Your point is that you want to throw away public reviews/comments because you think it blindsided your game.
Wild-Dog, why do you believe my point to be this?
Mine is that they can create a sense of trust and community that's invaluable for those who know how. They're also more reliable than refund systems and demos.
And why do you believe reviews that are open to public (and usually developers can't directly reply to them) can create a sense of trust between the community and developers?
"A competitor dev published a negative review (which also affected my sales during the release) while promoting his own game on this same review."
But if your games are actually good and you connect with players and make them feel heard, they'll sing your praises and outweigh the couple bad reviews. That's part of why public reviews can be so useful.
"(and usually developers can't directly reply to them)" So you agree they'd be better if they allowed a more open relationship between developer and player?
Wild-Dog, I agree with you, but that's not what usually happens through open reviews from my own experience and observations.
Do you know how many downloads my games have? And how many of these persons never cared to rate my games? Saying they are bad are not an excuse, they could give a "poor rating" if it was the case. Most (actual) players don't use the rating system, or the review system either, from most stores.
Who really will benefit from this change?
Because there's no human or "honest" element without reviews. Without reviews, all there is is a box for the developer or company to toot their own horn.
If at-least one person (who doesn't sound like a bot) reviews a product, I instinctively feel better about the product and creator compared to without reviews.
