Hi

So I've been a supporter of GoG and honestly do enjoy their cause of DRM-free games in the age of Games-as-services ala Steam quite a lot.
There's still some particular things that rub me the wrong way, one major part being the reviews.

There is something to be said about how the star-rateing on the top of the review-page is encourageing non-reviews that generate more sales through influence via consensus, but it's a common practice at this point and is rather unlikely to change, seeing how GoG is runing a business afterall.

What I do not understand though, is the way written reviews work. You can write one and people who read it, can rate if it was helpful to their purchase-decision or not. So far so standard, but then you have no way to organize the reviews by date/rateing/or "review-information-value". The first two filters are basically the golden standard for most online-storefronts.

Another thing is, that the reviewsystem seems to quite honeslty activly "lose" average to bad reviews.
Twice I have written a review now for games that underwhelmed me. For Elex and Dead in Vinland.
Both of them through the galaxy-client and both close to, but not instantly on release.
The Elex-one I afterwards reposted via the GoG-site on firefox, since I had it pasted to a txt, which worked. The Dead in Vinland one was lost in the process, while a repost via the site is not possible, seeing how the "add a review"-prompt is not avilaible.
Neither of those reviews were outright hatemongering, contained spoilers or used problematic language - to my knowledge.
They were simple down to earth reviews, trying to give interested people another venue to read about the game.
In the case of Elex, there were a shitton of non-reviews in the 1 and 5 star-category.
Dead in Vinland has no reviews so far, which was the reason why I wrote one.

Quite honestly, if GoG really wants to stay true to it's consumerfriendly policies and continue the path of a renegade strideing a different path, it should consider to either fix it's reviewsystem, so it actually holds some value and is easier to filter for the few worthwhile informationnuggets in the midst of the whitenoise

or

axe it alltogether.

RIght now it's mostly outdated reviews for games which have been updated or nostalgia-ridden nonreviews of people who never played through their beloved "gem" in recent times and just judge their childhood more than they do the game.

Here's my question now:

Is there an approval-time for reviews in the current system? Do Devs get a say in which reviews get the go ahead and which don't?

Cheers

Please learn spelling punctuation and grammar before posting.

or just post in your native German so this guy can have a better time.

I'd mark this as a solution, but I can't via Galaxy. Gonna relog to the site tomorrow and get you the rep that way.

It's sad tbh.
I get that a GoG won't have the funds of a Valve, but this seems like willfull-neglect. It's not hurting sales to have noninformative reviews you can't filter, so it's not a priority.

If they'd at least give the option to edit reviews later down the line. I bet a lot of people would actually do that, instead of writeing about outdated mechanics and issues. Heck, even simple stuff for the readingpleasure of guys like Dahlia_Finola, like correcting spellingmistakes.

All around a weak show.

edit: turns out it did mark it down. Good on GoG galaxy.

Oh, the irony.

Maybe meant to be ironic. It is also missing a comma. <shrugs>

Nazi scum!!!!!!

Damn, that's a bummer for people who post reviews (like yours truly). :S

Nope. Just an alt of the dorod norod dude with the orange avatar, who was banned.