To say something in honor of the OP - there is a bias here. There is a bias here that negative reviews which are not really reviews and are not helpful are voted down and spoken ill of while positive reviews which are not really reviews and are not helpful either are voted up as helpful even if they aren't. It is indeed as pointed out first by user
R8V9F5A2 partly a popularity contest. People who love a game will just find anything about it useful even if it is rather uninformative.
As an example look at the top most helpful review of System Shock: Enhanced Edition. Currently 102 out of 109 people find it helpful which probably translates to very helpful, so you would expect lots of information about the game itself but you won't find much if anything at all, just a general positive sentiment in exactly the same way the review of the OP expressed a general negative sentiment, only with more words. In short: Reviews here on GOG really are partly Popularity Contests.
For completeness the review I'm referring to:
"LL-l-l-look at you hh-hacker! You're getting yet another chance to go against a perfect, immortal machine. Oh damn. I'm so glad GOG finally did it (presumably, also kudos on sorting out the rights, Night Dive!). This Sci-Fi / Cyberpunk successor to Ultima Underworld is IMO one of the best things that ever happened to gaming.
The game's creators managed to bring to life an environment so life-like by contemporary standards, that playing the game I felt immersed completely. All the emotions were genuine. Awe, disgust, curiosity, and fear. Mostly fear...
I was invested in this game to the point of looking for a safe spot and making my character lie down on some comfortable surface and letting him play a few games on his PDA thingie, before I would "put him to sleep" before turning off the game.
After all these years I remember System Shock to be a near-perfect computer gaming experienced, only flawed by non-intuitive control scheme. Since this isn't mostly a problem anymore in the enhanced edition (mouselook FTW!), there are few games or none I could recommend more!"
Why this is rather not so helpful and should not be upvoted so much:
- "I'm so glad GOG finally did it ..." - Has nothing to do with the game itself and doesn't say anything about the game but rather something about the reviewer.
- "This [...] is IMO one of the best things that ever happened to gaming." - Just a general sentiment of approval, tells you nothing about the game.
- "The game's creators managed to bring to life an environment so life-like by contemporary standards, that playing the game I felt immersed completely" - The central tiny bit of information of the review. Immersion is supposedly very high. Okay.
- "I was invested in this game to the point of [...]." - Is just an iteration of the same thing which prolongs the review but does not add much information.
- "After all these years I remember System Shock to be a near-perfect computer gaming experienced..." - Again a general sentiment of approval (in case the reader didn't get it yet)
- "...only flawed by non-intuitive control scheme. Since this isn't mostly a problem anymore in the enhanced edition ..." - Well this is actually some information for those who are used to the non-intuitive control scheme of the original.
So if you would condense the review to the information that is contained it would sound like:
"I love this game. I think it's really good. I like the immersion. Controls have been improved."
This is somewhat useful but 102 out of 109?
Would a review sounding like:
"I don't like this game. I think it's bad. I don't like the immersion. Controls have been improved."
get the same number of usefulness votes? I guess not.
Because there is a bias and a quiet understanding that a popularity contest is included in the voting.
I don't mean to say about anyone personally. It's just what happens.