Agree that an "owner" filter would be nice - but I don't think it would get anyone away from the "nostalgic users with rose-tinted glasses" effect - there'd still be plenty of those. But the filter would placate those that think it would make a difference - so that would be good.

I agree with the OP. It would e nice to see a review by a gamer who actually played the GOG version.

It's not prevent lie in review, since gog not like steam you will never know what build reviewer used, it wil not force reviwer for QA like TS want, it will not break viewer glases whatever colours they are.
And it will not guaranty you and reviwer shared one point of view.

Forgive me but all that fuss is about "I would like to blame others for my choice".

If you're going to post in a topic like this at least spend some time to understand what the issue is before spouting off this non-sense.

There are no guarantees that a review will be useful, but when you have reviews on the front page where the reviewer states that they haven't played the game recently. Or worse where the reviews are from day one, I don't think that those are credible reviews and they are certainly not helpful.

Then you've got the morons out there that -1 my warning about Wasteland 2 being basically undownloadable for Linux because of the lack of a downloader for Linux. Something that's very much relevant to anybody that has a capped connection. That was an issue that GOG could have fixed in a trivial way, but chose not to fix and it rendered the game essentially unplayable.

Eh, add this one to the wishlists' pile for the incin.. I mean, for Gog's staff.

As much as I think what you portend is negative, it ends up with a positive spin. Go hedwards!

I doubt it would change a lot.
Even if it's a "verified owner" what if he just buys the game here, never plays it and writes a review? Just because he's a "verified owner" doesn't mean he played it or played it long enough to properly judge it (like kids buying an old game and then cry "this is old, i can't jerk off to the graphics and where's my waifu 0/10 IGN won't buy again" like 80% of all customer reviews on Steam (where you can only write reviews about games/dlc you own and it doesn't help at all)

User Reviews is a system that always will be abused. Be it nostalgics, kids or morons who go "this puzzle game makes my brain hurt, thumbs down" or people who think puking out some stupid meme is witty and clever and 3 words are a proper review.

I like the open ended reviews; it is sometimes a nag to see overly biased fluff but censorship is a slippery slope... plus it's probable that as many reviews are valid from people who own the game on another platform versus nostalgia.

Would I get bonus points if I could get Yoko Ono to sing happy birthday to you?

Are you seriously comparing the two? :P Her songs sound better if you play them backwards.

Maybe they could split the reviews in 2 user base, for example:

Part 1 "This review has been submitted by a verified game owner."

Part 2 "This review has been submitted by a user that doesn't own the game on GOG yet."

It may not be perfect but would probably give a reader a good idea of who reviewed the game.

The only thing that may be a small issue with this, is if someone owns the game on CD and hasn't bought it again on GOG, that user should manually specify in his review, if GOG adds a checkbox it could be prone to abuse and lies.

From what I've understood, all songs played backward sound better to any cult.

Good idea !
I like the idea of a "Game Owner" tag right next to the name of the reviewer. Let's make a community wishlist for that.

Hopefully, they can do it in a way that doesn't get Amazon up their butt.