Yeah, that review is certainly
something alright and as someone who grew up with these games, and really values a sense exploration, it's rather depressing
.
It's not that I don't agree, I haven't played the game, and I realise not everyone will share my preferences. It's more that I can't see this article (I imagine the RPS team would suggest in response to criticism that it's not a review, it's a "Wot I Think"
) being helpful for
anyone.
If you've played 90's FPS's it doesn't help you decide if this is a good example of the genre and you'll already know your own tolerance for a lack of hand-holding, so a protracted moan about the existential horror of sprawling levels and the lack of an objective marker is unlikely to be informative. If you've never played anything similar you're unlikely to know whether this kind of design works for you, and the take home message of "I’d rather not be lost" is unlikely to help you decide unless you very specifically avoid games where you're not obviously funnelled from one objective to the next.
It's like asking my parents, who feel TVs should be tucked into the corner of a room and max out at 24" to review an 88" 8k OLED. Ten paragraphs of "Much too big, takes up the whole wall, wouldn't give it house room" would be of no use to anyone.
Both Eurogamer & Dominic Tarason (RPS former news person, I think) have perhaps a more informative take