Valve removes game developer from Steam for calling his company 'Very Positive'

[Humza]

Facepalm: User reviews often make or break a buying decision for many people, which is why big storefronts like Steam have mechanisms in place designed to keep things fair for everyone on the platform. One developer went the sneaky route by taking advantage of Steam's UI and calling his company 'Very Positive' in the hope that users would mistake it for positive feedback on his game. Valve soon got aware of this trickery and has since banned the developer for review manipulation.

Being optimistic is one thing, but the developer of Emoji Evolution seemingly had other priorities on his mind when he named his company 'Very Positive' in a sneaky attempt to dupe gamers into thinking that his games were highly-rated on Steam.

Of course, the tactic is unlikely to work on seasoned users who'd spot the trickery at first glance, but the platform is also home to millions of others, including gullible players looking to try something new and who may just mistake the game's overall user review summary label with the developer and publisher name. They do, after all, have the same font and color, and are in close visual proximity.

GameDiscoverCo founder Simon Carless noticed some fishy stats about Emoji Evolution last week when the game was still on Steam

As the issue started getting mainstream attention, Valve's quality control swung into action and banned the developer's account, which he confirmed in a tweet. He also gave Vice some background on Emoji Evolution and the reasoning for naming his company 'Very Positive.'

"They [Steam users] make conclusions about information when seeing familiar words and don't spend much time reading all the words," the developer said, adding that he noticed the colors and closeness of Steam reviews summary and developer/publisher info, which he then manipulated for this prank.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/88665-valve-removes-game-developer-steam-calling-company-positive.html

 

[Uncle Al]

Hmmmmm ..... some might cry censorship but I give Steam a thumbs up for nipping this in the bud!

 

[franticfrosty]

So, techspot told you nothing about the game, the article they link to however - explains why steam removed the game... and you guessed it.. its not because of the "very positive" developer name.

The game was removed because the developer used bots to try make the game look good in reviews and used bots to push it to the recommended sections, again, absolutely nothing to do with the "very positive" developer name just bots.

 

[Shadowboxer]

If the game is still on sale then this news story would probably give it far more attention that it ever would have.

Honestly a developer wouldn’t do too badly to name themselves something controversial. I don’t know like the “gamesformenonly” or something. Then that way the press will flock to publish a story about you and the games you develop.

 

[Neatfeatguy]

Steam itself is a front for Valve to manipulate reviews how they see fit on their system (hide reviews they don't approve of, this adjusts the overall feedback given).

I don't see how this is any different than what Valve does. I guess the only difference is that it wasn't Valve that did the manipulating.

Moral of the story, don't try to beat Valve at their own game. They'll just ban you.

 

[Nobina]

Steam itself is a front for Valve to manipulate reviews how they see fit on their system (hide reviews they don't approve of, this adjusts the overall feedback given).

I don't see how this is any different than what Valve does. I guess the only difference is that it wasn't Valve that did the manipulating.

Moral of the story, don't try to beat Valve at their own game. They'll just ban you.

When did that happen?

 

[GamerNerves]

My problem with Steam's user reviews is the constant spamming of short uninformative reviews. I know "professional" critics and user reviews alike have always been problematic way to judge if something is good, but at least you can get some hard facts sometimes like if the game is unoptimized or how long it is. By the way, did you know that on the box of infamous Ultima IX reads a quote from a critic "a good chance that this could be the greatest RPG of all time"?
The best way to judge if a game is good is to watch gameplay videos without commentary - this is a positive side of modern day, enabled by fast internet connections.

Anyway, I wish there wouldn't be these one-liner reviews in Steam and other inconsiderate stuff, just what the article is showing us. I'm willing to bet Valve doesn't want Steam to turn into dumping ground of deception either.

 

[m4a4]

Anyway, I wish there wouldn't be these one-liner reviews in Steam and other inconsiderate stuff, just what the article is showing us. I'm willing to bet Valve doesn't want Steam to turn into dumping ground of deception either.

FWIW, you can vote on reviews for how "helpful" they are to push the good ones up.

And yeah, Steam doesn't let you leave a "yay" or "nay" for a game without also leaving a few words. So sometimes we like/dislike a game enough to want to leave an impression, but not waste more time than that lol

 

[Ravey]

I've just realised there is no direct way to review a developer and publisher. This could be something that Valve could add to give consumers more informtion before purchasing a game. Its great that a game can have Mostly Positive reviews. but if a Developer had Mostly Negative reviews it might make people stop and ask why. Just in case the reviews have been distorted somehow?

 

[Puiu]

Steam itself is a front for Valve to manipulate reviews how they see fit on their system (hide reviews they don't approve of, this adjusts the overall feedback given).

I don't see how this is any different than what Valve does. I guess the only difference is that it wasn't Valve that did the manipulating.

Moral of the story, don't try to beat Valve at their own game. They'll just ban you.

I call doubt on all that. Valve rarely intervenes in reviews and when they do, it is generally justified.