@ALLIAMOS: Not even that a lot of the time. That blown out lighting at the start was pretty horrific too!

@tom2750: Woah! Use some punctuation!

Infamous: Second Son is the only one I really want to play from that list, having played the previous ones. I'm keeping an eye on Horizon: Zero Dawn but I'm not buying a game, let alone a console based on an E3 demo.

Not really a fan of the sponsored content. There are more interesting things I could learn about in 2 minutes than the history of a game company who makes games I don't care about.

I only ever played a demo of the first one. Second was great, third was good.

I'm kind of gutted that it's a Sony exclusive series, returning to PC gaming after years of PS2 & 3 has raised my standards too much & I don't know if I can bring myself to buy a PS4 for a few exclusives.

Just imagine the facial animations we could have if we weren't being held back by consoles.

It continues to amaze me just how good devs can make a vertical slice look while the rest of the game is so completely unfinished.

I'm guessing there's more than just optimisation to do in The Division if they're saying next year as early as May. There are probably some serious online connection issues with a game that detailed.

So much spin.

I love single player games so I'm happy but just be honest. Unity was a disaster & you just can't do it right. You need to save face & make a good game in the series again. Something easier to achieve.

Any reasonable sized piece of content that's developed after the game is shipped can be OK as DLC. Borderlands 2 had some pretty good story based missions in the season pass. Stuff like armour or guns that the art team works on while after their job is done & the rest of the dev team are working on optimisation & bug fixes are kind of a grey area. I'm personally very much against paying for extra stuff that is purely cosmetic but some don't mind. In a F2P game I absolutely understand but in a game I've paid for, I feel like it should just be something you can unlock.

CDPR did a great job of supporting their previous games after launch & that builds a lot of good will. I know I can trust them to keep working on a game, fixing bugs, optimising, balancing etc. while other companies focus on pushing microtransactions before the base game is even running properly.

@Jdzspace @G4mBi7 GTA V was never worth a 10 to begin with. I think scores are dumb because people like you end up arguing over a number rather than concentrating on the content of the review. As a game, it's highly iterative & lacking in innovation. What it does, it does reasonably well but I would only give it an 8 if I had to put a number to it after playing on PS3.

Acting like this game is perfect in every way & it has somehow been robbed of a 10/10 for some clandestine reason is silly. If you think it's a good game, great. If it's your favourite game, great. That doesn't mean everyone has to share your opinion. Rockstar isn't exactly losing money by not selling enough copies because Gamespot gave their game a 9 instead of a 10. This is not some poor indie developer whose career got scuttled by a rogue reviewer that you're defending .

I think the first person perspective is such a weird addition to THIS Grand Theft Auto. The first two games were top down so changing the perspective is nothing new but the big change with GTA V was having three different protagonists. A big part of the story is seeing your different characters interact with people in different ways, they have different abilities & you dress them in nicer clothes as you make more money & advance in the game. Playing in first person means you only see the hands of your three different characters.

Personally I've never felt that playing in first person is more immersive anyway. I don't need to imagine that it's me gunning down hundreds of people.