Steam Ask Users to Label Sponsored Content

[WYP]

Steam want full disclosure when it comes to sponsored content on their new Curation System.

http://www.overclock3d.net/articles/software/steam_ask_users_to_label_sponsored_content/1

 

[Damien c]

Seems only fair to be honest, some reviewers could recommend a game that is actually extremely poor and has some serious issues and flaws, but because they have been paid to review it then they might not want to say the truth about it.

I know with the likes of Hardware Reviews you get that happening, but atleast with OC3D you always, get a none biased review whether it is by a staff member or member, even if it comes in White.

 

[Blobby 72]

this is totally Turtlebiscuits doing

 

[Wraith]

Seems only fair to be honest, some reviewers could recommend a game that is actually extremely poor and has some serious issues and flaws, but because they have been paid to review it then they might not want to say the truth about it.

I know with the likes of Hardware Reviews you get that happening, but atleast with OC3D you always, get a none biased review whether it is by a staff member or member, even if it comes in White.

Understandable really especially after last year when Steam pulled quite a few Greenlight games after they were caught reviewing their own products and giving full thumbs up ratings.

 

[shambles1980]

the more i think about it the better this oc3d recommendations is.
we are all independent, not paid, have no vested interest in the franchise, and so will only recommend games we think deserve it.

one of the issues i have with review sites is many of them will gloss over points that really should be mentioned because not glossing over them can lead to them being denied review samples in the future.
tech radar for example seem to be glossing over anything apple simply because since "bendgate" if any one says anything derogatory about apple phones then apple will no longer supply them with samples or information..

it has to be the same for many other websites and review pages..
So i have to generally wait for the games to be full release and then read reviews that come form people who actually paid for them..
If you were given the game for free and hope to get given another one for free at a later date then that will probably sway your opinion slightly.

the good thing about toms reviews is they are so indepth that even if he was to gloss over something "which i really have not seen him do" you would usually be able to come out with the correct conclusion regardless just by how much you get to see and the time spent on each aspect of the object..

So some people are good with reviews that are sponsored or the product was supplied for review.
but others like tech radar really do sell out just to ensure they keep the mfr/dev on side.

 

[AdmiralDonut]

The reason Steam want it done is because it is actually a law in both the United States and in Europe. It isn't because of random YouTubers or because Steam are being proactive.

For instance, see here: http://www.business.ftc.gov/documents/bus71-ftcs-revised-endorsement-guideswhat-people-are-asking or the rules overseen by the FCA in the UK.

 

[WillSK]

I think this is a great step forward.

As shambles said it's what makes things like forums and "OC3D recommends" so good. Take Shadow of Mordor for example. I had absolutely no intention of buying that game but having seen the discussion about it here and the decent chatter about it across the web I decided to give it a go and i'm loving it!

 

[altshep123]

Weather it's forced or not, this is good for the players. A company gains more respect from me when they do things like this that show they aren't only avoiding manipulation for their own gain, but going above and beyond by possible hurting their bottom line to make sure MY experience is honest and reliable.

Cheers Valve.

 

[Greenback]

Does that include if you are shagging the game maker, or just if they paid you?

 

[BigBlue1]

Steam has been in so many court battles because they are basically unscrupulous and have very low morals. I stay away from their games. They got sued by Australia recently because they don't give refunds even if a game is of poor quality and that's not allowed in Australia. I have been forced to do charge-backs on them for selling sub par games and refusing a refund. Consumers do not have to put up with that.
This is just the latest battle they have lost.

 

[shambles1980]

hell if every one could get their money back for crappy games then ea would be out of buisiness by now.

i dont see some one having buyers remorse as a thing that should lable the seller "bad" fine if they sold you something that wasnt what you tried to buy.. "i buy gta 4 and get gta 2" or if it was dangerous/contained viruses then sure that would be a factor.
but if i go to a shop buy justin bibers cd. listen to it decide its shit and take it back telling them "yeah i dont like justin biber" then how is that the shops fault.
i dont expect the shop to take that back. i bought it my bad my fault.. Nothing to do with the retailer.

im all for consumer rights and so on. but some of this is just getting stupid.
you buy a ferrari decide its not right for you after you drove it arround for a while they want be giving you a full refund and you shouldnt expect them to either.

and having said all that i dont really see what ANY of that has to do with the original post.

 

[Kleptobot]

hell if every one could get their money back for crappy games then ea would be out of buisiness by now.

i dont see some one having buyers remorse as a thing that should lable the seller "bad" fine if they sold you something that wasnt what you tried to buy.. "i buy gta 4 and get gta 2" or if it was dangerous/contained viruses then sure that would be a factor.
but if i go to a shop buy justin bibers cd. listen to it decide its shit and take it back telling them "yeah i dont like justin biber" then how is that the shops fault.
i dont expect the shop to take that back. i bought it my bad my fault.. Nothing to do with the retailer.

im all for consumer rights and so on. but some of this is just getting stupid.
you buy a ferrari decide its not right for you after you drove it arround for a while they want be giving you a full refund and you shouldnt expect them to either.

and having said all that i dont really see what ANY of that has to do with the original post.

The best example of why it is important to offer refunds and to have a good unbiased method of reviewing games is due to cases like aliens colonial marines where the promised product is nothing like what was delivered. This problem is exacerbated by pre-ordering, where incentives are given to early purchasers.

