I am not a typographer, but I know how to read. Like most people, I enjoy reading most when the font is, you know, legible. So here I am, ranking the top 10 worst fonts you can use on google docs. My criteria are extremely simple: is the font bad? Bad can mean unappealing to look at, or hard to read. Each font has a screenshot of a sample sentence in 12 point font and black coloring. As an example, here is a sample sentence in Georgia. So let’s get started….
10. Lobster
Well, it’s got a funny name. I’m not a big fan of the mixing of cursive and shorthand, and it appears as if the text is bolded even when it isn’t. Even the word “Lobster” looks strange to me, with the cursive font up until the ‘r.’ Still, it’s legible, so I can’t put it very high on the list.
9. Faster One
Faster One is the first example on this list of a font that exists to serve one purpose. It’s used in some designs for the unique look, but I find it gets in its own way. Like lobster, its default setting looks bolded, but when you bold Faster One, it becomes even harder to read. Overall, it gives back the cool design features in how hard it is to read.
8. Creepster
Here’s another example of a font that is used for design purposes. Creepster’s obvious horror feel earns it some use in various projects, and it’s decently legible. The reason it finds itself on my list is because there are simply better horror fonts. Eater and Fontdiner Swanky both give much more oozy feelings. I just don’t see why someone would choose creepster over either of those.
7. Megrim
Megrim is perhaps the neatest font on this list. It has an orderly vibe that most of these fonts don’t have. My complaint is that some of the letters are poorly designed. The lowercase has its line at the bottom rather than in the middle, the lowercase “f” looks more like an, and the lowercase looks like a deformed pacman. These really bother me, or else Megrim wouldn’t be on this list.
6. Barriecito
This is the portion of the list where we start to see some of the worst fonts. Barriecito is plainly uneven. Some strokes are extremely thick, others extremely thin. It bothers me. Beyond this fact, Barriecito reads shaky to me. I can read it, but looking at it feels so visually unappealing. I’m not sure what the purpose and vision is.
5. Beth Ellen
4. Asset
Why is it so large? It’s not just that it’s large, it’s chunky. The picture does not do it justice. To be clear, I did not change the font size, nor did I bold the font, and a simple sentence took up one line. It’s legible, and visually fine, but how massive the text is makes it virtually unusable. Ironically, it is an asset to no one.
3. Raleway Dots
Raleway Dots breaks one of the first rules of typography: it’s hard to see. It’s hard to see because it is so lightly colored. Not to mention, I don’t know why it is needed. One can make a similar design to Raleway Dots by using any common font and choosing grey text color. Why anyone would want to do this is beyond me, because I feel either way is almost completely eligible.
2. Herr Von Muellerhoff
Herr Von Muellerhoff is almost completely eligible in the standard sizing for fonts. In fact, I had to enlarge it to be able to read what the font was called. The style itself isn’t completely awful, but it’s too complex to be as small as it is. There are plenty of other fonts that accomplish Herr Von Muellerhoff’s purpose better as well, like Pacifico (sample). But seriously, I don’t think anyone can actually read this font in standard sizing.
1. Badeen Display
Behold. The most eligible font known google docs. I’ve played around with it a little bit, and I have found no way to make Badeen Display legible. The font appears to be bolded automatically, the letters are too close together to read, and the letters are too ‘bubbly’ to read. The black may help it be read against the white paper, but there is no white to distinguish where one letter stops and another begins. I do not understand the purpose of this font, nor do I believe anyone who claims they can read this font. The world is worse because of this font.
Featured photo credited to Wikimedia.
