This sentiment is quickly becoming the most annoying low-effort comment on HN. If you don't want to read it, don't read it. If something about the writing offends you, then describe it, so we can talk about it.
It doesn't help that the figures of speech ai loves to use are those that stress things and create tension and drama. And it uses one in every single paragraph, rendering the text into the literal equivalent of a deepfried faux HDR jpg (or a dialogue scene in a Michael Bay movie).
And beyond those practical concerns it's just hard to gauge how much the author truly understands of what he's writing about (and transitively if it's worth to continue reading)
No you haven't, you've made an unprovable claim about how the writing was accomplished without pointing out a single feature of the writing itself.
Too long? OK, but homebrew gamedev articles often are. Skimming was a good skill before AI and still is.
Bad writing? Again -- hobbyist posts don't exactly win awards. I suspected possibly some AI myself but not to the extent you're baselessly asserting: I really doubt there was a single prompt in any case. The article is structured like any other.
If it were content-free clickbait or something, the complaint would hold water. As it is this is a reasonably interesting article that has generated a large and fun discussion on HN, so even if you _could_ prove AI use, so what?