator whether they read steam reviews or not.
 

The Wall

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck Zionist Agent
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
3,018
Location
SERPGIA
Codex should be like Senate during Empire phase of Rome. We should be place where all Devs who share our design values and dream similar perfect RPG can come to counsel and find truly unique place in digital world. We can offer them honest opinion on both design and marketing. Final decision will always be theirs

I summon following Heroes of indie RPG design!
Atomboy Vault Dweller Josh SJWyer Styg CadmusLabs Cleveland Mark Blakemore RatTower Sztaszov Timeslip USG_Mucifikatorul Kamaz Rhuantavan Wayfinder DavidBVal
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
4,229
You can say a lot of bad things about user reviews and more often than not you will be correct. However users are still far better than corporate journalists. They don't have ulterior motives for positive rating shitty AAA games like journos have, such as a desire to have a good relations with a publisher. They tend to have some expertise in genres they play, an average reviewer knows more about the genre they are reviewing than a journo does. I prefer to have the fate of studio lie in the hands of actual players rather than corporate bootlickers.
 

jackofshadows

Magister
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Messages
4,491
Blah blah blah, yeah, yeah. Just stop playing certain mediocre to trash games/abandonware and come over to Stigian Software/ITS crowd before you've lost your marbles completely. You can count how many fucks those devs give to the actual steam reviewer complains without using your hands or toes at all. Bonus point, imagine this: they're making pozz-free games.

See also: blaming a system instead of devs that have no strong vision to begin with is silly.
Gamers, are terrible co-designers of games. They should be always heard but not always listened to.
More news at 11, please.
 
Last edited:

The Wall

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck Zionist Agent
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
3,018
Location
SERPGIA
Sure, it's better then journo$. I'd even argue that ignoring journo$' whining and/or even capitalising on it, while maintaining great relationship with relevant YouTubers (like ACG, SplatterCatGaming, SkillUp etc and/or those who specialise in RPGs like Click4Gameplay) combined with word of mouth and (truly) different difficulty levels (throw normies a bone in Story Mode, stay true to your design principles on Hardcore) and releases on different platforms (GOG/Epic), different OS (Linux), console release year later after last patch&DLC (outsourced so that no manpower from next game is pulled), even Android release (like ATOM:RPG which can be bought on tablets), and last but certainly not the least, a word of mouth, all of above, when combined, can make sure that no good indie RPG Devs will ever starve. They'll even have money for new car, new small boat, new mistress and to expand a team.
Key ingredient to success is: balls
 
Last edited:

d1nolore

Savant
Joined
May 31, 2017
Messages
662
Codexers as a whole are unfortunately not a good source of what’s good. I mean just look at all the fantasy action games (FAG) littering the General RPG forum. Some of these retards think XCOM is an RPG because units have skill sheets.
 

The Wall

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck Zionist Agent
Joined
Jul 19, 2017
Messages
3,018
Location
SERPGIA
Codexers as a whole are unfortunately not a good source of what’s good
Codex is the best what Humanity currently has. Peak RPG design and marketing advice mixed with latest memetic weapons systems and most diverse rating button selection. We gotta do what gotta be done with it
 

normie

️‍
Patron
Zionist Agent
Joined
Mar 9, 2019
Messages
3,727
Insert Title Here
it perverts early access titles because devs want to keep the average review score in the green and not put brakes on the hype by having in the red

otherwise, who cares, and who the fuck reads them lol
 

J1M

Arcane
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
14,616
Chaos Reborn is the poster child for why you should never cater to whiners.

The game was all about RNG. It's called Chaos, for heaven's sake. But they managed to get it played on some big YT channels at the time before launching.

TotalBiscuit (rip) played it with Julian Gollop and Ken Levine on his channel!

So the game ended up reaching a way bigger, more mainstream audience than intended. And the devs were flooded with whining about "too much RNG", "it's unfair", etc.

Instead of focusing on improving and expanding the game they made, these devs decided to cater to the whiners and created a completely new game mode with zero RNG. And the game fucking died almost immediately. Because the whiners moved on to the next new thing and didn't even play the shitty no RNG mode.

