• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Metacritic has pledged to introduce stricter moderation after “abusive and disrespectful" Horizon: Forbidden West DLC review bombing this weekend.

Draugoth

Gold Member
Horizon-2-1280x720.jpg

Popular review aggregation site Metacritic has pledged to introduce stricter moderation, after Sony’s Horizon: Forbidden West Burning Shores DLC was review bombed by users.

A New plot point seeming inspired many users to give the game a critical rating on the site, with many still-live comments criticising developer Guerrilla’s decision to add the romance option.

“Visually look awesome, but what about storytelling? Aloy lesbian! What are you doing Sony & Guerilla really? Stop doing it with your characters,” reads one user review.

“Hey Sony PlayStation, this is enough,” reads another. “You must see a solution to the issue of the agenda. We are in a world of entertainment, not in a world full of deviant and misguided ideas. ”

In response to the review bombing, Metacritic and Fandom told Eurogamer they were aware of the “abusive and disrespectful reviews of Horizon Forbidden West Burning Shores,” and claimed they were “currently evolving our processes and tools to introduce stricter moderation in the coming months.”

“Fandom is a place of belonging for all fans and we take online trust and safety very seriously across all our sites including Metacritic,” the statement reads.

“Metacritic is aware of the abusive and disrespectful reviews of Horizon Forbidden West Burning Shores and we have a moderation system in place to track violations of our terms of use.

“Our team reviews each and every report of abuse (including but not limited to racist, sexist, homophobic, insults to other users, etc) and if violations occur, the reviews are removed. We are currently evolving our processes and tools to introduce stricter moderation in the coming months.”
 
I'm surprised it took them this long to incorporate this moderation. Review bombing on Metacritic has been going on for years and it's one of the reasons why people turned to RottenTomatoes for movie reviews as the idiots are annoying. Hopefully Steam will implement something similar, but that would mean they'd have to get off their asses and do some work.
 

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
Just delete user reviews altogether. Utterly and completely useless. Have a thumbs up/down and leave it at that if you must.
Steam reviews are far better and a great example of user reviews. i trust steam's reviews far more than any paid critic.

Metacritic's lack of moderation and basically allowing people who didn't even play the game to make a review is why the user reivews are so damn toxic. They should force you to connect a Playstation/Nintendo/Xbox/Steam account and ensure you've played it for more than 30 minutes before you write a user review on any game
 

Black_Stride

do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
Right.

Console warriors have been using User Reviews for years....literally years.
Whenever you see an exclusive Xbox/Playstation game with pretty much any 0/10 review......quickly look at those users other reviews.....you will see a trend quickly.
 

Saber

Gold Member
Just delete user reviews altogether. Utterly and completely useless. Have a thumbs up/down and leave it at that if you must.

That won't do because theres definitively people there who have valid reasons for giving that score, even to the point to explain the game in details.
Steam reviews also have reviews which are useless, but also people who give s specific and well contructed context for not liking a game.

"Review bombs" aways existed. Aways. It's not news, it's only a thing when it has strange themes behind it and when it's convenience for the fanboys.
What they need to do is filter the people who have valid concerns, are giving valid criticism or have good reputation/well behaved and delete the ones who they investigate to be trolls, console war fanboys and etc. You know, something they should have done decades ago.

Isn't there a requirement in Steam that you have to have actually played the game to review it? So it's completely unlike what MC does.

Yes, but also means a person can just play for an hour and can review.
 
Last edited:

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
Isn't there a requirement in Steam that you have to have actually played the game to review it? So it's completely unlike what MC does.
not even play it once but you're prompted to review it after playing for like 3 or 4 hours straight. It's why so many reviews there are positive and accurate to the game's quality, even the short 1 sentence meme reviews are more authentic than the review bomb trash on metacritic, because even the 1 sentence meme reviews have extraordinarily long playtimes.

That's another thing, the playtime is displayed next to the review on steam. Therefore it's far easier to see that a review with a long playtime is more trustworthy than a review with only 2 hours in.
 
Last edited:

GHG

Member
Isn't there a requirement in Steam that you have to have actually played the game to review it? So it's completely unlike what MC does.

You have to have owned it and your playtime is displayed as part of your review along with how you acquired the game (e.g. if you received it for free then that is displayed).

It's the most robust user review system out there and renders all other attempts useless.
 

nowhat

Gold Member
not even play it once but you're prompted to review it after playing for like 3 or 4 hours straight. It's why so many reviews there are positive and accurate to the game's quality, even the short 1 sentence meme reviews are more authentic than the review bomb trash on metacritic, because even the 1 sentence meme reviews have extraordinarily long playtimes.

That's another thing, the playtime is displayed next to the review on steam. Therefore it's far easier to see that a review with a long playtime is more trustworthy than a review with only 2 hours in.
Right, so all that's required is for the console manufacturers to get with the program with a singular website of disputable reputation (there's a reason why OpenCritic exists). Should happen any day now. Especially with Nintendo.
 

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
This issue does definitely need refining.

I also don't take it all too serious when it comes to movies because some (or apparently lots) of people review based on emotion and not merits.

God bless the republic of Lake Titicaca.
 

kingyala

Banned
Horizon-2-1280x720.jpg

Popular review aggregation site Metacritic has pledged to introduce stricter moderation, after Sony’s Horizon: Forbidden West Burning Shores DLC was review bombed by users.



In response to the review bombing, Metacritic and Fandom told Eurogamer they were aware of the “abusive and disrespectful reviews of Horizon Forbidden West Burning Shores,” and claimed they were “currently evolving our processes and tools to introduce stricter moderation in the coming months.”
always smells of fascism, whenever a company says ''moderation'' goodluck
 

STARSBarry

Gold Member
Steam reviews are far better and a great example of user reviews. i trust steam's reviews far more than any paid critic.

