Dead State - DoubleBear Review Controversy

[Archangel]

DB handled this terribly. The twitter parts were especially bad. They deserve whatever backlash they get for this. I don't believe in entitled gamers, only egomaniac developers.

I seen too many devs use entitled gamer catchphrase to cover their asses.

 

[Arahael]

I feel sorry for Brian and Double Bear through all this. I hope they can continue to move forward and improve the game. I'm sure they will.

It's negative, trolling "reviews" like this one that attempt to hurt people. I think we all have to learn to ignore these things and continue to move forward. You'll never silence all the internet trolls, so the only way to effectively deal with them is ignoring them.

I often wonder if these trolls actually like playing games at all. It's just very odd behaviour to me.

The problem is not just the bad review but the fact that many people who read the articles went to Steam to upvote most of the negative reviews just because they were negative not because they were accurate or helpful. They just felt entitled to ruin a game and company without even having played the game. This just shows that people can be very vindictive when they can hide behind the anonymity of Internet.

 

[Archangel]

The problem is not just the bad review but the fact that many people who read the articles went to Steam to upvote most of the negative reviews just because they were negative not because they were accurate or helpful. They just felt entitled to ruin a game and company without even having played the game. This just shows that people can be very vindictive when they can hide behind the anonymity of Internet.

No, it just shows DB's PR people are bad at their job.
In business you fail or succeed, there is no trying.

 

[shadow9d9]

No, you miss the point of the censoring. The "review" was pulled because it was an attack on the developers, not because it was unfavorable about the game.

Do you honestly believe such nonsense? You'd have to spin pretty hard to get that angle.

 

[shadow9d9]

The problem is not just the bad review but the fact that many people who read the articles went to Steam to upvote most of the negative reviews just because they were negative not because they were accurate or helpful. They just felt entitled to ruin a game and company without even having played the game. This just shows that people can be very vindictive when they can hide behind the anonymity of Internet.

What PROOF do you have that they upvoted it BECAUSE they were negative and NOT because they were accuract!? What in the world!

They are ENTITLED to an opinion and not to be censored. Consumers have this entitlement. They absolutely do.

There is nothing vindictive about pointing out what every other review also points out, no matter how hard you twist, turn, and spin.

You came up with your own conclusion ahead of time and then made up your own evidence to back it. This shows just how biased you are. You simply assumed(made up) the reason for people upvoting it and then used that fake evidence to keep pushing some ludicrous idea that the ones censoring, using heavy handedness everywhere, and lashing out with personal attacks via twitter feeds from the actual heads of a company(you know, the ones that actually should have some kind of intelligence and common sense) are somehow the victims. I'm sorry, but if you release a buggy and more importantly, completely undeveloped game, you deserve every criticism you get.

 

[shadow9d9]

trolling "reviews"

The term "troll," on the internet, has come to simply mean that someone expressed an opinion that you don't like, and you want to personally attack them while skirting the moderation that other personal attacks would result in.

 

[Ripper]

They are ENTITLED to an opinion and not to be censored. Consumers have this entitlement. They absolutely do.

No, they don't.

They think they're entitled, and that's the problem. There is a lot of misunderstanding about the right to free speech and freedom from censorship. It means only that the government cannot come and take you away because they don't like what you say. It absolutely does not mean that anyone else, any company, any internet forum, has an obligation to give you a platform. Far from it.

It means that if someone wants to be a total dick, very loudly and repetitively, then the state can't stop them - but the only platform to which they are "entitled" is a soapbox in the park, as they tell it to the pigeons.

 

[Arahael]

What PROOF do you have that they upvoted it BECAUSE they were negative and NOT because they were accuract!? What in the world!

They are ENTITLED to an opinion and not to be censored. Consumers have this entitlement. They absolutely do.

There is nothing vindictive about pointing out what every other review also points out, no matter how hard you twist, turn, and spin.

You came up with your own conclusion ahead of time and then made up your own evidence to back it. This shows just how biased you are. You simply assumed(made up) the reason for people upvoting it and then used that fake evidence to keep pushing some ludicrous idea that the ones censoring, using heavy handedness everywhere, and lashing out with personal attacks via twitter feeds from the actual heads of a company(you know, the ones that actually should have some kind of intelligence and common sense) are somehow the victims. I'm sorry, but if you release a buggy and more importantly, completely undeveloped game, you deserve every criticism you get.

If you read the reviews in Steam you will notice some of them are very unhelpful as a review with just one line ¨The game is buggy¨ in 0,5 hs of playtime and nevertheless they get hundreds of upvotes.

 

[Arahael]

They are ENTITLED to an opinion and not to be censored. Consumers have this entitlement. They absolutely do.

Not necessarily. I don't know where you live but many countries and in the US, some states, have defamation laws that criminalize the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of a business.

I am not making any reference to this case with Dead State, Doublebear or saying that the reviews were false or inaccurate. I am just mentioning this because of what you wrote. Consumers can't write whatever they want in public forums depending on their jurisdiction.

 

[shadow9d9]

No, they don't.

They think they're entitled, and that's the problem. There is a lot of misunderstanding about the right to free speech and freedom from censorship. It means only that the government cannot come and take you away because they don't like what you say. It absolutely does not mean that anyone else, any company, any internet forum, has an obligation to give you a platform. Far from it.

It means that if someone wants to be a total dick, very loudly and repetitively, then the state can't stop them - but the only platform to which they are "entitled" is a soapbox in the park, as they tell it to the pigeons.

I know exactly what the first amendment is.

Customers are entitled to giving their opinions.

The developers of a game can whine absolutely to steam to get a negative review removed. That is exactly what happened. Steam's right to kowtow to whiny devs.

Their actions have been recorded and put on display here.

