No, this is not shameful behavior, nor is it anywhere near fraud or false advertising. The reviews were irrelevant. Those deleted reviews (the ones I saw, at least) said literally nothing about the game. They focused exclusively on the fact that it is a censored version of the game, a point which is explicitly mentioned on the store page -- at the top of the page AND at the bottom of the page. You literally cannot look at the store page and miss that text (at least not on a desktop browser; I haven't tried looking at it on a mobile device).

So yes, if a review says literally nothing about the game other than the fact that it is a specific version -- a fact which is explicitly noted multiple times on the store page -- then the review SHOULD be removed because it is irrelevant. Reasonable people look at reviews to get an idea of the gameplay and to get an idea of what is NOT explicitly mentioned on the store page.

I understand you are upset that GOG offers the censored version of the game but not the uncensored version and I agree that that's a stupid decision. Regardless, that fact and that emotion have literally nothing to do with whether the censored version of the game is good or not. Reviews are about reviewing the game, not about airing your grievances with the company.

No, they gave it the title "M Edition" to differentiate it from the AO edition. They explained that quite clearly on the store page.

If they called it "Censored Edition", then they would have people complaining about the "mature" parts of the game (the remaining nudity, gore, etc). Yes, the M Edition is a censored version of the game, but it is still very much a game for a mature audience.

The only way the title is misleading is if you look exclusively at the title and ignore everything else on the store page. And no, the text which explains that this is a censored version is NOT "fine print". It is the same exact size as ALL of the text on the page (except for section headers "A New Take on the Fan-Favourite Horror" and "Changes in the M Edition", which are in a LARGER font size).

If you buy a game based ONLY on the fact that it contains the words "M Edition" (or something similar) in the title, then you deserve whatever you get. Your ignorance is not proof or indicative of anything other than your ignorance.

They could put the part about there being an AO Version a bit more prominently on the page.
I assume Gog doesn't want to point to other stores so it's in the "fine print".(Fine print only because it's the last bit of the page)

Easiest solution......bring the full version over, then they could put an AO link with an age warning in a similar way to the demo link.

I agree with you about the reviews, but check the Kagura games or other H games, the bad pointless reviews are still there.
I usually don't but I now reported them, let's see what happens. I wonder how one would be ok and the other isn't.

I saw many nonsense 5* reviews nobody cares about. Type of "gooooooooooooddddDDdd....xDDDDD"
I saw many reviews talking about a game, but not about the gameplay but just celebrating the game/company.
Reviews that are guides for a game or guides for something technical.
Reviews that are warning for something (like DRM removed, something repaired)
Reviews telling you where to get something (sort of fundamental for it to work, enjoy or some mods)
Reviews bashing other reviews (negative ones).
Reviews that are memes, jokes or just something interesting about/behind the game's existence.
Reviews that are check-boxes (memes).
All of these (mostly) 5* and often "most helpful" or on the top.

Those rules are purposely misused if they don't go as far for the made up term "review bombing". Reviews do include talking about a game, it doesn't have to be just about gameplay.
Or in this case it's a new invention and "streamline" of GOG and something very "special" (well, not that much) is going on here.

Cherry on the top are reviews from developers itself, giving themselves 5* and telling people to go on some different site.
(example:)
gog.com/en/game/mdk

This is some serious bias going on here...

i really dont understand why its a problem to offer both versions of the game
The M version and the AO eddition then all woud probably be happy since then they can chose what to buy here

Yes, and they were removed as well because, just as with Red Dragon's and the other removed reviews, they violate GoG's review policy. Keep up.

That review was in 2011. This is 2022. Seriously, your need to grasp at whatever straws you can just to attack GoG is extremely transparent and pathetic.

I already asked this guy to not go around and insult me or engage with me at all. ALL he does are insults, following people and calling people mentally ill, etc... I think he wants people to loose minds and start doing something that would get them banned (or some threads closed), I don't know. Unfortunately, he is for some reason protected by moderators (especially by one specific one) and allowed to be just trolling people, spamming one thing over and over (in some cases) while there is no "volume" behind it. For "ages". It's just about the insults and spam which he even admits and he is proud about. He even said he is in specific thread(s) to just oppose every single person that will come there and "call their bullsh*t out" or something like that. Which is just one thing he "expects" from people.
While I see other people being censored for nothing by moderators (like people saying something "spicy" against anime porn - "edited" and censored especially by the one mentioned moderator). Or I just see disappearing posts (that are just critical of something GOG is doing/not doing). It's sad.
Also, anytime this guy is active those downvotes happen right before he posts something (I tend to edit my grammar always for a while so I see that when refreshing a page a lot because of it).

Anyway I will answer for others to clarify that:
The fact that this review is from 2011 is even worse. It's also promoted by GOG itself as the 'most helpful'.
And they were warned about that specific review couple times (just by me - publicly and directly) and they still do ignore that.

And reviews I am talking about are not removed and the most visible ones. Front page ones. That was the point I made in previous post.

Dude it doesn't matter when a review happens if things are not handled equally on review polocies when review politices are changed then its unfair treatment.. As unlike laws //'grandfathering in'' or '''Allowed do to Legacy '' Reviews are somethings that should always in terms of media get equal treatment

Probably because adapting the original AO version (and other games from the series) for GOG requires extra work. This new lame edition is basically a separate game that was developed with GOG in mind from the start (just my guess).
I don’t know why the publisher (and GOG) thought that offering this castrated version as the only available one would be a good idea.

JarJarRIP: Soo... they are selling anime porn "games" now here (with "arguably" underaged girls), that sometimes have a rape in it.. but they are also censoring games that are sexual.. but not anime? :D

I don't even know anymore... :D

I don't know much about this, but if I would see something called "M" edition, I would assume "Mature", therefore uncesored.

I kinda understand why they (the devs) have made this censored version. They can sell it in places where they can’t sell the AO original (some countries, like Germany & China, and consoles, I guess). (Although I can’t imagine many people would want this butchered version instead of the true one.) But GOG nowadays doesn’t have problems with selling AO games. Anyway, a lot of people loathe censorship, and selling only the censored version is just dumb.

(P.S. Personally, I don’t believe that they try to mislead customers with the “M Edition”. It is just to distinguish from the AO original. Calling it “Censored Edition” wouldn’t be good for sales.)

As was to be expected, this issue has caused some of the gog forum's most egregious intellectual lightweights to rear their ugly heads....

M-Muh review bombing!!!

Maybe gog should've just taken the hint instead and sold the unrated version - which people have been vehemently asking for ever since this thing got announced over a month ago. Now people are miffed that gog only sells the censored version. Whoda thunk it?!? It's like watching a train crash in ultra slow motion.

That's not how forums work. You might want to brush up on reality before proving your inexperience.
No, I said that engagement in conspiracy theories, like you constantly do shows there's mental issues. I'm sorry if that fact offends you. Case in point: You love conspiracy theories:
Here's some tinfoil. You clearly need to make yourself a hat.

<Facepalm> That's not how the review system works. It was promoted as the most helpful because it set the most positive votes over a time frame, not because the of your conspiracy theory that GoG staff chose it. Again, tinfoil, you need a hat.
If you want it removed, then report it. Otherwise, stop whinging.
Talk about projection.