Ajent Comments

Page 1 of 6

  • Digital Foundry vs The Last of Us Remastered

  • Ajent 28/07/2014

    @ElCobrito Not necessarily. Unless you're saying that Last of Us is not one of those masterpieces. You have to bare in mind that out of all the masterpieces in that time that he has likely played, The Last of Us might simply be his favourite. Doesn't make him right or wrong, but as someone who has been gaming for around 25yrs, I'd have to agree with him. Reply +17
  • Batman: Arkham Knight's Red Hood Story DLC is a GameStop exclusive

  • Ajent 25/07/2014

    @Pasco Validity of statement/ debate. Semantics. Statements form the basis of debates.

    Games Industry. Games business. That's what these publishers are. For them the primary concern IS making money. Taking issue with that is pointless. It's their business.

    "I already stated what the issue is and that is that these "bonuses" have no advantages whatsoever for the player." - This is what I was addressing. You say there is no benefit of bonuses to the player. I argued there is a benefit. You're now saying that you don't like jumping through hoops to get the DLC? If that's the case then we come back to the matter of 'wanting something for nothing'. Paying for DLC is not jumping through hoops in my eyes. It is simply paying for something you want to buy. Something superfluous that only enriches the experience and is not necessary.
    Reply 0
  • Ajent 25/07/2014

    @Pasco hmmm... Rocksteady didn't publish AO. WB Montreal did. But the context of your statement seems to insinuate that you're suggesting the publisher 'leaves' bugs in games? I doubt the publisher has that much of an extensive hand in the programming that they could be held responsible for bugs. The publisher just sell the game. And costs have risen there as well. You say you're not ignoring the rise in costs to both developer and publisher, yet you don't actually offer a constructive argument as to why it is bad other that saying it is bad and they just want money (which seems pretty obvious, what with them being a publisher that is actually there primary role... to make money). The 'behind the scenes' stuff does indeed effect the validity of the debate. It is the reason the debate exists in the first place.

    I also MASSIVELY disagree with your statement that these bonuses offer no benefit to the consumer. I found the ACIV DLC (pre-order and season pass) to be completely superfluous yet enjoyable. Being a touch more specific, I found the B:AC DLC to be completely awesome. I loved going around as Robin and using his gadgets and more acrobatic approach. I enjoyed playing the challenge rooms as the Animated version of Batman. The benefit is that good games are extended by such content. I really fail to see how people could argue that there is NO benefit.

    As an individual you may not enjoy the DLC. That's it. And whilst my opinions are obviously unpopular here, in the real world I am very much in the majority. So I can't be THAT wrong.
    Reply +1
  • Ajent 25/07/2014

    @kevboard Woah. Your post comes across as a little bit crazy and as such you lose a little credibility. Rather than profanity and aggressive tones, try explaining exactly why DLC is bad?

    I politely disagree with your view. I like DLC. I'm happy that the core game I buy is a whole and complete experience in itself. I enjoy buying additional DLC to expand the game. It makes the games I like last longer.

    I understand the necessity of DLC and pre-order incentives (the costs of game development and marketing have significantly increased over the years).

    There probably are games that utilise offensive DLC methods, but I have never bought them in the first place since the games are usually rubbish to start with. The DLC for ACIV was great. The DLC for Arkham City was great (I loved being able to play as Robin).

    I am definitely not stopping any pre-orders of games that I know I am interested in and that I know have been extensively previewed and covered in hands on articles etc. (case in point, B:AK has had insanely positive feedback from those who played it at E3. Coupled with the fact that I am a massive Batman fan and the previous two games were awesome, I feel fairly confident that this is a game I will want to play as soon as it is released - thereby negating a massive chunk of the 'opinion' pieces you linked to ).
    Reply +1
  • Ajent 24/07/2014

    I've only just replied to the guy below you and you've perfectly encapsulated what I wanted to say. Rocksteady are worth our consideration and any content is likely to be worth while.

    Thanks.
    Reply -1
  • Ajent 24/07/2014

    @Pasco not spelling out, no. That would take a reaaaallllly long time 😜

    I do however disagree with you. You seem to want something for nothing. You're failing to recognise the massive rise in development costs from the days of 'unlock codes' to modern day. Companies need to pay the bills!

    Plus, Rocksteady are a decent developer and I have not been let down by them yet with the Arkham franchise. Any additional content is likely to be worthwhile, supplementary and available as paid DLC at a later date anyway. So what's the issue?

