Search Unity

  1. Megacity Metro Demo now available. Download now.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Unity support for visionOS is now available. Learn more in our blog post.
    Dismiss Notice

"BEST BEFORE END... " The asset store, its sales and QA. Not very impressed.

Discussion in 'Assets and Asset Store' started by base4, Mar 16, 2015.

  1. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    I have a question about the asset store

    Many of the things put "On Sale" in the daily deals, are utterly reviled in the comments, and whilst this may not reflect the actual quality of the packs themselves this can be hurtful.

    Today's pack https://www.assetstore.unity3d.com/en/#!/content/12141 comments state that some of the content is poor to unusable quality. It is totally unanswered by the Author. Who has indicated that answering native english comments is tiresome. which is fair enough.

    EDIT: Here is a review of that pack which is in-general excellent.
    making those unanswered comments look even more foolish.​

    But it was selected to be throw it in a bargain bin Sale.

    Tools that are end of life or near unusable, or (don't work on 5 at point of sale), or are unsupported or... The list is not a good one.

    Honestly, your stores QA could be improved a lot. The sales very often FEEL like a piece of Junk the an author is trying to milk the very last cash from before abandoning. (Opinion)

    I would find that embarrassing. It is demotivating to the people who make the stuff and makes it feel like poor value for money.

    There was also a point raised about DLL obfuscated sources being FORCED to be released as open source once they become abandonware on the store. It seems like the process of "end-of-life" for products could be less "CAVEAT EMPTOR"

    Please fix it. I get that you are a small team and you have 100's of new items to process per week. But seriously, please stop anything that might be soon outdated, poor quality, or junk as the "soups du jour",

    There should be a policy to review the quality of feedback on an item ( by some poor git at UT) BEFORE is is put up as "Recommended" in the daily sales. It is making you look like money centric fools who have zero care about your end-users experience. Fools because that is not a great long term plan for the stores survival or profits

    Simple steps to fix.
    Check stuff in sales is not "BEST BEFORE END" junk,
    Make DLL releases fail-over to source if they become bit-rotted abandonware.

    EDIT: This could have been less contentious, I don't know what the editing policy is on here
    But I went ahead an rewrote the more contentious sections to have appropriate balanced language.
    I'll just point out that I, IN NO WAY am saying that the animation pack I pointed to was actually bad. It was the fact that those comments could go unanswered on a product that was being placed up for sale in a Unity Technologies Approved Sale.
    In these instances I personally felt that the policy should be amended to hold these items to a higher standard. Perhaps I managed to put it better. I then went on to - initially - talk about quality, which should have been made with more clear distinction from the pack itself, which I have now purchased and will review impartially.

    My bad. It's still valid points, if not well made.
     
    Last edited: Mar 17, 2015
  2. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    I should just add that there are some incredibly incredible assets.

    Also some authors clearly have undergone apotheosis for their unending efforts to support their products.

    I am not saying it is all junk. Just the junk is.

    And yes it's a relative term: "Poor quality", But I think we - and the authors - and UT all know the type of product I am referring to, the first person to say "Whut? there is no problem" is a liar.
     
  3. mr_Necturus

    mr_Necturus

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,956
    I don't think my animations are unusable and poor quality.
    Did you purchase and tried to use it? Or this is just attempt to harm for personal reasons? :)
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2015
  4. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    "This is a decent animation pack with a ton of animations to choose from, however some of them are a little buggy" is a long, long way from "utterly reviled".

    Authors don't get to put anything on sale (not the official sales, anyway). You can opt in, but it's up to the asset store staff to actually pick them.

    --Eric
     
  5. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    I agree it seems kind of overkill to claim "utterly reviled". If reporting a genuine issue, do not be dramatic. Doesn't work.

    I would think that the reviews and sales offer a good way to determine if an asset is good or not. I have bought several assets that are rated 5 stars by others which I personally found terribly sub-par, but I think this is the nature for any store.
     
