Public opinion doesn't just rule reputations. Media is controlled by reviews and what others think of it. What can one bad review do to a decent game, movie, or book? Let's dig into that today.
.jpg) |
| Courtesy of complex |
I was afraid to read the copy of Ready Player Two that I bought on a whim after seeing all the Youtube buzz on how bad it was. I started reading it, then found it to be good writing. Midnight In Salem (MID) - a Nancy Drew puzzle game - got lots of delays and didn't turn out like the rest of the Nancy Drew Herinteractive games. I played it and found it wasn't half bad (Perfect? No, but we knew it wouldn't be.). Today I'm diving in on why bad reviews kill media that isn't all that bad.
Let me be clear on this. Some media do turn out to be dumpster fires attached to nuclear bombs. I'm admitting this openly. Some honest reviews do turn out to be true. Fifty Shades of Grey and 365 are both horrendous examples of this. Not only are they badly written, but they are abusive erotica. No, I didn't read them, but I watched a detailed review on the plot of both (done by Amanda the Jedi, who talked about them in enough detail to know the plot details in the book). Both are based on Twilight fanfiction, which is bad enough already. These are the best examples of honest reviews that I can think of, both of which are dumpster fires of books that I'd gut and repaint into book safes.
Why Do We Trust Reviews
In a world that gives us false advertising daily, we want to hear what people actually thought about something, whether it be a doctor, movie, or videogame. We want something called transparency, which is part of why reviews are on websites and apps. The primary reason to give a review is if you loved it or hated it. Most who thought it was "okay but not great" don't post reviews very often.
The more we trust the source of the review, the more we trust the review itself. If our friend says they loved the Twilight series we might pick it up at the library. Verbal reviews from those we are close to mean the most. Second to that might be celebrities or mainstream people we trust online. No connection to the person doing the review means we discard it as unreliable unless backed by friends/family or celebrities.
We all want to know what we are buying and if we can trust those doing services for us (doctor, plumber, maid...). When a review is posted we read it, especially when it is something we think we want to invest in. At the time the new Nancy Drew game came out, several reviews were posted all at once. We care what others think. All humans that are connected influence each other. Don't pretend your friend's opinion of a new movie doesn't impact your will to go see it. My friend is the reason I watched Encanto. I would have missed a good movie without her opinion.
The level of good and bad reviews impacts whether we put that Amazon item in our cart. Say an mp3 player has seven reviews. Upon counting the reviews, you see four good reviews and three bad ones. I already have doubts. Yet, what if six reviews were positive and only one was negative? I'd be more compelled to buy it. While I would read the content of the reviews (please do, some people review different objects and put it in the wrong place), negative reviews discouraged me from investing in that mp3 player. This is where having bad reviews all over the internet can kill a product or any form of media.
The Internet
We are all heavily influenced by people over social media. One bad review can get circulated everywhere in seconds. One share button can make a world of difference in either direction. Every person on Youtube or social media has an opportunity to draw attention to either flaws or positives. Sometimes the 'so bad it's good' works in a person's favor. Amanda the Jedi watches movies that are sometimes really bad and sometimes quite good. Saberspark does the same thing. Either way, the public is now aware of the movies and may go see them for themselves. Sharknado is one of those movies, just like The Room. There is a particular category that some media fits into called 'so bad it's good', which bizarrely benefits from bad reviews. We like to laugh at films so bad they are laughable. Neil Breen benefits from this.
Youtube has whole channels that review media. Saberspark and Amanda the Jedi are just two of them. Markiplier and Jacksepticeye go into this category because they review games and expose the audience to what the game truly is. That is still a form of review (which convinced me to buy at least two games already). They have an impact on gamers and movie fans everywhere. So many people watch Youtube today instead of cable. You share that video and it goes right onto your social media, where it gets spread farther into the world wide web. This is why one bad review or one great review can make a massive difference in sales. My husband and I fell in love with West of Loathing and bought it after watching Markiplier play it.
Worst Case Scenario
The worst-case scenario for a bad review is when no one checks to see if the review is actually accurate. Letting reviewers think for you is bad. Everyone has different standards for games and books. Some like it spicy, adventurous, perplexing, complex... I think you understand what I mean. Standards for one person do not equal the standards for you. The worst situation that can happen for any media is when everyone reads the review and blindly decides to not fact-check. Even worse, they can hit share after blindly believing it.
.jpg) |
| Courtesy of postec.com |
This situation does not apply to the 'so bad it's good', just to clarify. The human race likes to show people how bad something is when it is laughably awful. This category gains traction from people reacting to it. What doesn't gain traction are books and movies that don't reach the laughable level. It has to be so bad that it borders on ludicrous or people won't watch it for the laughs. Neil Breen makes it to this level. What makes it even funnier is that ludicrous movies often have directors with serious intent. You can't fake it to get here. Those that try fade into obscurity because they tried too hard.
Let's talk about a big example of this. Harry Potter got this treatment in the Christian Bubble. It was labeled as evil by some Christian moms, who then forbid it in their house. Some individuals took that as a challenge to read it, others didn't, and it still remains today. It had enough good reviews to keep it going in secular culture. It couldn't be stopped. Yet, among some Christian homes that never did their research, it is still thought to be evil. Fact-checking, let's make sure we're doing that.
Harry Potter may not have gone under, and I'm glad of that, but others have. The true worst-case scenario is that a company with a good game, movie, or product can't make ends meet and can't keep going. Bad reviews that get left unchecked can obliterate a company. This is the saddest ending to this story. Bad reviews can also kill a TV show, too. There is always a risk to targeting smaller niche groups. Media directed at small fandoms is a risk, which is why small fandoms seldom get large-scale productions.
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment