this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2025
182 points (98.9% liked)
Games
20603 readers
92 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Review weighting formula needs updates, if it's not taking this into account already. There are many many ways to do this. For example, review and it's score are multiplied by coefficients that are computed from hours spent in the game, percentage of achievements completed, time from the last review posted on the same account, number of people who clicked "this looks like a shopped review" button, etc.
Sounds good, except which of those metrics you proposed can’t also be gamed by bots?
Have a lot of those metrics in place & keep the formula private. If leaking the formula into the public seems probable, then make formula polymorphic: certain weights differ based on RNG seeded by hashcode of game's internal ID. This doesn't fully protect from gaming the formula, but it makes automated influence unreliable and hits botters business. It's a questionable approach, but I think it hits botters way more than it hits legitimate reviews, because in legitimate reviews there are zero expectations how certains reviews contribute to overall score. Such expectations can only exist, and thus can only be ruined for malicious actors. This definitely has some limits of how much it can contribute to overall score, because RNG shouldn't be able to make a good game with legitimate reviews not reach good overall score. Unreliable means that botters were able to take 1000$ from client and bump their game, but then they take 1000$ from their next client and their shit suddenly doesn't work anymore for unknown reasons and client is mad and botters decide to quit their business and move to something else.