Ford was right. People don't know what they want. The only relevant number when it comes to reviews is how many there are. The actual scores are irrelevant.
YES! I've noticed that majority of Indies who find too much success, that success fucks up both their game design and their future sales. Why? Because gamers never fell in love with perfectly balanced game with piss-easy difficulty. Some gamers' complaints were valid, some should have been implemented in certain normie difficulty levels, some, I repeat some, it's never all, UI criticisms should be listened to. All other steam negative reviews should be weared as badge of honor

Many steam negative reviews define game as much as positive reviews. I was sold on quite a few great indies thanks to their negative reviews. They hate everything that many, including me, LOVE

Devs should never strive to have 0 negative Steam reviews. It makes as much sense as Australian/New Zeland 0 Covid19 policy. It's idiotic
Common mistake: you assume that when one of the million monkeys types something you like that the monkey knows what it made or why it is enjoyable.
 

Gerrard

Arcane
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
11,927
Steam reviews need an option to filter reviews that are below 300 characters or something.
 

1451

Seeker
In My Safe Space
Joined
Jan 1, 2011
Messages
1,368
A buyer should be allowed to write his opinion about the game he purchased.
If you dislike transparency you can stop using steam and go to epic.
 

InSight

Learned
Possibly Retarded
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
421
Review definiton:
  • To look over, study, or examine again.
  • To consider retrospectively; look back on.
  • To examine with an eye to criticism or correction.

    The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.

Opinion part A(title pending):

So do coins have two side, so their are bad and good reviews. The good reviews will naturally/often/frequently contain more structured words/info/data which are based on reviewer experience. Words have to based/linked/refer to something(the experience of playing) and it is not easy to overload/makeup/fill a review with lies/nonsense/deceit without breaking its structure/sense/logic to these who are capable of it.

The Issue with steam reviewer is that they do not distinguish/separate/divide between technical issue (external) to play issue(internal). Many negatives review are so simply because the game has not worked, or worked and crushed. This can be a regression for capable developers to create advance works and their works are for others hence consideration is required/accompanied/inevitable.

It is an issue for advance, complex , games that offer/capable of more would likewise have advance, complex and more technical problems(has light can cast great shadows). It is an uncharted territory, path not walked, a road not paved. Unexpected hurdles are bound to happen.

The most shining/glaring/off-memory example of such case is with "For Honor". On the website of meta-critic user reviews(at the time which was years ago) could be divided into two groups: these that gave it 10/10 and these that gave it 0/10 scores. The complaints of the latter were these of internet connection or not being able to start thus wrote less about it, while the former group who could actually play the game(capable of filling/feeling its potential) written more about it ,praising/elevating/honoring it.

While i have not played "For Honor", based on reading/description/trusted opinion, it is a game that advanced the fighting genre(how many are like it?).
The latter (0/10 scoring) evoke behavior similar to these that could not watch a colorful movie either they were blind or could only see black and white or simply did not have the hardware required yet they could not imagine/consider/factor these that could and then claim the movie does not exist, it doesn't work, not special yet there are many/other who say otherwise.
If only one review were to be taken/considered/relied on, who's review would that be, that which has played the game or that which has not? (Yet both scores/reviews are applied and calculated.)

Steam reviewing system could resolve such issues by adding parameter of had/had-not technical difficulties alongside their like/dislike.
It allows "reviewer" to warn of technical faults without diluting/tarnishing/smearing the overall game "reviews" score which should represent the game itself, the design/rules/mechanics developers spend years to create. So than a potential player could weight/factor/consider the risk versus reward the game could provide more accurately and not avoid due to bad/poor/faulty percentage of "likes".

Opinion part B(title pending):

One can also in the very term "review" when applied to games. One requires more than viewing which tackles the external part of the game. If watching/viewing/seeing a game would encompass/contain/reveal all their was to know/experience from it than for example any human should have been able to replicate 100/100 times a combo seen in a fighting game. This is not the case.

A more proper/accurate term would have been a "replay" (to play again). This could have subtract or emphasize/embolden/highlight the requirement one need to make a good/accurate/useful "review" of the game. Yet experiencing most of the games require days and even years to master them (experience in full) for ultimate overview in contrast to movies which last an hours where twice the viewing amount(the re-view) is sufficient for proper/good/useful review/opinion.

