FAB should look at how Steam does it
I know that likely makes Epic cring a bit but there is a reason Steam is king and EGS is not and its the user AND publisher experience
Reviews are part of that.
- Review is positive or negative, no stars that is far to subjective and it ALWAYS devolves into 5 stars is good everything else is bad.
- Written review … you cant thumbs up or down without writing a reason why
- Pattern monitoring … the system doesn’t remove sus reviews but it does highlight them as being sus and doesn’t consider sus reviews when calculating the overall
- Fuzzy Overall … e.g. Mostly Positive, Overwhelmingly Positive, etc. … its a feeling not a number
Yes this si a machine so the machine needs to use a number but the consumer is using a feeling understand that - Feels Obvious … but you have to OWN the product, also this indicates how you own the produce and rather or not you refunded e.g. paid vs free vs keyed from the outside and rather or not you refunded as well as how long much use at time of review … for FAB this would be time from purchase to review not so much “play time”
Re-review
Next encouraging users to review and encouraging users to reconsider negative reviews when the system knows they keep using the thing.
So you played a game, you gave it a bad review … you played the game another 2000hrs … Steam gona ask you to reconsider that review. You dont have to its a simple highlight at the top of the game page.
Epic could easily say … o your downloading and importing that asset you reviewed negatively … again … for the 300th time … are you sure its a negative?
First Review
This would be easy to tie into the store similar to Discovery Queue.
So the idea is that first the store asks you to go over 10 of your un-reviewed purchases and let the store know how you feel about them … thumbs up or down … with the option to write a review.
Now the store can suggest more assets based on those sentiments
This is similar to how Steam uses metadata from the user to suggest games not simply a popularity contest but actually understanding the user.
User Tags
Reveiws frankly aren’t all that useful.
No matter what we do they will always be subjective, they will always lean negative and they will always be weaponized.
This DOES NOT mean you can remove reviews
they are required but it is a minimal requirement you have to do … its not however “good enough” so you need to do more!
However there is an alternative.
Provide users with tags they can mark on assets they have used. These tags should indicate factors about that product so not thumbs up or down but
- Time Saver
- Works well with 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, etc.
- Works well with (tag other asset)
- Fast Support
- Easy Install
- Blueprints
- C++
- Extensible
- Samples
etc.
the idea is that users who have used the asset can tag it up with factors that stood out to them about this asset.
These tags should describe the asset, its usage and its relationship with engines, other assets and any logical services such as community, tech support, guides, tutorials, samples, demos, documentation online and offline, etc.