His point still had valid rooting. There are many ways a game can be mechanically bad for someone and actually broken down. I have done this many times with Uncharted 3, which I do feel is a legitimately bad game. Enemy waves, lack of feedback, AI that felt designed literally just to annoy you as much as possible, many potential instant kill situations that the player could be unfairly thrusted into, poor pacing regarding puzzle/combat/traversal, etc. But when I levy these complaints, even in massive ass posts breaking it all down, I get a lot of softball answers saying I am nitpicking, or I'm biased, or some other thing like that. Looking at the majority opinion doesn't agree with me, but I feel majority as a whole don't really look at things critically. Many games can be digested and enjoyed casually, but some people are more critical by nature and don't let as much slide. Also, with UC3 specifically, 'majority' in the critical sense COMPLETELY missed the entire busted aiming on launch, and many people also acted like it was all some falsehood people imagined with frustrated me beyond belief. A lot of people just don't like reading harsh critiques regarding experiences they enjoy, but if you personally enjoy a game some negative words don't really change much.
I was actually planning on making a topic relating to this subject pretty soon; big name games always seem like they have this aura of being incapable of being actually bad. GTAIV is another one that gets ripped a lot and many people try to just shrug it off as 'gaf hates everything' instead of directly addressing and having interesting game design arguments. Of course, there isn't anything that exists in any medium that will ever have a 100% success rate with users. Classic movies, books, etc. all have this but I personally feel there is something more tangible to be broken down with regarding interactive products.