Do you trust steam reviews?

yes

Attached: game reviews.png (968x925, 309.32K)

I don't read individual reviews.
If a game seems interesting and has a decent rating, I'll give it a shot. If it's got a shit rating, I ignore it.

>DIGITAL CRACK
>1.6 hours
lol

>Rust player
>Hates black people and actually executes them IRL
Average Rust player

CK2
Near 1k hours but I cannot recommend anyone ever get it, since you need ALL the DLC for it to become the masterpiece it is, and you cant really advertise places to DL it on Steam obviously.

Attached: 6786153f56ef439b20505c0817e9766c.png (305x329, 189.16K)

I read negative reviews.

What game is that supposed to be?

It's fake

Steam reviews are the lowest quality reviews possible. No one actually rates games based off of the gameplay. They only buy games on sale and whether or not they give a game a good review is based on the following
>If it runs even remotely poorly on their rig no matter how old it is or how weird their settings are, it gets a Negative UNPLAYABLE TRASH review
>If they are a Third Worlder, they will give it a negative score if the game isn't priced low enough for their zero income neet selves
>Positive review of a game they only played for 10 minutes, as shown on the fucking review itself
This sums up the vast majority of Steam reviews. Every game is reviewbombed by third worlders whenever it isn't dirt cheap in their currency. Any meme game with zero substance is given Overwhelmingly Positive if it was shilled hard enough by vtubers or on Twitch.

There's literally nothing more useless than user reviews, minus journalist reviews. They're all garbage.

It being his steam account or the shooting?

Sadly, Ark survival. And I'll be playing Ark Survival 2 like an ape when it releases too.
I've also played other games for 40+ hours and left negative reviews despite beating the games to the fullest that I can to extract my money's worth after I accidentally trip over the 2hr landmine.

Only from users who pass the background check.

no

Warframe.
It's usually live service games in general that have this problem, one update they can be great, the next they could be catastrophic, but ultimately they offer you something that scratches an itch no other game does, which people need to realize is not the same thing as enjoying something. I play warframe because it's a game with like 500 fucking weapons to shoot at large amounts of enemies, the only other thing that gives me that experience is classic doom with mods except classic doom with mods is actually good, it just doesn't have the addicting action RPG loop of getting more and more loot and dripfeeding you more content at just the right pace to make you appreciate said new content.

It's like an abusive relationship sometimes, like in Destiny 2's case for example, there's no other game that has gunplay I like that much, but I refuse to play it anymore because it literally steals my money through sunsetting content, which no matter how much I like Destiny 2's gunplay, I'm not gonna stick around and have my time wasted completely by farming loot rolls that will become permanently invalidated by new light level caps that don't let them scale. It does not have enough content to justify an MMORPG subscription fee's worth of cash each year, it simply makes you replay a normal game's worth of content stretched out to MMORPG hours. But you leave a bad review, because despite your addiction, you KNOW you're not having a good experience.

Attached: 1336177533701.png (653x833, 781.9K)

>70% positive rating
>All the negative reviews are 2 years old and complaining how slow it runs on their 1998 Voodoo graphics card
>Positive ones have 20+ hours and paragraphs of admiration for the game
Sometimes OP. Not all the time but sometimes.

I don't give a fuck about if that's fake or not but the steam picture is fake. 3 people made copycat profiles.

This right here.
First thing I do when I read reviews, is that I sort it by negative reviews so I can see just what the bad parts are. I feel like I've dodged so many bullets because of this.

GTA V, at 2500 hours.
Hurt me to do it because I love the series, but holy fuck, I wish everyone at Take-Two died with their families.

Attached: bored.gif (500x282, 949.41K)

i disregard the reviews of those who received the game for free or have a playtime that is too short or extremely brief reviews.

Yes, because you have so much filtering options to get an accurate description of what you want. The issue is that so many people here don't know that Valve is giving you these options, so most here are stuck with the default option and no one bothers. Here's some things that should help you out
>Have purchase type to be "Steam Purchasers"
>Have a specific date range for games before they were shilled by e-celebs or a huge spike of positive reviews
>Set playtime to 10+ hours or more depending on certain genres like RPGs or roguelikes
>Display either "summary" or "recent", because most people don't bother to like recent reviews and some users actually put decent effort
>Check and then compare review types "positive" and "negative" to get an accurate idea on what the game is like.
So many games these days are shilled by e-celebs or flavor of the month games where you get low-effort shitty reviews that try to be "funny". Steam reviews are still better than game journos shit or fucking youtube reviews.

Attached: file.png (1246x648, 93.91K)