Other situations where unbiased reviewing is important are the early access games, where developers can potentially turn a profit before the game is even out of beta, then new projects come up0 and support for the original game wanes.

And why would anyone complain about the right to return products? its a consumer right that everyone should have, why would you argue against it? I agree that there should be terms and conditions on a consumers ability to return a product, but to outright refuse is criminal.

 

[shambles1980]

are just somethings i would never even think of returning..

I bought monopoly the board game.. Didnt like it took to long to play needed more players..
so i return it??

that i dont get..

i do agree that reviews should be better.

as for early access i only have asetto corsa on early access and its been great. and apparantly its becoming full game this or next week.. But i do understand where the issues of no updates for 6 months and they are working on a different game could cause you to complain.
but i don't see how that is steam's fault either..

i never bought colonial marines by the way. i very rearly buy a game on release and Never pre order "although i almost did for gta 5" that way i get to see reall user reviews.
When i used to buy nes games for £80 a pop and they were terrible. i couldnt return those because the game sucked though..
i dont comprehend how people can make logical choices about a purchace and then after they get it say. well my choice was bad thats the sellers fault..

having said that it seems it is also a consumer right to order clothes online have them delivered wear them for a night out then return them..

I think there are some fundamental flaws with consumer rights.

a faulty product should be returned.

a product that is not what you orderd should be returned

A product that is not faulty but you decide you dont like it should not be returned.

and a product that is what you ordered but not what you expected should not be returned.
Thats just my view on it.

 

[Greenback]

The best example of why it is important to offer refunds and to have a good unbiased method of reviewing games is due to cases like aliens colonial marines where the promised product is nothing like what was delivered. This problem is exacerbated by pre-ordering, where incentives are given to early purchasers.

If you pre-order a game to get incentives and the game is crap that's not steams fault that is the chance you took by pre-ordering, you took a gamble and lost buyer beware

Other situations where unbiased reviewing is important are the early access games, where developers can potentially turn a profit before the game is even out of beta, then new projects come up0 and support for the original game wanes.

Again this is a case that you are taking a gamble that the game will be, A) a good game and B) the company doesn't go tits up and the game never gets finished. But it's still your choice to take that gamble steam is not stealing your wallet to pay for the game

And why would anyone complain about the right to return products? its a consumer right that everyone should have, why would you argue against it? I agree that there should be terms and conditions on a consumers ability to return a product, but to outright refuse is criminal.

If a game comes out and is supposedly complete but is buggy and crashing and after 2 weeks the developer has done nothing to fix it then I would say you have a genuine case and you should get a refund

The first 2 are like playing roulette putting your chips on black and the ball lands on red and you ask for your money back

 

[Kleptobot]

If you pre-order a game to get incentives and the game is crap that's not steams fault that is the chance you took by pre-ordering, you took a gamble and lost buyer beware

Except I'm not talking about if the game is bad or not. I am talking about where the game barely represents the advertised features/content. And where sponsored reviews do not accurately portray the released product. This is when a consumers rights have been breached, when they have been deliberately mislead.

Being a consumer should not be related to gambling. Gambling by definition has an uncertain outcome, a consumer should be able to pay a fee and receive in exchange something of equal value, where the value is set by the market.

It is important to hold onto these rights as they are how consumers can exert pressure on companies to produce better products.

 

[shambles1980]

or you just dont buy any more of their stuff..

 

[Kleptobot]

or you just don't buy any more of their stuff..

The power of choosing not to buy products has largely been eroded, and only in cases of mass consumer outcry does it tend to have any effect, recent corsair cluster fuck comes to mind. So checks and balances need to be put in place in order to protect the individual consumer against the large companies.

I agree that returning purchased items for reasons other than:
- the item being faulty
- the item not behaving as advertised
- the item being the incorrect model
is incorrect and should not be enabled.

But what about the case of gifts? If someone buys you a shirt and you can't wear it, do you feel that you are entitled to an exchange of equal value?

Games are able to be 'gifted' on steam. If you never install the game (as this is akin to opening a box, or removing tags in the case of clothes) then should you not also be able to exchange the item for one of equal value?

Exchanging and refunding are important. As is the right of the consumer not to be mislead.

This new system will be great for informing consumers accurately as to what games they will most likely enjoy and which games suffer from bugs/lack of functionality. The more educated a consumer is the more power they are.

Ps. sorry for the rants/quasi thread hijacking, i just feel pretty strongly about this stuff :S

 

[barnsley]

Games are able to be 'gifted' on steam. If you never install the game (as this is akin to opening a box, or removing tags in the case of clothes) then should you not also be able to exchange the item for one of equal value?

If you manage to buy someone a gift of a game that they already have you'd have just really not have been paying attention. It usually greys their name out/ says they already have the game. Trading steam gifts is also a big thing.

 

[shambles1980]

i dont return gifts either lol..
it was a gift..

but thats just me and a few others. the wife would return it, and my aunt pretty much insists on a recipt in the box.

 

[Kleptobot]

If you manage to buy someone a gift of a game that they already have you'd have just really not have been paying attention. It usually greys their name out/ says they already have the game. Trading steam gifts is also a big thing.

Sorry to be nitpicky, but what if your system cannot run the game? or you feel that its content might offend you? I know these are very specific scenarios, but I'm just trying to illustrate that there might be some legitimate reasons where a refund is required.