My ideal review is something that is fair to the game (even if it is awful) and does not let nostalgia or bias get in the way still getting personal. I think the best reviews are technically two in one, one where the reviewer is giving their biased opinion and one where they get unbiased and give how they think others would like it. Like if I were to review Star Control 2, I would sing praises on how much I love its gameplay, story, and universe but then get back to reality and explain what I think others would hate even though in my eye they are nitpicks. Its a hard balance to find I know, but still...

As a whole I do think technical issues belong to the forum, HOWEVER if the technical problem is persistent even after hours and hours of troubleshooting or several people have the exact same problem I can accept a small review alerting everyone of the technical issue (like what happened with Dungeon Keeper 2 a while back).

Don't get me wrong ;) Sounds now quite different from the beginning ;)

But for this definition we agree!

And I must say, I do NOT understand why your original comment is being down-voted. Except from people who do not like an open discussion and are AGAINST freedom of speech.

IF YOU WHO DOWNVOTED would at least say so and voice what you don't like, THAT WOULD be a discussion, but just hiding behind a downvote button is plain stupid!!!

Feel free to downvote it as you like, it will just prove the point.

A discourse is also to test oneself opinion, but just downvoting without participating is a dictatorship.

So back to the discussion ;)

Even if you look at professional reviews even they do not meat your high standards ;) But that seems to be a problem of the new age. (No I don't ant to single you out tomyam80 ;) ) If you look at like text speech, comments on other platforms, TV and so on: Everything is being just downgraded too yes or no, with us or against us, just black and white.

So I put forward the hypothesis, that a lot of people can not longer really participate in a proper discussion or even understand what a discussion really means. They can often just be mean without even thinking further what they really propagate with this.

As a positive criticism for your opinion:
You think that technical problems just belong in the forum: Nice example in the moment (not 100% sure if it true), the latest patch for TW3 has downgraded the FPS to 20 (on consoles), IMHO opinion that shall be in a review, right at the front. Some people might say, no it does not belong in a review.

Now, if you would be the buyer: Is it critical information? Me thinks Yes ;) PLUS GOG could always make an add-on saying it has been fixed and the reviewer could confirm or still disagree.

Even small technical problems can be a throwback for some customers (thinking off in-game music here ;) )

But again, I think it is better to have such information prior in the review, than just at the end. The first thing you want is a WORKING product, am I right? What it is, at least for me, is only the secondary question, as if it is not running no description/review would help me at all ;)

Which brings us back to a fair review:
Now for TW3 (as I said, I think in the moment the best example):
Is it a fantastic game with stunning graphics, yes for sure.
Has it got a good game-play/scenario, yes for sure.
Is it NOW for some people unplayable, unfortunate, I think yes. (20 FPS is even less than on the old TV's!!! ;) )

So for a fair review in this case, it WOULD mean to first say, sorry console guys, you are screwed, but TW3 is great ;)

Disclaimer: I do not have a console with TW3 and I can only re post what has been written in other medias.
Disclaimer 2: All what has been stated is MY OWN OPINION

sometime it gives the buyer heads up

Dunno - I post (the few) problems in the forums, not in the reviews. ; )

Well, u just single me out. ;)

Anyway, I agree that OP is being downvoted 4 some stupid or no reason (just like in my case in another thread). Ppl (or shd I say trolls) that lack the courage 2 openly admit they r the 1 who downvote another member shd hang their heads in shame. These ppl either lack the intellect 2 hv a open discussion/debate or simply just hv a lack of civility & respect 4 freedom of speech. All they know how 2 do is hide in the bushes & downvote u if they do not like wat u post. Well, trolls will be trolls I guess. ;p

The main pt however is such actions r deplorable & MUST NOT be condone by other members. I personally feel if any member come across a post that was downvoted 4 some stupid or no reason & feels it does not warrant being downvoted the member shd do their part 2 upvote the post. Doing so will counter any future attempts by these trolls as they know their time downvoting others will be wasted & futile cos we certainly more than outnumber them.

Aside fr the issue highlighted abv, I also 1 2 commend some really great ideas contributed in this thread such as hving a separate review or bulletin 2 highlight any current technical issues in a game & keeping it moderated as well as updated once it is solved. I think this wld really help any potential buyer of the game make up their mind if it is worth buying now or 2 wait till those technical issues highlighted r fixed 1st b4 buying.

Lastly, just like 2 pt out that when 1 intends 2 write a review concerning glitches, 1 shd remind themselves 2 write in a neutral/unbiased manner instead of being overcome by emotions & hving 2 resort 2 RANTING IN CAPS. The keyword is Constructive Criticism & this of cos applies 2 how 1 shd write in a forum as well.

Thks all 4 reading & sry 4 the slight derailment. :)

Because negative reviews are a thing that exists. If people have faults with the games they have every right to express that. If I go to a restaurant, and the waiter treats me like garbage and the food tastes awful, damn right I'm going to complain. So why should games get special treatment?

The only way to update the review is to contact support and have it changed.

Even without that, what they ought to do is flag posts that refer to older versions of the game as being out of date. Most of the reviews are going to be equally useful for more recent versions, but if there's a mention of bugs, those may not apply any longer.

There's also a bit about having to retest if something has been broken. That can take a rather long time and it makes more sense to just place more weight on recent reviews when it comes to bugs.
What makes you think that they aren't speaking or have something to say that hasn't already been said? There's no reason for me to post if somebody has already said what I want to say. I suppose that I could give a post a +1, and I suspect that's what usually happens.

Note, I haven't been voting for or against posts in here, but it's worth considering that it's probably not trolling, it's likely that what they wanted to say was already said.

Wasn't it possible to sort by date before the site redesign? There's no sort option now.

