Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
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*