    Rajmahal likes this.
  6. elbows

    elbows

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Posts:
    2,502
    I'm sure thats much easier said than done. It would require a legally different relationship between Unity, the creators of the assets, and the assets themselves. Probably way more trouble than it is worth, if its even do-able.

    I don't think Unity should take on an additional role as some kind of guarantor of asset longevity, even if it were practical to do so. There are ways I think they probably could improve their responsibility to asset store customers, but there has to be a limit somewhere.

    As for 1000's of people demanding their money back, depends on the circumstances, its not clear to me exactly which scenario you are discussing with that one. If I buy an asset store item and it works ok for me at the start, I am not going to think of myself as serving of a refund if it doesn't get updated and breaks with a newer Unity version in a years time.

    As for DLL's, generally I am much less likely to buy a pack in the first place if it doesn't come with source code. If the quality or functionality of an item forces me to overlook this concern, I still know the risk.
     
  7. elbows

    elbows

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Posts:
    2,502
    Now having said all that, I suggest that it is in Unity's own interests to intervene and find a solution in some situations, purely on a case-by-case basis.

    For example, check out this post by the author of ShaderForge. I suggest it would be in Unity's interests to take note of the situation and be ready to offer possible solutions by working with the author in some way if the author indeed ceases ShaderForge development in the future.

    Here is the post
     
    base4 likes this.
  8. IanStanbridge

    IanStanbridge

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2013
    Posts:
    334
    Because all asset purchases are linked to a unity account I think that unity should provide an automated refund request to improve quality control. You should be able to get a refund for an asset up to 6 hours after you buy it so you have time to test it. The system should allow you to be able to request 2 refunds no questions asked but if you try to make more than that you have to actually purchase an asset and keep it to stop people just using it as a way to download assets for free.

    I don't think that just reading reviews is a good enough way to work out if an asset is suitable for you and also that is a problem for brand new assets. I think it would benefit both buyers and sellers if this feature was present.

    Also unity seems to update the release date for an asset if only the price changes which shouldn't be the case. There are a few assets that are listed as new and free because I am assuming they just been made free because they aren't compatible with unity 5.

    They shouldn't show up as new and the price change shouldn't register as a new release because otherwise some sellers will constantly change their price to game that list I would have thought which wouldn't benefit users.
     
    base4 likes this.
  9. sicga123

    sicga123

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Posts:
    782
    @base4, Personally I'm somewhat dubious about your reasons for these comments given you joined these forums on Wednesday and all your posts are of a similar nature. Besides the rating system is certainly broken but largely because there should be no stars merely reviews as it is possible to reduce a 5 star rating to 4 with one bad review, many of which are undeserved due to the person giving the review not really understanding what they are doing, much about building games and even less about art. Not to mention that some buggers on principal reserve 5 stars for the one asset that will never come along because that particular developer expects it to not only build the game, sell the game, clone an improved version but also to put the kids to bed, and cost $2.
     
    mr_Necturus likes this.
  10. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    Well, I didn't set out to be so contentious. I joined because someone I know was using Unity professionally and I wanted to have a look myself. I regret being vocal in a way that may hurt the company or it's sales, that was never my intention.

    I am happy to review all of my posts, and add some weighted , more thought through and balanced, addendum at this point; given that my seemingly brusque manner is upsetting people.

    Apologies again for any actual insult that you felt was given. Grovelling for my lack of tact aside I have raised valid points, that I will try to make in an acceptable way in the future.
     
  11. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    Hi. I do not in any way think that your products are poor. I suppose that was completely lost in my typical misguided over zealousness. Silly really. I apologise to you personally.

    I have now purchased your pack and will provide a detailed and honest review.
    The point I was trying to make there is that despite feedback that was negative on your asset, that had gone unanswered, your product was still selected to be put into the sale.

    That's bad for business, it makes you look unresponsive, there is a huge difference between someone leaving one star reviews and saying "THIS IS RHUBARB" for no reason on great assets, and someone having genuine concerns about a pack that are in a public place.

    It would be better practice to ensure that all assets that make it into a Unity Technologies Approved Sale reach a certain standard, one that should be higher than assets that do not attempt to use this approved channel of promotion.