    If it really is only cost, then I feel you have already lost the debate.
    Reply -1
  • Ajent 24/07/2014

    Also, an INCREDIBLY unpopular opinion, but I actually like DLC and can't wait for Arkham Knight. In fact it is the one game I can guarantee that I am getting day one (but then I suppose my last post, showing that I am an Bat-Freak, would have made that obvious)

    Edit: yep. Negged as expected. No one willing to say why they disagree though? Just moaning then ?
    Reply -15
  • Ajent 24/07/2014

    I'm going to be the comic geek here.

    This Red Hood is and always has been Jason Todd, the ex-robin thought to have been killed by Joker who blames Batman for letting all the villains literally get away with murder (ie. preferring to lock then up, as opposed to killing them- as Red Hood shows he is willing to).

    The Red Hood who has had various interpretations/ reinventions is the alias used by Joker before falling into the vat if chemicals. However, it is never (mostly) a complete reinvention/reinterpretation since there is usually something that the Joker says (or some other incident) in such a story that acts as a sort of deus ex machina, explaining that what ever origin of the Red Hood is being told is potentially just another version of the Jokers fractured memory or another level to the Jokers mysterious true identity (ala the recent Zero Year story)
    Reply +8
  • Final Fantasy character designer Tetsuya Nomura re-imagines Batman

  • Ajent 24/07/2014

    Nah... Don't like. I've always thought that the more simple bat suits look the best (the bat suit is probably my least favourite part of the upcoming Arkham Knight game... which otherwise looks completely awesome). Reply +4
  • You've got male

  • Ajent 19/07/2014

    @Darren I would agree with most of you comment except that it is obvious you don't actually read comics, otherwise you'd know there already is a Spider-Woman and She-Hulk ! Reply +8
  • Thunder god Raiden confirmed for Mortal Kombat X

  • Ajent 14/07/2014

    Love the Christopher Lambert to Highlander reference. Classic. Reply +4
  • BioWare's first "fully gay" male party member in DAI

  • Ajent 01/07/2014

    @telboy007 ahh... in that case I misunderstood your comment (the simplicity of the statement lacked context and I thought you were relating anal sex to the gay relationship discussed in the article - my bad).

    But by all means, I'm up for hearing your less serious answer as well...
    Reply 0
  • Ajent 01/07/2014

    @telboy007 you do know that anal sex isn't exclusive to gay men right? Reply +4
  • Ajent 01/07/2014

    @L0YD Ha! I find it a bit funny that everyone seems to have latched on to the use of "fully gay" and completely forgetting that the full quote is "the first fully gay character I've had the opportunity to write". He talking about the game and his past and current experiences writing for the game, not a sliding scale of 'gayness'.

    In context all previous characters have not been fully gay because they were written to be either gay, straight or bi, depending on player choices. It seems to me Gaider is stating that Dorian is just gay with no chance of a female player character having a romance with him. Hence 'fully gay'.
    Reply +5
  • The Last of Us Remastered PS4 bundle confirmed for UK

  • Ajent 27/06/2014

    @chucklepie Last of Us PS3 was only 39.99 digitally. So if they did a similar thing that they did with ACIV et al, then it would only work out 49.99 in total for a PS3 and PS4 copy. Reply -3
  • Rainbow Six Siege has male and female hostages

  • Ajent 25/06/2014

    @SpaceMidget75 well said... Reply +10
  • Ajent 25/06/2014

    This is ridiculous. Mr Bramwell... You do realise that Ubisofts decision is actually grounded in social science. People DO feel more empathetic towards children and women. It's not that all children and women are helpless and need men, it's simply a fact that most men are more physically capable (and so in a violent situation one may expect them to cope better, therefore the average person would worry less about a male).

    Note the words I use; most, average. People may feel some bizarre agenda to get worked up about this and call it sexist, but why? Why are these people trying to tell me that I cannot care to be more empathetic towards a woman? Should I stop holding open doors for them, or standing up when they leave the table? Chivalry be damned...
    Reply +29
  • Editor's blog: I am sexist

  • Ajent 19/06/2014

    Tom, just so you know, you're not sexist. You may have been ignorant to some issues that others perceive as sexist, but that in itself does not make you sexist.

    Sexism is either a deliberate intention or a perception. To that end, I don't believe the industry is deliberately sexist, ie. Ubisoft didn't remove female avatars because they were female, they removed them because the market responds better to male avatars and so that's where they put there focus. Again, some will say 'but that is sexist!'. I am not sexist because I want to play as a male. I want to play as a male because I want my avatar to be as relatable as my fantasy will allow. I'm not a woman, so I would not relate as well to a female avatar. It doesn't mean I'm sexist. It means I'm male.

