- cross-posted to:
- games@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- games@lemmit.online
You must log in or register to comment.
Hot take: if people have a legitimate opinion that needing to sign up for an Epic account is something that they didn’t anticipate / don’t like / don’t want to do, then it is a fair and valid review and not “review bombing”.
This is a cold take, honestly. Review bombing is a term that attempts to discredit valid criticism. This is valid criticism.
It’s sure as hell a reason I won’t consider playing it.
“Review bomb” aka getting bad reviews.
Yeah, I wanted to ask about that. Is it “review bombing” if the complaints are legitimate? I thought review bombing was mass downvoting a game for reasons unrelated to the game, or for otherwise unreasonable reasons.
Who decides if reasons are legitimate or unreasonable? You may like something about a game that other won’t and vice versa. Every customer has the right to complain and give a bad review just as to praise and give good review. It’s up to the individual. There’s no such thing as “review bombing”, it’s a game/movie/whatever simply getting bad reviews and producer/media trying to discredit those reviews.
I am tempted to agree with you. I could see some theoretical scenario where some influencer with a large following convinces them to all review something poorly just because they say so. If that happened, I think it would be legitimate to call it review bombing. I don’t think it’s likely, mind you, that someone could convince a large enough group of people to do that without a valid reason. But it could theoretically happen.
Genuinely curious, what makes this a legitimate complaint? Because the next complaint will be that it doesn’t have cross play. Since Epic provides this service for free, that’s why games implement EOS. I get the sense it’s a kneejerk reaction to the word “Epic” rather than something like Sony not being available in their country.
Hm, fair point. I personally hate external accounts because it makes your ownership of your purchase that little bit more tenuous. Your continued access is now contingent on Valve remaining extant and good, Epic remaining extant and… tolerable, and the game’s servers, assuming EFD has those and offers no local / P2P option. Admittedly if that last is the case, you would hope if things fell through with Epic that the publishers would come up with some other solution, but I know it took a LONG time for most games that straddled the Steam+GFWL boundary to become playable again after GFLW died. And I’m not sure if they all did.
Yeah, I think the real thing worthy of review bombing is no local or direct IP substitute, but that’s also unfortunately most multiplayer games these days. No matter what, if you want cross play, someone has to pay for it, and Epic is willing to foot the bill. Plus, Valve’s multiplayer servers, if I had to bet, have less uptime, so Epic might be an improvement.
I definitely agree on the lack of local / direct connection options.
At time of writing, the 24-hour Steam player peak for *EDF 6 *was 17,690, over twice that achieved by *Earth Defense Force 5 *(which stands at 8,416). Other *Earth Defense Force *games can’t hold a candle to those numbers.
Did somebody try to game the free market and can’t handle the backlash for their greedy motives?
Wah wahhh wahhhhh, cry harder. I’m gonna go buy this game just to leave a negative review for the production company’s greed, then I’ll return it.