    I should have taken the time to say it like that before.

    And probably left out the word Junk a bit more.

    But this point is still valid.

    Expect a balancing, honest review and please accept my apologies on any comments you felt were aimed at your product (I will go re-read my post) - I should have make a clear distinction between the places where POLICY was wrong and the place where the PRODUCTS were wrong.

    This is a huge area that isn't going to improve overnight and loud-mouths aren't going to help (mea culpa), but someone certainly needs to consider a review in my loud opinion.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2015
  12. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    Thanks for the better perspective on the process.
    "but it's up to the asset store staff to actually pick them" - sort of my point I think, I know everyone needs and wants to make money (and let's be honest more would be better) I just think that over time more people would ACTUALLY spend money on the assets if integrity of the process and its products was perceived to be high.

    Dialling down the coffee this end. I re-read my post and I never implied that today’s pack was utterly reviled in the comments, but fair enough.
     
  13. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    Thanks for somewhat raking me from the fire.
    Will do on the Drama. I agree on "the nature of any store", I also agree that comments are, largely, meaningless, however - there they are - splattered at the bottom, thus must be considered.
     
  14. nasos_333

    nasos_333

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Posts:
    13,288
    Low score reviews dont always reflect the pack value. There may be a pack that gets some low scores because has too amazing effects and may appear that is heavy overall, even if it is one of the most optimized in the store in its parts or needs some more advanced manipulation to use in some areas, but offer a huge ammount of customization.

    Bad reviews are bound to happen, this does not mean packs of great value with low scores dont deserve attention. For example a complex pack with a low score for beeing too hard to use, might become the ultimate tool in my arsenal as a more experienced user.

    imo the best way to judge a pack is by watching videos, play demos and follow its development. If none is available then i may check on reviews as a last resort
     
    base4 likes this.
  15. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    "Many of the things put "On Sale" in the daily deals, are utterly reviled in the comments, for example today's pack". If that's not implying, I don't know what is. :)

    They already do have quality standards; the example you're complaining about is currently rated 4 stars, which seems high enough to me. Naturally, quality will be subjective at least to some extent. But there have been threads started by people complaining about their assets being rejected. So the lessons seem to be 1) The store has standards of some kind and enforces them, and 2) No matter what you do, you get complaints. ;)

    Nobody can say you're not dedicated!

    --Eric
     
  16. hippocoder

    hippocoder

    Digital Ape

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2010
    Posts:
    29,723
    But purchasing any packs by eric pretty much will be 5 stars from me, for what it's worth and I'm not sucking up. Some people do go that extra mile, for example Vectrosity was the first Unity asset I purchased (afaik back then there wasn't a store) and it still gets updates.

    Well, I would if I could transfer obj reader and vectrosity to the asset store (I bought them from the site). But anyway, it's just stars :)
     
  17. mr_Necturus

    mr_Necturus

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,956
    There are several reasons I didn't answer for some comments.

    1. In order to use animations in Unity Mecanim you need to know this system very well. Characters have different bones structure and different bones sizes. These make animations played not exactly the same as it was shown on examples. Mecanime have many tools to improve this, but as, I said you need to know how to use it. And this is not easy.

    2. Most of people which want to solve problem are sending letter to publisher. 90% of people living negative comments on Unity Asset Store product page don't change it or rating they gave for the first, even if issue was resolved. No mater what publisher do. No mater answered publisher or not.

    You can look on version and see how many times I fixed and upgraded this Medieval Collection. How many new animations was added in time I have 200 more assets same time.

    3. As you can see my English is not very good. It takes much useful time when I enter such rhetorical debates. I prefer to leave these for people which more like to write words then to create useful digital illusion. For people like you I suppose.:)
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2015
    base4 likes this.
  18. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    Yeah, sure. For the last time, you can NOT borrow my luxury yacht. Not for 5 stars, or 10 stars, or 100 stars...well...maybe 100 stars.

    --Eric
     
    hippocoder likes this.
  19. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    Yup, but those poor reviews are easily answered with great answers like that.
     
