Those comments after the article were hilarious. I learnt a lot of new bad words and that surprised me immensely as I thought I knew 'em all already.
Most people commented to say the article's author - Tom Law - was up himself and pointed out he had based his judgements not on playing the game itself but on watching game trailers. Law's beef wasn't with how the game played - as it appears he never even played it - but with the game's deliberate puerility, a viewpoint which he was almost unanimously criticised for. It seems he substitutes political correctness for good gaming analysis and thereby completely misses the point of not only DNF but writing a good review that isn't just clever sentences strung together. DNF clearly wasn't going to be anything other than vulgar. Was there really any need to lament that fact?
Still, that's not to say the game itself had any redeeming features so far as to say it was meant to be fun and worthwhile to play, as a user named bigbaldjon commented "this game is absolutele [sic] dog [censored]." It was very entertaining reading the comments as it often is and the article itself was written very well indeed though the guy's points were totally out of synch with his audience.
When it comes to games reviews who do we turn to? Why,
time2die of course! Want the definitive word on how a game plays and if it's worth buying? Then wait till T2D gets it and if he's still talking about how good it is after a few days then chances are it's worth getting!