Steam Review Bombing

Status
Not open for further replies.
The reviews seem to be trending up a bit, it was at 39% positive the previous time i checked and it is now at 42%
 
I'm not surprised by this at all. I've been more and more concerned about the game throughout the fall as I saw more of it and it seems that my concern was valid. The age transitions seem to be half-baked and abusable. The UI is a mess. The maps are not good. Normal size maps are the maximum.

Also, the one thing I'll say about politics/review bombing and gaming is that if your game is good, people won't really care about some politics bolted on. Baldur's Gate 3 and Spiderman 2 are good examples. But if your game is mediocre or bad and it looks too political people will pile on. In extreme cases like Concord that can be fatal. Right now to me Civ 7 looks very mediocre, certainly way worse than the Civ 6 launch.
 
SammyKhalifa said:
Really? I guess it ran well but that's mostly because there was so much less to it.
Click to expand...
Civ 6 at launch felt on par with Civ 5 after its DLCs. They had at launch all of the features from Civ 5 like the World Congress, Espionage, etc. Districts were fun albeit unbalanced at first. No major technical issues that I recall.
 
ls612 said:
Civ 6 at launch felt on par with Civ 5 after its DLCs. They had at launch all of the features from Civ 5 like the World Congress, Espionage, etc. Districts were fun albeit unbalanced at first. No major technical issues that I recall.
Click to expand...
I don't really remember it all that well, but it certainly didn't have WC at launch. Probably a good thing based on how it turned out. :lol:
 
Mr Jon of Cheam said:
I don't really remember it all that well, but it certainly didn't have WC at launch. Probably a good thing based on how it turned out. :lol:
Click to expand...
This is what I get trying to remember everything in detail from over 8 years ago off the cuff. :lol:
 
ls612 said:
I'm not surprised by this at all. I've been more and more concerned about the game throughout the fall as I saw more of it and it seems that my concern was valid. The age transitions seem to be half-baked and abusable. The UI is a mess. The maps are not good. Normal size maps are the maximum.

Also, the one thing I'll say about politics/review bombing and gaming is that if your game is good, people won't really care about some politics bolted on. Baldur's Gate 3 and Spiderman 2 are good examples. But if your game is mediocre or bad and it looks too political people will pile on. In extreme cases like Concord that can be fatal. Right now to me Civ 7 looks very mediocre, certainly way worse than the Civ 6 launch.
Click to expand...
In the modern gaming environment, I think a delay is almost always preferable to a launch like this. The UI was universally criticized in the pre-release period. They should have just taken the time to fix it.
 
Sprenk said:
Their tone is the problem. It's not at all thoughtful in most cases. I posted a thread saying I liked the game and I got called a "****" :)

And the UI isn't as extremely bad as some of these folks are claiming. I'm having no trouble playing and enjoying the game. But "UI" seems to be the bludgeon some folks are using.
Click to expand...

So because you think there is no problem with the UI means others can’t? The UI is legitimately terrible

I’m sorry but if all the reviews were “go woke, go broke” I’d agree with you about review bombing but most of the reviews I see are legitimate concerns with the game
 
The blocky rectangle Archipelago or Continents or Continents Plus that doesn't even articulate what is so different between them is an absolute travesty.
That map generator is meme.

UI that does almost everything, but give enough information or scatters it or doubles itself in many places. Lack of enough information in Pedia or linking. Lines in Tech trees don't even line correctly. Late game it creates FPS drops.

In 8 years people will say it was a solid release.
 
SammyKhalifa said:
If I recall correctly (no guarantees) it worked pretty clean and well but was pretty bare bones.
Click to expand...
It certainly didn't feel barebones, which is why in my mind it had all of the big systems from Civ 5 at launch. In reality it only had most of the big systems from Civ 5 at launch.
 
ls612 said:
It certainly didn't feel barebones, which is why in my mind it had all of the big systems from Civ 5 at launch. In reality it only had most of the big systems from Civ 5 at launch.
Click to expand...
Though I far prefer Civ 5 to Civ 6 (2000 hours vs. 150) it is indisputable that the Civ 6 release was better than Civ 5. Civ 5 was a disaster at release.
 
