Steam Reviews

[Poojam]

Did I miss something? There were a massive burst of positive reviews in the last week starting on June 29th. 690 positive reviews on June 29th, 512 June 30th....

 

I see they dropped the price to $8.49. A lot of them are by players with less than 20 hours in-game, and in broken english. Are these people rating the same game we've been playing for the last 6 months or are these cross-platform reviews and it's diluted by console players?

 

So weird that the reviews will hover around 55% month-over-month for 6 months, and then they cut the price to a 1/3rd and apparently 88% of people like it.

[OzHawkeye]

There was a Steam incentive sale on that rewarded players for making game reviews. Hence (in large part, I suspect), the burst of extra reviews 7Days (and other games) have received.

[Poojam]

There was a Steam incentive sale on that rewarded players for making game reviews. Hence (in large part, I suspect), the burst of extra reviews 7Days (and other games) have received.

 

Interesting. I have never heard of anything like that being done by Steam before. Quite the contrary, it seems they have been having problems controlling review bombing (both positive and negative). Doesn't make sense to me that they would buy a review by issuing a reward of some sort.

[Roland]

Interesting. I have never heard of anything like that being done by Steam before. Quite the contrary, it seems they have been having problems controlling review bombing (both positive and negative). Doesn't make sense to me that they would buy a review by issuing a reward of some sort.

 

Its nothing really different than their badge incentive program. You earn points towards a steam badge by submitting a review among doing other things like trading digital cards etc. Its been that way for years. There is no distinction between leaving a positive vs negative review. The incentive is simply to encourage gamers to utilize the review function of steam.

 

Also, it has been known for the past six months that most players who play A17 without any knowledge of A16 find it enjoyable and fun in its own right. Most of the negativity has been from those who did not like the changes.

[RipClaw]

Also, it has been known for the past six months that most players who play A17 without any knowledge of A16 find it enjoyable and fun in its own right. Most of the negativity has been from those who did not like the changes.

 

These new players will then have to decide in future versions whether they like the changes or not. For example, there is currently no infection in A17.4. Infections could be therefore a big topic for players who started with A17.4.

[Viktoriusiii]

Its nothing really different than their badge incentive program. You earn points towards a steam badge by submitting a review among doing other things like trading digital cards etc. Its been that way for years. There is no distinction between leaving a positive vs negative review. The incentive is simply to encourage gamers to utilize the review function of steam.

 

Also, it has been known for the past six months that most players who play A17 without any knowledge of A16 find it enjoyable and fun in its own right. Most of the negativity has been from those who did not like the changes.

 

Nobody said that it was a bad game Roland.

It was a massive step back. But since A16 was such a great game, even a big step backwards means its still one of the greatest survival sandboxes.

 

New players liking it is like having the perfect sandwich. Now someone puts extra majo on top, it is now more soggy, the taste is overshadowed my majo, but it still tastes good. Those who never tasted the old one will love it still.

 

 

And yes to dislike a step in the wrong direction is not "review bombing" Especially if the devs for 6 months didnt even acknowledge that their step was a bad one. (now MM at least said that A17 was now what it should have been, I don't expect more)

 

So this is not really news This always happens on sales (which is why the 30% like on release was so staggering, because it WAS salesday and the negative reviews still outweighed the positives... but nobody believed me) new players get their hands on it for a reduced price and like it and upvote it. Doesn't mean suddenly everybody is okay with A17

Just means they never knew greatness

Theres a saying in germany "was ich nicht weiأŸ macht mich nicht heiأŸ" which is only roughly translated into the english "What the eye does not see, the heart does not grieve over." this is definatly the case here ^^

[Roland]

These new players will then have to decide in future versions whether they like the changes or not. For example, there is currently no infection in A17.4. Infections could be therefore a big topic for players who started with A17.4.

 

Absolutely. Every alpha there are those who are unhappy with the changes and believe that the previous alpha was the pinnacle of the game. I already suspect the hot topics of A18....

[Poojam]

Absolutely. Every alpha there are those who are unhappy with the changes and believe that the previous alpha was the pinnacle of the game. I already suspect the hot topics of A18....

