Game Reviews on Steam

[Bach]

I've got some totally new virgin players joining the game recently that im trying to help. One asked me about a certain steam review. So I went to the site read it and scanned through a bunch from the last year. Basically, I had to tell the guy the review he was concerned about was mostly a sour grapes emotion response by a disgruntled player and not really of value despite the clicks on the site that said it was.  To prove it I asked him to look at the number of game hours the poster has played. I'm sorry gents but if you have played over 2000 hours in game, writing a scathing review because someone said something that hurt your feelings is just over emotional crap. If you got entertained for .02 cents an hour or less then one way or another the game couldn't have been all that bad.  Seriously.

[z4ys]

But people like to blackmail devs. Almost always it's about a special personal advantage or what they think the game should be like so it's suits them best.

[Christendom]

I disagree.

If you're asking money your alpha pre-release game you open yourself up to reviews and opinions.  If you dismiss the reviews, as the devs do, as sour grapes and "blackmailing" you discredit any validity or truth the reviews might contain and never change how you develop.  They only want yes men.  Yes men won't help the development of this game.  Which kinda explains why 2 years after I started playing NA it still doesn't feel like much progress has been made and just old ideas get rehashed over and over.  

Remember when the devs said they would give us more ships if they got more steam reviews?  That's actually blackmail.  

[Christendom]

3 minutes ago, Liam790 said:

There is a balance.... we all know the reviews are weighted to disgruntled people complaining. The average player who enjoys the game wont write a review. A player having a hissy fit and just wants to shout about it will.

It is in our interest to balance this out so to attract people. The reviews are not Representative and so are stooping people joining the game.

Actually I think the reviews are highly representative.  This game is adversely difficult for new players and offers them zero protection to appease an "elite" group of PVPers that refuse to fight each other and just want soft targets.  Majority of the reviews I've read describe how difficult it is to simply do anything.  It's not intuitive and sailing 15 seconds out of your capital/starting zone you can get ganked.  This game simply isn't new player friendly.  And ya know what, we don't have new players.  

Go figure.

[Fellvred]

It's always important to look at the other side of any opinion. A lot of the negative reviews I disagree with but I don't think a majority of them are just there because their favourite ship sank too often or was nerfed. A number of them do make decent points.

Remember the question on the review people see is "Do you recommend this game" not "did you get your money's worth" etc. From a personal PoV I've enjoyed almost everything about the game but I find it hard to recommend it to someone unless they have a good wedge of free time to play it enough.

[Corona Lisa]

Would you recommend a game which got a new patch which makes the game literally unplayable and it never gets fixed, but you have already 5k hours into it? By your logic the answer is yes, since it was worth your money before the patch went live.

9 minutes ago, Liam790 said:

The reviews are not Representative and so are stooping people joining the game.

And how do you know?

[Christendom]

And don't get me wrong I want the game to succeed, I enjoy playing it.  But if the devs simply ignore every review as "the haters" they'll never improve the game.  

[Corona Lisa]

3 minutes ago, Liam790 said:

Well i dont believe it to much of a stretch to suggest players will stop joining a game that has bad reviews.... Ok i dont have piles of statistics on it but it is a reasonable assumption.

Yes thats why steam reviews are great. You can see what other people think about the game and dont have to rely on reviews from magazines (which could be bought).

My question was why do you think that they are not representative tho.

Edited May 21, 2018 by Jon Snow lets go

[Bach]

The review in question wasn't about a patch that made the game unplayable or anything like that. It was essentially all about the posters opinion of the Devs communication. Which, literally, has nothing to do with game play.

The game is very hard for truly new players but it's not that bad. Two simple facts are all you really need. NA requires teamwork of experienced helping the new. NA ships are modeled to be very realistic. Read up on real sailing will help a lot. The ships simply don't steer like cars. In POTBS it was a point of jokes that 1st rates could sail directly into the wind as fast as they could tacking.