  20. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    You missed the end of the full sentence, which - I felt - changed the meaning. However I can see if could be read that way, even without the revision. My bad
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2015
  21. IanStanbridge

    IanStanbridge

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2013
    Posts:
    334
    base4 not replying to a review is not really an issue. There isn't enough space there for a proper reply and disputing a review or disagreeing with the reviewer can look unprofessional. A review is just an opinion and everyone is entitled to one. The asset you used as an example already had a video and the reviews on it weren't saying it was terrible they were just pointing out some limitations with it. Also reviews can be faked there is nothing stopping a rival posting negative reviews against a product or someone else posting overly positive reviews to boost an assets rating.

    Really the best solution would be to just have an automated refund policy so that people would have more confidence buying new assets or not only having to base purchase decisions on reviews.
     
    base4 likes this.
  22. elbows

    elbows

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Posts:
    2,502
    I expect there is a legitimate concern that automated refunds would be open to abuse. Would-be pirates dribble over assets they've not been able to get their hands on yet, and although I generally recommend being somewhat philosophical about how the level of piracy compares to actual lost sales, an automated system that could be exploited is probably best avoided.
     
  23. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    They did have an automated refund policy, and it was abused, hence the current situation.

    --Eric
     
    base4 likes this.
  24. nasos_333

    nasos_333

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Posts:
    13,288
    Indeed i guess
     
  25. nasos_333

    nasos_333

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Posts:
    13,288
    That would indeed by a nightmare, plus would hurt the store or could make it a deserted place if piracy becomes the standard.
     
  26. IanStanbridge

    IanStanbridge

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2013
    Posts:
    334
    An automated system would be fine because the person would have had to have entered a credit card identifying themselves and also link it to a unity account to purchase so unity would know the purchase history. If the system simply limited to 2 refunds before someone had to keep a purchase perform the could issue more refunds. Also they could refund it as store credit rather than back to the card ensuring that only people who wanted to make genuine purchases would do so.
     
  27. nasos_333

    nasos_333

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Posts:
    13,288
    The only problem would be those that would just want to pirate the asset and would buy everything, keep it for use and refund the ammount once for each pack.

    If they refunded credits, the pirate could still own all packs by cancelling and buy news ones with the same credits.

    Certainly piracy already exists, but having an easy way to buy any pack with just one payment would definitly increase it a huge lot.

    EDIT: If you mean have only 2 refunds in general and not per pack, then this would work, but would not be a full refund system.
     
  28. Eric5h5

    Eric5h5

    Volunteer Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Posts:
    32,401
    No...stolen credit cards are a thing, and more common than you probably realize, as anyone who's had chargebacks on their asset store sales knows.

    --Eric
     
  29. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    You are of course right, this is a much more complicated can of worms than it might seem on the face of it.
    It never even occurred to me about fake reviews to smite your competitors, the world is an ugly place.

    Perhaps make the comments section expandable by choice, rather than making the Top3 show regardless.
    User choice, I would choose not to see them,except as a last resort reference as outlined by someone above
     
  30. mr_Necturus

    mr_Necturus

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,956
    Just payed attention on one fanny detail about all this

    Not really usable
    (10 of 11 found this review helpful)

    It was only 2 people few hours ago which agreed with this review of my collection. Now there are 10. And number grows, when rating remains the same - 4 stars and 10 rating givers. So I think it is really someone trying to harm this sale.
    Because to give rating you need to purchase but to agree with review you don't need.
    In spite of this sales are going very well. :)
     
  31. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    Hmm that is absolutely the case in terms of "un-take-back-able" products.
    Unity's - very fair - licensing makes it tough to track usage as I understand it.

    The problem with criticism, constructive or otherwise, is it is seldom well received.
    Change to existing ways of doings things are also unpopular.
    There are a few big issues being mentioned that it would seem are "covered old ground". Well, that's sad.
    Break out my rose-tinted spectacles maybe and hope for a brighter future.
     
