Ok, so now GoG is selling games at 20 bucks, we have people useing the review system to complain about it.

WHAT GIVES?

The review system is there to REVEW THE GAME NOT GOG. If you want to complain about something, USE THE FORMUS LIKE I AM NOW.

All you do by useing the review bit to say your crap is make you look stupied.

Lets not forget that you don't just get the game on GoG, and people complaing about not geting your moneys worth becose you found a pack a few years back is STUPIED.

I hope GoG go though the reviews and remove the ones that do not have anything to do with the game. They do nothing good for anyone, and should not have been writen in the first place.

I don't usually nitpick, but if you're going to call other people stupid, then you shouldn't misspell "stupid". Just saying.

Are you new to the internet? (I kid, I kid) Complaining is kind of ubiquitous; it has become nearly a sport in some places. That goes double for gamers and gaming forums. GOG has, generally, a better community, but we are not immune.

I haven't seen the reviews, and I am sure they are as silly as you say. In that case why not just let them stay where they are. If they truly throw the review score of the game off by a huge amount, then maybe some action could be taken, but there is no point in trying to censor stupidity and bitching out of the internet. :)

"I have in my hand a boxed copy of "World of RollerCoaster Tycoon" that contains RollerCoaster Tycoon 2+3 and all expansions, and I paid a lot less than $20 for it 2 years ago.
C'mon GoG, you are better than this. "

"GOG needs to seriously do something about its highend prices. $19.99 for Rollercoaster 3? Ouch. "

"I already own the boxed copy of this, which cost me $10 a year ago. $20 is far too expensive for it. "

"This really needs to be a $10 game or it needs to be gone. People come to GOG to find good games at the $5-$10 price range. This isn't even a game that took any special treatment to get to work on Windows (obviously). Whatever happened to giving us the older games that had to be reworked to allow them to work on Windows? Before you release new games how about you work on getting us more classics from Microprose, Impressions, Sierra, Lucas Arts, Maxis, Accolade, Apogee, etc. I love you guys and I understand that you have a business to run that needs revenue to succeed but I'm starting to see you as just another software vendor. Focus!"

"Let me just say, that this is the first time GoG honestly overpriced a title. I mean, I've bough this game (with both expansions) in retail for less, and that was months ago.
WTF GoG? "

Couple of them :)

Only whining about the price - nothing for the game as a game ...reviews are not for this for sure. Btw don't you need to buy the game to make a review?

In terms of GOG reviews, some games do need to be given bad reviews just because of how bad the game is, MoO3 and M&M9 I think deserve bad reviews to ward off new buyers.

But the reviews OP is mentioning likely aren't even made by people who have purchased the game, they just write a review which has nothing to do with the game but something irrelevant (GOG's pricing).

This is unacceptable, and really GOG at the least should restrict the ability to write a review of a game, to owning that game in your GOG library. Also, I would recommend having a two-week waiting period between buying a game, and being able to review it, so they can actually play it.

That being said, the people who give these rubbish "reviewers" aren't posters on these forums, they are babies who just lurk about, and probably pirate GOG's releases anyway (that's the kind of people they are).

Oh don't get me wrong I don't want censorship,but this is getting silly. If somebody don't like the game pricing ok ... but reviews are for opinion for the games not for that for sure ;)

I agree with you that these are not the best reviews on the planet. I am pretty sure most people feel that way as well. If most people will disregard the reviews anyway, then why bother removing them? Once a group starts deciding what can and cannot be put in a review, then guidelines must be made and enforced. Who is to say what should and should not belong in a 'valid' review at that point? Who makes the rules? This is the danger I see. I would rather the lame reviews stay than artificial limits be introduced to the system.

Everyone can rate any game, regardless of whether they own it or not. At least with such reviews you know why people voted a game down and can make up your own mind. And if you find a review unhelpful, you've got the option to vote it down, too. Price is part of the package, even though it's subjective, so IMO there's nothing wrong with mentioning it, if it's an important criterion for the reviewer. Sure, just nagging about the price and writing nothing substantial about the game is unhelpful, but is it any worse than people just writing "This game is great, you need to buy it"? Most people are smart enough to only pay attention to the more helpful reviews and just ignore the rest.

we don't need limits,we need people to understand that the review system is not for whiniing for prices that is all :)

I am a grown up and I can make my own mind up if a game is overpriced.

I can equally ignore the "this game isn't Good enough for GOG", "this game isn't Old enough for GOG" and "this game doesn't work on my machine, so is rubbish" reviews.

There's no point getting worked up about them.

As someone else stated lots of people may already own the games so should be entitled to review them even if they don't own them through GOG, so I don't agree with the "only if you bought it on GOG" policy either.

Oh, good luck with that then... ;)

"Am getting sick of people" is actually the plot of "I have no mouth and I must scream".

...

/slow clap

smart people like me