i already posted that to Steph on the Slack Chat, but i was told to also post it here. The two major points here are the following:
1. More information about buyer
Would it be possible (any time soon) to have a list of the buyer in our Seller-Portal? So with Usernames?
It’s really hard to figure out who really bought our product without having any data about the purchaser.
Giving support to a pirate is nothing i would want to waste my time with. And asking you guys via Email for every
person that needs help is way more work for you and me than needed.
2. Rating linked to reviews
I already told Jon about that when he was still working here: Last time i checked, you didn’t need to write a review for rating a system.
It would be awesome if you could force people to write a short review of the product if they rate it. So that we don’t get 1 Star ratings without knowing why.
Also it would be nice to have the name of the Person who rated 1 star. That’s normally a common thing in Markets.
The two things above will make it easier to identify the people needing help and it will make it easier for us to respond to low star ratings and fix/improve our product.
Agreed on 1st suggestion, but not so sure about the second.
Only 3% of users have rated my product aand I think forcing people to leave a comment could decrease desire to leave a feedback
The reason feedback is critical in conjunction with ratings is that we won’t know why a user leaves a 1, or a 3, or a 5. If there’s an issue with a pack, and a user rates it low without informing the seller then how can they become aware of it in order to fix it? Same as if someone rates a package a 5. It would be beneficial to know why, so that way you can continue to strengthen the areas developers are fond of in future packs. I also think ratings in general should be encouraged, because the more information out there from fellow buyers the better informed others can be on their purchases. It’s one thing to hear about it from the sellers own mouth, it’s another to hear from a fellow developer/purchaser.
I’m not saying that reason is invalid or this serve no purpose, I’m just saying that low amount of feedback has higher priority for me and I’m against everything that could set this amount even lower. People are lazy and if there will be a roadblock they might just fall back and abandon idea to leave a rating at all.
Let’s take for example Modular SciFi: Interiors. You have only 2 rating and 2 comments. I have 32 ratings and 32 comments on my SuperGrid. I honestly don’t see a problem or any reason to force users to leave a comment, however I see that amount of feedback is ridiculously low in comparison to amount of users
I agree with you that some people might not rate a product because they are lazy and don’t want to write a review.
But these people are exactly the ones i want to filter (mostly the low star ratings).
I faced a 1 Star Rating due to trolling. And if Jon wouldn’t have helped me, i would have been stuck with this 1 Star, without knowing who it was and why he did this.
We should not allow this to happen, only to get some more ratings. The correct way is to setup a better Rating/Review system and encourage people to rate
the products.
The current missing Reviews were mostly due to the Launcher not supporting a way to write them in the past. So people bought it on the Launcher and that’s it.
Now the Launcher also supports this and people know they can rate it without the need to go to the web-based marketplace.
If you leave the few less ratings aside, then you might see that combining rating and review + username will help most of the products to improve, because the
idea behind a review is to point out things that can and should be improved. And if people just rate low stars without a review, you can’t improve your product.
It usually works like this, you see much more innovation and effort put to comply with customer requests from startups and smaller companies who want to prove things, like Godot. Epic is now more like an old man in a jacuzzi doing whatever he wants
With a few exceptions, I guess that’s the price you pay - you can either shape the product, but it lacks many core features, or it can provide the minimum of every substantial tool you need, but you won’t really have a say in its development anymore.
