I suddenly got emails that one of my old reviews for an asset was delete.
I don’t care about the actual action, that my review was deleted, but this review was years ago and I never got a email like this before.
So I was wondering if the Asset Store implemented a new (AI based) system to check and delete reviews?
I hope that this was just a random cases and that Unity doesn’t let AI decide which reviews are “allowed” or not in the future. It always looks fishy when a very old comment / review is suddenly deleted after years.
I reported a few reviews last week when browsing an asset, because they weren’t actually commenting on the asset itself and rife with entitlement. The reviews were relatively old as well.
Perhaps an automated system is doing a sweep and checks them against the ToS.
Hopefully they’ll wipe away those reviews from accounts that only have 1 review and all on the same publisher’s asset. Aka some one making multiple accounts and posting barely credible reviews on their own assets.
As a Unity Asset Publisher, I can say that irrelevant or outdated reviews can be removed through moderation by using the “Report” button. This is a pretty old practice, but you may now get a notification when such an action is taken.
You need to explain why the review is no longer relevant, how the issue was resolved, and so on.
Previously, it could take up to 1.5 months after the comment was left, but, as some developers say, it may now happen within just one day.
It’s quite a stretch to assume from this one standard email that there was an entire sweeping AI system created that reviewed and deleted user generated content.
You can go report any review ever made, anytime you want, and it’ll be reviewed and removed if verified problematic.
Would have been good to know what the review actually said. Like others mentioned, if it was a complaint about an issue that is no longer relevant it’s good for the publisher that such reviews get deleted. Bad reviews really hurt visibility.
You can be pretty sure such review deletions won’t be automated because AI can’t make the necessary judgement calls and publishers might be able to abuse this by tricking the AI into agreeing with their point of view.
My main concern was that the review was very old. I don’t know the exact date, but we are talking about 5+ years old and the asset has many pages of reviews by now which are all newer than mine.
So I was just wondering why would this random old review be suddenly be reported and deleted by an human or the publisher.
The review itself was positive, full stars, but it said that adding one specific feature would make it even better and the email claimed that a “feature request” inside an review is not allowed.
To me it just looked weird why the publisher (or an other human) would randomly report this very old, positive review, just because of a “feature request”. I mean it would make sense if the review was negative, but maybe it was really just a random report from a real human. It looked like something an AI would do if you prompt it to check all reviews based on certain rules.
It was probably the publisher. Even if it’s an old review publishers tend to care a lot about their review history.
I don’t think that most users leave any reviews. It is also very common for users that do leave reviews have done so because they receive really good support. In this situation, those users will often leave reviews on multiple assets of the publisher.
Saying that a user automatically is “the publisher with another” account is libel and slanderous because you are just making an assumption based on that and this hurts that publisher. Making such blanket comments as if they are absolute truth should be punished by these forum admins. It is spreading lies and misinformation. Don’t make claims that have no proof.
It is really hard to get reviews for art assets as it is.
I think like a lot of things people want to leave reviews if its great, or crap. if its ok.. well you kinda expected it to be ok
Naw, these days popular assets are getting much more sparse reviews than in the past. The quality is subjective and irrelevant that the overall number of reviews seem to have gone down. Some of the most popular assets on the store seem to get a review once every few weeks. It’s been pretty noticeable. I think asset purchaser’s have been discouraged pretty hard overall, myself included. I personally don’t even really leave reviews anymore because I’ve lost faith in the integrity of the system as a buyer.
This forum might have overcorrected on getting reviews removed, leading to people not leaving reviews at all. If the average buyer looked at this thread, they would be discouraged to leave reviews. It’s real dude.
Also I was referencing art assets. It is often seen as a disadvantage to help make art assets more popular because that makes games look less original. Maybe there’s some people out there that want their games to look and sound like a bunch of other games, but I honestly wouldn’t understand why anybody would have incentive to get more games to use the same art assets as them.
Not sure what part of that context you thought I was referring to you. I was referring to what Harenhall said, which I thought was obvious from the context. Good lord.