Review-bombing Imperator Rome is not the solution...

[TheK00lAidMan]

Review bombing a game you like is just shooting yourself in the foot. PDX pauses development for the game because it's low priority likely because the player numbers are very, very low, and the community's response is to review bomb the game to discourage anyone else from playing making it even LESS likely that PDX would return to the game if the player count gets even worse.

This is truly next level baffling. The game has been out for two years. PDX is making very little from it at this point. Do you really think review bombing is going to do ANYTHING productive?

 

[TheK00lAidMan]

I just updated my review to a negative one because I‘m overall dissatisfied with how the things are being handled at PDX. I feel betrayed, and I‘m convinced that this is the right thing to do in order to confront the management with their actions.

This is misguided at best and actively harms your goals at worst. PDX is not going to care about Steam reviews on a two year old game they're no longer supporting because it routinely had triple digit avg. player counts.

 

[Godd_Howard]

Review bombing a game you like is just shooting yourself in the foot. PDX pauses development for the game because it's low priority likely because the player numbers are very, very low, and the community's response is to review bomb the game to discourage anyone else from playing making it even LESS likely that PDX would return to the game if the player count gets even worse.

This is truly next level baffling. The game has been out for two years. PDX is making very little from it at this point. Do you really think review bombing is going to do ANYTHING productive?

People went into full doomer mode and rightfully so. What else is there to do other than to pour ashes on your head and scream in terror when Rome is literally falling before your very eyes?

I could not ever bring myself to give a negative to Imperator but I did update my EU4 review since the game is broken.

 

[TheK00lAidMan]

People went into full doomer mode and rightfully so. What else is there to do other than to pour ashes on your head and scream in terror when Rome is literally falling before your very eyes?

I could not ever bring myself to give a negative to Imperator but I did update my EU4 review since the game is broken.

I get the backlash but maybe people should stop for a second and channel their displeasure into something that isn't actively counter-productive to their cause. It's cutting off your nose to spite your face.

 

[Godd_Howard]

I get the backlash but maybe people should stop for a second and channel their displeasure into something that isn't actively counter-productive to their cause. It's cutting off your nose to spite your face.

True but that is what pure outrage is. You don't think about your actions in the middle of it. Did the mob sit and listen to Brutus after Caesar was killed? Or was it very easy for Mark Antony to get them riled up in a rage against the ones who killed their beloved Caesar? Mob justice is swift and brutal.

 

[Bovrick]

Tbf being anti-mob in that situation isn't something to complain about

 

[n0cturn4l]

Positive reviews are fine, if the reviewer has the honest opinion that the abandoned game is already worth to be played in its current state.

I'm not discouraging positive reviews, I'm just pointing out that "rewarding" Paradox with positive reviews is detrimental to new customers and won't give us back Imperator.

 

[Monophtalmos]

I´m a bit confused how some people thought this is a good idea.
Wasn´t everyone saying the game is in a pretty good state right now ?
Do we want to express our support and love for the game by doing negative reviews on steam so it´s down to mixed again ?
Surely this way new players are going to buy this and give paradox an incentive to redistribute more ressources to it.
Let´s make sure nobody will get this game so it will definetly die.
That´s just strengething the position of everyone saying this fanbase is toxic, I´m honestly just disappointed.

If anything we should do a positive review bombing.

Amen, brother

 

[LSF]

I don't know how you can ignore prices when they are a core factor of every product. People have different budgets but you can concur that some products are going to be expensive for most people and they are also compared to competitor products.

You can ignore prices, but don't make it sound people don't look at them when buying something.

Of course people look at prices when deciding if they buy or not.

The decision about buying a product is a cost-benefit analysis.

But the potential buyer already knows the cost, which is the price. He/she doesnt need help to know the cost, but needs help to generate an expectation of the benefits. Here is where reviews can help.

If you write your review based on prices, will you follow the price changes and update your review accordingly?

Because you can think I:R is not worthy the current price and give it a "not recommended". But assume in the future PDS drops the price to a value quite cheap for the product quality. Will you go back to your review and update for a "recommended"? I doubt it. So you will not help the potential buyers facing the new price.

 

[DesNibelungen]

Despite the heroic efforts of this thread, it's not getting any better:

 

[Chehabian]

Despite the heroic efforts of this thread, it's not getting any better:

View attachment 715597

People really suck sometimes.

 

[herrickrcw2]

I made this comment one year ago and I will keep my word.

 

[Daft]

True but that is what pure outrage is. You don't think about your actions in the middle of it. Did the mob sit and listen to Brutus after Caesar was killed? Or was it very easy for Mark Antony to get them riled up in a rage against the ones who killed their beloved Caesar? Mob justice is swift and brutal.

