It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
low rated
avatar
zheprime: When 14 of the top 15 "Most helpful" reviews are useless review bombs
avatar
Megabyte: You know you MIGHT have a point here, but for this.. this line right here. The number of reviews dont matter so much if the collective community has spoken by promoting them like that. Just saying.
"The community" consists of people going to the store page with the sole intention of review bombing and marking review bomb reviews as "helpful". How many people to you think actively goes to random store pages and looks through a bunch of reviews, reads through them all and marks them as helpful (because why would a bunch of people just head onto a store page and mark a bunch of reviews as helpful without reading them?). These people are united by their review bomb crusade. It's not a natural process at all.

This is why I think that review bomb reviews should be flagged as being automatically unhelpful. MAYBE allow one for visibility. MAYBE. But it'd be much better to have an actual review that mentions it as well and not just some shitpost "review" with a 1/5 score.

You're not helping your fellow gog users by review bombing.
avatar
kmanitou: Reviews are only useless if you don't read them or don't know how to read. Consumers don't have a lot of power, especially once they have spent their money, so this is only a natural reaction. Buying a product isn't supposed to be supporting Marxist indoctrination and "reeducation programs", funding alternate lifestyle agendas and promoting censorship, which are all things that the publishers have attached to the product.
avatar
Demitrix2k: what do you mean by Marxist indoctrination?
Maybe I should have said cultural Marxism.
If a publisher is willing to throw away a successful product and send the artists for the reprogramming of their broken brain, to avoid the backlash of having possibly hurt some members of a protected class, it shows you where they think they stand socially. "Assumed" White cishet toxic gamer better learn his place or be brought down.
avatar
kmanitou: Maybe I should have said cultural Marxism.
If a publisher is willing to throw away a successful product and send the artists for the reprogramming of their broken brain, to avoid the backlash of having possibly hurt some members of a protected class, it shows you where they think they stand socially. "Assumed" White cishet toxic gamer better learn his place or be brought down.
Cultural Marxism? All that google tells me is that its a phrase used by conspiracy theorists and people who like to blame the ills of the world on Jews.
This type of bullshit again.

/faceplam
avatar
Megabyte: You know you MIGHT have a point here, but for this.. this line right here. The number of reviews dont matter so much if the collective community has spoken by promoting them like that. Just saying.
avatar
zheprime: "The community" consists of people going to the store page with the sole intention of review bombing and marking review bomb reviews as "helpful". How many people to you think actively goes to random store pages and looks through a bunch of reviews, reads through them all and marks them as helpful (because why would a bunch of people just head onto a store page and mark a bunch of reviews as helpful without reading them?). These people are united by their review bomb crusade. It's not a natural process at all.

This is why I think that review bomb reviews should be flagged as being automatically unhelpful. MAYBE allow one for visibility. MAYBE. But it'd be much better to have an actual review that mentions it as well and not just some shitpost "review" with a 1/5 score.

You're not helping your fellow gog users by review bombing.
You know... lashing out like this cause you dont like that people agree with the sentiment (which in essence is WHY THEY ARE BEING MARKED AS HELPFUL) isnt going to help your fellow users either. What is is to make them aware of issues you have with said game.

That said if you want to ignore all that, Im sure you can find people streaming the game and see it for yourself to make up your mind. That might help YOU and those who dont care about this issue far more.

EDIT: actually I reccomend it over reading blurbs in a gamestore anyway to be quite honest. I use these blurbs myself SEPCIFICALLY to be alerted to bullets to dodge. If I want to know how good a game is, I would rather check it out myself... and reccomend anyone else do the same
Post edited August 23, 2019 by Megabyte
If I were one of the developers of Ion Fury, instead of changing my game to suit the fake rage, I would have trolled them a little bit by adding in "Butt Kickem" as a secondary character to pick from at start. Basically a Duke Nukem ripoff, complete with similar dooshy one-liners and misogyny. And if they kept crying I'd throw in a Lo Wang type character to boot. And if they still cry I'll add Leisure Suit Larry. lol
Post edited August 23, 2019 by scarasyte
avatar
kmanitou: Maybe I should have said cultural Marxism.
If a publisher is willing to throw away a successful product and send the artists for the reprogramming of their broken brain, to avoid the backlash of having possibly hurt some members of a protected class, it shows you where they think they stand socially. "Assumed" White cishet toxic gamer better learn his place or be brought down.
avatar
Demitrix2k: Cultural Marxism? All that google tells me is that its a phrase used by conspiracy theorists and people who like to blame the ills of the world on Jews.
I'm sure Google has your best interest at heart. Maybe Snopes could help you as well, and CNN is still going strong. Go, sailor!
"Conspiracy Theorists"
I've seen the mainstream media using that term to smear anyone and everyone who proves them wrong or even slightly disagrees with their narrative. Even if you bring proof of what you say, they call you that. And also notice how last month YouTube said they would "crack down on conspiracy theorists". I can smell the collusion a mile away, but they'll have you believe "It's a conspiracy theory to claim that we're calling people conspiracy theorists". lol

I know that was off topic but I had to say it.
Post edited August 24, 2019 by scarasyte
low rated
avatar
scarasyte: "Conspiracy Theorists"
I've seen the mainstream media using that term to smear anyone and everyone who proves them wrong or even slightly disagrees with their narrative. Even if you bring proof of what you say, they call you that. And also notice how last month YouTube said they would "crack down on conspiracy theorists". I can smell the collusion a mile away, but they'll have you believe "It's a conspiracy theory to claim that we're calling people conspiracy theorists". lol

I know that was off topic but I had to say it.
Dude, stop. Just stop. You sound like Alex Jones, and only discredit your cause.
high rated
avatar
scarasyte: "Conspiracy Theorists"
I've seen the mainstream media using that term to smear anyone and everyone who proves them wrong or even slightly disagrees with their narrative. Even if you bring proof of what you say, they call you that. And also notice how last month YouTube said they would "crack down on conspiracy theorists". I can smell the collusion a mile away, but they'll have you believe "It's a conspiracy theory to claim that we're calling people conspiracy theorists". lol

I know that was off topic but I had to say it.
avatar
RawSteelUT: Dude, stop. Just stop. You sound like Alex Jones, and only discredit your cause.
They're not wrong though and I don't see you proving otherwise.

If people feel it's the way to get their opinion on what these idiots did. I support it. It doesn't mean it's a bad game and I doubt anyone actually cares about those reviews. But people have the right to state their opinion on the situation.
high rated
avatar
RawSteelUT: Dude, stop. Just stop. You sound like Alex Jones, and only discredit your cause.
LMFAO... Wow just wow... You just validated my point.
avatar
kmanitou: I'm sure Google has your best interest at heart. Maybe Snopes could help you as well, and CNN is still going strong. Go, sailor!
You have a better definition?
avatar
kmanitou: I'm sure Google has your best interest at heart. Maybe Snopes could help you as well, and CNN is still going strong. Go, sailor!
avatar
Demitrix2k: You have a better definition?
AltaVista tells me that you're not worth the time, but you could always prove me wrong.
avatar
kmanitou: AltaVista tells me that you're not worth the time, but you could always prove me wrong.
Is that codeword for dodging the question?
avatar
kmanitou: AltaVista tells me that you're not worth the time, but you could always prove me wrong.
avatar
Demitrix2k: Is that codeword for dodging the question?
What does Google tell you about that?