Reviewing terrible games used to be a lot of fun. Big-name publishers would release utter horrors and ask £40 for them, and breaking down why they sucked offered all manner of opportunities for entertaining writing. It's how I made my name over at PC Gamer. But in the days of Steam and open access to development, the fine art of the sub-50% review has become something akin to kicking kittens. Of course the game is terrible - it was made by two guys in their spare time using tools they didn't understand for reasons they hadn't thought through. A review doesn't serve to warn people away from spending their money there, it only serves to bring an unknown game to people's attention when it would otherwise have slid past the new release lists unnoticed.
To view this article you'll need to have a Premium subscription. Sign up today for access to more supporter-only articles, an ad-free reading experience, free gifts, and game discounts. Your support helps us create more great writing about PC games.See more information