Ajent Comments

Page 1 of 7

  • Leading creators back latest Tropes vs Women video

  • Ajent 28/08/2014

    @MrTomFTW we'll have to agree to disagree. I believe that a majority of the games I play can be equally appealing to females as they are to males. Last of Us, Tomb Raider, DCUO, Batman etc. are all games that a female can enjoy. Sure, Saints Row may be filled with sexist jokes, but then I didn't like that game either (not because of the jokes, I just didn't like the game). My wife even thought Bioshock and Assassins Creed were midly interesting BECAUSE of their stories.

    To suggest that such games are not appealing to women is to presume that you know what women like, which would require a little bit of stereotyping.

    There are plenty of casual games that cater to casual gamers and I think that's where the link needs to be made. A majority of that 48% have things they'd rather be doing and game causally whilst waiting. They are being catered for. Your point is redundant unless you are suggesting females need 'female games'?

    As stated by others, the examples used by MS Sarkeesian are poor and out of context since I know plenty of female games who loved games like Hitman and Bioshock (especially). Female gamers do have stuff to play. If they want to weigh in with their thoughts then that would be beneficial, but again the female gamers I know do not share Ms Sarkeesians views with the games she raised.
    Reply +1
  • Ajent 28/08/2014

    @MrTomFTW I feel like I should give up on you, but I will persevere. People who don't buy video games more than likely don't buy them because they have no interest in them (I doubt they are even aware of the issues discussed here).

    The difference between being a consumer and being someone who actually knows the subject matter (a gamer) is highly relevant for the points raised in my previous response. If someone is going to offer valid debate points for MS Sarkeesian then obviously that person should know what they are talking about ?

    As for mobile and F2P games/ gamers- I'M not discounting them, the argument is. What mobile/F2P games (again, using Candy Crush, Clash if Clans and Angry Birds as examples of the most popular) contain elements discussed in this debate? We are talking about female characters used as background titilation that offer no forwarding purpose to the story. Most mobile and F2P games lack a story full stop, never mind having story driving mechanics. So again, it isn't ME discounting mobile/F2P gamers, I'm am simply stating that I believe a large portion of that 48% you referred to simply don't have the knowledge relevant to this debate. If they haven't played the games we are discussing and don't even know what those games are then how do they contribute in any way to either side of the debate?

    Seriously. FOCUS.
    Reply -2
  • Ajent 27/08/2014

    @MrTomFTW Your missing the point. And using specific words in my comment out of context. A bit like how Ms Sarkeesian tries to make her points. Which WAS the point I was making. I guess I'll have to be a bit more obvious since you like being so pedantic.

    You said "They just tend to avoid AAA games. I wonder why?". I understood this comment to mean that you suggest a 48% population of gamers don't buy AAA games in support of your views aligned with Ms Sarkeesian. It seems fairly clear that is what you meant, although if you want to clarify go ahead, but then don't be so pedantic about others comments.

    With regards to 'identifying as a gamer' (which wasn't the POINT, but an example within my explanation), it is important to establish a persons reference and experience. I know absolutely naff all about football. I would not be able to offer any kind of valid debate about 'last weeks football game'.

    I disagree with what you say about how it is only about who plays games and F2P games count.

    I don't think they do. Candy Crush, Clash of Clans, Angry Birds offer very little point of context in a debate such as this. So how do gamers who only have experience with such games offer any valid insight to games like Red Dead, Bioshock and Assassins Creed when they don't even know what those 'names' mean, let alone having actually played them?

    So no, F2P games and gamers don't count in a debate such as this. Either this is an important debate that needs to be discuss seriously, or it isn't. If you want to discuss it seriously then focus on the relevant aspects.
    Reply +1
  • Ajent 27/08/2014

    @Retroid My point was that MrTomFTW comment and link lacked context. I thought that was obvious? Reply 0
  • Ajent 27/08/2014

    @MrTomFTW ... jeez. Even the article you link to (rise of female gamers) attributes that fact to mobile games. My wife plays hundreds of mobile games, but in absolutely no way what so ever does she identify herself as a 'gamer'. She has a vague passing interest in mobile games because they can entertain her in the waits between other more meaningful (to her) things.

    You shouldn't really use contextually vague statistics to strengthen you support of the lady in the article.

    She does a very poor job of getting her point across and uses poor examples. You're only doing the same here and it lessens any supportive argument you may want to put across.
    Reply +4
  • Ajent 27/08/2014

    @bobomb raising awareness doesn't necessarily change anything when people disagree with your view. It only raises awareness of a difference of opinion.

    Suggesting solutions would be more productive.
    Reply +8
  • PlayStation Plus gets Velocity 2X, Sportsfriends and TxK in September

  • Ajent 27/08/2014

    @Kichijoten That's my point. You get six frames a month, plus discount benefits and the occasional extra freebie. SIX games. And they're general all good games.

