Do you "trust" game studios?

For a given value of 'always', Valve.

I can't trust any studio if basic trust was the question, all they want is the money out of my bank.

As for quality it's drying up slowly in this world of post release fixing.

Most of the big Sony devs. At least the games will normally always be finished.

Not really Sony owned, but always liked Insomniac in terms of quality.

Introversion Software

Bioware? And you cite ME: A? That's a weird choice OP.

So anyway I'm going with CDPR

CDRP is an even weirder choice

I think the OPs list is of good devs that made bad games?

From that point of view Bethesda takes the prize

If by "trusting" you mean that I would preorder their games no questions asked, then... none.

I think Rockstar are still quite safe. GTA Trilogy was a lazy port and not really reflective of them as a developer. GTA 6 will likely be a huge hit. Have they ever made a really bad game?

What happened to Treasure?

/shake shake

It used to be bioware and Bethesda for me. But both have fucked up the last generation or 2.

Naughty dog are the only one I think I still rate as worth a blind preorder. In terms of series rather than studios I think Yakuza and Persona are probably the only 2 I trust at the moment.

• Supergiant
  
• ACE Team
  
• Toby Fox
• Vlambeer (RIP)
  
• Increpare/Stephen Lavelle
• Amanita Design
• Zachtronics
  
• Lucas Pope
• Klei Entertainment
• From Software

Are all developers I trust to release a quality game that's worth playing, every single time. I might not play every single one of them but it's extremely rare that I'll recommend against playing any of them. 

I don't trust any studio on the first in a series of games, and I raise an eyebrow if they're making huge mechanical changes or fundamentally changing their approach (c.f. Resident Evil, pretty often), but a studio can earn my temporary trust for sure, particularly by making two good games in a series in a row. I trust the studio note, not the publisher.

So after ME1, I mostly trusted Bioware, so got ME2 immediately, and pre-ordered ME3, and honestly despite the "ending controversy" (yeah it was bad, real bad, but eh, the game overall was good, particularly the MP), that didn't burn me. Andromeda I stupidly saw as a continuation of this, and whilst it's nowhere near as bad as some say (it's really a solid 7/10-type game, mostly in a good way), I was pretty shocked by that.

Dragon Age, however, every game I considered on its own merits, because each was a big change mechanically and general approach. As such I wasn't never shocked or disappointed by any of them.

With Total War Warhammer, the first one I liked but it didn't blow me away enough to pre-order the second. However, because both were really solid, I will likely buy the 3rd day one. I don't buy Creative Assembly stuff sight-unseen though, and wouldn't have got Troy at release if it wasn't free on Epic.

I stupidly used to trust Bethesda Game Studios, even after being burned once. Personally I loved Morrowind, loved Oblivion even though it was in many ways terrible, really did not like FO3 (because it was a mess and I was a fan of the FO1/2 universe, which it clearly is not set in, any more than the Synderverse is the same as the BTASverse), loved Skyrim, wrote off FO3 as aberration, and preordered FO4 like a numpty, and then found... whilst it's undeniably a good game, it's another "basically 7/10" game where I expected something a bit more (in some ways it seems less-developed than Skyrim or even FO3, particularly the writing and storytelling, which is distinctly retrograde). Starfield will be on Xbox Game Pass, and I'm sure I'll sub for that, though may cancel again if it's not great. But I definitely don't trust BGS to make a good game.

Firaxis are another one I stupidly used to trust, until, against all sense, I got Civilization: Beyond Earth, which was basically pissing on the grave of SMAC (a totally incredible game). I should have hard-noped when one of the lead devs said not only had they never played SMAC, they never would. Or even before that, when the two leads listed all their sci-fi influences, and literally none of the books were after about 1975 (so missing amazing and very appropriate stuff that did influence SMAC, like the Red Mars series), and none of the movies after about 1989. Civ:BE was just basically a mediocre Total Conversion mod for Civ V, and had no personality, ideas, style, or really anything going for. I wouldn't auto-buy an XCOM 3 either, because however good XCOM1&2 eventually became, neither was amazing-amazing at release, and XCOM 2 was the biggest trashfire I've ever seen in an AAA release at launch, it took them months to fully fix it. I quite like Chimera, it's quite light but it's got a lot of style and some cool ideas. Still, I am not forgetting that XCOM2 release. It also didn't play THAT great at release. It only became absolutely 10/10 after WotC for my money.

So yeah, I trust a third sequel without big changes and that's about it. There are a lot of companies whose name makes me interested, but that's a bit different.