The Valve Corporation integrated a new system for the Steam platform in March 2019 with the introduction of "Review-Bombs" https://steamproxy.com/games/593110/announcements/detail/1808664240333155775 which identifies unusual and unwanted review activities. The aim is to classify so-called “Review Bombs” (a freely invented terminology for a large number "bad" of reviews for a product in a short time) as “Off-Topic” and exclude them from the overall rating.

Reviews that relate to topics such as DRM changes, EULA updates or other (external) factors are considered as"Off-Topic" as well. Products that were not purchased directly on the Steam platform are also subject to these restrictions.

Why is this bad for consumers?

This practice raises several critical points

1. Censorship of Consumer Opinions
   By excluding certain reviews from the overall ratings, the Valve Corporation exercises a form of censorship on Steam. This approach results in legitimate consumer concerns regarding privacy, DRM, security, and other issues being pushed to the background.
   
   The decision of what is considered "Off-Topic" is solely at the discretion of the Valve Corporation, leading to a selective representation of customer feedback.
   
   
2. Defamation of Customers
   Characterizing reviews that deal with DRM and similar topics as "Off-Topic" imply that the concerns of these customers are less valid or important.
   
   This attitude defames customers who want to include such aspects in their purchasing decisions
   

   Quote from "User reviews revisited"
   
   Q: I care about some things that I worry other players don't, like DRM or EULA changes. Review bombs have been about them in the past. Do you consider them unrelated or off-topic?
   
   A: We had long debates about these two, and others like them. They're technically not a part of the game, but they are an issue for some players. In the end, we've decided to define them as off-topic review bombs. Our reasoning is that the "general" Steam player doesn't care as much about them, so the Review Score is more accurate if it doesn't contain them. In addition, we believe that players who do care about topics like DRM are often willing to dig a little deeper into games before purchasing - which is why we still keep all the reviews within the review bombs. It only takes a minute to dig into those reviews to see if the issue is something you care about.

   
   Technically they're part of a product, or better said SOFTWARE - Games are nothing else. The concept of the "game" deliberately weakens the consensus
   
   Eulas or privacy agreements can be part of a game, namely when they are presented to the customer in the game itself.
   
   Among other things, same applies to
   1. Digital Rights Management mechanics is often fundamental
      
   2. Analytics services, data pipelines, funnels, highscores, form-mailer, newsletter
      
   3. Multiplayer,- and Cross-Plattform functions
      
   4. Ingame-Advertising (Banner, Redirects, Affiliatelinks, Videos)
      
   5. Redirects to Social platforms like Discord or Facebook
      
   6. External game launcher
      
   7. Authentication processes with logins and/or tokens
      
   8. Anti-Cheat mechanics
      
   9. Microtransactions
      
   10. Graphics, Sound, Controller layouts
   and whatever I may forget at this point.
   
   What the list doesn't include is subjective enjoyment and impressions of the game. Valve is right on this point, because they're technically not part of the game.
   
   What does this mean for mostly all existing "reviews" and in the context of the "Review-Bombs" on Steam? Just as an approach for reflection to what can usually be read.
   
   
3. Restriction of Freedom of Information
   The practice of not allowing certain reviews to influence the overall rating limits customers' freedom of information. Customers looking for comprehensive information to make informed decisions may overlook important aspects addressed in the filtered reviews that are important for individual purchasing decisions.
   
   
4. Homogenization of the Review Landscape
   Filtering reviews promotes a homogenized viewpoint that primarily highlights gameplay aspects and impressions of the game while important, but less visible issues are neglected.
   
   
5. Falsification of statistics and ratings
   The review-bombing mechanisms distort the overall ratings and statistics, often in favor of better product evaluations. Reviews filtered for "Review-Bombing" create a skewed impression.
   
   Especially when they are based on legitimate customer concerns and critism.
   
   
6. Influence on Opinion Formation
   The establishment of the term "Review-Bombing" within the gaming community has led to a distorted view and opinion on how both new and existing customers perceive and interpret product reviews.
   
