Review bombing, the practice of flooding online platforms with negative reviews, has emerged as a powerful tool for gamers to influence publishers and developers. While publishers ultimately call the shots with pricing schemes and delivery, consumers are able to effect change through one of the most powerful levers in the space: Review bombing. Review bombing campaigns have proven to be one of the most effective ways to send a message to publishers.
Billion-dollar titans like Sony Interactive Entertainment, Electronic Arts, and even Take-Two Interactive are not immune to mass negative feedback on public storefronts; these negative reviews are a kind of scarlet letter that deter players while sending shockwaves among shareholders. Bad reviews–whether it be on aggregators like Metacritic or the aforementioned Steam–are a clear red flag to investors, and can spook stakeholders into selling their stocks.
Two recent examples of mass review bombing effecting change come to mind: The disastrous PR nightmare of Helldivers II, and the more recent backlash against Apex Legends. Both of these games have contributed significantly to their respective publishers, with Helldivers II’s amazing 12 million sales helping boost SIE’s earnings at a critical point, and Apex Legends’ revenues helping consistently drive EA’s multi-billion dollar live service empire.
In the Helldivers II fiasco, Sony Interactive Entertainment and developer Arrowhead had announced that PC gamers would be required to register a PlayStation Network account by June 4 in order to play/keep playing the game on Steam. This didn’t sit right with players, especially since the game would effectively be removed from sale in countries that did not support PSN accounts. A period of significant controversy and backlash ensued, leading to mass review bombing on Steam (gamers detonated over 148,000 negative reviews on Steam in response) and even mass refunds. Sony eventually relented and reversed course. Helldivers II no longer requires a PSN account in order to play on Steam.
Something similar just happened with Apex Legends, the billion-dollar free-to-play shooter that has buoyed EA’s quarterly revenues and profits since releasing in 2019. Respawn and EA made the incredibly unpopular decision to revise Apex Legends’ battle pass payment structure. The publisher effectively was going to force all Apex Legends players to pay a flat $9.99 fee in order to unlock Season 22’s premium battle pass. And since the battle passes are “split” with 2x passes per season, the fee would be a total of $19.99 to unlock the full pass.
Before this controversial announcement was made, gamers could buy one half of a season’s premium battle pass for 950 Apex Coins, which can be earned through successfully ranking up through various free battle passes and/or simply playing the game over time. But with the new changes, gamers would just have to shell out money in order to get the premium pass. Predictably, the userbase revolted against the new scheme, and launched a significant review-bombing campaign that left over 80,000 negative reviews on Apex’s Steam page. EA and Respawn today announced they were reversing the decision. The original pricing model was brought back, and gamers can once again buy one half of a season for 950 Apex Coins.
Without mass review bombing, this may not have been possible. As per Game File’s Stephen Totilo, review bombing has been acknowledged by some of the biggest players in the industry. In an annual 10-K SEC filing, Take-Two Interactive, the firm behind the mega-hit Grand Theft Auto and NBA2K sports games, includes “negative review campaigns” in its risk factors:
Electronic Arts’ latest 10-K SEC filing also has a similar sentiment: For now, review-bombing remains one of the most effective ways for gamers to not only send a message to both developers and megaton billion-dollar publishers, but to also spark change in their favorite games and experiences.