Also, the player community here is generally friendlier and more supportive than you will find in most first person shooters. Yesterday I was training a new player how to capture NPC trader brigs. Two enemy players in princes jumped in the battle. They could have easily sunk my cargo ship and her cutter. I simply typed in what we were doing to the All chat. Being experienced players they quickly summed up the situation and wished us well as they left. NA has a lot of good players. It just also happens to have a decent sized crowd of very noisy bitchy players too. It would be better if they could keep the emotional stuff out of the steam reviews.

[Norfolk nChance]

Unfortunately, I think both @Bach and @Christendom are correct which leads to some very hostile reviews indeed. I’ve just read all the reviews out to 1 year, try it...

 

A negative review from a player with 2,000 hours in game seems madness until you read them. In most cases it will revolve around a mechanic change involving PvP. It never says the graphics are rubbish. Ganking or in real terms Seal Clubbing [SC] noobs is a big concern and the UI. The [SC] I’ve answered on STEAM already. This the game is too hard to play GRIND. Why do the Dev’s wipe and losing my redeemables?

They the players are still treating it like it’s a launched game.

 

@Christendom makes the valid point of “Paying” to Test gives you more of a say. If NA-OW was always completely FREE would you still have negative reviews?

 

For me I believe whether its lost in translation or man power its communication that’s lacking. The ONE main thing that comes through all the reviews is they the Players feel unheard by the Dev’s. If this is TRUE or NOT it’s a different argument. The fact they feel it is the problem...

WoWs is a different game but small YouTube clips and PRESS releases on a daily basis’s I like but that’s man power. You feel in touch...

 

Like Mrs. nChance when she feels unheard or ignore she tends to get more vocal and harsher in her review of my lacking attention. Maybe the player who rights a review is feeling somewhat similar...

 

Norfolk.

 

[Wind]

1 hour ago, Christendom said:

I disagree.

If you're asking money your alpha pre-release game you open yourself up to reviews and opinions.  If you dismiss the reviews, as the devs do, as sour grapes and "blackmailing" you discredit any validity or truth the reviews might contain and never change how you develop.  They only want yes men.  Yes men won't help the development of this game.  Which kinda explains why 2 years after I started playing NA it still doesn't feel like much progress has been made and just old ideas get rehashed over and over.  

Remember when the devs said they would give us more ships if they got more steam reviews?  That is blackmail.  

If you remember early statement from Developers. It says - they follow very unusual development approach. They build the roof first, make sure roof has no leaks. Only after roof is spotless they proceed with the foundation. However, this approach only works in few industries where reviews are not posted 1 hour after the product is produced or being produced. 

Bad reviews do cost a penny and in game industry is the most effective tool to warn potential customers. No Mans Sky suffered the same fate, but is recovering nicely, With Xbox release it will do just ok. 

In game industry we can learn that this approach created a long term infection. Such infection can only be healed by a massive non stop content supply. I mean creative and progressive content that will change peoples minds. Yes it will require larger team, and epic long term plan, but hey... there are still tons of ways to make cash in NA. 

Not everything is lost and can be repaired easily. I am sure that is what Developers have in mind for NA at this point. No Mans Sky should be the main motivator in our case. 

I do believe in NA success. 

Edited May 21, 2018 by Wind

[Wind]

1 hour ago, Christendom said:

 And ya know what, we don't have new players.  

Go figure.

We don't have them yet. Yes I do agree that the we have limited time left. I personally want to see how much content we get in the next patch. This will obviously give some ideas on what will happen next.  

We have to understand at this point people think NA is a released product. You will not change their mind because alpha state took too long to develop. People settled and they feel warm and comfortable, and all of the sudden they are forced to switch and go sit on that cold uncomfortable seat. How do you think they would react? Natural. Any changes that are made will be met with hostility and that includes bad reviews. It's a very difficult case with NA, it's a very unique case that worth researching. How it started, what what caused escalation and outcome. 

In my opinion, developers have everything to make NA beautiful. 