   Instead of forming their own opinion, many customers directly adopt the existing conceptual inconsistencies without questioning the underlying reasons. This can be observed everywhere in the forums and reviews.
   
   New customers don't necessarily know where the relevant settings are located to display reviews in full.

In 2020, Bethesda Softworks, LLC integrated the "Denuvo Anti-Cheat" service into the release of its product, Doom Eternal. Subsequently, a significant number of customers expressed their grievances about the product and the publisher through reviews, leading to a shift in the product's rating from "Overwhelmingly Positive" to the lowest possible outcome.

Nevertheless, due to the systematic downplaying of these complaints, this adverse impact was short-lived, and the rating reverted to positive in a short time.

https://steamproxy.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2102834964

Lucky for Bethesda in this case, as customers rarely (can) refund a product and opinions change quickly (sometimes with a little help), even if nothing changes at the heart of the matter.

Well, this kind of protest (admittedly with often unqualified content) as well as legitimate form of warnings have always been found everywhere on this platform.
 
 

The additional problem that arises from this is the following consideration.

If customers have no way of complaining about developers, publishers and products (and in such a way that not everything is swept under the table), where else can they complain - except in reviews?

Regardless of the existing "refund policy", the "Vote with your wallet" argument does not count with currently 132 million active accounts on Steam (Feb. 2024).

In forums, topics are closed, moved, customers are banned from game and public forums (sometimes for years), and topics and replies are deleted silently.

Not forgetting that review content including artwork and screenshots can be banned and censored as well. And also that developers have the possibility (I have already experienced this myself) to deny and discredit review content by customers even though it is based on neutral facts.

I don't want to promote or even gloss over meaningless content, but I would like to raise this as a question that everyone should ask themselves

Summary
In short: All efforts on Steam are directed towards securing a favorable rating and enhancing the presentation of the product/developer/publisher and the "Steam support" often sides with the developers and publishers (despite existing and demonstrable rules).
 
 

Optional knowledge course:

Reporting content as an alternative form for critism is completely useless, as the report function is intended for other purposes and not, for example, to express your own displeasure.

Customers should note that content to be reported should not comply with the guidelines, online conduct and user agreement.

If something fits into this category they have the option of reporting content directly. This applies to user-generated content as well as published products.


The disadvantage here, however, is that often nothing happens and customers only receive a text module as feedback, if at all and much content that was legitimately reported is often still visible long after one or more reports.

In short:
If anything happens at all - everything happens invisibly and, as already mentioned, is swept under the table. A little more transparency and reasonable feedback as to whether something has been processed or not – would be nice.

Note:
Just because someone personally doesn't like something doesn't mean the system can be abused to report something. The system is only to be used for declared cases.

And that's often another crux of the matter: Many people on Steam constantly violate and disregard the platform's rules and use the reporting function (or "review-bomb"), mobbing, insulting, threatening, insinuating for everything that doesn't fit into their own context. Mostly without neutral facts.

At least in some of these cases, the report system may be useful again.

But now back to the main topic.
 
 

The settings for managing the visibility of "Review Bombings" are concealed within the store preferences, and new customers are often unaware of their existence or the specifics of what is being obscured, as the context is frequently shaped by the opinions expressed in forums.

Valve Corporation adopts a simplistic approach in this regard, as undesirable content is obscured by default, thereby reinforcing the previously mentioned critiques of the system.

Customers are required to specify in their own account settings which types of reviews they wish to view. It is advisable, as among the many "opinions" (I will refrain from using the term "reviews" now), there may always be something that is relevant to one's own purchase.

To accomplish this, navigate to the store preferences and proceed to "Review Score Settings".




Select "Edit Preferences" and enable "Include reviews from all Steam purchases in Review Scores".



However, the settings do not change the fact that user-generated content continues to be devalued, delisted and filtered and reviews disappear from the respective product page after a short time and are difficult to find even in the "Browse all xxxx reviews" section by each product with explicit filter settings given for customers.
 
 

At the end of the story, another aspect: The systematic devaluation of product ratings for products purchased via digital distribution or retail platforms and activated on Steam.



Customers and curators on the Steam platform should consider this in advance when creating product reviews.