Oh, I'm well aware why they're there. For my opinion. Considering that I have a habit to buy even games I'm never going to play, then I'm even too generous. I assure you those games are real manure and would deserve less than a star (unfortunately that's not possible to give).

P.S. All you crybabies can downvote this post as well. I already started to worry that I might look too much of a mainstream shill, loser or a sellout.

You know, once you openly admit you abuse all systems like this, you don't really have much of a moral highground to call others names for downvoting you :D

What I find a bit funny: When I click on the game page, the "You may like these products" selection recommends Outlast 2 for some reason. Is this showing for anyone else? lol

Look at the bright side: There's about 100 people who pledged not to buy any games on gog this year, so maybe gog decided to play nice and make it easy for them.

Same for me. And Batman Arkham Asylum. I guess if kids come here to buy a cheap, flash-looking dating sim at least they'll get recommended an actual good game too :D

Cats are no cats, dogs are no dogs
Cause I lost my true love in middle school
And I've never found it.
Only you.

---
Obligatory https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgDKtLPp46s [Flying Pickets '83]

What abuse? That's my rating system. If it's shit but I still might buy it - 2 stars, total manure not worth my money - 1 star. What's wrong with that? Mediocre, Good and Great games still recieve their appropriate stars. I didn't find it important to mention since that should be obvious. Sometimes it happens that I still buy that manure for various reasons but I leave it at 1 star since I wouldn' t recommend it to others. It's rare, but sometimes I only discover how bad a game was after the fact. I obviously try to avoid such situations. I don't mind helping others to avoid similar situations. That's why I never hold myself back when it comes to ratings.

If you seriously don't see the problem with rating games you didn't play, I'm certainly not going to lose my time trying to argue with you, the same way I don't argue with flat-earthers.

Really have to agree here, while I loved the art direction and mechanics of this game, (I'm nuts over Gridders/Blobbers) I found it too much of a slog even on the first dungeon, and those bandit sounds were like nails-on-the-chalkboard-aggravating!

Getting my entire party one-shotted by fire-breathing beatles in the first dungeon is too unbalanced for my tastes... and yeah, wizardry is not as unbalanced as I at least had enough resources to heal my party in battle, so it was doable, but having your healers have only a few HP healing power ain't gonna cut it when the RNG has a 20:80 ratio, rather it was 50:50 instead!

I really loved the game aside from that, so much so, I'm still considering re-purchasing it again, even though I refunded it due to the horrific unbalancing!

NOTE: I prefer balanced games, so the casual difficulty is just as bad as brutal, I want normal difficulty as I simply do not have a lot of patience for do-overs; personally I'm too old to spend eternity fighting against the game instead of just playing it!

Do you ONLY identify manure when you step in it OR maybe you can smell it already few yards away?

Do you think that the Earth is cube?

Cool release!

Edit: this post got eaten by a grue.

In what world is 2 stars worth buying to any average Joe? Last time I checked, 2/5 = 40% is considered a failure in all the hundreds of tests everyone has taken. And why would you still buy games that are poor quality? That signals to the gamedevs that there's a market demand for that product and they should be making more of it.

You do realize by abusing the rating system, some person on the polar opposite is going to go in there and add in their own inaccurate fan bias to their rating to counteract your low rating? Then we get games like YIIK, for example, that has a 1.9/5 overall rating because of its controversies and a 4/5 verified English owners rating that aggravates me because it means I can't trust any of these numbers at face value and I have to waste more time finding independent reviews to get a second opinion, which invalidates the entire purpose of the rating system in the first place. Instead, if people managed to overcome their personal biases and rate the games more fairly and objectively, then the system will work as intended.

There are some games here that I can't stand, but I understand if I also engage in review bombing, it makes the system worse for future legitimate customers who may like it. Honestly, how can your opinion count if you've never played the game before in any significant capacity - this same logic can be applied to nearly everything in life. Keep those worthless review bombing practices outta here.

And one has to wonder what utter trollop they must have had to play for the game to be classed as "A hit and miss RPG".

Yes, after an hour of reviews and watching gameplays, I now know it's an objectively bad game. But to an unsuspecting buyer, they might just see the 4/5 and try it out and get duped. That is why I still vouch for a standardized rating criteria to limit extreme rating variability to weed out sociopolitical bias, revenge bias, and/or review bombing.

Anyway, as a grown ass man, this game about middle school love is clearly not for me. So I'll act like a reasonable human being and refrain from buying a product I know I'm not going to like and review bombing it. Like the rest of the silent majority.