Steam’s “review bomb” fix is so far failing its first big test

In the six months leading up to March 31, received a total of 412 negative reviews on Steam—a paltry 4.5 percent of all the reviews posted in that period. In the few days since April 1, by contrast, the game has received a flood of 2,156 negative reviews, or nearly 62 percent of reviews during that time.

You can see similar recent review patterns on the Steam pages for the original , , and various series DLC packages as well.

Dive into the text of those recent negative reviews, and you’ll find practically no one criticizing the games themselves. Instead, you’ll find hundreds of people expressing their displeasure with Gearbox’s recently announced decision to release the upcoming exclusively on the Epic Games Store for a six-month period.

One characteristic reviewer with over 300 hours spent on  writes that the game is “one of the few looter shooters that actually keeps me engaged.” But the reviewer then justifies their “thumbs down” rating “[because of] Epic Games exclusivity [for , please don’t play into Epic’s game.” Plenty of other reviews use copy/pasted ASCII art of double middle-fingers to express their general distaste for Epic and Gearbox’s decision.

This would seem to be a textbook case of the kind of off-topic review bombing Valve is trying to combat. The company defined that kind of review bomb back in 2017 as “issue[s] players are concerned about… outside the game itself.” Valve restated that definition in March as a situation “where players post a large number of reviews in a short period of time, aimed at lowering the Review Score of a game [and] where the focus of those reviews is on a topic that we consider unrelated to the likelihood that future purchasers will be happy if they buy the game.”

This isn’t the first time Steam users have taken aim at companies that are making the move to Epic exclusivity. Games in 4A Games’ series faced similar off-topic review bombs in the months after sequel migrated away from Steam. Plenty of other Steam titles have faced review bombs for issues totally unrelated to the games’ content itself. But those games’ review bombs predate Valve’s announcement of a potential fix for the problem on March 15, making the new system’s first real test.

We’re waiting

Valve says it has an automated tool that “identifies any anomalous review activity on all games on Steam in as close to real-time as possible.” But the final decision to remove such potential review bombs from the aggregate review score is up to “a team of people at Valve” who investigate the machine-identified anomalies.

If a review bomb is manually identified by Valve, the developer is notified and “the reviews within that time period will then be removed from the Review Score calculation,” Valve wrote last month. While such reviews will continue to exist and be visible, they will no longer factor into the top-line aggregate summaries (i.e. “Mostly positive”).

As of this writing, the apparent review bombing has been going on for over 48 hours in a distinct pattern that should have been quickly identifiable. So far, though, there has been no apparent action by Valve. If there’s pending action in the works, Valve has failed to identify it in response to multiple unanswered requests for comment from Ars Technica.

(It’s also possible that Valve doesn’t see reviews focused on ‘s move to Epic Games Store as “off topic” to previous games on Steam. But that would raise other questions.)

In the grand scheme of things, this isn’t a huge problem for Gearbox (which has sold over 41 million copies of alone) or Steam users themselves. Yes, the prominent “Recent Reviews” metrics for games on Steam have been flipped from “Very” or “Mostly Positive” to “Mixed” or worse because of these review bombs. But those anomalies are still just a drop in the bucket compared to the tens of thousands of positive reviews the games have received over the years, as listed in their “All Reviews” summaries.

This will almost certainly end up being the kind of “temporary distortion of the Review Score” Valve called out in 2017, forgotten by all but obsessive fans. That said, this is also the very kind of temporary problem Valve said it was now equipped to quickly identify and combat with a combination of new policies and tools. ‘ Steam situation is the first high-profile test of that new system and, just over two days in, it’s a test Valve is failing.

Kyle Orland Kyle is the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica, specializing in video game hardware and software. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He is based in the Washington, DC area.
Email[email protected]//Twitter@KyleOrl

You must login or create an account to comment.

Channel Ars Technica

Related Stories

Sponsored Stories

Powered by

Today on Ars

CNMN Collection
WIRED Media Group
© 2019 Condé Nast. All rights reserved. Use of and/or registration on any portion of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement (updated 5/25/18) and Privacy Policy and Cookie Statement (updated 5/25/18) and Ars Technica Addendum (effective 8/21/2018). Ars may earn compensation on sales from links on this site. Read our affiliate link policy.
Your California Privacy Rights
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast.
Ad Choices

[ufc-fb-comments url=""]

Latest Articles

Related Articles