hacking towards release
We've endured two delays to get here, but Watch_Dogs is finally within release sights, and ahead of that event we go hands-on with the latest build. Read on for our full thoughts!
inquisitive minds
AusGamers managed to catch-up with BioWare's Cameron Lee, an Aussie expat who serves as a producer on Dragon Age: Inquisition. Check out our full interview!
oracle of ages
Batman: Arkham Knight is set to be Rocksteady's final in the Arkham series, so it's fitting that it's just so damn big. And Batmobiles. Nuff said. Click for more!
to the moon, athena
We caught up with 2K Australia and Randy Pitchford to discuss Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel and why Australia is making an impact on the moon. Click for more!
AusGamers Games
inFamous
inFamous

PlayStation 3
Genre: Action Players: 1 to 0
Developer: Sucker Punch Official Site: http://www.suckerpunch.com/d...
Publisher: Sony Computer Entertain...
inFamous

Genre: Action
Players: 1 to 0
Developer: Sucker Punch
Official Site: http://www.suckerpunc...
Publisher: Sony Computer En...
Hide Video Player
Click To View the inFamous Video
inFAMOUS Review
Review By @ 01:07pm 27/05/09
PS3
We've had two reasonably extensive looks at Sucker Punch's inFAMOUS, one at least year's Tokyo Game Show, and one just a few weeks prior to this review. And in both instances we concluded inFAMOUS was a fence-sitting game without being able to fully test its tangible sandbox touts, or experience the raw power of electricity through the palms of the game's protagonist (and potential antagonist), Cole McGrath.

For the better part of the last few days then, I've been running the game through its paces, literally. inFAMOUS proclaims sandbox, but you're never going to be getting into cars, on motorbikes or the like (though you do *kind of* ride the roof of a train). In fact all of your traversing is done on foot, and for the most part, across rooftops.

The game-world then, reflects this and isn't necessarily the biggest of the open-world games out there. There's still plenty of space to explore, and the city planning (aka level design) is actually quite good; Sucker Punch serving up a veritable parkour playground for players where a speedy line across ledges, rooftops, signposts and railways can be easily strung together once you've worked out the machinations of Cole's cat (or racoon)-like motions. This might all sound hunky-dory, but it's just... well, let me explain.



inFAMOUS purports to be a superhero sandbox game, and all the incredibly well-presented comic-book inspired cut-scenes and narrative 'powers-post-explosion' elements maintain this claim. Unfortunately the game's inner workings, stemming from minor elements such as dialogue right through to enemies, counteract the claim, bringing it - and the game's fun-factor - to a screeching halt. It takes an incredibly strong will to push through to a point where you're somewhat satisfied with what you've just put yourself through, and I doubt anyone barring the most die-hard of Sony fanboys (and there are a lot of them) will find this strength of will to see that inFAMOUS does have something enjoyable to offer.

If I could put an image to this game, it would be of me constantly scratching my head in frustration and ever-escalating angst. Not necessarily because inFAMOUS is all-round bad, but because the idea here and myriad elements are so strong, I want them to work, it's just in the wake of all the bad things on offer, it becomes something of an exercise in tedious faith; hoping for something more, but consistently finding loopholes, misgivings and plain dead-ends in the road towards gratifying gameplay fulfilment.

Issues begin with the game's structure early on. You're given control of Cole post-massive explosion (which is the catalyst for all events that unfold from here on out), but on a very linear path. It's a narrative decision, I understand, but unless you follow the game's intended course from the outset, you can actually die within the first few minutes of gameplay - which to me, is a little silly in a sandbox title and equally depressing given you're meant to be a character who is manifesting 'amazing' power each step he takes.

Don't get me wrong, it serves its purpose, I just feel it was handled poorly given the overall goal.

This follow-the-leader formula then continues for the first few missions as we're slowly introduced to the game's mission structures and the ways in which to play and engage them. Comparing this opening to the likes of say, GTA IV (or any GTA title for that matter), where you can start running amok almost immediately is another clear indication that just because you have a sprawling metropolis populated with cars and NPCs doesn't mean you have a game with ultimate freedom.

Speaking of NPCs, the inhabitants of Empire City really aren't too bright. From the game's early moments, you're somewhat disliked amongst the denizens, which is shown through negative banter towards you, or animations of NPCs cowering or running away from you. Later on in the game, if you choose to follow a good karma path they'll start to respond more favourably to you, but what I noticed more than anything is this in itself is fleetingly glitch-ridden. One instance saw me rescuing a downed chap in a sewer. He stood up, thanked me then told his friend across the way to open a locked gate for me. As soon as this role was completed though, his AI switched back to being afraid and he cowered right next to me. Both inconsistent, and just plain rude.

