It’s either a completely truthful breakdown about what makes the game not worth it, or a wackadoodle comment about the dumbest thing possible.
this post was submitted on 07 May 2025
482 points (96.9% liked)
Gaming
4986 readers
783 users here now
!gaming is a community for gaming noobs through gaming aficionados. Unlike !games, we don’t take ourselves quite as serious. Shitposts and memes are welcome.
Our Rules:
1. Keep it civil.
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only.
2. No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia or any other flavor of bigotry.
I should not need to explain this one.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Try not to repost anything posted within the past month.
Beyond that, go for it. Not everyone is on every site all the time.
Logo uses joystick by liftarn
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
At 4,500 hours, I would say the majority would be “it used to be great until the devs did X”
The joke ones with thousand of hours are just "Eh, not that fun"
Not 4500 hours but I made sure to leave one of those about the sudden block of Linux players in GTA Online.
"game went woke"
About as stupid as "toxic players"
or as I see in the case of GW2, the game has always been "woke", but a handful of players manage to not run into any of the LGBT NPCs for hundreds of hours, then freak out when they do 😅
I've read so many negative reviews that only say "bodytype A and B" that I'm running out of steam points to gift them clown awards.
Edit: Thanks for letting me know I shouldn't give those awards, since it's more of a reward for them. I'll stop.
I will say I kind of get annoyed at this. Not really on principle because I am all for inclusivity but on some games it's legitimately hard to tell which one I'm picking and I don't personally want my character to be trans (male voice, female body) in most games. In Avowed the character selection screen has your character in clothing that kind of obscures the body shape and I was like "are there boobs on this one? I can't actually tell." I'm apparently bad enough at this where I usually have to use the clothing off button if there is one to conclusively tell the difference. Helldivers 2's "Brawny" and "Lean" are pretty good but those characters are in heavy armor and either one could plausibly be either biological sex. Baldurs Gate 3 uses the terms "masc" and "femme" which is less confusing but that game also lets you do any combo of muscles, voice, titties, and genetalia you want, which kind of eliminates the whole confusion in the first place since it's all customizable. I totally get not wanting to label things but I am dumb and just want to know what I'm picking.
My annoyance with the Oblivion remaster is more that, from what I've read, this "body type A/B" change does not make a material difference inside the game, as NPCs still refer to your character as male/female. As a trans person my opinion is, either meaningfully rework how gender is handled in the game or just leave it alone, players know what to expect when playing an older game. This UI-level change actually just muddles player expectations.
That's just lazy tbh. Kind of the worst of both worlds.
Oh yeah, you have a good point. For example, unlike games like bg3 and cyberpunk (to some extent), some games use "body type" but your character is still recognized as either male or female depending on which you choose, so there's no point in NOT using "male or female".
My issue is that bodies are much more diverse than "male/female". The most common form of sex confirmation surgery (IIRC) is cis men having breast tissue removed. (Assuming clothing isn't baggy and hiding them) if you can't tell the difference then there isn't a big enough difference for you to care, and both of them cover some of both birth gender's typical body forms.
Basically, male/female isn't accurate and can be an issue with some players. A/B isn't helpful but at least isn't problematic.
If you can't tell does it really matter if you accidentally use voice 1 with body type 2? (I don't really see why it would but I realize that my experience is likely quite different)
As an enby I personally do prefer the body type being labelled by a number or letter rather than a gender when I try to make a character I can identify with. My favourite is to have a body with sliders for body shape options but that isn't viable for a lot of games and does make it difficult to make good looking characters.
Also in Baldur's Gate 3 the body types are labeled 1 and 2 (+3 and 4 for those with strong/not strong variants) It's only the disguise menu (and I believe the game files) that call it masc/femme.