  32. nasos_333

    nasos_333

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Posts:
    13,288
    I am starting to get very suspecious after this thread :)
     
    mr_Necturus likes this.
  33. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    I see, well. since I bought your pack. And I contacted you personally. And I'm not an author or anything, I assume you don't mean me personally.
    It was mere coincidence that yours was just the next asset with no commented feedback in the sale.

    Possibly people are just getting motivated.

    Maybe you started this thread!!! heh. Only Joking :) No really. Enough with the Area 51 stuff?
    Good job on the sale going well. :)
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2015
  34. mr_Necturus

    mr_Necturus

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,956
    I have no evidences. I just hope you are writing the truth. Can you ask me for more? :)
     
  35. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
    provided evidence by PM.

    Let's end that there
     
  36. Rajmahal

    Rajmahal

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Posts:
    2,101
    I've bought lots of things on sale and most have been pretty decent. Obviously, there is the occasional dud but not a lot to be honest. I also check the daily sales every day as I like to buy as much as I can at a discount.

    Regarding Mr. Necturus' work, I don't have the animation pack but I do have most of his models that use the same animation. They are excellent quality models and the animations work beautifully. I have no qualms whatsoever in puchrasing Mr. Necturus' models as soon as they are released because my past experiences have always been very positive.
     
    mr_Necturus likes this.
  37. paulojsam

    paulojsam

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2012
    Posts:
    573
    i subscribe Rajmahal opinion, i dont have the respective animation package, but i consider Mr Necturus reliable and with an amazing work under his wing. Its helpfull to have forum reviews, since a bunch of aliens crooks invaded planet earth long time ago ... Beeing serious, Mr Necturus, you have my vote!
     
    mr_Necturus and Rajmahal like this.
  38. base4

    base4

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2015
    Posts:
    30
  39. Jaimi

    Jaimi

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Posts:
    6,203
    Not sure why someone is bombing your asset, but I have to say that I like it, and have owned it for some time. While I don't have a use for every animation in the set, there are quite a few that I do like and use, as well as many that just aren't available anywhere else.
     
    mr_Necturus and Rajmahal like this.
  40. mr_Necturus

    mr_Necturus

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Posts:
    2,956
    I want to say thank you for all guys, which write positive things about my work here.
    Its very important part of artist, to know that people like what he doing and enjoy then they enjoying!

    And Thank you to base4 review which are better then I expected and better then I was write to myself. :)
     
  41. sicga123

    sicga123

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Posts:
    782
    The star system should be removed, let purchasers look at the reviews and read them all and not buy on the strength of 5 stars on one and 4 on another. The system is definitely being gamed, there was one asset with 3 5 star reviews that if I ran the lines through stilometrics software would no doubt prove they were all written by the same person and he wasn't Shakespeare. This star system is fast becoming, if it isn't already, the metacritic of the asset store. There are some assets on the store I have that have 4 star reviews, even Master Audio had one at one stage and for many of these to quote Vizzini that rating is
     
  42. nasos_333

    nasos_333

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Posts:
    13,288
    I would remove the review system completly and rate the assets by the answers in Unity forums or a public question/answer form.

    Clearly if someone has a problem with a pack, or a question, the best way to clarify the situation is through dialog that everyone can see, so there will be zero chance for either side to have a one sided opinion posted.

    Non reply from publisher should be punished by removing score, reply should be automatically added score, since even if something is the developers fault he would have answered and everyone could see it. In that case score could go higher or remain neutral, depending on the answers given. Maybe other users can rate the answers themselves or something.

    I think a streamlined version of such dialog/score system would be the only fair solution so everything can be transparent and available to see by everyone, the current system is totally unfair, especially to new asset developers.
     
  43. elbows

    elbows

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Posts:
    2,502
    If you want to get rid of the star system, I would suggest replacing it with another 'score-based' system is no good either. A simple number does not really inform a user of the details that matter with an asset, its never going to be the same as, for example, actually reading forum threads about assets.

    Plus a system based on the author replying won't work well if the author chooses to have different channels of support communication. For example some asset authors want tickets to be raised on their own support system, and/or want the person asking for support to send them their invoice number (to prevent cheeky pirates asking for support).
     
