85
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
85 points (93.8% liked)
Games
16499 readers
534 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
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.
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.