They even beat Caesar's innocent friend to death in the aftermath, thinking he was one of the assassin's, but he just shared a name with one of them. Not very productive.

 

[LSF]

I made this comment one year ago and I will keep my word.

Well they wont abandon CK3 because there are thousands of people playing it daily. There is just a handful hundreds of people playing I:R.

The bad launch killed the game.

PDS should not have made the 2.0 patch, but re-released the game instead with another name and the new mechanics (giving it for free to I:R owners). Maybe they could have achieved better sales.

 

[Culann]

To point out the obvious the announcement didn't say anything about axing the game, just putting it on pause. While I get the apprehensiveness about what that means, there is a plausible explanation for this. The latest EU4 DLC bombed, well frankly the last two really bombed. In addition to mid staff changes during Emperor, apparently Paradox liquidated their QA division which anyone who has plays most of their games could tell. It's entirely plausible that they are just overreacting and devoting resources to their flagship games to right the ship. EU series getting hit is particular of note seeing that it is the first series of games they produced. I'm not saying that the doom and gloom scenario isn't possible or even likely just that it isn't a good idea to speculate and or assume the motivations of this move without further information.

 

[KassandrosF]

burning down Paradoxs bottom line seems absolutely like a solution, tho people should not only do it to Imperator but to the other games as well

 

[hansnoetig]

This is truly next level baffling. The game has been out for two years. PDX is making very little from it at this point. Do you really think review bombing is going to do ANYTHING productive?

I find review bombing petty (well, unless it's something like that Leviathan, where it's more like a warning) and would normally agree.

But this isn't about doing anything productive, imho. It's a middle finger response. And to be frank, they deserve it: Management knew that the game will be axed before the release of 2.0 (let's not kid ourselves, there won't be a revival, that's just corporate talk). They didn't say anything for more than 2 months, because they wanted to grab the money from those people who got interested in 2.0 and thought the game will receive further development. I don't know what the original plan was, but in the end, they basically used the shitstorm that is Leviathan to bury the bad news. Not that this is wrong (like other abandoned early access titles), the game works (with a few very annoying bugs), it's just very lame. And further cements the image PDS builds for themselves, as greed is never a good look.

I'd bet the response would be different if they would've let people know before the release of 2.0. Something along the line of "we discontinue the game, but as a service to our customers, there will be a big update (mostly) for free". That would've also helped the dev team, which knew before the release of 2.0 and had to tip-toe around many questions and suggestions for i don't know how long. That's very very lame, and shows how much management cares about all these things. So, why should we, simple customers of a corporation, care if they sell a single copy more of one of their products? Do some people think that a few hundred more sales will actually change the minds of this management group?

 

[MrNewVegas]

Of course people look at prices when deciding if they buy or not.

The decision about buying a product is a cost-benefit analysis.

But the potential buyer already knows the cost, which is the price. He/she doesnt need help to know the cost, but needs help to generate an expectation of the benefits. Here is where reviews can help.

If you write your review based on prices, will you follow the price changes and update your review accordingly?

Because you can think I:R is not worthy the current price and give it a "not recommended". But assume in the future PDS drops the price to a value quite cheap for the product quality. Will you go back to your review and update for a "recommended"? I doubt it. So you will not help the potential buyers facing the new price.

It is not the responsibility of the consumer to write a good review or to automatically adjust their review based on price points.
You asses the product as it was given, and the review lists a date of review. If someone wants to know what the price was at that point that's on them, not on the consumer giving the review. This isn't some professional review service.

 

[MihaiROU]

EU Rome costs 10 euros today, it didn't when it was originally released. ;-)

Yeah, it costed 30 euros with the expansion added (in 2010), Imperator Rome costs 55 euros with the "Deluxe" DLC, lmfao. Still the same difference in price, more or less double than what it should be compared to the predecessor while offering shallow gaming experience at release compared to the previous Paradox games which is the point.

sources: https://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/europa_universalis_rome_gold_edition_for_mac_released
https://store.steampowered.com/app/859580/Imperator_Rome/

Edit: to add, with additional DLCs I think Imperator Rome goes over 100 euros, I don't even care, it's overpriced for what it offered, and EU Rome had much more love put into it both in music and in art, it was some glorious 40k universe level art design and menu design there.

 

[CPU Taro]

Yeah, basically the same bandwagoning that flooded 1.0 and ultimately led to where we are today.

Painful to watch the same people who made sure IR's playerbase never kicked off, despite its great team and updates, return to put a nail in its coffin.