    Also, things like your comments in the GTAIV review. If the NPC girlfriend nags, then she nags. It doesn't mean your sexist for realising that. It doesn't mean it is sexist that GTAIV includes an NPC that nags (GTAIV includes a variety of female characters). It just means you noticed an NPC nagging the protagonist (unless we're suggesting such a portrayal of a women is inherently sexist because no women has ever actually acted like that and to include such a portrayal is completely offensive?)
    Reply +25
  • Why online shooting peaked with Bungie's decade-old Halo 2

  • Ajent 17/06/2014

    Halo 2 was revolutionary for all of the reasons mentioned above - the two weapon system, the regen shields, almost single handedly launching xbox live, etc.

    In order for something to be revolutionary it does not necessarily need to do something different, new or unique. It is the way that it does it in order to bring about a change that makes something revolutionary. Halo 2 was one of the first major online console gaming franchises that made online console gaming popular. It was only when CoD 2 launched with Xbox 360 did another online shooter start to offer any competition.
    Reply 0
  • Ajent 15/06/2014

    @Alex_V Halo 1 wasn't online, my comment was in revelance to the article as well as in reply to you. I felt Halo 2 was a great shooter and I agree with the article. I believe it is a shooter that has stood the test of time and is comparable with the other greats. I'm not saying it is better or the best, but that it definitely deserves to stand up there with the greats. Again, this is based on my experience with the game and you may obviously disagree... Reply 0
  • Ajent 09/06/2014

    @Alex_V as others have said, the article seems to specify console shooters. Also, in my opinion, Halo 2 brought a number of features into the mainstream - regen health, only two weapons, vehicular combat (the first time I hijacked a banshee was EPIC!).

    I suppose everyone is different, but I know I agree with the article. I never got on with PC shooters, too many things to consider. I wanted simplicity.
    Reply 0
  • Ajent 09/06/2014

    This is exactly how I remember Halo 2. Brilliant game. Reply +5
  • Sony had more wow moments, but Microsoft has closed the competence gap

  • Ajent 10/06/2014

    I was actually very pleased with E3 this year. I bought a PS4 at launch as I had more faith in Sony's messaging and I prefer Playstation last gen. I got an XB1 in May for my birthday (thanks to the missus) solely in anticipation of Halo 5.


    I was going in to E3 hoping only for a Halo announcement for MS and for Sony to announce a load of cool new IP. I was pleasantly surprised at just how awesome MS' conference was. Halo:MCC is a big win for me, Sunset Overdrive looks an absolute blast and I am an complete sucker for Crackdown. Sony would have easily lost if not for their excellent third-party showing (the Far Cry 4 demo was ace), No Mans Sky and Uncharted 4.

    I'd say both conference were equally entertaining, but that MS accomplished more (for me personally) as they got me excited to be an XB1 owner (I was already happy with my PS4).
    Reply +2
  • Halo: The Master Chief Collection looks set for Xbox One

  • Ajent 20/05/2014

    @Widge MP high point. Halo 2, two friends and I were playing. One friend and I were in a Warthog, the other friend was trying to get in the passenger seat but we accidentally drove off with out him.

    Our friend was known for being a bit 'aggressive' and started to shoot at me for daring to drive off with out him. I stopped the jeep and for a laugh my friend on the gun started to shoot at our other friends feet, whilst telling him to stopping moaning and get in the jeep already.

    Defiant, our friend decided to protest and threw a grenade at us. The 'nade rolled under the Warthog and exploded, causing the jeep to flip into the air and land squarely on our grumpy friends noggin, killing him out right.

    After 30 mins when I finally stopped leaking out of my eyes and stitched up my sides, I decided that I absolutely loved Halo MP.
    Reply +14
  • The next major PS4 update is out now

  • Ajent 30/04/2014

    @UncleLou You're not the only one. I've never really noticed it whilst playing either.

