Publishers are trying to exclude “review bombing” because they think it’s just social manipulation, while just casually ignoring that there are actual problems with the game. Review bombing used to be something else, but now be wary of it because it’s usually them just trying to discredit actual concerns.
You can have actual concerns without abusing the review function, though. If you don’t own and never planned to play the game and are “reviewing” it because something on the internet made you angry, then that just discredits the actual review platform as a whole.
Reviews should be an actual review, not a tweet reply. If you haven’t actually played the game, don’t review it.
Sure - problem is that publishers are not making that distinction and calling any mass negative review (like a bad release, or game crashing bug) “review bombing”.
How much of a problem is it really though?
I don’t like it but eh.
Publishers are trying to exclude “review bombing” because they think it’s just social manipulation, while just casually ignoring that there are actual problems with the game. Review bombing used to be something else, but now be wary of it because it’s usually them just trying to discredit actual concerns.
You can have actual concerns without abusing the review function, though. If you don’t own and never planned to play the game and are “reviewing” it because something on the internet made you angry, then that just discredits the actual review platform as a whole.
Reviews should be an actual review, not a tweet reply. If you haven’t actually played the game, don’t review it.
Sure - problem is that publishers are not making that distinction and calling any mass negative review (like a bad release, or game crashing bug) “review bombing”.
How much of a problem it is will vary by how much it impacts and upsets a customer. For you, sounds like it’s not that big of an issue.
But the fact that they pulled out the “review bombing” exscuse means that it qualifies as a problem to a significant percentage of customers.