Well like I don't want to get surprised if in the game I take my armor or clothes off and there are boobs there, especially in games where there's not an option to change later
load more comments
(2 replies)
sorry to say, but by awarding them, you're part of the problem by rewarding bad behaviour :|
(I hate the award system, it made the troll reviews problem so much worse)
Giving clown awards gives them Steam points. It encourages people to leave those type of shitty comments on purpose.
What do they mean by that? Is it a complaint about limited character customization or is it something as stupid as the character model with breasts doesn't forcibly make you a woman and vice versa? Edit: Based on other comments I'll assume that it's the second one.
I'll admit to being someone who dislikes most Larian games (DoS, BG3). I've written reviews from the perspective of a casual gamer who finds overly complicated or mechanically overwhelming games to simply be too much. You say those things here and you get destroying by the hivemind, but it's fair for someone to say "I didn't like this game for the following reasons." Not all players are looking for the same thing.
I like to leave compliments about the games as well, because there are some great storytellers or unique things about games that should be celebrated even if you didn't like the final product.
load more comments
(2 replies)
You always have the hardcore players who make some obscure point the heart of every discussion. "This game is trash! They nerfed magic flummox attacks from +6 to +5! Who is the idiot who makes these decisions!? This is going to kill the game."
2/5 just drove past
Haha yea I always check out the negative reviews first - either they quickly show that I'd be wasting my time with the game, or the negatives they highlight are actually neutral or positive for me, either way I generally find them better value/time than positive reviews. (Especially when a significant portion of positive reviews are memes, award-begging copypasta, or "best game ever" with no further details.)
I do the same. If the negative reviews highlight a consistent issue that I have an issue with and hasn't been fixed, then I doubt I'll be buying the product. Doesn't have to be distinct to steam, either
If Steam would let people leave positive reviews without a comment there would be fewer low value comments.
I think Valve severely escalated the problem when they introduced the award system. Now people are extra motivated to cash in a quick laugh, or provoke outrage for the Clown awards. What boggles my mind the most is that hundreds of people give awards to the same copypaste comments that appear under every major game. I sometimes try to report the reviews of the spammiest accounts, but Valve is really hands-off with their moderation. At the end of the day they profit from the points system, and as always, user experience takes a firm second seat to profits :/
if there's a "funny" react option there should ALSO be a 'display negative, but be positive' option because joke reviews harm the view of amazing games SO MUCH
fnaf1 has 96% positive reviews where nearly half of the negative ones are just shitposts
https://steamcommunity.com/app/319510/negativereviews/?browsefilter=toprated&snr=1_5_100010_
Counterpoint. That game deserves a shitload more bad reviews. But people that understand what bad games are, don't play it, and thus don't review it.
And before you start, no, I don't have to eat shit to know it tastes bad.
The original fnaf isn't that bad, the community is.
It's not an amazing game, and it's not a good horror game, but it's fun for a few hours.
I'll disagree with your disagreement lol
I think it is a good horror game, at least for the first playthrough. (Though most horror games aren't good for replayability)
You directly control your fate and the first two nights you hardly have to do anything which lead to you micro analyzing everything, terrifying yourself even if there's not a real threat, which means in the later nights when there ARE threats it actually terrifies the shit out of you. Add the "holy FUCK" feeling of foxy running made my soul fall out of my socks.
that being said though replayability is mid and when the whole series is just the same game over and over but different it loses its charm. Also the community is really insane which is the reason I didn't play it until wayyy after the hype died down.
no, I don't have to eat shit to know it tastes bad.
So you wouldn't bothering reading the reviews of people who ate shit either.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's too bad steam doesn't have a "mixed" review option.
Like Fallout4. It's terrible. Bad story. bad gameplay. Buggy. But I still sometimes mod it the fuck up and play anyway, because I want a kind of stupid stealth shooter or to stomp around in power armor. So I don't really recommend it, but you could do worse.
IMO this is a good thing. With a "mixed" option, it's hard to know where the borders are for each person. Say you rate a game on a scale of 0-100 - is "mixed" 30-70, or 25-75, or 20-80, or anything else?
