Okay, first of all, there are many badly done muds all over the internet so I don't really see the point in singling one out and righting up a review just talking about how bad it is. But, maybe you feel that it is so bad that you have to warn all the people who are going to try it out? Ok, that makes a little since, but what if there are allready plenty of bad reviews on it? What is the point?

I just glanced at the reviews on a mud (which I have never played) and saw that there were four reviews written on the same day (something that seems to have been happening a lot recently) and they were ALL negative reviews talking about how bad the game is. What is the point? Don't you think that anybody who pays atention to negative reviews would allready make up their mind after the first two or three?

Reviews should be reviews, not flames at a game you don't like. If you think the game is bad, say so in the review but you don't need to post such a review when they have allready been posted THAT SAME DAY.

I think I just needed to say that as I have seen so many negative reviews here lately for various muds written on the same day as each other that it is just crazy.

My speculation is that many* muds that have a bunch of reviews (good or bad) for one day, and one day only, are really written by one person who has created multiple accounts.

* I say many here as there are probably some muds that fall under this criteria that really do have reviews from multiple people. My apologies to any mud owners I may have offended that have legit reviews... or in dragon master's example... reviewers.

The point is that the perceived validity of a review can be affected by the prevalence of other reviews of the same or similar nature. If I, as a person reading reviews, see only one negative review among a slew of positive reviews, the one negative review affects my judgement less than a large collection of negative reviews would. That is the point. I don't buy the "you shouldn't pick on bad muds, because there are other bad muds too" line. That's a silly perspective that ends up getting you nowhere. You might as well also say that it's bad to post a positive review, because there are other good muds out there. The "If you can't say anything good, don't say anything at all" adage shouldn't ever be the form for writing reviews. If a reviewer sees something horribly wrong with a particular mud, then that person is probably right in voicing the opinion, if for no other reason than to allow the MUD implementor a chance to assess the claims.

No. At least, I hope not. Anyone who makes up his mind about a game that he's never played based on only two or three negative reviews is being rather foolish. If, however, he reads 50 negative reviews... You see my point? It all boils down to the perceived validity of the complaints.

So, should someone also not post a positive review if one has already been posted that day? What a ludicrous concept. The date on which a review is posted should not factor into your judgement of the review's content.

Purely speculation, though I'm inclined to agree that it is likely to have happened at least once and possibly more times. This is why it pays to think for yourself instead of being a zombie. You have to apply a bit of critical thinking to any review to judge the validity of the claims for yourself.

Reviews, Flames? Negative review, it's rare you read a negative review that ends with but please try this out for yourself, most end with never play, stay away. All negatiev reviews are flames, against the mud? players? combat system? Whatever.....