And I suppose it's all relative. The last big release I was anxious for was Cities Skylines II. :thumbsdown:
 
Side-stepping the semantics of what constitutes review bombing I will say this - the overwhelming majority of them appear to be focused on the UI. Which is fine if you feel that strongly about it. But what bothers me is that the way Steam works is that it requires a thumb up or down and then codes the game on the ratio. So I suppose I am conflating the aggregate reaction with the aggregate evaluation of quality, and there is no universe where the Civ 7 is a 4/10 game. It just isn't. And I would stand by that even of the UI was never improved (which we know for certain it will be, the only question is how good of a state is the UI in when the killer moders on here get a crack at it). So to circle back to the thread topic - that may be while it feels like review bombing to some people, because while the UI is definitely worthy of criticism, even judged solely by the UI, it isn't a 4/10. I have tried (and abandoned) games based on the UI in the past and will again in the future, and this one just isn't *that* bad.
 
Last edited:
Graethyenne said:
Side-stepping the semantics of what constitutes review bombing I will say this - the overwhelming majority of them appear to be focused on the AI. Which is fine if you feel that strongly about it. But what bothers me is that the way Steam works is that it requires a thumb up or down and then codes the game on the ratio. So I suppose I am conflating the aggregate reaction with the aggregate evaluation of quality, and there is no universe where the Civ 7 is a 4/10 game. It just isn't. And I would stand by that even of the UI was never improved (which we know for certain it will be, the only question is how good of a state is the UI in when the killer moders on here get a crack at it). So to circle back to the thread topic - that may be while it feels like review bombing to some people, because while the UI is definitely worthy of criticism, even judged solely by the UI, it isn't a 4/10. I have tried (and abandoned) games based on the UI in the past and will again in the future, and this one just isn't *that* bad.
Click to expand...
If I was a developer I’d advocate for some sort of 5 point system with tags to highlight positive and negative issues. While I understand the justification for the “would recommend” and “would not recommend” system that exists, I think it’s outlived its usefulness. Something that allows for greater specificity is needed for the current environment in the gaming industry.
 
ls612 said:
Civ 6 at launch felt on par with Civ 5 after its DLCs. They had at launch all of the features from Civ 5 like the World Congress, Espionage, etc. Districts were fun albeit unbalanced at first. No major technical issues that I recall.
Click to expand...
civ 6 felt a little sanitized at launch, but definitely not incomplete. this is almost the opposite. full of vibes, but extremely incomplete.
 
Graethyenne said:
Side-stepping the semantics of what constitutes review bombing I will say this - the overwhelming majority of them appear to be focused on the AI. Which is fine if you feel that strongly about it. But what bothers me is that the way Steam works is that it requires a thumb up or down and then codes the game on the ratio. So I suppose I am conflating the aggregate reaction with the aggregate evaluation of quality, and there is no universe where the Civ 7 is a 4/10 game. It just isn't. And I would stand by that even of the UI was never improved (which we know for certain it will be, the only question is how good of a state is the UI in when the killer moders on here get a crack at it). So to circle back to the thread topic - that may be while it feels like review bombing to some people, because while the UI is definitely worthy of criticism, even judged solely by the UI, it isn't a 4/10. I have tried (and abandoned) games based on the UI in the past and will again in the future, and this one just isn't *that* bad.
Click to expand...

While I agree that steam review system is flawed, can we stop telling people that their subjective opinions about this legitimately terrible UI is wrong? This isn’t review bombing … The fact that you don’t think VII’s poor ui and lack of information is so bad doesn’t mean everyone else shares that opinion

also a 6-7/10 game (which is really what vii looks like to me) with an $80 price tag is still a disappointment and something many will not recommend
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Kyriakos
About Steam reviews (including ratio of positive/negative) for Civ7
Replies
6
Views
615
ThERat
ThERat
KMadCandy
Saved games access across PCs
Replies
1
Views
249
CliffCo
CliffCo
KayAU
  • Locked
Was there this much backlash for previous Civ games?
6 7 8
Replies
142
Views
8K
Nikolai II
Nikolai II
D
A promising mess and I'm loving it.
Replies
2
Views
538
Devilbound
D
L
Rumor about why the UI is the way it is.
2 3 4
Replies
74
Views
7K
Elhoim
Elhoim
Back
Top Bottom