Instale o Steam
iniciar sessão
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chinês simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Tcheco)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol — Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol — América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polonês)
Português (Portugal)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar um problema com a tradução
Let's be frank: Steam makes finding games accessible. As such, we don't need one-glance scores and throw-away one liners to make a decision. A more holistic approach to reviewing games means that we can get a better feel for the game. Regardless of how important saving dollar bills is, the real benefit of a "thick and hearty review" (as you describe it) is to save our time from playing a game which wasn't ever going to suit us.
I don't mind reading a bit more, because it often pays off later. There is not a lot of nuance in reviews such as: "4/5 good graphics, 2/5 game length." Don't these other reviewers know that most games show the graphics in screenshots, and that Steam displays players' played-time? Useless reviews..
*followed*