    Also, does anyone know what the new voice commands are? It says that you can now launch apps, but I've been able to do that since day one?
    Reply +1
  • Activision indefinitely postpones Xbox One version of The Amazing Spider-Man 2

  • Ajent 17/04/2014

    @scuffpuppies it's been confirmed to be the X360 version in the gameplay trailers Reply +2
  • Here's a look at more of Batman: Arkham Knight's cast

  • Ajent 16/04/2014

    @ToiletDuck Read the latest issue of OPM. These are stills from the game running on PS4 dev kit. The article in OPM goes to lengths to specifically explain that this IS what the game looks like, and that they are NOT 'bull-shots'. So it's a fair assumption to say that these ARE PS4 shots (a lot are the same as those used in the article - although there are aome new ones here). Reply +4
  • "We're not evil villains building an empire"

  • Ajent 15/04/2014

    @PlugMonkey CandySwipe. See my other comment for a link. Reply +2
  • Ajent 15/04/2014

    @PlugMonkey which raises the question, why trademark the words 'Candy' and 'Saga' in the first place. Did Sony trademark the word 'Last' or 'Second'? Did Capcom trademark 'Dead' or 'Rising'? No. Because it's stupid and creates situations where if you want to defend your trademark, you need to target innocent companies using generic words, which inevitably leads to bad press and a general feeling of discontent toward your company.

    You're right in your understanding. But it's the fact they acquired these words as trademarks in the first place. Why not just trademark 'Candy Crush' and 'Candy Crush Saga'. That would be totally understandable.
    Reply +2
  • Ajent 14/04/2014

    @PlugMonkey

    Ooh, debate.

    - when I say 'stop making games', what I mean is that the devs stop making the game until they figure out how to proceed. I suppose it would be more accurate if I said that its slows development time whilst legal contestations are sorted out. Plus, if it is only to combat 'copy cat' games, then why target Banner Saga at all? It couldn't be more different, and it would be really difficult for anyone to confuse the two IP's.

    - when the filing is made, that may very we'll be all King wants to do. And whoever they file against probably don't need to do anything about it in such a situation. But would you not seek legal advice if someone made a legal filing against you? Especially if it could potentially upset your entire livelyhood? Especially when you have no legal training yourself? Any dev that King make a filing against would absolutely have to seek legal advice (which would cost them a consultation fee- at least), just to make sure they aren't going to have there earnings ripped from them in the future, or worse. And do you really think that King turn to these guys after making the filing and say "Hey, don't worry about it, it's just 'in case'". And do you think anyone would trust an employee from a company like King who said something like that to you, after they just made a legal filing at court against you, with no prior consultation process?

    - I would argue it is rightful to hate (maybe not hate, it's a pretty strong word - maybe, disgust) King's practices, because they do target games like the Banner Saga. Also, the guy who made Candy Crunch (I think?), who made a game almost exactly the same as Candy Crush (even down to the art style). But he released his game 10 months before King as a premium iOS game. King have tried to remove his ownership rights to his game due to the use of the word 'Candy'. Where do they get off attacking a game that came out a significant amount of time befores there's? Just because this guy didn't make the douchey move of copyrighting the word 'Candy' (although I do believe he copyrighted the title of his game - which makes more sense).

    EDIT - link re CandySwipe (it wasn't called Candy Crunch as I called it above) http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-02-13-candyswipe-dev-king-taking-the-food-out-of-my-familys-mouth
    Reply +3
  • Ajent 14/04/2014

    @Vorflynn I don't have an issue with the f2p model, so long as it's done well. But King don't do it well. The way they do it is exploitative. It's very different to the f2p MMO games. For one the prices for single transactions are much lower (when comparing the highest tier payments).

    I think the biggest issue people have with King are the other business practices it employs. This douche states that they respect others games, yet they have actively sought to use developers using the words Saga and Candy in their games (The Banner Saga is the most obvious example - 'saga' by it's very definition is a story of epic achievement, usually Nordic or Icelandic in origin. The Banner Saga was an adventure game about Vikings. The use of Saga makes sense. What the fook has matching fruit got to do with 'saga'?). By pursuing such legal actions, that King claim are in defence of their product, they are stopping other developers from making games that are much better. King claim that they have no intention to pursue the claim, it just needs to be filed. But these indie developers then need to seek legal support to contest the filing, which costs money they don't have (because they're indie's) and so they have to stop making the game until they can resolve the issue.

    This is the sort of crap people hate King for. And rightfully so.
    Reply +4
  • Watch Dogs season pass includes new playable character

  • Ajent 09/04/2014

    @TeaFiend you're not alone. I actually like seasons passes. I like that games are supported beyond release. The size of the downloads make it very clear that this is content that has to be developed post release (ie. It isn't on disc). It therefore has to be paid for and is extra. It isn't content removed - especially evident in the fact that the DLC is for a different character, playing missions and experiencing the game for a different perspective. That's quite a bit of difference.

