some people jsut 1 star certain games for no reason and i think there should be more restrictions on posting reviews so we actually g et some quality reviews left

I don't agree with the solution that you are proposing. There are plenty of ways for a reviewer to be familiar with GOG games and qualified to review them without actually owning them on GOG. Some of the most honest & reviews come from people who don't own the games on GOG.

However, you do have a point that there is a problem of certain troll users deliberately posting troll comments which aren't actually reviews, as if they are reviews.

The best solution to that is for GOG to curate the reviews and delete them in cases when they are obvious troll reviews.

1. We have the verified owners filter which you can use to see reviews from people who own the game on GOG.
2. Demanding a minimum amount of time to be logged to a game would require use of Galaxy, which would further go against the idea of it being optional and would be quite a literal "screw you" moment to Linux users.

The reviews system is much better right now with the included filtering tools.

What you're looking for is moderation of the reviews.

It entirely depends on the game, 2 hours might be fine for short games and extraordinary buggy ones to know whether they are worth buying. Games like Witcher 3, Kingdom Come etc and you would only have scraped the bottom of the barrel so it's hard to set a time limit also then there's the matter of having played on other platforms and other issues with this suggestion.

It would stop most troll reviews sure but shitty and rushed out reviews would be still be there.

How exactly do you propose to track drm-free games? Will people be forced to use Galaxy for 2+ hours before they can post a review?

Not everyone uses Galaxy and I wouldn't make it mandatory for reviews.
And as the other mentioned you could've played it on another platform (or in case of old games the original version on PC).

I think a working reporting feature for reviews would solve the problem too.
Once a reported review was checked and deemed valid it could be made "immune" to reporting, that way the support isn't busy with repeated reports. That would filter out the worst troll reviews.
That would risk review manipulation of course, but that's something GOG already could do anyway if they wanted to.

What a great optional feature that would be.

We can't do that! liltimmypoccet would commit suicide, and that would break my fucking heart!

Sounds like you're borrowing a mish mash of ideas from your favourite place, Steam.

"Logged in 2 hours of play"?

I see. Perceived review authenticity beats DRM free with a spiked club.

How this vending platform has fallen. And it can't get up.

You should only be allowed to start a thread if you have a clue and thought about what you're going to write for 2 minutes.

Good idea.
It would certainly keep me from making any more threads. :P

i appreciate your frustration from bogus reviews but putting a time limit of hours played before reviewing just wont work. Ive dropped games within 15min due to UI mechanics or nausea inducing graphics , glitches or any other myriad annoyances that make me as a consumer say screw it , my entertainment time is better spent elsewhere. I would however, like an ability to update a review to reflect changes in my opinion

He's not even a customer, he's someone standing outside of the store yelling at it because it contains "the devil's handiwork".

Either he's:

A) a troll with nothing better to do.
B) a beggar looking for codes/keys
C) a recipient of much head trauma

I'd gift him some VNs to break what's left of his mind, but I'm broke at the moment.

There are many people here who don`t use Galaxy, so you can`t track their gaming time. Should those people not have the right to write about the games they own and play?