Usually the top reviews stay relevant, but from time to time you get a game where the reviews are dominated by launch issues that were fixed. Or you get a game like Terraria with ongoing content additions. It's in GOG's interest to keep customers up to date with changes that improve a game. Changes that hurt the game would rise to the top too, but in the long run that's also in GOG's interest.

Except for options to sort by date and rating, the review list usually works well enough. It's not a pressing problem. And most games aren't going to get enough review traffic after the first week anyway. But it's frustrating when a popular game leads with several pages of upvoted complaints about a launch issue that's been solved. Even a direct link to the forum to discuss updates would be better than nothing.

Why doesn't GOG provide a store page link to each game's forum by default? It's a lot more convenient than hunting through the forum list.

Assuming they ever were relevant. The top reviews are usually just the ones that were released shortly after the game was released here. There are probably exceptions, but often times the more thoughtful reviews will suffer for not having been posted immediately upon publishing the game.

If they're truly terrible, they probably won't get ranked, but newer reviews are always at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to being ranked. I think they really need to consider adding some sort of weighted average to the ranking so that newer reviews have a somewhat improved chance of being seen.

Obviously, that's not something that should be undertaken lightly, old reviews aren't automatically worthless, but he ones released during that first week are much more likely to be problematic than more recent ones.

Really bad reviews rarely make it to the top, though. The ones that get the most upvotes for a week are almost always a good representation of the gameplay, the release issues, or both. The ones we're talking about being a problem usually become a problem only later on, after issues are corrected.

I agree the later reviews almost never get attention regardless of their quality. I think a major factor in that is the amount of traffic a game page gets. When are the most people going to be looking at the page and voting on its reviews? The first week, when it's visible on the front page. Giving later reviews more exposure would give later visitors a chance to see and rate them, but in many cases the sustained traffic and interest just isn't going to be there. People will come back for a sale, see the reviews, possibly rate them but probably just make their decision and move on.

It may not be a serious problem but you're right, the review system could be improved.

I don't recall ever having seen a truly bad review on the first page, except in the very short term when a new game comes out.

The really bad reviews are usually less of a problem than the reviews that look like they might be good reviews, but have issues that are only obvious to people who already own the game. And ones that are less useful than they appear.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure that it's ever going to be possible to fix those problems.

I think u completely missed wat Goodaltgamer (if I may spk on behalf) & I meant. We weren't talking abt those who +1 at all. In fact, I'm perfectly ok if ppl hv ntg more 2 add other than a +1. It's those who -1 that we were concerned abt, those that downvote ppl when they hv ntg better 2 do & do it just 4 fun or those who simply can't participate in a thread due 2 their low IQ & only know how 2 downvote ppl when they c some post they dun like.

Those who hv ntg else 2 add other than a -1 a neutral post 4 no apparent reason r definitely trollers cos if they r not happy they can always hv an open discussion in the thread. By choosing 2 give a -1 shows they r incapable of any intelligent debate & do not respect other member's views or right 2 freedom of speech.

This lack of civility is apparent in many forums as well the net in general, all 1 hv 2 do is look @ sites such as YouTube & other social media. The many 'thumbs down' & -ve reply comments 2 a well-worded & logical post or politically-correct video with no moderators stepping in is a worrying sign that will further encourage more trolls 2 flourish under the 'guise of anonymity' in the cyberworld.

But that's life on the net I supposed, still hate getting numb/used 2 it though.

Apologies 4 once again hving 2 derail this thread which I found 2 be of high standard in general with many useful comments. I wld appreciate if we can focus on the Topic subject rather than harp on issues that r not relevant, thks & keep up the gd work ppl! :)

I think I understood, I just think that there's no particular reason to believe that it's being done in a mean-spirited or secretive way. I don't happen to agree with the moderation, but it doesn't always make much sense to downrep and then explain why you've downrepped. In general, if you think you have to explain, you probably shouldn't be downrepping them.

Yes you did say it correct (man, if you could just speak and not text ;) ) even on my be-halve. As I stated, in a discussion (civil or not ;) ) you VOICE your opinion, the same as I voiced mine. But just clicking the downvote without saying so for no apparent reason is IMHO not acceptable out of 2 reasons:

1.) It will not help in any discussion to get further, even if the discussion might end up with: We agree that we don't agree, which is perfectly fine for a discussion.
2.) It is the act, me thinks not of a troll, but of a coward. Why not openly admit: Sorry, don't like what you are saying, I gonna downvote your post.

Heck no, it doesn't happen, which means this person is just a coward.

plus, if somebody doesn't like this top he is not forced to read, but using the downvote button is participating without participation. So just rude on top. I say it straight forward, pisses me off.

And as Tomyam pointed out derails a discussion as well.

And Hedwards, just read your last post, was working top to bottom ;)

That was what we were complaining about ;)

Back to the topic:

What you and wvpr brought up are good points as well, so older a review is, so higher it will rank as only the absolute number of helpful clicks are counted and not like number / lifetime.

Let's say for example, good game, but because of W10 (for example only ;) ) would brake the game (balance/gameplay/whatever) the newest review would be hidden at the end, so not really useful at all.

Spitting it up: MIGHT be a solution, but what about those games (talking about Vanilla here, so no modification ;) ) which because of new HW become really bad? Imagine, out of technical reason it could only be played in a fixed 320*200 Window and you want to play it on a 4k Monitor? Hey still great game, but who has a microscope before the monitor ;)

I think it might be better to go with a mix, remove the oldest reviews automatically unless the reviewer would 'repost' (lets call it) the review? Like the system sending after one year an email: Do you want to keep your review, then please visit blablabla...
But on top, users could decide via a let's call it keep it button, which one to keep.