    And it appears the 20 odd people on here nay-saying are very much the minority when you look at how popular both ACIV and the season pass for that game were.
    Reply 0
  • MSI GT70 2PE Dominator Pro with GTX 880M review

  • Ajent 06/04/2014

    @mega-gazz on the subject of 'only applies to a particular type of person', your comment only applies to PC gamers (in terms of stating that next gen systems are under welming).

    The PS4 and XB1 are quite obviously aimed at console gamers. The only fair comparison is to other games consoles.

    Comparing to PC's is to compare two completely different user groups as well. The majority of gamers use consoles for ease and simplicity. I haven't gamed on a PC in over 10 years for this reason. I am very impressed with the improvement from PS3 to PS4. That's a fair comparison.
    Reply +2
  • The numbers game

  • Ajent 05/04/2014

    It's a bit of a strange article. I completely agree with the writer. The text of a review is so much more important that the score (EG's inFAMOUS Second Son review for example - I completely disagreed with some of the comments, so I knew I would love it).

    However, I think the article presumes that the majority of people who buy games are 'core' gamers. The kind of gamers who would read a full review. I think in reality core gamers probably only account for 30% of gamers. The rest, 'casual' gamers, will buy their flavour of FPS (BF or CoD) and FIFA, plus the odd game that gets a good score. They aren't the sort of people who will take 10-20 minutes to read a review. They're just not that interested, they just want to be told if the game is good or not. If you don't tell them, they won't buy the game anyway, which is arguably worse than a score.

    The expert Metacritic score is a fairly neat representation of the general considered quality of a game. It isn't a single persons view, it is an amalgamation of an industry of experts opinions as to whether the game is good. For the gamer who only plays for an hour or two a week this is a perfect 'buyers guide'.

    And when that sort of gamer makes up for 70% of the consumer base, well, arguing against it is seems pointless. To us an analogy raised by Mr Whitehead, trying to convince these people to invest more time to gaming (reading reviews) instead of playing football with their mates, is like trying to convince people that they should be eating chocolate ice cream instead of strawberry, because chocolate (reading reviews) is better.
    Reply +5
  • Hitman: Absolution and Deadlight are April's Games with Gold offerings

  • Ajent 31/03/2014

    @Spong true, but PS+ is infinitely better ;oP Reply +10
  • Oculus Rift's John Carmack reckons Facebook "get the Big Picture"

  • Ajent 31/03/2014

    @goggyturk I honestly don't think they will be able to make this a success now. The core group of people who would have bought it at launch are the same people who are the most upset by this whole thing.

    Unless FB can somehow market the Rift for 50 I don't see any 'casuals' picking it up. And I don't see it selling for anything less than 100 (and I think even that may be optimistic). If I use the office I work in as a snapshot of society (it's a varied mix of people) there at least five people I know who play games out of 28 people in total. I'd consider us all to be core gamers (be being a little bit more leaning towards 'hardcore'). I know that I am the only one who knows about Oculus, but being a console gamer I'm more interested in Sony's offering. No one else in my office knows about Oculus. To try and sell this thing to the other four gamers and the rest of the casual smartphone game playing members of my office/ general public, well... I honestly can't see people looking at it and think 'Ooh, must get one'. Especially if it's expensive (100+).

    I understand the use for other media, movies, teaching, virtual tours etc., but you need to build a consumer base first and then expand. Gamers (or geeky hobby types in general) are the only consumers who would engage with such a product at such a cost.
    Reply +8
  • PlayStation Plus for April: Mercenary Kings, PES 2014, Sly Cooper, more

  • Ajent 28/03/2014

    @Malek86 Most long time PS+ members will have Batman anyway. We got it last year. Sony don't really repeat PS+ offerings.

    Like others have said, I think it's just testament to how good PS+ is that people actually find this month disappointing. Personally, I'm stoked for Mercenary Kings and Hotline Miami !
    Reply +8
  • How the Batmobile opens up Arkham Knight's next-gen Gotham

  • Ajent 27/03/2014

    Introduce Superman and Wonder Woman at some point and make the next game a next-gen Justice League game.

    It would be awesome if next-gen could power a game where you play as Superman and you can actually fly around the world. Or at least all of America. It would be EPIC !
    Reply -5
  • Facebook buys Oculus VR for $2 billion

  • Ajent 26/03/2014

    @blarty no. I totally agree. That was my point. I was pointing out that it should be obvious why Facebook want the tech (it's the new 'in thing'). But in my last paragraph I was saying how I DON'T want Facebook to be a pioneer of the tech, specifically with regards to gaming. Reply +1
  • Ajent 26/03/2014

    @penhalion you're comment seems to indicate that you only perceive VR as a gaming medium, when in fact VR is a new medium for all entertainment. It's seems blindingly obvious why Facebook would want in on that.

