• conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    “One single aspect”, especially cash grubbing, completely and absolutely removes any capacity to enjoy the game from most users.

    They’re not recommending that game because of that “one aspect” because that “one aspect” makes the game unplayable as far as they’re concerned.

    Ignoring massive deal breaking flaws to try to do some average of individual features is a far less honest or accurate review. A single issue, if it’s big enough, can change a game from the best thing anyone’s ever made into a complete and utter pile of shit. Games are not a sum of parts.

    • imecth@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      This isn’t massive flaws that suddenly appeared overnight, or the straw that broke the camel’s back, it’s purely because they want to get back at the developer. So yes, I think “review bombing” is accurate.

      Don’t get me wrong, i dislike enshittification as much as the next guy; but I don’t think a game’s review should be about what the devs posted on twitter yesterday.

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        It absolutely is a massive flaw that fundamentally changes their ability to enjoy the game.

        They changed the amount of cash they demand after the fact to take advantage of people addicted. Not giving it a negative review for such open abuse would be the unethical behavior. You have an obligation to do so. The ethics of monetization is what defines free to play games.