Just a silly little something I made after reading some... Less than impressive reviews here. This is really just meant as a joke.

1. Thou shalt not ignore a game’s flaws. No game is perfect and each is always going to have at least one problem. Even if you think it minor, be sure to divulge anything you think is an issue with the gameplay.

2. Thou shalt not complain about the price of the game, sales exist and can render complaints about price moot. If you sincerely think a game is overpriced, just say “wait for it to go on sale”.

3. Thou shalt not complain about the game not working on your computer when others clearly show the game itself is in working condition. FAQs and customer service exist for a reason, take your complaints to the people who run Gog and spare us.

4. Thou shalt not complain about modern games, yes there are problems in the industry today but overall games have gotten better over the years: less bullcrap difficulty, more varied gameplay, more innovation, better graphics, learning from the mistakes of old games, more multiplayer... No need to waste your review grumbling on how you think new games aren’t good.

5. Thou shalt not take into account whoever makes the game in your review. Some companies are scummy to be sure, but even they can make good games. Leave your opinions on them out of the review, review the game itself.

6. Thou shalt not title your review “best _ ever”, I hate to break to you but that one DOS game from your childhood is not the pinnacle of whatever genre it is, even if it is hailed as a classic there really is no one best game in any form. You can praise something without using hyperbole.

7. Thou shalt actually give details on how a game is “innovative”, “fun”, or “unique”, those words aren’t specific and don’t help anyone.

8. On a similar note, thou shalt not make a review that is just “this game is good. I’ve played it a bunch”. You are given a substantial amount of letters for a reason, use them and clarify what you actually like about the game

9. Thou shalt not talk about how you grew up with the game. You can gush about a game without giving your whole life story

10, In general, thou shalt not let nostalgia influence your review. Nostalgia isn’t a bad reason to like something, but it really doesn’t work as a reason to recommend a game to someone. Not every game is a classic or has even aged well, and that is perfectly fine. I myself love the game Wizardry 8, but also understand why a lot of gamers would not be into it, even those who enjoy CRPGs. Once again no game is perfect and not everyone is going to get into them.

Update: Dang, did not expect this to infuriate others. Again I'd like to reiterate this is just for fun and I apologize for hurt feelings, just please no tirades.

Thou shalt not trust reviews.

"yes there are problems in the industry today but overall games have gotten better over the years"

lol, no, stopped reading there.

I too question #4.

I also have a problem with #3 & #5..

I´m not someone who look a lot for the past stuff, but have to ask, define better please.

I don't look at reviews here. Too much, "I played this 20 years ago when I was in my mother's womb, it's amazing!" They haven't played it yet, so why review it?!

No. 4 - only the graphics in some games improved:)

I wholeheartedly agree.

I’d like to thank some of the posters here giving everyone perfect visual examples of the nostalgia-goggle wearing people who keep polluting GOG reviews...

Its not really a question that games have in fact gotten objectively better in a multitude of ways; if you don’t like them fine but you cannot deny games like Super Mario Odyssey, Smash Bros Ultimate, Dragon Quest 11, Astral Chain, God Of War PS4, Red Dead Redemption 2, and various indie games have been breaking boundaries and have taken things old games did and improved upon them.
“BUT MICROTRANSACTIONS”
Not as prevalent as people claim. Plus believe it or not there are games that use them right,

Also like I said: these commandments were just meant as a joke. If something In them triggered you enough to stop reading, you have emotional problems to sort out.

That is a fair review, thank you kindly. However I really must iterate this:
The definition of perfection is being entirely without fault or defect. If a game has a flaw it is not perfect no matter how good it is. Not even Ultima 7 can fulfill this, which I must be frank that while I do enjoy the game greatly it does have substantial flaws: the UI is clunky, the graphics are subpar, and the writing is extremely annoying. It is ALL a matter of taste, the perfect game can only be a game that appeals to all regardless of their tastes. The only games I find that do come close to this are Smash Bros and Minecraft.
And there is nothing wrong with the lack of a perfect game, you can love something even when it has big flaws.

That definitely isn't true. Most modern games are garbage, whereas in the past, most games were good and very few were of poor quality.

Agreed Half-agree.
There are games which never goes on sale, and some games that ask a lot more than it's really worth.
Those scenarios should be pointed out, but they are overall rare. Half-Agree.
It entirely depends upon how many people experience problems.
If 1 person shows it working, doesn't mean 99 other people don't have issues. Disagree.
This is a question of taste mostly, and reviews are there to display your particular flavor.
The important part is to explain what, and why, you didn't like it. So others can judge for themselves.
Your own litany of "improvements" doesn't align with my thinking, and your review leaving those out would therefor deceive me about the content of the game. Half-Disagree.
Certain practices by certain companies are detrimental to the whole of the industry, and not mentioning that is like ignoring a flesh-eating virus because the morphine makes everything feel better for the moment, leaving it to fester and spread.
Make people aware that giving them money is akin to supporting those practices. Agreed. Agreed. Agreed. Half-agreed. Half-agreed.

Leaving aside "various indie games" and Astral Chain (which I am not familiar with), I'm not sure what "boundaries" were broken by the other games you named. They are sequels iterating upon the last games in their series, not examples of radical new experiences. That is fine, I personally like "more of the same" in gaming actually, but when it comes to your point I am not sure they are great evidence. Also, not everyone agrees the sequels are the best versions of a series gameplay. Ain't many people holding up the newest Final Fantasy as the best one. I'm curious how much prevalence would there need to be for you to acknowledge it as a problem? Could you assign a percentage point to that? For example, my standard is that any percentage above 0% in the industry is too prevalent. I wholeheartedly disagree with the idea that they can ever be done right. I will admit that straight up no-gambling version is "better" than the randomized gambling version, but I happily choose neither.

As far as nostalgia-goggles reviews go, I'm fine with them, but with one caveat: The reviewer should have played the gog version to completion at least once.

There's cases like that Call of Cthulhu game where the game page is full of five star reviews from people who took gog's claims that they "fixed it" at face value. And those same reviewers would later show up on the forum and complain about a game breaking bug where you get crushed by a rock at the very end of the game (which - to my knowledge - still hasn't been fixed).