Hi

I haven't ever done this sort of thing before, but I've noticed this happening and I think it's gonna have a negative effect on GOG. I've noticed that most new games that appear on gog, they seem to almost immediately get like a 2 star. There are some games that get more about what you'd expect, but a lot of the more newer indie releases and some games exclusive to gog get instantly panned. I have a possible theory that it may be some small scale industrial tampering or something. I've noticed some of these game coming out at the same time on steam, and the majority of them haven't gotten this instant hate. It's not a huge deal, cus a good game will still end up getting the praise to counter this sort of thing and this is all just a hunch. All I'll say is, keep an out out on the games coming out gog and steam, and take not of the ratings. Nothing can really be done if this is happening, but if it is happening it would be good if people are being made aware of it.

I don't want spark anything, but if this is actually happening I just think people should be aware. I haven't managed to get evidence in time, but if you notice something iffy you can put it here. Again this is just speculation, but anyway thank you for your time.

There are 3 different ratings. The first one you can ignore, as anyone can put anything there. Go by the second one, the verified owner score.

Right now, Superliminal, for example, has a 3.6 overall rating, 5.0 verified owner rating

This might be something as simple as a quick-and-dirty calculation algorithm on GOG's side to avoid division by zero (votes) for new games.

Yes.
Tons of people on here refuse to face it, but, since there aren't that many reviewers on GOG, a couple of shitfaces are reviewbombing everything and have destroyed the whole use of the overall rating for pretty much all recent indie games. It's especially infuriating, because the wishlist use this rating.
So couple of examples : Charlestone digital edition ( 2,9 overall rating, against 4 for owners), Ikenfell is worst (3,5 overall rating against almost 5). I used to put thing on my wishlist just to see what overall rating would be some time later before taking a decision. Now, it's simply worthless. The overall rating is also losing any value it had because of those f&cks.

oh yeah I forgot about the verified user thing. I do also think that there are some people taking the piss in some cases. There was a user I saw called Balaclava Bandit or something and the reviews they put for some games were completely irrelevant bullshit. Can't remember what game it was for but the review was not about the game at all. That kind of thing really bugs me, because it's damaging the reputation of a game for the sake of a joke, and for indie games that can be a death sentance for sales

Only seeing "Verified owner" scores isn't better. That means you are looking at ratings exclusively from people who have a vested interest in justifying their purchase to themselves in order to feel like they didn't make a stupid decision and waste their money.

Hence, in order not to feel bad about themselves, they are likely to over-inflate the scores they give, which misrepresents the game by making it seem way better than it actually is in reality.

at least it is people who have actually played the game

Really now? Have you played every game you own? Never tempted to give a score three minutes into the game because the intro was cool or some such?

at least you know there is a higher chance they have played the game....

Even aside from systemic problems with griefers, it's not totally unbelievable this would be a thing.

Someone enjoying a game is likely to play for several hours/days/weeks before reviewing, whereas someone who experiences technical problems, or hates the game 20 minutes in, is going to have both the motive and available time to share with the world.

That said, I find GoG's review/ratings system to be pretty unreliable, and the interface is meh at best. Even if I'm buying a game here I tend to look at reviews on ahem, other game sites, or more typically youtube reviews before focusing on the GoG ones just for comments about version compatibility.

I think it's a lack of reviews, as already mentioned. Big titles like Witcher, Baldur's Gate and so on, get lots of reviews. Judging by the number of reviews, any given Indie game only sells 10-20 copies on GOG, and that can't be correct.

Even though there are not that many reviews for most Indie games, the rating spread is usually good.

To me, a game having only 5/5 ratings is a bad sign, I want different opinions - not the same ones repeated. A game that has an average of 3.5 or something has reviews that are worth exploring, because then you read about the great stuff and the bad stuff. A wider range of the ratings means a wider range of opinions.

In general, I think gamers are too accustomed to mainstream media reviews, which align themselves with each other because they are written by people with more or less the same taste in games and similar gaming backgrounds. A healthy review environment should have a wide spread in the ratings, reflecting different opinions.