You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
42 points

Emmm not really. They haven’t regained trust by simply backpedalling on a very stupid decision.

permalink
report
parent
reply
53 points

It’s not about trust, of course they don’t deserve trust. It’s about showing them that players have influence when it comes to their bottom line and that they can’t just get away with anything they want to do without it hurting their main objective.

In other words, be nice to the community and they are going to be nice to you. Be shitty to the community and they are going to be so shitty towards you that it hurts your profits. That’s the only motivation that makes them go back on something that they want to do.

If they think that people are going to behave negatively towards them and review bomb their games regardless of how they act, they will just keep acting however they want.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

I disagree.

If all people would immediately reward them with a positive review after backpedaling, then their learned lesson would be “just try it out, worst case we can backpedal”. By leaving up a negative review, they might realize that they should not even try it if they want to keep the goodwill.

I will leave my negative review standing, although I also have other points of criticism.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

If all people would immediately reward them with a positive review after backpedaling, then their learned lesson would be “just try it out, worst case we can backpedal”. By leaving up a negative review, they might realize that they should not even try it if they want to keep the goodwill.

They are always going to have this mindset, companies will never “learn it”, they will always try to push anti-consumer bullshit onto consumers if they think it benefits them and if they think they can get away with it.

They don’t care about goodwill, they care about numbers. It’s a business.

I will leave my negative review standing, although I also have other points of criticism.

And that’s perfectly fine, people can leave whatever review they want to leave. But I think for the people who specifically changed their review or left a negative review specifically to protest this specific issue, it makes sense that they change it back to an actual review of the game to signal that their actions have an impact.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

They have a legal responsibility towards investors, they only moved back because refunds started happening, they didn’t give a crap about the reviews, they had made their money already… Until that got taken away from them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

they only moved back because refunds started happening,

Kind of, but refunds only started happening because steam allowed it. And steam only allowed it because there was enough of a shitstom.

Negative reviews by themselves don’t do much, you are right about that, but they do kinda show a community’s mood (especially to other gamers in the community).

they had made their money already

Helldivers is a game that has a lot more monetizing potential than just the initial sales.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

This again? They don’t have a legal responsibility, it’s just if the CEO isn’t making investors money, he could get ousted.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Especially if this much backslash (and extraordinary steam refunds) was needed for them to reevaluate their choices

permalink
report
parent
reply

Helldivers 2

!helldivers2@lemmy.ca

Create post

Welcome to the Helldivers 2 Community on the Fediverse.

Links

Galactic War Status

Rules

  • Be kind to other Citizens of Super Earth
  • No discussion of cheats or bug exploits.
  • Posts or comments with leaked / unreleased info must be clearly labelled. Example: Use [Spoiler] in the title or spoiler tag in comments.
  • No spam or advertising (YouTube, Twitch, etc)

Community stats

  • 530

    Monthly active users

  • 558

    Posts

  • 6K

    Comments

Community moderators