Corruption in Video Game Reviews? > https://www.rockpap

>>384572850
Considering how a lot of Steam reviews are just chucklefucks that think they are funny and write unhelpful quotes and smart-assery like /v/ he's not wrong with
>Nor are Steam reviews "research"
other than the port/bug/performance whining.

The only steam reviews that matter are the thumbs down since they are only ones that give objective reviews while not shitting on the game completely. A majority of steam reviews are just epic memers trying to outfunny each other

>>384572850
Why would you read reviews as a part of your own review process?
It makes no sense.

>>384574940
Makes sense if you found some bug, or if you're having performance issues and check if you're the only one with it, or it's a widespread issue.

>>384574940
>>384575078

Well, I mean in this case it was the amount of complaints about the lack of support / development for the previous two games.

While I wouldn't say that Steam reviews qualify as "official" reviews like >>384573821 pointed out, the reception of the previous games and common issues had by people who purchased them DOES seem relevant when reviewing . . .

I mean, he wasn't even reviewing an actual game, but the Kickstarter of the game.

It just seemed sketchy to me.

>>384572850
Well like 95% of Steam reviews are "it's good/shit/memes" or "Hahaha got fucked in the ass 10/10 would get fucked again".

You don't have to make a case to ignore those. That's just something people expect you to ignore. If anything, bringing it up is what makes it suspicious. Like you think you should but you're making a case not to.

Because you know the Steam reviews are right. And that's terrifying.