    However, viewing VR as a means to experience video games I agree with you. Facebook are not the company you want to push a new gaming experience. I think PC based VR just got shot in the foot. Thankfully Sony's offering looks good for PS4.
    Reply +2
  • Assassin's Creed: Unity confirmed by Ubisoft with in-game footage

  • Ajent 21/03/2014

    @Chickenzilla yeah, ACIV last year, ACIII the year before that. ACV this year would make that a pretty straight definition of annual release.

    I assume you are recently new to the hobby of gaming. Usually, large publishers like Ubisoft will have multiple teams working on different iterations of major IP's so that they can leap-frog each other on the release schedule (ie. Call of Duty between IW and Treyarch).
    Reply +2
  • Batman: Arkham Knight screens show off Penguin, Two-Face, Riddler

  • Ajent 21/03/2014

    The latest issue of OPM has an 8 page article on Arkham Knight. The first paragraph is used to explain that the screenshots in the article are not 'bs-shots' but that they actually do represent how the game looks (the article describes what they saw when they went to view a gameplay demo at Rocksteady). It's a really good article if you're looking forward to Arkham Knight.

    And yes, the screens in the magazine look amazing. As in, the reveal trailer might even be in game graphics!
    Reply +3
  • Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes review

  • Ajent 18/03/2014

    @Playstationman "No matter how good it is it cannot possibly be worth 30 for 30mins - 2hours.
    Thats on par with crack !"

    Or far a slightly more legal and relevant example... A trip to the cinema for two people. Are you also suggesting that going to the cinema is also unworthy of your time/money? If so, then I think you will find yourself massively outnumbered and also missing out on some superb entertainment.

    As many have already said... value is subjective.
    Reply +2
  • Microsoft quietly ends Xbox subscription offer

  • Ajent 14/03/2014

    @Jay-ITFC I'd agree with you both, kind of. Gaming is great value, but value is subjective and it's still expensive.

    Also, compring one expensive activity with another expensive activity still means both activities are expensive.
    Reply +4
  • Matt Stone: South Park The Stick of Truth censorship "not that big a deal"

  • Ajent 07/03/2014

    @danielhorvath sorry, I think you misunderstood my comment. I'm not blaming anyone. I'm simply suggesting that the article (paragraph 9) specifically states that the censorship may be down to the USK.

    I was suggesting that the EU version of the game may be published under one inclusive publishing deal for all EU and therefore certain concessions have to be made due to the censorship enforced by USK. It was merely a suggestion that this may be why. And it's not Germany's fault, it would be USK's fault.
    Reply +1
  • Ajent 07/03/2014

    @TeaFiend it seems fairly clear in the article that it is the German USK (their version of PEGI) that can censor content. It is because of the censorship in the Germany that the UK version is also censored. I imagine it has something to do with the business of publishing an EU version of the game as opposed to different publication deals for each country within the EU.

    It's similar to the reason that the eShop on Wii U used to be censored until 11pm when it first released. That was due to the Nintendo EU HQ being in Germany and being restricted by their rules.
    Reply +7
  • Titanfall Season Pass announced, priced at 19.99

  • Ajent 06/03/2014

    @NathanDaviesUK I didn't really want to say the same as you have (for fear of being negged into oblivion), but I totally agree. I really don't get the hate for DLC, it's just expanding a game you already like playing. Reply 0
  • Interceptor buys 3D Realms amid Gearbox lawsuit

  • Ajent 03/03/2014

    @mrsquare that's exactly what I took from it as well. What an odd thing to say! Reply +1
  • Rambo: The Video Game review

  • Ajent 21/02/2014

    I kinda skipped to the score and the last paragraph.

    The last paragraph actually makes me want to play the game...
    Reply +2
  • Win a 400 Sony Entertainment Network voucher

  • Ajent 21/02/2014

    Batman Arkham City's Harley Quinn's Revenge.

    Being a massive bat-nut I absolutely devoured the main game. I also read the Arkham City comics published in conjunction with the game. I love the idea of cross-media and I feel the story of Harley Quinn was really fleshed out in both the DLC and the accompanying comic.

    Plus you got to bash joker hoods with a big stick as Robin. A stick that transforms into a shield! Transforming sticks! Awesome.
    Reply 0