  44. nasos_333

    nasos_333

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Posts:
    13,288
    All that can be handled in some way or another. The core of the idea is to actually have the now rigid reviews, open for everyone to debate on and see. The way this would work is for Unity to detail and realize i guess the way they think best.

    Obviously the ticket and invoice part of the support can be separate from this procedure, which would be customer initiated on demand here.

    Say a customer for whatever reason is frustrated because something does not work as expected. He could come in the asset thread (that could be linked in place of the reviews in the store for example) and raise a request/review for clarification by the developer (not for support or specifics at this point)

    If the developer does not respond in a week for example, lower the asset score. Notification for this should be sent to the developers chosen media as well (email, PM here etc) to make sure it is seen. This way everyone that wants to see if what the customer states is actually true, can do so by either looking at the dialog or participating in it.

    Rating the asset itself can never be fair, but allowing a complete dialog to be seen for a matter on the asset is at least fair. Everyone can make an opionion better out of a dialog than a score or one sided post.
     
  45. elbows

    elbows

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Posts:
    2,502
    But there is usually already dialogue on forums, and have you seen how long some of the threads get? I wouldn't want to see all that replicated on the store itself, especially as the store is not highly regarded as being fast to load etc.
     
  46. nasos_333

    nasos_333

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Posts:
    13,288
    Maybe have a limit in answers or a filtering method. Or a link to the full dialog etc

    Since as you said there is already dialog in forums, the review process should be move to that dialog, to keep it fair and less vulverable to exploits

    Maybe have a simple flag as review system for a post, which would be shown on the site and the first asnwer of the developer, plus a link to the forum to see the rest
     
  47. elbows

    elbows

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2009
    Posts:
    2,502
    Forgive my negativity, but it all sounds too much trouble for not that much gain.
     
  48. nasos_333

    nasos_333

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Posts:
    13,288
    That is not true, bad reviews can destroy an asset for everyone and this can only lower the store offering ability in the long run.

    If we want to keep getting amazing assets for 1/1000 the actual price and variety, having fair reviews is the only way.

    If they cant get them fair, remove them altogether and remove trouble completly. There is no mid way in my mind. An asset can always be evaluated by the forum, demos and interaction with the developer.
     
  49. sicga123

    sicga123

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Posts:
    782
    I'm not suggesting removing reviews, merely dumping the star rating system. Content creators have commented in the forums that losing a 5 star rating damages the asset and the 5th star can be lost for fairly arbitrary reasons. Remove these 'review was helpful' things as well. As Mr Necturus pointed out after the OP kicked this off some people had gone and added quite a few of those. More importantly whatever the OP reason for his attack all of those questions had answers that could have been obtained without singling out this asset, but the fact the asset has an undeserved 4 star rating gave this OP the perfect opportunity to use it for some spurious attack and to repeat opinionated reviews from some purchasers as if these were set in stone, were hard cold fact and not possibly the opinion of someone that did not understand how to use the asset or was expecting something else.

    Why the OP started this is immaterial it highlights a problem with the star and review system, assets that do not have 5 stars do give one pause before buying them, and then having a bad review have 10 people say it helped them make a decision is just a bad idea, were those people ever going to buy the asset? it's just vaguely passive/aggressive and doesn't encourage developers to investigate assets more deeply to discover if it s what is needed.

    Besides content creators are gaming the system, they are having friends buy their asset to give it 5 stars, they are buying and down rating a competitive asset with a poor review. I don't believe this is a general practice, propbably even less than 1% of 1% do this, but the fact it can be done is a problem.So keep the system as is, just remove the stars system, let the reviews stay but it would make it a more level playing field for everyone..
     
    base4 and mr_Necturus like this.
  50. Archania

    Archania

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    Posts:
    1,662
    The other thing is that I'm sure many people who buy assets do not leave a review. I'm guilty of that myself. I have many assets that I haven't touched either let alone give a review.
    The ones that you hear about are usually the ones that have a complaint. Not the ones that are happy with the purchase.
     
    mr_Necturus likes this.