This lack of dynamic AI is rampant throughout the game and extends itself in most ambient aspects. Cars just circle the block (I know because I sat on the roof of one to see), and will simply come to a miraculous stop if anything dangerous is happening in front of them. There's no organic desire to live, or avoid accidents such as those seen in GTA, which simply paints a fairly simple algorithmic pattern of background noise for all of this, which in turn negates the intended soul for Empire City – what's the point in saving a place that doesn't feel real or alive?

But the word "saving" brings me to my next major problem with the game and something I mentioned earlier. Idealistically inFAMOUS is a superhero title, but beyond Cole's amazing balance and climbing ability, there's very little here in the way of true superherodom. His electricity isn't very strong, and feels more like an eccentric gun and grenade combination than anything else. You rarely use it in the way it should be, such as electrifying surfaces to take on enemies in an outside-the-box contest. It's equally vexing the baddies, junkies-turned-super-mutants, are crack shots with their weapons, more often than not killing you before you even know where they are (and yes, that pun was absolutely intended).

In fact there's an absolutely unbalanced system of conflict, and it happens with grunt enemies. You can take them out from afar, but even at certain distances your lightning bolt may not reach them, yet, their sniper-like abilities – from the same distance – can knock you senseless. It's also annoying because Cole can suck up power from any nearby power-source, but it's incredibly easy to have this interrupted (and you dead very quickly), meaning you're constantly running from battle to find a safe spot to recharge. And most unforgiving of all is jumping from far above with the intention of performing Cole's best move (best described as "death from above") only to have a single bullet hit you just centimetres from the ground, thus culling the ability and leaving you wide open to attack.

Cole has a few different default offensive moves that manifest early in the game. The aforementioned lightning bolt action takes no 'ammo', and can be used over and over again (sort of like a pistol with endless rounds). Eventually he'll also get grenade-like electrical charges, which really only act similarly to grenades (they don't really do much more than explode) as well as the ability to hover and perform a "Force Push" type of move that is just more like a stun gun than anything (it doesn't do much more than push people or items directly in your path about). There's also the "death from above" move, which a massive area of effect devastation action, but it only seems to be effective around 60% of the time, which just adds to all the frustration on offer already.

The karma system is also really lax in that it's just too cut and dry. Throughout the game, in narrative effect, you're offered choices of either good or bad consequence. One particular instance had me choosing whether to be sprayed in the face with a murky mutagen substance that brought on hallucinations (which actually progressed the story), or make a bystander do it. Here the choice was obvious - do it myself so I can get more of the story fleshed out. What's worse is said hallucination lasted less than 10 seconds with no negative effect. You will unlock different abilities specific to your karmic alliance, but for the most part these rarely change the shape of engagement.

Missions see you having to turn power grids back on through sewers, looking for satellites on roof-tops, collecting battery shards, saving makeshift medical centre, disrupting enemy couriers, riding (and running) trains and infiltrating enemy strongholds. Initially your hand is fairly held, but eventually you're somewhat free to roam the city, and engaging and completing side-missions (represented via yellow icons as opposed to blue ones which are narrative-specific) will create enemy-free zones, so diligent players can free up the immediate area to traverse without being annoyingly shot at or accosted by the Reapers. But ultimately, this is all just distraction to the main game.

The real crux here, is in the game's story, and for the first half of the game, you're going to disagree. Powering through to the bitter end though, will reveal some stellar story-telling in the interactive form; it's just a hard slog to get to that point.

Some of the proceeding missions are also really solid to engage, and manage to break the monotonous mould you've been curing in with gusto, but again, non-hardcore Sony types are seriously going to find it difficult to feel compelled to get to said point.

Unfortunately inFAMOUS just doesn't look the part, barely plays the part and therefore really isn't the part.

There are moments of excellence, but they're so few and far between, they're easily forgotten in the wake of all the tedium on offer. So much of the game is formulaic and old-school in a negative sense; you'll wonder how this wound up on a next-gen powerhouse like the PS3. There are far too many moments and ideas pulled directly from the Sly Cooper series to make inFAMOUS stand on its own two feet and when it does, it really is just fleeting.

If you can make it through to the end, you deserve a trophy for perseverance, but if you've been waiting for a rock-solid PS3 exclusive to sink your teeth into, be prepared to be disappointed and just be thankful Uncharted 2 really isn't that far away.

