I think the only way to really be fair about this would be to have separate reviews for either the developers or publishers. You might see that Destiny has a "Mostly Positive" rating, but underneath you would see "Publisher Rating: Overwhelmingly Negative" and you could click on it to see the review page for Activision if you care.

As for how they're doing things currently, AFAIK Valve saw this as a non-issue up until now. So I ask myself, "What happened recently to change their mind?" My best guess is that this is about scummy publishers becoming exclusive to Epic, so sadly this system will probably be geared toward giving scumbags the chance to censor players' warnings.

At the end of the day though, in 2019 Steam's reviews are merely a convenience. If you are worried about this sort if thing, it's not too hard to research the major complaints about a game with a quick internet search.

@Thanatos2k: "in a physical game like Yugioh, the card I own in my hand will never be nerfed overnight"

I haven't played since the early days of Magic, but it's good to know that they stopped doing that. Back then, Wizards of the Coast actually used to ban physical cards you had bought from them all the time, sometimes even if whiny parents objected to the artwork.

That's cool, but for such an old game it would be nice if they included the expansion with it. I still have my old retail copy from 1997 I found at my parents' house, but if I got the expansion I might be tempted to buy again.

@wallacom: Yes, we know this because publishers are 100% honest and never put their own spin on the facts. Getting $50 each from a much larger number of buyers than was possible 25 years ago can't even begin to cover the costs of development. Between the late 1990's (when games got so much more expensive) and the late 2000s (when microtransactions became common) they lost millions on every single game they made, but luckily still stayed rich.

Also, I'm going to assume that Apex Legends, which is free, must have been free to develop as well or EA wouldn't have been able to afford it. Forget loot boxes, the government needs to find where EA is hiding their slaves and free them.

@bdrtfm: That only makes sense if you are a super casual gamer who only buys one or two games per year, and assuming none of those games are online multiplayer. Otherwise, the base price of the console + over $100 per year to play online + generally worse discounts during sales = As much as or more than a good PC over the lifetime of the console. I actually have a "good enough" PC instead of PS4 or Xbox 1 because the console makers have gotten greedy enough that PC gaming is now more affordable for a family on a budget.

@darkhunterix: You should get a job in Bioware's marketing department. You just made the game sound more interesting than anything I've heard from Bioware, EA, or Gamespot.

@Gamer_4_Fun: Because games will change in the future, but that can never change all the advertising space bought in the past.

@redhedjack: It's also often credited by insane murderers as the specific reason why they killed people.

@jamesbr27: ... unless this eventually leads to a Metroid Prime / Halo crossover, which could actually be kind of cool.

Of course, I'll be eating my words when this turns out to be like Prime Hunters + multiplayer Halo, while I was imagining something inspired by GameCube Metroid Prime and single-player original Halo.

I get the feeling that we'll slowly find out that this game has an everything that's "just like Fortnite's".

Xerox Legends