Staggering claims don't come much richer than the BBC's stillborn attempt to repeat Robot Wars' success with a fighting game designed by computer literate monkeys. "FightBox is the radical entertainment experience where gaming meets TV to create a unique new sport for the 21st Century." Just in case the show's commissioning editor is reading this (presumably in the Job Centre) here's our verdict: FightBox has about as much chance of offering anything that could be described as entertainment as Beagle 2 does of whirring into life and making the Martians a cup of tea.

But what of the PS2 game? Does being able to 'play' rather than simply 'watch' make FightBox any more fun? Does it fluff. But here's something that is fun. Take these adjectives: CLUMSY, UGLY, SHODDY and NON-EXISTENT and mix them up with the following nouns: CONTROLS, GRAPHICS, CAMERA and COLLISION DETECTION. Doesn't matter how you rearrange them, the result's the same. FightBox simply has no business calling itself a PS2 game - an atrocity of Charlie's Angels' proportions.

The 'gameplay' involves designing an avatar (bland and ugly, or really bland and ugly?) and then lumbering through clunky challenges and the weakest combat engine ever seen. There's no discernible combo system and an apologetic elbow is typical of the laughable 'special moves'. Making rubbish games is one thing but using the licence fee to do so is quite another. Now where's our EastEnders RPG?

Graphics 30%
Poor textures, rubbish camerawork

Sound 30%
Really weak sound FX and music

Gameplay 10%
Beat yourself up - it's more fun!

Lifespan 10%
Load... laugh... lose all will to live

Overall 10%
A truly terrible game can be enlightening, making us realise how good we've got it most of the time. That said, this is a total loss!