WHAT WE LIKED
Parkour element can be fun
Some story-telling moments are gold
comic-inspired cut-scenes are well crafted
Solid soundtrack
WHAT WE DIDN'T LIKE
Enemy AI is an inconsistent bitch
NPC AI is plain ridiculous
Looks really dated
Mission structure is very formulaic
Barely promotes "sandbox"
Can take a long time to get to enjoyable moments
MORE...
WE GAVE IT:
6.9
OUT OF 10
AusGamers
Latest Comments
Khel
Posted 04:46pm 27/5/09
I bought this yesterday and so far I'm really loving it, played it for about 3 or 4 hours last night and had a lot of fun. I wasn't really expecting it to be like GTA though, I'm kind of over GTA and games that try to be like it, this feels a lot more like Crackdown than GTA to me, but with a good story vs Crackdown's non-existant story.

That platforming mechanics feel really awesome and solid too, I can jump towards the thinest ledge, or the make the most death defying leap onto a suspended cable and be pretty confident Cole is going to do what I want him to do and land where I want him to land. The AI hasn't bothered me yet, I don't mind that everyone cowers and runs screaming from me, I mean, thats probably the smart thing to do because I'm most likely going to kill them and suck the electricity out of their bodies to feed myself.

Its not the best game I've ever played, but so far, I'm having a lot of fun. Its easily as much fun as Crackdown was for me, probably more so. And just for the record, I'm not a Sony fanboy :P
Steve Farrelly
Posted 04:48pm 27/5/09
Nah, fair call Khel, I just thought it acted a little dated, and when you get deeper in and are dealing with a host of reapers, Cole's sticky legde/climbing ability can actually become somewhat cumbersome
Khel
Posted 04:55pm 27/5/09
It does definitely have its rough edges, the fire effects in the intro bit looked really shit, thats one thing that stuck in my mind. Some of the props and stuff around the world are animated really poorly too, like the fridge on the roof of your friend's place, if you zap it, it swings open, and if you zap it again while its open it snaps back to being shut and swings open again.

But yeah, I guess the novelty of electrocuting people and tossing stuff around with emp blasts and such hasn't got old yet, those rough edges might start bugging me more when the initial shine has worn off.

I do definitely agree about the death from above move though, that kicks major amounts of arse, I didn't realise at first that the longer you fall for the harder it hits, and I jumped off a really high building into the middle of a street and basically annhilated everything in sight, quite cool :)

last edited by Khel at 16:55:27 27/May/09
ChiZ
Posted 04:55pm 27/5/09
6.9? Really? I'm really enjoying it. I think the look of it is pretty good. Also comparison it to GTAIV and saying it's not sandbox because you can't drive cars isn't a fair point.

ALSO, Cole has a lot more moves than you listed, the ones you unlock after doing good missions are pretty good. And you don't touch on getting the ability to grind along rails, and hover etc!

Again, 6,9? :( I like it much more than that.
Steve Farrelly
Posted 05:09pm 27/5/09
oops, for you early review comers - this para was missing due to it being missed during cut and paste :P

The karma system is also really lax in that it's just too cut and dry. Throughout the game, in narrative effect, you're offered choices of either good or bad consequence. One particular instance had me choosing whether to be sprayed in the face with a murky mutagen substance that brought on hallucinations (which actually progressed the story), or make a bystander do it. Here the choice was obvious - do it myself so I can get more of the story fleshed out. What's worse is said hallucination lasted less than 10 seconds with no negative effect. You will unlock different abilities specific to your karmic alliance, but for the most part these rarely change the shape of engagement.

it's in the review now though
Khel
Posted 05:15pm 27/5/09
While I can understand that driving cars and stuff might have been beyond the scope of the game, one thing I thought was a bit corny was that they went out of their way to give silly reasons why he can't do those things. Like he can't touch guns or he ignites the powder in them and they explode, or he can't sit in a car cos it will explode. He can ride on top of a car, thats fine, doesn't hurt the car at all, but yeah, can't sit in them apparently. It just felt pretty ham-fisted.

Its like that game Wet, I remember watching a dev interview with some of the guys working on it, and in the game you're an assassin and you have your own set of custom handguns, and you only ever use your own handguns. Fair enough, thats how their game mechanics are built, you don't pick up other weapons, you use your own weapons. But then they felt the need to write in a reason for it, and added a backstory to the main character about it, saying how she only ever uses her own guns because she has a phobia of touching other people's guns.