 

I can see how from your chair it would be easy to generalize. Started in A9. The fun peaked around A11 just before they did the first Unity rebuild (A13 was it?) I have enjoyed elements of the last 4 or 5 alphas, and dismayed over the poor implementation of XP/specialization/character growth models.

 

They aren't so bad if you play the game as a Fallout style RPG. But for years, we used to be able to enjoy the game in a large playerbase server and PVP environment. It was just that it was not really designed FOR it, and it was mediocre in those combat elements. That's okay though, and a lot of players and servers were really growing around the idea of a basically Minecraft for adults with better PVP. But in recent incarnations, the gameplay systems have been designed in ways that destroy the semblance of balance and it makes the PVP elements unmanagaeable. Nevermind the fact that they seem to specifically want to destroy the multiplayer playerbase (ahem, 1 land claim block... really?).

[Roland]

I can see how from your chair it would be easy to generalize. Started in A9. The fun peaked around A11 just before they did the first Unity rebuild (A13 was it?) I have enjoyed elements of the last 4 or 5 alphas, and dismayed over the poor implementation of XP/specialization/character growth models.

 

There was plenty of heat and ranting about A11 being a step backward from A10. I'm not generalizing when I say that every major release results in unhappy feedback about the changes. A16 was around for so long that there were many who never knew the game before it had LBD components so for them LBD seemed to be central to the game. I can understand why there was such a large backlash to that change. There will be similar reactions to A18 by those who only knew A17 but the pool of those players will be much smaller than what accumulated after 1.5 years of A16.

[Viktoriusiii]

Absolutely. Every alpha there are those who are unhappy with the changes and believe that the previous alpha was the pinnacle of the game. I already suspect the hot topics of A18....

 

 

DO I need to explain statistics to you or can I leave it at that?

 

If you need it:

 

 

Every iteration before A17 was overwhelmingly positive, with slight bumps at release.

Every sale, loads of new players came in and loved the game (thats those massive spikes)

But for A17 it only got positive reviews in november (when the superfans got access to the beta and everyone was excited (as predicted) about the changes. AS SOON as the real thing hit it went to ~50% total (31% in the last two weeks was the lowest point) and this was even though there was a wintersale and a humble bundle with 7d2d in it.

 

After 17 hit, the reviews never really recovered. Only when all the bugs were fixed, levelgates were mostly removed and so many other issues were fixed did a sale help the reviews. Those reviews are of totally new players (< 30 hours), which goes in line with previous "spikes" in ratings.

 

So while yes there are people that do critizise new iterations (I am one of them, since I want this game to be great and I am great at spotting flaws in gamedesign, so why not try and help, even if I will be disliked) it never really impacted reviews, since they never broke the game this badly. No not even the "black sheep" of A13 (which I personally never had an issue with except that I couldnt play online because EAC kicked me 24/7) had any backlash even roughly comparable to this.

 

[Poojam]

Don't get me wrong. I'm happy to see a bunch of new reviews. More noobs for the slaughter.

[Roland]

Don't get me wrong. I'm happy to see a bunch of new reviews. More noobs for the slaughter.

 

It’s very good news for anyone interested in the success of the game and seeing an increase to the player base....even if the ulterior motive is more targets.

[Feycat]

Nobody said that it was a bad game Roland.

It was a massive step back. But since A16 was such a great game, even a big step backwards means its still one of the greatest survival sandboxes.

 

New players liking it is like having the perfect sandwich. Now someone puts extra majo on top, it is now more soggy, the taste is overshadowed my majo, but it still tastes good. Those who never tasted the old one will love it still.

 

As usual, your condescending insistence that you know what's good/bad for the game and your opinion is The Answer is tired.

 

I've got over 1k hours. I've been playing since A9. I like 17 better than 16 by a lot, and so does my whole playgroup.

 

"They never know greatness," lol you're so extra.

[hotpoon]

No not even the "black sheep" of A13 (which I personally never had an issue with except that I couldnt play online because EAC kicked me 24/7) had any backlash even roughly comparable to this.

 

Oh man, I forgot about the EAC kicks in A13. That used to grate my tits.

