• kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    So you think the ratings people are giving it reflect a balanced consideration of all the game’s aspects including story, gameplay, graphics, art direction, sound design, and the existence of microtransactions for things trivially earnable in normal gameplay?

    I’m all for people sending a giant middle finger to publishers putting in unnecessary cash grabs into games by hitting them where it hurts in reviews (which do impact lifetime sales numbers).

    But let’s not try to call this anything but what it is. Giving zero score reviews for something you don’t like existing in the game (whether gender options to microtransactions) irrespective of the quality of the game outside of those things existing is literally “review bombing.”

    It’s ok to be that, and it serves an important protest function in the industry, but let’s call a spade a spade here.

    • MrPoopbutt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      Think of it this way -

      If you have a marvelous feast laid out across the entire table, made of all your favorite foods, and right next to plate of pie is a bowl of cow shit - it doesn’t matter how good the pie is, you’re still going to smell the shit and it will ruin the experience.

    • conciselyverbose
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      The fact that there are microtransactions changes me from buying it to not buying it. Clearly a lot of people feel the same.

      But yes, the addition of monetization I’m not OK with absolutely can turn a 10/10 game to a 0/10 game. Quality isn’t an average. It’s the end product. A single flaw can very easily make a masterpiece into a pile of shit.

      It’s not possible for something that affects gameplay changing your review to be a review bomb under any circumstances.