Edited May 21, 2018 by Wind

[Vernon Merrill]

Its pretty naive to think that everyone who will potentially buy this game has already been reached....  

If anything, the potential audience has barely been touched.  Other than an occasional Steam sale, there has been little to no advertisement of this game.

And why would they?  Its not completed yet.  

All we are is a suitably-sized pool of testers, which admittedly we all wish was a bit bigger due to our own selfish wants.

We should hold off on the panic button until the game is completed, advertised and people still decide that they dont enjoy it....

 

Just my $.02

[Wind]

5 minutes ago, Vernon Merrill said:

Its pretty naive to think that everyone who will potentially buy this game has already been reached....  

If anything, the potential audience has barely been touched.  Other than an occasional Steam sale, there has been little to no advertisement of this game.

And why would they?  Its not completed yet.  

All we are is a suitably-sized pool of testers, which admittedly we all wish was a bit bigger due to our own selfish wants.

We should hold off on the panic button until the game is completed, advertised and people still decide that they dont enjoy it....

 

Just my $.02

Correct, but bad reviews infection must be taken care of and met with a strong content supply. This will break the shell that formed over NA and will allow fresh flow of new customers and those who already own the game. Huge advertisement campaign must be pushed when all things are polished and ready.  

We also, can't forget that time is limited here. If we ignore it the amount of bad reviews will be overwhelming. 

Edited May 21, 2018 by Wind

[Slim McSauce]

I have 1k hours. I would have no issue changing my positive review to a negative one, it wouldn't be hard at all. The only reason I don't is because there's still some hope that we get big content. But in another 4 months if the game hasn't gone anywhere I'll probably drop NA and wait for someone else to pick up the concept.

[Aster]

I think a review should be honest first and foremost. Secondly quite a few "Negative" reviews do not say that the game is actually bad, just that you should wait to buy it for X reason. I do understand that many people just look at the review score and maybe read the top few reviews though. So what you can do is mark reviews as helpful if they are a accurate representation of the game and not just.

2 hours ago, Bach said:

mostly a sour grapes emotion response by a disgruntled player and not really of value despite the clicks on the site that said it was.

 

[RaimundoJoe]

You want good reviews, make a good game! Its that simple. 

[John Jacob Astor]

2 hours ago, Bach said:

The game is very hard for truly new players but it's not that bad. Two simple facts are all you really need. NA requires teamwork of experienced helping the new.

Not quite that simple.  I am on clan number two and as a newer player (this year) the whole teamwork thing has been something of a mixed bag.  Part of it is time zone and play-hour incompatibilities.  Part of it is that the person doing the inviting may have expectations of what they are inviting a new player to do that are somewhat at odds with what the player is interested in doing. 

We don't all have 20 hours a week to spend on a video game.

The game is in dire need of an actual clan directory in the new UI.  And not just a the leaderboard that was articulated in the plans.

Then new folks might get a better sense of crew they might actually want to be teamed up with.

[Wind]

32 minutes ago, Marcus Corvus said:

Not quite that simple.  I am on clan number two and as a newer player (this year) the whole teamwork thing has been something of a mixed bag.  Part of it is time zone and play-hour incompatibilities.  Part of it is that the person doing the inviting may have expectations of what they are inviting a new player to do that are somewhat at odds with what the player is interested in doing. 

We don't all have 20 hours a week to spend on a video game.

The game is in dire need of an actual clan directory in the new UI.  And not just a the leaderboard that was articulated in the plans.

Then new folks might get a better sense of crew they might actually want to be teamed up with.

Well 20 hour a week was part of the game design and I do not think we can do anything about it. If developer knew game world would be so massive then developer surely has content for that big world and all player bases. I feel we will see more content as final pre release phase is approaching. They actually listened to very old suggestions (ex. make World map same as Ultimate general) which indicates one thing they are going through their big book of notes and suggestions. I am personally expecting a ninja move where they will out of nowhere drop a whole bunch of their long term work. 

