Aaron Keller pledged to improve the game for “players who are playing now.”

      • A review bomb is when people start jumping down the game’s throat with negative reviews for shit unrelated/peripheral to the game. If they’re triggered by the actual core design choices of the game it isn’t a review bomb.

        These reviews are because the game is a money grubbing downgrade from the game people bought and had taken away from them, and this is the first opportunity they had to publish a review on a storefront. The motivation being the actual game means it can’t be a review bomb.

        • So if General motors was using slave labour to build their cars and feeding said labour with baby kittens, would you consider it a review bomb for someone to say ‘You shouldn’t buy the latest vehicle from General motors because of the way it is made’?

          What if general motors came out and said that they think a great start to the day is to wake up and punch a dutchman in the face?

          A review is, ultimately, a recommendation of whether or not you think other people should buy this product. If you can’t recommend it because of something the company who made it did, to me, it’s still a review. Because recommending that product is recommending financial support of that company. Not recommending it, is not supporting them.

          For me a real review bomb would occur generally only in a case where a site like 4chan might suddenly spin a wheel of mayhem and pick a random game to just go shit on or something like that.

          • You tried to argue with someone else over this, but the fact that more people played it, being F2P, means that more people can agree that they wouldn’t recommend it. Given how Steam ratings work, that makes it the worst rated. There’s no arguing how it is. You seem to take an issue with it as if it meant Gabe Newell personally stamped it with a 0/10, which is not how it works.

            In Steam, being 4/10 for thousands of people is worse than being 0/10 for a couple people.

      • Based on what?

        The negatives are extremely bad, and people are legitimately reviewing the game negatively because they legitimately think it’s a pile of shit.

        It is literally unconditionally impossible for it to be a review bomb if the reviews are motivated by the core design decisions of the game.

        • Today’s concurrent player peak is ~47k.

          Why would 47k people choose to play the game when it’s the worst game on Steam? Literally worse than a game like Bad Rats: the Rats’ Revenge that fundamentally doesn’t function correctly. For reference, its peak today was about 20 players.

          Before you reply with something like “marketing”, you seriously think that if Bad Rats launched today, and with the same marketing budget as OW2, that it would achieve anywhere close to 47k players peak 10 months after its release?

          Like I said: you’re disconnected from reality if you think OW2 is the worst game on Steam.