Trap of Dissociated Feedback

Look at how much controversy there is in all of that. What this was all about - is mainly to show how counter-intuitive and controversial feedback might be, as well as controversy in dynamics of each topic. We are so used now to "listening" to specific words, triggers, details - the more detailed something is, the more we trust it, but if you look at a massive amount of reviews yourself you will see one thing - same things are treated in completely opposite ways by different people, one can exaggerate the problems - another might ignore them, one can praise the previous game with 40% reviews - another can praise the comeback. On top of that patches, wrong decisions start a chain-reaction, the results of which won't go away, but will affect the way people think about the game. In the end - who are we gonna trust? Most popular opinion? Most detailed? This tool we are developing gives us a lot of information to dig into and build insights out of it, and we are missing lots and lots of important things there, but the main ideas are: Perception of the game spreads across all parts of your game. If a developer messed up something, that will drag down the perception of other, initially positive parts. Positive feedback is changing smoothly across topics, but negative is highly polarized, which is often described as "review-bombing". We explored visually how price, nostalgia and technical performance make up a big portion of the reviews. Exactly the same pros and cons of the game can be treated and explained with a completely opposite assessment.