Edited May 21, 2018 by Wind

[z4ys]

1 hour ago, Otto Kohl said:

I love this game and have ovrer 3500 hours in it but it still needs some extra polishing and additional content to earn my positive review. I still would not recomend it to a new player at this stage of development.

What's different to your pre 3500h and now? Everyone has to start somewhere. Pre 3500h argument like game isn't finished, no content (we had even less content in the past - just shooting others in a big circle with no real physics) are just not valid because the game moved ahead it may have not improved for everyone personally but in general it did. Now imagine someone said "I don't recommend the game because it's not finished and has no content" to you would you believe him? I mean 3500h you must have gotten some fun at least. I can't understand such behavior the only valid point would be to say: "It's a choice you will love it or regret it but only you will find out"

Sorry @Otto Kohl I just picked you out of the hole pool as example. It's a general answer

[Wind]

11 minutes ago, z4ys said:

What's different to your pre 3500h and now? Everyone has to start somewhere. Pre 3500h argument like game isn't finished, no content (we had even less content in the past - just shooting others in a big circle with no real physics) are just not valid because the game moved ahead it may have not improved for everyone personally but in general it did. Now imagine someone said "I don't recommend the game because it's not finished and has no content" to you would you believe him? I mean 3500h you must have gotten some fun at least. I can't understand such behavior the only valid point would be to say: "It's a choice you will love it or regret it but only you will find out"

Sorry @Otto Kohl I just picked you out of the hole pool as example. It's a general answer

In past there were few incidents that created ripples. That ripple effect is still active until these days. As I said before NA is a very challenging case, but can be easily fixed with content people are asking for(ex. Tutorial was a success, so much can be built off that foundation) Take for example Patrick OBrian stories, use imagination and create Missions Campaign (Storyline) with rewards. Easy. 

Edited May 21, 2018 by Wind

[John Jacob Astor]

6 minutes ago, Wind said:

I feel we will see more content as final pre release phase is approaching. They actually listened to very old suggestions which indicates one thing they are going through their big book of notes and suggestions. 

I am hoping.  Would really like to see it succeed.  But without accessibility by a broad range of players the game may be in a demographic blind alley.

The desktop / gaming laptop market is not getting much bigger.

[Wind]

7 minutes ago, Marcus Corvus said:

I am hoping.  Would really like to see it succeed.  But without accessibility by a broad range of players the game may be in a demographic blind alley.

The desktop / gaming laptop market is not getting much bigger.

I know, crypto is killing it and consoles are taking over big time. I mean think this, I already can use mouse and keyboard on PS4 in FPS shooters and that console is so affordable compared to a colapsed Video Card market where you have to pay $1000 just for the video card just to have good fps.  

If they don't bring video card prices down, we will see console market booming. 

Edited May 21, 2018 by Wind

[Nelsons Barrel]

For a game that is nearly 2 and a half years in active early access phase the game simply hasn't developed enough.

In the most positive future, we will see the same effects that does DAYZ standalone see currently. After many years and millions of sold copies its finaly in a stage of 'its playable', but the playernumbers are super low compared to the millions of sold copies. Now only NA suffers even more, because we dont have many servers with each a small pop you might fill up fully with what you have, no, we have ONE single pvp server that is never gonna fill up and the lack of players brings the biggest chunk of problems this game currently suffers.

[Jean Ribault]

It's humorous that this thread repeats itself on a continual basis.

Steam reviewers are only given the option of thumbs up or down, nothing else, and they are recommendations for buying the game or not buying the game, not necessarily game is good or bad.  If the game has good parts you can still say so and not recommend others to buy it, i.e. thumbs down.  There's obviously a reason why this game gets so many thumbs down, it's not because of a host of disgruntled people as someone above suggests.

Whoever said that the average player who enjoys a game won't write a Steam review is wrong.  If that were the case you wouldn't see games with hundreds of reviews that are positive or overwhelmingly positive.