Relegation fodder. [Aug 2010, p.117]

The quests are grinding, the dialogue linear, and the loot at lower levels decidedly 'meh.' [Oct 2012, p.117]

For all the filth and frustration it's still oddly fun in places. [Issue#51, p.105]

As big a letdown as Tim Henman's efforts at Wimbledon, it does a huge disservice to Top Spin's legacy. No amount of Pimm's should sanction you buying this. [Issue#151, p.96]

What Star Trek does well is to achieve a serviceable level of entertainment. However it never stands out thanks to derivative design and occasional shoddy corners. If this was a cheaper, downloadable title I’d score it more favorably but this is competing in price and scale with bigger and more impressive games with a well practiced bag of last year’s tricks.

The only redeemeing feature is that you don't have to deal with the AI's incompetence as much when playing against a mate. [Apr 2008, p.104]

This stinks worse than week-old zombie balls. [Feb 2011, p.103]

Too technically deficient to get a high score, but the over-the-top voiceovers, evolving combat and ripping yarn make this worth a look anyway. [Dec 2011, p.111]

Avoid like you would a family holiday to Nudefest 2010. [Issue#51, p.110]

It's an awkward fudge, and compared to the full sex that is "Call of Duty", feels like five minutes of unsatisfying over the sweater action. [Feb 2009, p.99]

A framerate that's juddery like a hand-cranked projector. [Feb 2009, p.103]

Pretty amusing until you realise what a shameful rip-off it is. [Sept 2011, p.108]

As sure as I am that Infinity Runner is a bad game, it's certainly not a game I dislike. [June 2015, p.88]

While there’s not much to Avalanche’s mechanical uprising, running-and-gunning bad robots with buds is a blast. The arresting Scandinavian vistas are worth visiting. [Issue@162, p.93]

Random turn-based combat and impenetrable inventory. [Spring 2011, p.116]

We're going to have to wait a little longer for a true VR Time Crisis. [May 2018, p.92]

Feeble mimic. [Spring 2011, p.108]

While this bug-infested horror doesn’t quite inspire us to grab the fly swat, we can’t recommend this in its current state. However, its few bright spots draw us like a moth to a flame. [Issue#182, p.152]

Almost every idea included here is a strong one - yet they've all been exectured terribly. A patch to slow the entire game down by 50% would immediately elevate that score. [Aug 2016, p.89]

Basic graphics, a beyond dull battle system and truly hateful lead characters make this an unwelcome flashback to deservedly forgotten J-RPGs of decade's past. [Apr 2010, p.100]

It's not worth it, mate. [Christmas 2008, p.116]

It's an overly complicated system that screams of an attempt to be modern and forward-looking, but will actually end up with a bunch of pissed-off purchasers feeling like they've paid nearly 20 pounds for a trial version. Which, to be perfectly honest, is pretty much all this is.

There's an element of novelty in the first few minutes of play, but it doesn't last long. It isn't even the sketchy gameplay that sinks this Battleship – it's the abhorrently commercial objective apparent in every second of rushed gameplay. There's no artistic vision here, and the original idea at its core hasn't been given the time and love needed to build a coherent or enjoyable game.

Bland weapons and generic enemies. [Spring 2011, p.111]

Major bail. [Jan 2010, p.108]

Among the rubble there are elements of what could be a good game, but it's not worth your time to excavate them. Technically disastrous, it lets down its own story. [Sept 2014, p.111]

The game mostly consists of busywork. [July 2009, p.102]

Tells an entirely forgettable story. [Nov 2012, p.97]