 

I'm sure OzHawkeye is right about the Steam thing. As soon as I saw you could increase your max points in the Steam grand prix by submitting a review, I thought 'Oh boy, here comes a bunch of useless reviews', and sure enough, I've been noticing my friends posting one liner reviews on arb games. Really stupid on Steam's part. Def. not the way to get quality reviews.

[meganoth]

Oh man, I forgot about the EAC kicks in A13. That used to grate my tits.

 

I'm sure OzHawkeye is right about the Steam thing. As soon as I saw you could increase your max points in the Steam grand prix by submitting a review, I thought 'Oh boy, here comes a bunch of useless reviews', and sure enough, I've been noticing my friends posting one liner reviews on arb games. Really stupid on Steam's part. Def. not the way to get quality reviews.

 

You expect quality reviews from steam? The only somewhat reliable thing you get out of 95% of all steam reviews is a thumbs up or down. And even though the new "reviewers" are just doing it for the steam points they can be expected to mostly pick the right thumb (except for those that haven't even played the game or don't understand that a thumbs up is not required to get a point)

[Viktoriusiii]

You expect quality reviews from steam? The only somewhat reliable thing you get out of 95% of all steam reviews is a thumbs up or down. And even though the new "reviewers" are just doing it for the steam points they can be expected to mostly pick the right thumb (except for those that haven't even played the game or don't understand that a thumbs up is not required to get a point)

 

And this is someone who has absolutely no idea how any of this works.

Reviews are reliable. Gaming sites are paid. Individual experiences and interests vary.

the only way to get a feel of the quality of a game are nonbiased reviews. That doesn't mean you will/wont enjoy it, obviously.

But it is the best way to quickly get to know the concept, and the flaws of the game, without watching 3hours of lets plays.

 

And WHO IN THE WORLD thinks that ppl go around leaving negative reviews for games they didn't dislike?

Are you that kind of person?

Because ALL my games have shot up (gradually declining obviously the higher the reviews are already from 70-85; 80-90; 90-95;95-97;)

 

Thank you for making me check. So my argument was assuming that new players liked it. And EVEN THAT was wrong xD

Its just that the steamevent boosted EVERY game by 5-20% in ratings xD

I love that I was actually giving 7d2d too much credit and still get hate for it

Its almost as if certain people dislike beeing told that something they like is not the best it could be.

 

 

Again: 7d2d is a great game.

A17 is a step back from A16 when looking at gamedesign (less varied gameplay, less meaningfull choices, less immersion)

A17 is a step back from A16 when looking at the overall opinion of players (reviews beeing in the 50% bracket isnt good.)

 

THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN'T ENJOY IT. IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU CAN'T ENJOY IT MORE THAT A16.

There are people that like to eat meat raw. There are people that like Atlas. And that is okay.

That doesnt make criticism invalid.

How hard is that to grasp.

 

And just if you think I'm just hating:

I actually enjoy A17 with rolmod. Because it fixes the most annoying gamedesign mistakes.

So yeah. There you go. I can talk negatively about a game I enjoy if I see its flaws. What a shocker.

[art1336]

You expect quality reviews from steam? The only somewhat reliable thing you get out of 95% of all steam reviews is a thumbs up or down. And even though the new "reviewers" are just doing it for the steam points they can be expected to mostly pick the right thumb (except for those that haven't even played the game or don't understand that a thumbs up is not required to get a point)

 

Try my steam review. I state how many thousands of hours I have played, I stated things I like, things I dislike, and it is as reliable an iteration of my opinion as, well, it's my opinion, so it is the only reliable iteration of my opinion.

 

What I like about reading reviews, especially from steam, is you can learn things. Such as TFP incentivizes people to leave reviews. You get rewarded for it. So you see people with less than one hundred hours saying it's great. Then everyone with 2000+ hours stating what they dislike about things. You can also see that, prior to a17, the reviews would bounce back. New alpha drops, ton of bugs, bad reviews. Alpha gets cleaned up, reviews get better, rinse and repeat.

The difference is that with 17 things haven't recovered.

By the way, could you give your source data for ninety five percent of all steam reviews is a thumbs up or down?

