GameRager: True, but I don't know if i'd want some of those types(judging by the wording of their reviews) working on fixing(or "fixing") games I had interest in. ;)

Leroux: You just dont get the joke of people 'in development', do you? Hint: It has nothing to do with games. ;)

toxicTom: I was talking about fixing some people who seem to have some kind of defect... ;-)

GameRager: I dunno, though some things are obvious(or seem to be):

The 1st/top review seems to be the most genuine of the bunch.

The 2nd is an obviously politically motivated reply(note the use of the word fascist and the term p"unch down") and should be reported, imo.
(Also note that they pirated it which means they likely thought it'd be more aligned to their way of thinking, hence their review is biased as heck & likely based more on what is said and how rather than game play)

The 3rd might be done as it is for the same reasons as the first, or they likely re biased against it in some way(as shown by the 1 star and wording).

The 4th I dunno about...that term isn't familiar to me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

As is, I uprated the top review, reported the second one, and downrated the other two.

==============================GameRager: Do you actually mean thankfully no? ;)

I ask as, given their wording(especially review#2) I don't think i'd want most of them making games I had to pay money for.

ozzyoscy: I think you should write 'obviously' a few more times to make yourself feel better.