I have to go back and reread things, but people were suggesting that censorship was ok simply because they want to protect their precious. We aren't talking about the rights of Steam to kowtow to whiny developers who want to block negative reviews. That is neither here nor there though. We are talking about it being ok in a moral sense, not a literal legal sense.

So, yes. I think it is disgusting to censor negative opinions. If they want to be egomaniacs on their own forum, that is one thing. To push for a negative review in another location is not only disgusting, but if this was allowed universally, then no game would EVER have a negative review in ANY location. Just pressure all organizations to take down negative reviews. They can continue to personally attack the people who wrote the reviews that were censored.

It is all ok though, because some people desperately want to defend a bug ridden, barebones game, that was clearly pushed out way too early.

Think about what is being said and the repercussions it would have if the developers had clout to influence all of the other review sites. The whole point of a review is for the sharing of opinions. When we begin to pick and choose which is acceptable, you'll be left with only glowing reviews.

You and I both know that no one here was talking about the legal right of steam to censor their own site.

 

[Bubbles]

DB handled this terribly. The twitter parts were especially bad. They deserve whatever backlash they get for this. I don't believe in entitled gamers, only egomaniac developers.

I seen too many devs use entitled gamer catchphrase to cover their asses.

Read the lady's post from this link, which caused this to blow up- http://murderblonde.tumblr.com/post/105832304380/exhaustion

She isn't an egomaniac. She is a person, who was emotional, at the end of her rope. Maybe calling a customer a dickbag isn't professional, but when someone is in a very bad place emotionally they usually aren't known for their great decision making. I know when I'm angry I often think extremely short term to my detriment.

If you really, honestly, think doublebear should be ruined as people and as a company over this, not only do you have extremely bad taste in crpg combat, but you may want to ask yourself some tough questions on the type of person you may be.

 

[Couchpotato]

Not necessarily. I don't know where you live but many countries and in the US, some states, have defamation laws that criminalize the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of a business.

I am not making any reference to this case with Dead State, Doublebear or saying that the reviews were false or inaccurate. I am just mentioning this because of what you wrote. Consumers can't write whatever they want in public forums depending on their jurisdiction.

One example is the various on-going YELP Lawsuits I still read about happening.

Anyway a business should be able to sue over a false review, but if the customer writes the truth that's another matter. Buyers do have the right to know if the seller is shady.

Sometimes I think the whole world has gone crazy with frivolous lawsuits.

 

[rune_74]

So.....this seem to have got a bit crazy.

I'm pretty convinced shadow is the "reviewer" at this point after that last post....

Gem lines like:

developers of a game can't whine to steam to get a negative review removed.

or

They look like cowardly, pathetic developers though. Their actions have been recorded and put on display here. That is the whole reason we are having a discussion.

My god, this isn't that big a deal....the guy was a douchebag, I'm personally glad someone told him that.

 

[Bubbles]

The term "troll," on the internet, has come to simply mean that someone expressed an opinion that you don't like, and you want to personally attack them while skirting the moderation that other personal attacks would result in.

I have to agree with this. People who use the term troll drive me nuts.

 

[shadow9d9]

If you read the reviews in Steam you will notice some of them are very unhelpful as a review with just one line ¨The game is buggy¨ in 0,5 hs of playtime and nevertheless they get hundreds of upvotes.

That is simply your opinion of what is "unhelpful." The fact that you can't see this shows your shocking bias. There is no universal definition of what is helpful or unhelpful. Rabid fans will not find ANY negative review helpful. Your personal opinion of unhelpful is and always will be irrelevant to this discussion since you are not the arbiter of helpfulness.

And the sad thing is, "The game is buggy" sums it up pretty nicely, doesn't it? It mirror every single review out there.

Go down the road to censorship and the only approved and "helpful" reviews would be the glowing ones.

 

[rune_74]

That is simply your opinion of what is "unhelpful." The fact that you can't see this shows your shocking bias. There is no universal definition of what is helpful or unhelpful. Rabid fans will not find ANY negative review helpful. Your personal opinion of unhelpful is and always will be irrelevant to this discussion since you are not the arbiter of helpfulness.

And the sad thing is, "The game is buggy" sums it up pretty nicely, doesn't it? It mirror every single review out there.

Go down the road to censorship and the only approved and "helpful" reviews would be the glowing ones.

Man, this game has got you mad huh?

 

[Couchpotato]

My god, this isn't that big a deal….the guy was a douchebag, I'm personally glad someone told him that.

I wish I could give your comment a thousand +1's as we have certain members on this forum just like him. They are a blight on the internet, and every gaming site.

 

[shadow9d9]

I have to agree with this. People who use the term troll drive me nuts.

It is amazing that it isn't considered a bannable offense to use the term on most sites. It is used to discredit/brush aside entire arguments, yet requires no proof, and is a personal attack all rolled up into one, while avoiding getting into trouble at the same time. Ironically, it is the ultimate trolling.

 

[rune_74]

I wish I could give your comment a thousand +1's as we have certain members on this forum just like him. They are a blight on the internet, and every gaming site.

I'm not used to people agreeing with me here anymore

 

[Bubbles]

That is simply your opinion of what is "unhelpful." The fact that you can't see this shows your shocking bias. There is no universal definition of what is helpful or unhelpful. Rabid fans will not find ANY negative review helpful. Your personal opinion of unhelpful is and always will be irrelevant to this discussion since you are not the arbiter of helpfulness.

And the sad thing is, "The game is buggy" sums it up pretty nicely, doesn't it? It mirror every single review out there.

Go down the road to censorship and the only approved and "helpful" reviews would be the glowing ones.

Let me ask this, if the negative reviews didn't get upvoted until the reddit post, and there are far more positive reviews than negative reviews (people who actually bought the game), do you honestly believe there is no correlation? This specifically is sabotage from a bunch of pricks.