[Roland]

 

What I like about reading reviews, especially from steam, is you can learn things. Such as TFP incentivizes people to leave reviews. You get rewarded for it.

 

It’s Valve incentivizing reviews. TFP has no review incentive program.

 

By the way, could you give your source data for ninety five percent of all steam reviews is a thumbs up or down?

 

IKR...My source tells me it’s 100%

 

(You misrepresented what he said)

[Viktoriusiii]

By the way, could you give your source data for ninety five percent of all steam reviews is a thumbs up or down?

 

and basicially none of those had a recent update.

I hope that is enough. Especially the last one. Even bad games get the thumbs up because why not?

 

since this forum made it impossible to read here the better version:

https://www.bilder-upload.eu/bild-6ad7ca-1562350299.png.html

[meganoth]

<lots>

 

What has your tirade to do with what I posted?

 

Try my steam review. I state how many thousands of hours I have played, I stated things I like, things I dislike, and it is as reliable an iteration of my opinion as, well, it's my opinion, so it is the only reliable iteration of my opinion.

 

Without reading your review I firmly believe it is in the 5% bracket, even if I might be of a different opinion about a lot of your points there.

 

By the way, could you give your source data for ninety five percent of all steam reviews is a thumbs up or down?

 

My point was that the majority of steam reviews is not what you would call a quality review (i.e. a dissection of good and bad points of the game from which you could interfere whether you would rate the game good or bad as well). Many reviews are single sentences of the type "Boring game", "Didn't like it", "Great game", "Couldn't stop playing"...., which, if you look closely, is just embellishment for a thumbs down or thumbs up. (Luckily steam has users vote for helpful reviews, so you tend to see the few better reviews often on the first page).

 

So while I don't expect quality reviews to come out of the grand prix, there were mostly no quality reviews before, just thumbs (again, with the exception of a few who expend some effort to really make a review)

[Viktoriusiii]

What has your tirade to do with what I posted?

 

 

My point was that the majority of steam reviews is not what you would call a quality review (i.e. a dissection of good and bad points of the game from which you could interfere whether you would rate the game good or bad as well). Many reviews are single sentences of the type "Boring game", "Didn't like it", "Great game", "Couldn't stop playing"...., which, if you look closely, is just embellishment for a thumbs down or thumbs up. (Luckily steam has users vote for helpful reviews, so you tend to see the few better reviews often on the first page).

 

Do you not automaticially sort by "most helpfull"?

Because those are generally not just one sentence reviews.

That is what I meant. Reviews on steam are often very helpfull and the overall rating gives you an overview of opinions that you can not gather by watching letsplayers (mostly fans of the game) or reviewers (often paid/given the game/still one person)

 

That was my point.

[asmosnuts]

Incentivized reviews help no one and steam is a terrible place to look for an honest review. A few minutes online can get you all the balanced reviews you need wthout all the fanboy/hate filled garbage.

The game is not great atm (my opinion) and is almost like a shooter on rails, go into a poi you know where the mobs are , where that ceilings gonna collapse which cupboard yadda yadda yadda. Outside is bleak and lonely without any real incentive to exploration and even 16k maps are small when you have the motorbike. Give us back our random hordes that show up at exactly the wrong time, populate maps and put the agoraphobic zombies to rest or at least randomize where they will be in a poi!

[CHangWOlf]

7 Days to Die Reviews

 

Just out of curiosity, what happened to the reviews all of a sudden? Looking back 2 months ago, the reviews were mixed, and then I come back shortly and somehow they've became very positive. Is there anything that was added in the last two months that made the game that much better?

[KingSlayerGM]

https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?121013-Steam-Reviews

 

 

merged. --Roland

[artistichippie]

Just out of curiosity, what happened to the reviews all of a sudden? Looking back 2 months ago, the reviews were mixed, and then I come back shortly and somehow they've became very positive. Is there anything that was added in the last two months that made the game that much better?

 

Maybe more people are just moving from the console version (such as myself. Even though I only meet the Minimum requirements, I am liking pc much more just because of all they added in comparison) And since more people who liked the game are getting it again for PC and putting their positive review on steam, which would move it from "mixed" to "positive"