    I said what makes you SO special. As in, what makes you think you get to demand more on what is already a very generous offering.
    Reply +2
  • Ajent 27/08/2014

    @Kichijoten entitled much? When did you become SO important? Reply 0
  • Mario Kart 8 getting Zelda and Animal Crossing DLC

  • Ajent 27/08/2014

    This sounds awesome. Unfortunately I got rid of my Wii U to fund my PS4 purchase (there hadn't been anything on Wii U in about 6+ months at that point and I was very disappointed ted). I'm now wishing I still had it!

    I generally like DLC (but as others have said, I only getting it on games where it is obviously good value where I already enjoy the core game). But, I do find it hilarious that EVERY other article mentioning DLC gets the game slammed, regardless of perceived value. And yet when Ninty do it (and arguably - despite other comments- no differently) there is barely a negative thing said. Ninty do command a strange sort of loyalty.

    EDIT: hmmm, negged. Plenty as well. Do people actually disagree with what I'm saying? And if so what part? This being good DLC, me liking DLC for good games or the fact that I pointed out a lack of consistency in the vocal minority opinion?
    Reply -11
  • Dragon Age: Inquisition reveals four-player co-op mode

  • Ajent 27/08/2014

    "This co-op mode will launch with 12 characters - three of each class (warrior, rogue and mage)"

    Three characters from three classes equals nine characters, no? Or am I missing something?
    Reply +10
  • Microsoft testing 24-hour free game unlocks for Xbox One

  • Ajent 22/08/2014

    @MattEvansC3 I don't get what you're saying. 5 hours is longer than an hour? By which pint you'd have bought the game? I don't know, maybe I'm having a stupid day... Reply 0
  • Ajent 21/08/2014

    @Sunsprie What really bothers me? I'm confused. Did my comment seem 'bothered'. It wasn't meant to. But I still don't know what you seem to think I am bothered about... Reply 0
  • Ajent 21/08/2014

    @Bilstar I don't know if you're joshing me or not. Just in case, I'll explain what I meant. Too many 'free' games is bad. You've already said you'd be too busy playing free games... My point was that this sort of behaviour (only playing free games) may lead to no one buying them. And then, guess what happens if the publisher/ dev don't make money? Bad times.

    EDIT: Who negged this? I'm basically saying that we don't want devs to go out of business. Look at THQ etc. If you disagree, then you're a tool for coming to a gaming website!
    Reply 0
  • Ajent 21/08/2014

    @dragulagb agreed. A whole day is a little too much and opens up the possibility of the game not selling.

    On PS+ free game trials only last for an hour. Easily enough time to play the game and gauge whether or not you like it. It saves your progress as well just in case you buy the full game.
    Reply 0
  • Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor Season Pass detailed

  • Ajent 19/08/2014

    @Sapporodan So... Someone disagree's with your view and you think the appropriate response is to insult them?

    Brilliant debating skills. Well done.

    Also. You're wrong. Whenever has a GOTY edition been free? You still pay for it. It's just that the cost depreciates over time. Just like everything else.
    Reply 0
  • Ajent 18/08/2014

    @Sapporodan Really? You think your opinion is the majority opinion? I think you'd be quite surprised to find out just how insignificant the negative opinion regarding season passes actually is. So long as the core game sells well (and is received well) then season passes generally sell well (indicating a majority of people actually like them). Reply -5
  • Ajent 18/08/2014

    Awesome. Love extra content for the games I enjoy. Can't wait.

    😜 Bring it, haters.
    Reply -13
  • EA's Gamescom 2014 briefing

  • Ajent 13/08/2014

    A bit lame in my opinion Reply 0
  • Rise of the Tomb Raider exclusive to Xbox One

  • Ajent 12/08/2014

    @BreakAtmo Agreed. In the announcement he said, quote, "Exlauively in 2015".

    So 2016 on PS4 and PC.
    Reply +4
  • Destiny's beta characters are being wiped

  • Ajent 11/08/2014

    @A_Virtual_Duck Your math is a bit off. Bungie have stated that there are 32 story missions. We played 6 in the beta. Rounding up, that's 17% of the story missions only. Then you have the Explore mode with random beacon quests and bounties, Strikes, Nightfall missions and the dailies.

    I would imagine that once you're at level cap it will be the Nightfall raid missions and the dailies that form a substantial amount of the game. Something that NONE of us have played.
    Reply +3
  • BioShock 1 announced for iPhone and iPad

  • Ajent 04/08/2014

    Hmmm... The idea seems tantalising (playing Bioshock on the go, especially on my phone/iPad which I generally have with me all the time).

    However, I cannot see how this type of 'full' game can ever be properly done on a touch screen device. Sure, if you have a controller then it works and everything is good. But when the current crop of iOS controllers cost a fraction less than a 2DS, I know what purchase I'd be recommending.
    Reply +6
  • Destiny's six-player raids can only be played with friends

  • Ajent 04/08/2014



    I'm glad Bungie have stuck to their guns. People complaining just don't seem to be grasping the concept of the game.
    Reply -2
  • Ajent 31/07/2014

    @George-Roper The only thing I find disappointing is that you seem to be the only person on here who 'gets it'.

