The problem with these steam reviews is that they don't go into depth as to why. For example:
>the design is awful. I didn't like it and want to sound smarter than I really am.
>checks are absurdly high I don't understand how to make a character who is good at something. I am also probably playing on Hard like I'm used to.
>encounters and locations are not planned appropriately I got filtered by spiders.
>constantly overwhelmed Actually, I got filtered by everything.
>"choices" and their consequences are completely opaque until too late I can't read and/or am mildly retarded and want the game to cater to my disability.
>quests are broken Ditto.
>issues have not been fixed after all the negative feedback for the same issues. Waaah, the big, bad, meanie devs won't make the game easier and stroke my fragile, fragile ego.
What does any of the above even mean in the context of Kingmaker? You could copy those very same complaints, and paste them for any other RPG and it would read the exact same. These complaints are just so generalized and lack any real depth. The only point that has anything to do with Kingmaker was the mention of kingdom management. The low effort steam reviews are not worth the effort of pasting here. But Gregz is on a mission. I respect his dedication. I would have burned myself out on page 1, and went back to playing Pathfinder.