AFAIK with surveys etc. there's also a bias towards the "middle" option. By not giving one, you force people to think harder about their opinion, which in turn makes the rating more useful.
Hmmm I see your point. I guess I'll just keep giving "recommend / don't recommend" reviews and writing the details with words.
I wish it used a 5 star system instead of binary yes/no. I don't like that "yeah, it's a decent game" and "holy shit this game will change how you see games going forward" get weighed the same. A game that everyone kinda likes will have a similar rating to a game everyone loves.
Would also be nice if they had a "shows promise but it isn't quite there yet". Or a way of using ratings to encourage devs to address issues, and maybe a mechanism where certain issues can be tied to a review and then the dev can mark the issue as "addressed" to make those reviews expire with a notice to the user that the game might be much better for them now. It sucks to see a game with a bunch of negative reviews addressing an issue that was since fixed.
This game I had on my wishlist came out recently. All 12 reviews are negative. Ouch. I'm thinking I shouldn't play it.
There's only 12 reviews, you get 2 hours within 2 weeks of buying to return the game. There's no downsides for you to try it
True, but the game is a sequel and I didn't really like the first one. I was hoping the sequel would be better. It seems not.
Which game?
It's a horror game called Dollhouse. The sequel is called Dollhouse: Behind the Broken Mirror.
You won't know until you try it. Don't pay attention to what others say. I made this mistake countless times with games then when I eventually played them, I loved them. Give it a go. If you don't like it, refund it.
Perhaps I'll give it a try. I'd have to finish the first one first.
The people who are first to review are those that strobgly dislike it and closed it early (or with some point to make). Everybody that strongly likes it is busy enjoying it and won't review until they take a break or are done.
Give it time and see the reviews in a couple days.
Bloom and Rage is a perfect example of this. It’s a complete horrible garbage mess of soulless characters, terrible voice acting, horrible sound mixing, and a trash story and somehow it’s very positive. There are some negative, sane comments. I loved Life is Strange 1, but hooo boy is Bloom and Rage bad. It’s about a band and the music is not even music. It’s very funny, though.
Recently i played Xenoblade Chronicles 2 in Switch, because XC3 was very good and XC1 was even better. So i heard the community praising it, and i gave it a try. Man i hate this game so much, i really had years to play something just only to finish the story. This is the reason to always check both sides.
I liked all of them. What did you hate about 2?
- Navigation was frustrating bad.
- the mechanics until the 3/4 of the game were slow and not that fun.
- dialogs felt bad and unfinished, also english VA was really bad.
- the UI in general was bad.
- the story felt shallow and the characters didn't grow. Especially Rex felt as one of the worst protagonists.
- Gatcha mechanic ...
- oversexualization of almost all female blades.
- i won all boss fights, but the cutscenes kept showing that i was losing
- i fought the last boss maybe 4 or 5 times.
- i didn't care for the world, because of the way that the game introduced it to me.
And many more. In general felt as an unfinished game, that they released just to hit the date. I don't know how it has 83 metacritic score..
Definitely agree on gacha and oversexualization. I played with Japanese audio, so can't comment on English VA. The rest I didn't have an issue with, but I can see why someone else would.
I always make a point to at least look at a few of them. Sometimes it's ragebait, but there have been a few times where the review has actually mentioned something that was a deal breaker for me.
I get a lot of good information from bad reviews, just by having a bit of introspection.
“This game is too easy!!”
Oh, that’s okay, I was looking for something easier.
“Two body types!!”
Oh, wow, so the only people that hate it are bigots.
“If you die once to the first boss, then it kneecaps your stats and you get no healing items for half the game.”
Wait, what…? But everyone else loves the game. Is this true?
“lol it’s fine, only scrubs die to the first boss, if you do just restart the 3-hour intro.”
Are these reviewers paid!? No thanks.
view more: next ›