It's all too easy to defer to a critical review of a game, lest you risk taking a gamble. It's only natural, as nobody wants to waste time or money on a potentially rubbish expenditure.
And for the most part? Sure, they're usually right. After all, it's a critic's job to weed through the good and bad to help us, the unknowing consumer, make an informed decision.
But what if... they're not always right? Just because ten reviewers didn't like a game doesn't mean you won't. Or worse yet, what if the practice of paid reviews has overwritten journalistic integrity, as it has done? They'll swear a steamer of a bad game is actually quite good to appease their paymasters, regardless of those that will then waste money on it.
So instead, let's have a look at some games that are not actually as bad as they were initially made out to be - or otherwise came out completely different to the general consensus.
(And yes, I am aware of the irony of me telling you what is good or not after chastising those that get paid to do it. But I'm doing it for your benefit, remember.)
Full of useless film trivia. Lover of synthwave. Jiujitsu enthusiast. Collector of 80's film soundtracks. Has a bad habit of buying remastered games.
Also reviews games/attends podcasts over at fingerguns.net.