An ultimate video game "reviewer" would have need to play all video games from beginning of its history almost in full at least twice (the prediction system human have cut/subtract/mitigate such excessive need) for the most ultimate "review" where no other "review" after it would be necessary and since some games are multiplayer and factoring the order of their play, would such tremendous task be even possible for one human player with its bio-logical/structured/created limits?
How many can truthfully claim to do so for one game and then many/multiply times over for others all which are necessary for the database? Steam reviews generally serves as a force of good in games on the basis that they allow more view points(reviews) and provide them in one place allowing one to make many needed compressions.
 

samuraigaiden

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
1,954
Location
Harare
RPG Wokedex
A buyer should be allowed to write his opinion about the game he purchased.
If you dislike transparency you can stop using steam and go to epic.

I don't think anyone is saying that tho. It's more about how they are received by devs
 

InSight

Learned
Possibly Retarded
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
421
I can even make list of indie/AAA Devs who found too much success for their and their game's own good

Let's start with....They Are Billions and Darkest Dungeon. Or Bethesda with Skyrim. Yeah, democracy sucks. Games shouldn't be democratically designed
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
They Are Billions and Darkest Dungeon.
The tune of your post implies negativity, yet these two games are worthy of their success for they introduced things/mechanics/rules previously unfounded in other games. How has their success made these games worse?
//////////////////////////////////////////////////
Games shouldn't be democratically designed
democracy definiton:
democracy
dĭ-mŏk′rə-sē
noun
  1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
  2. A political or social unit that has such a government.
  3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.
Can one elaborate, explain, give examples?
How many games are their that are democratically designed?
Where are the games where the lead designer has been democratically elected?
Where are the games where each and every aspect( or at least the core/main/important such as mechanics/rules) of it was decided by a majority vote of the populace or player-base?

Recently, in past years, I've noticed Devs changing fundametal design pillars of their games because few or small minority of steam reviews were negative.
How do small minority out of many constitute a democracy who's votes need to be decided by the major majority?

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Yeah, democracy sucks.
Why does democracy sucks? Be reminded/aware/know that "video games" and so the existence of this site, came to be/manifested/birthed from what described as a democratic society/rule/government.
One should be reminded the periods of history which were not democratic, how were the living then to compared to now (on all/many as possible factors one can conceive/hold/encompass).
 

Atomboy

Atom Team
Developer
Joined
Oct 1, 2016
Messages
713
Are Steam Reviews force of Good.TM or are they normie Borg machine that makes most RPG Devs conform to their cries and demands for "quality of life", "gameplay loop" and let's not forget "balance", which are all code words for: mechanically dumbed down games, with little to no challenge and artisticly the same experience? Many Devs are scared as fuck of negative steam reviews (they can kill any game, indie or AAA)

Whether Disco Elysium or Dark Souls, gamers just like women, are turned on by men with vision and principles. More Devs should make games that they themselves would enjoy, at least in Hardcore modes of their games. In past years too many indie Devs have replaced Publisher for steam normies as new Owners of their game's indentity and design

As Henry Ford (owner of first car factory) said : 'Consumers are wrong, ask average consumer what he needs or wants and he'd tell you "a faster horse". His mind is incapable of crossing borders of already familiar and well-known into new and innovative.'

TLDR: Gamers, are terrible co-designers of games. They should be always heard but not always listened to. Devs' balls are in hands of steam normies
You have summoned me, so here I am! I guess I should share my opinion on the subject of this thread?
Well I can only speak for myself. My team makes games for a tiny segment of a tiny (yet growing, thankfully) niche, that's why a huge percentage of people who discover our game are aristocrats, men of refined tastes and interesting opinions that coincide with our vision. I always gather feedback from Steam reviews and Codex reviews and stuff like that, because a lot of it is very good. We have acted upon many a demand from a negative Steam review, and from many a positive Steam review, and these suggestions made flesh turned our game into a better version of itself, without breaking the initial feel and ideas we wanted to see. That's why feedback is very important and I see it as helpful in a lot of ways.
However even in our case there is a need for a very strong filter.
Sometimes even reviewers who are Intellectual enough to discover our game in the first place and kind enough to buy and play it, suggest bad things that would hurt our games if implemented.
We've been suggested: quest markers, fast travel, tacticool combat, making graphic sex scenes, level scaling, adding rape, adding romance, marriage, and having children, adding political things from real life, essential-flagged unkillable NPCs, New Xcom combat, vehicular combat and lots more things that would be out of place in the game or ruin our vision. We never acted upon this, despite this meaning the author would not change their negative review, which in turn would hurt our revenue and plans for the future greatly. Reviews are a very powerful thing indeed. But following some would cause even more harm.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom