🔴 LIVE UPDATE: Feb 13, 2026 — Following our report on the Starsand Island review controversy, Renaissance PR has informed The Phrasemaker that they will reach out to the developers in China. As of this time, the agency is waiting for a response from the team. We will update this story as soon as a formal statement is provided.

Starsand Island drew a lot of attention before its Early Access release, due to an influx of suspicious positive reviews on Steam. Having covered multiple Early Access launches and controversies, I was among the first journalists to report on the Starsand Island review issue and this is the follow up.

Fans have noticed a large number of positive reviews appearing on Steam, and discussions on Reddit and Twitter highlighted mentions of features not yet in the game and unusually short playtimes.

Starsand Island Studio launched the Early Access, allowing fans to play while the team continued development simultaneously. In my previous article, I highlighted Reddit community posts and a Twitter thread where fans pointed out unusual review patterns. Many screenshots mentioned features not yet in the game, and short playtimes with unrealistic reviews.

The Starsand Island Developers’ Take on the Positive Reviews Controversy

The developers addressed the situation in a public Steam post titled “Announcement Regarding Artificial Comments.” They said they had seen a surge of “overly positive ‘praise’ comments about our game appearing across various social platforms.”

At first, the team felt encouraged, but they noticed unusual patterns. Some reviews were posted after very short playtime and appeared almost at the same time.

The developers wrote: “At first, we believed this meant our game was being recognized and appreciated. However, we soon noticed something unusual on Steam: some comments were posted after very short playtime, and were released at nearly the same time (appeared to be AI-generated). This made us realize that something might not be right.”

The statement mentioned that posting a review requires purchasing the game, which made the pattern even more unusual.

“What makes it even more puzzling is that this approach is not cheap, since leaving a review requires purchasing the game. We later discovered that some of these accounts refunded the game after posting their reviews.”

The developers also said they have no concrete evidence that this activity was intentional. The team emphasized their main goal: making a good game for players.

“Making an indie game is not easy. We simply want to focus on building a good product and giving the players who truly like our game a better experience.”

They appealed to those involved in the unusual review activity, asking them to allow the developers to focus on the game: “To whoever may be behind this, we kindly ask you to stop. Please let us focus on making our game in peace. We pose no threat to anyone.”

The post ended with a promise that future updates would respond to questions and feedback from the community.

“Thank you very much for your understanding. Next announcement, we will respond to the main concerns raised by the community.”

Fans have widely shared the letter and praised the developers for being open about what they noticed. Starsand Island’s Early Access continues to be a chance for players to provide feedback and shape the game.

What Questions Arise After This Starsand Island Announcement?

But with this announcement, a bigger question arises. If the developers didn’t do it, then who did? It is easy to notice that the review accounts have purchased and played the game for hours. Perhaps a marketing agency is quietly boosting the early ratings.

It’s also possible that enthusiastic fans coordinated a review push to make the game look more popular. Some fans speculate that bots with genuine‑looking playtime were used to avoid detection, or that the competitors are manipulating perception to create controversy or stir the community.

The recent discussion about reviews shows how engaged and observant the community is. The developers have shown their commitment to transparency by addressing the situation publicly.