Metacritic's lack of moderation and basically allowing people who didn't even play the game to make a review is why the user reivews are so damn toxic. They should force you to connect a Playstation/Nintendo/Xbox/Steam account and ensure you've played it for more than 30 minutes before you write a user review on any game

In before some one goes "but steam gets reviewed bombed too" which is true... but as below...

Isn't there a requirement in Steam that you have to have actually played the game to review it? So it's completely unlike what MC does.

This is indeed true and makes all the diffrence. I have had someone argue that thousands of users will buy a game, review bomb it and then refund it. Which is funny because its very hard to find a review below 2 hours, and that's your refund window so...

Thing to keep in mind, steam reviews are not the review of piece of art, they are a review of a product someone has bought. If the product has shitty DRM or a terrible MTX store that negatively effects the user of the product, that's why it's being review bombed... except its not because people are just reviewing the product they bought.

For example


Release a broken game with missing features... 56% but what's this the very next update instead of adding those missing features you add a cash shop to sell skins and a Halo infinite challange system everyone hates?

Boooooom 36% positive review score... oh no a review bomb... except its not, its just a review, lots of them, about how much the product they bought sucks.

And yet...


It's an 80% game on meta and no one is playing it.

This is why when you review a game built as a product user reviews by the product owners is better. It's when you need to review games that are clearly a piece of art that things get dicy.

I think most people can feel out the diffrence, at least I hope so.
 
Last edited:

Dr.Morris79

Member
Steam reviews are far better and a great example of user reviews. i trust steam's reviews far more than any paid critic.

Metacritic's lack of moderation and basically allowing people who didn't even play the game to make a review is why the user reivews are so damn toxic. They should force you to connect a Playstation/Nintendo/Xbox/Steam account and ensure you've played it for more than 30 minutes before you write a user review on any game
Spot on. It's the only way it will logically work in any sense.
 

GHG

Member
Right, so all that's required is for the console manufacturers to get with the program with a singular website of disputable reputation (there's a reason why OpenCritic exists). Should happen any day now. Especially with Nintendo.

Well that would depend on what json entries the playstation/xbox/Nintendo apis have. If it doesn't allow the client to fetch the necessary data (games owned, time played, maybe even achievement %, etc) then something like this isn't happening any time soon.
 

Aenima

Member
Just remove user reviews, or create a system where users need to link they PSN, Xbox Live, Steam, etc to be able to review a game, if the system detects the game was actually played. Just moderation dont stop trolls from giving 0's and 10's for games they never played just because they are exclusive to certain platforms.
 

mrmustard

Banned
User score has 3 problems:

1. 'Controversial' games attract weirdos
2. Fanboys downvoting exclusive games they didn't play
3. Fanboys upvoting exclusive games they didn't play

You can click through the first 20 red scores of any Sony or Microsoft game and you'll find immediately plenty of shit like this:

User score is sometimes useful if a game gets patched, because the pro reviewers don't retest. But it's mostly a quagmire full of sick people. They should remove it completely.
 
Last edited:
Isn’t it interesting that they finally decide to do something about the ridiculous review bombing now after it’s been going on for so long? Hmmm……
 
Last edited:

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
User score has 3 problems:

1. 'Controversial' games attract weirdos
2. Fanboys downvoting exclusive games they didn't play
3. Fanboys upvoting exclusive games they didn't play

You can click through the first 20 red scores of any Sony or Microsoft game and you'll find immediately plenty of shit like this:

User score is sometimes useful if a game gets patched, because the pro reviewers don't retest. But it's mostly a quagmire full of sick people. They should remove it completely.
another reason why steam reviews are best, since it's all PC there's almost no fanboyism to be found
 
Of course the mindless gaf corporate consumer will say they should be removed, because they would eat any trash the corporations feed them. Bombing does not impact sales, if people want to do it then let them do it. Freedom and all that. Your choice if you want to actually take at face value the user scores, you'd be an idiot if you do, just as the "critics" scores.
 

Fake

Member
Review bombs are all the place since ages. Game journalisms, Game media and even neoGAF fanboys keep saying they don't care about user score review and you shouldn't care too, but somehow suddenly they started to care now?
Talking about snowflakes.

I hope this is not some selective bullshit. If you gonna remove trolls/useless reviews, make so in every other user score from every game inside Metacritic, not just HFW.
 
Last edited:
Just remove user reviews, or create a system where users need to link they PSN, Xbox Live, Steam, etc to be able to review a game, if the system detects the game was actually played. Just moderation dont stop trolls from giving 0's and 10's for games they never played just because they are exclusive to certain platforms.

That's a pretty good idea. Sony, MS, Nintendo and Valve would have to buy into it though and allocate development resources to expose game playtimes to an API.
It would be pretty cool. User reviews would probably be more reliable than media reviews....lol
 

DenchDeckard

Moderated wildly
Should have to sign in with your xbox, steam, nintendo or psn network Id to post a review...

Edit oh shit, great minds and all that
Just remove user reviews, or create a system where users need to link they PSN, Xbox Live, Steam, etc to be able to review a game, if the system detects the game was actually played. Just moderation dont stop trolls from giving 0's and 10's for games they never played just because they are exclusive to certain platforms.
 
Last edited:

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
I just follow OpenCritic reviews. No users reviews, and they put all platforms of a game into a single score instead of individual platforms.
that's gonna bite you in the ass one day. We need user reviews, just a good system for them to be trustworthy and reliable rather than useless and troll bs
 
Top Bottom