    Destiny does have clans that you can join and play with up to the point where you're character is Raid level.

    There's a massive community aspect to Destiny that builds relationships up to the end game content.

    People keep saying that they want the choice to take on a raid boss single handedly. But what about the other elements of the raid that require teamwork. From the video there seems to be a lot of traversal. What if you need to get through a door that has two switches that need to be pressed at the same time in order for it to open? How do you solo that?

    What people seem to be forgetting is that this is one aspect of Destiny with a very specific design feature.

    I only have three people on my friends list that I can play Destiny with, but I know I will make friends in Destiny and join a clan. I anticipate absolutely no problems joining or filling a team of 6.
    Reply -1
  • Unsubscribe?

  • Ajent 02/08/2014

    @Some_Goats well I suppose you could say that in my opinion the article sounds like someone complaining about something that they are otherwise trying to say is good value. I think the article comes across as a little confusing (if it is to be taken as 'informing EG members') and unnecessary.

    To be clear, I'm not decided personally whether EA Access is good value for me. I already own BF4 and I don't play sports games. Early access to DA: Inquisition is enticing, but that's it. And I'm not convinced that's enough to make me subscribe yet. If I did sub, it'd probably just be for a month to test the waters.
    Reply 0
  • Ajent 02/08/2014

    I don't know.

    If you think it's good value why the deep concentration on finding something to complain about? If it's good value, does it really matter that you don't love EA?

    I don't love EA but I also don't see the relevance of that. Just like I don't love Tesco, but I still get my milk from there without giving it a second thought.

    If people are concerned about what this good value proposition may turn into then don't buy into it. Or if you do and further down the line find yourself not liking it, just cancel your sub. At 3.99/19.99 it's affordable enough to just give it a try and see for yourself.

    Why complain. Just do what you want...
    Reply +6
  • Destiny has a soft level cap of 20, but you can go beyond it

  • Ajent 01/08/2014

    @wobbly_Bob I respectfully disagree. Stating that you can play the story by yourself does not mean that you can play the co-op multiplayer elements by yourself (again, by virtue of the fact that they are co-op and multiplayer this should be obvious).

    They have always showed off the game in a online multiplayer co-op way.

    My point is; people expecting a pure single player experience or that the entire game will be playable as a single player, those people are clearly missing the point of the game.

    As for calling Destiny a cynical money grab grindy shit fest, ? I take it you haven't played it then? I honestly don't get how anyone who has played could say it was shit. It might not be your cup of tea, but it's certainly not shit. 'cynical money grab' ? Based on what ? What are they 'cash grabbing'? This isn't an established IP or a game based on a popular previously existing IP. Bungie are a well respected developer, but if Destiny is successful based on the reputation of Bungie that isn't a cash grab, that's Just Bungie being good at what they do. Grind fest? How can you possibly say how 'grindy' the game is when it isn't even out, let alone the fact that you haven't even experienced the end game. The content released so far is anything but 'grindy'. I say that in the laborious annoying sense of the term 'grind', since raids and end game content is actually always about grinding out quests to farm epic loot. But if hunting for loot isn't your thing then you're already looking in the wrong place.
    Reply +1
  • Ajent 01/08/2014

    @penhalion I think the thing that people need to remember is that the raid elements are very similar to games like WoW. When WoW started raids were private, it's only as the game evolved and Blizzard could be confident that players were familiar with necessary roles for creating an effective party (ie. The players had learnt the etiquette) that they introduced the role request system (similar to how match making wouldn't work in Destiny).

    People need to remember that through the course of the game you will meet people whilst exploring, playing public events and during strikes. There is the Tower social hub and clans. Clans seems to be the big one. If you're interested in raiding, then you're likely to join a clan. You'll no doubt end up with various clan members on your friends list thereby completing negating anyone's concerns about not having people to pay with. This is the way games like this have always worked.

    This is and always has been pitched as a co-op heavy multiplayer game. People complaining that they want to play on their own are obviously missing the point of the game (ie. It's meant to be played with other people).
    Reply +1
  • Over 4.6m people played the Destiny beta

  • Ajent 30/07/2014

    Great Alpha and Beta. Sunk a ton of time into both. Pre-ordered and can't wait.

    For those saying that it doesn't do anything new... I don't know what else you're expecting? I can't think of any other game that plays like a shinier more story driven version Borderlands, with more options for customisation and upgrading (both character and gear) that mixes persistent online drop in/out co-op with randoms and friends with dynamic 'public events', with MMO inspired social hubs for quest acquisition and item management/shopping with MMO like Strikes and (although not in the Beta) Raids for end game content.

    What other game mixes all these elements thereby making Destiny 'not new'?

    Personally. I loved it (obviously). Even The Crucible plays a little like Halo competitive matches (again, something I've missed since not having an Xbox for a number of years).
    Reply +4
  • 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 +19
  • 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.

    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
  • 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