>>718451027
Yaaay now we can have even more shit be across the board 10/10!

>>718451123
>Why could letting a company cherry pick who is allowed to give reviews to artificially boost ratings ever be a bad thing. Surely they will not keep doubling down and expanding on this to make the system even faker and gayer.
Anybody crying about "review bombing" is a faggot if there is some controversy with your game people can check the reviews and see for themselves if it is worth giving a fuck about or not. Very few games deserve a perfect rating. The fanboys supporting censorship because chinks didn't like their game will inevitably have it turned on them.