I have trouble understanding the whole idea of trusting - or not - sites that review games.
Like, say you "trust" GameSpot. What des that mean? Does it mean that if GameSpot gives a game an 8 you're gonna buy it, and if they give it a 6 you aren't? Reviews are mostly subjective, sure, but they are based on objective facts. The game has this and that, this mechanic doesn't make any sense, the difficulty spikes in infuriating ways.
But that's not really the point. I live and breathe video games, I dont CARE about reviews and review scores in a "should I buy this game?" manner. I'm interested in games to the point where I want to check them out myself if they have something interesting in them. Or if I have a positive history of the creator's past projects. To give a specific example - I didn't buy Destiny day one because I won't be near my PS3 for another two days. But, even though some of the early impressions from, say, GiantBomb and GameSpot were rather mixed, I ordered the game a day or two ago and will play it, because it's Bungie doing a big, sci-fi shooter-Diablo mix. I don't want to miss it and I want to see for myself why it didn't work out quite as well as planned. And, who knows, perhaps I will find something that'll speak to me in this game.
I appreciate reviews on a critical basis: as works of cristicism, enhancing my understanding of games and often making me look at something from a different perspective. That's why I read Rock, Paper, Shotgun, sometimes Polygon, sometimes Kotaku. Occasionaly a review of a little indie or mobile game will make me go "huh, it seems to be good, let's check this out!", while other times negative reviews will make me hold out on buying a game on release, but overall I don't see game reviews as buying guides.