I assume they do it in an attempt to try and not break the immersion, but it just has the opposite effect on me, it just harshly reminds me of how fake and contrived the world I'm playing in is.

last edited by Khel at 17:15:03 27/May/09
d0mino
Posted 05:18pm 27/5/09
And you don't touch on getting the ability to grind along rails, and hover etc!
spoilers?
Steve Farrelly
Posted 05:24pm 27/5/09
I did touch on it actually
ChiZ
Posted 05:31pm 27/5/09

And you don't touch on getting the ability to grind along rails, and hover etc!
spoilers?


Not really? You see that in most of the video and screenshots.

EDIT:

And you don't touch on getting the ability to grind along rails, and hover etc!
spoilers?

Sorry, just re-read, it was in there.
pixem
Posted 09:05am 28/5/09
just like to say I'm really enjoying this game myself. I thought at first it could be a bomb as definately noticed the dated visuals.. especially compared to something like killzone 2, the last game played by myself.

But its actually a lot of fun, and I actually like the AI. I don't find the AI predictable at all. Maybe I don't game enough, but when I used to the AI always would do the same thing, if you figured out how to beat them you could just keep using the same trick. So far the AI pisses me off because it does things differently than I expect and makes it harder for me to kill them.

Sometimes the ledge stickyness can get in the way but for 90% of the time I find it really great and a lot more fun than games where you have to be so precise with your jumps you give up in frustration. Maybe its suited to the more casual gamer which I probably fit into these days.

I find the style of gameplay fun and not having to beat minibosses all the time is actually refreshing (ala Force Unleashed, a similar style in my opinion but infamous is far more enjoyable). Only once or twice have I done a mission that was repetitive, but it were some side missions anyhow.

Really enjoying it thus far, probably 70% in.

last edited by pixem at 09:05:43 28/May/09
trog
Posted 09:04am 28/5/09
Feedback from someone who couldn't be bothered making an account but took the time to post feedback via our contact section:
What are you guys smoking over at the office. I read your review of infamous and was very confused and have a few questions for you.

Did you guys confuse your copy of Infamous with GTA4 or something. Having play 20 hours of Infamous so far and barely getting to 15 hours with GTA4 I must say that your review reeks of unfair critism. Everything you describe about infamous would have been true if describing GTA4!

Furthermore there is no room in an objective review of a game for words like"fans", or more accurately "Sony fans". It only makes you guys sound like fanboys, which is what I've been led to believe.

Bottom line is that although I'll admit that it has its flaws, but in the end it is an infinitely more fun and good looking game that GTA4 was (Game of the Year 2008 scoring 98 in Metacritic) with a better story and unmatched platforming. To label it 69 out of 100 is downright wrong, and I hope for Suckerpunch's sake that no one reads this review and takes it seriously.

This will be the last time I visit your site and will be the advice I give everyone I come in contact with in person or online.

Cheers to unbiased reviews.

Disgruntled gamer.
Beanith
Posted 09:14am 28/5/09
This will be the last time I visit your site and will be the advice I give everyone I come in contact with in person or online.


Will he come back if I promise to post a photo of a kitten?
Nathan
Posted 09:24am 28/5/09
David gives a movie 2 stars and Margaret gives it 3.5 stars. Which of them is wrong?
Reverend Evil
Posted 09:26am 28/5/09
Does Ausgamers get angry emails from developers and publishers when you score a game below what they think it should?
pixem
Posted 09:57am 28/5/09
I'll say this for his rant, the bit he refers to in the article is a little confusing..

non-hardcore Sony types are seriously going to find it difficult to feel compelled to get to said point


I don't really get that statement. I guess I've never been a type of any console whatever that means, I guess if I am I'm a PC type - i like my mouse. I just find it hard to believe that someone will percervere just because they are compelled by faith in a brand. Can such a statement be applied to a Microsoft or Nintendo fan? Would a similar issue on an Xbox exclusive title garner the same quote? If it did wouldn't that make hardcore Microsoft types and hardcore Sony types the same?

Or are the types different based on their choices of brand - i.e only a certain type of person would by a PS3? If not then the statement doesn't relate to brand and would relate to a type of gamer irregardless of brand. If it is, then if the title were an Xbox exclusive the Xbox review would contain the same quote referencing hardcore Sony types.

I don't mean to start any fan war thing. I know people get protective about their choices in life. But the point they would percervere with something that you consider others would find painful and unenjoyable seems a bit unrealistic to me. I've always seen games as a source of entertainment and fun whats the point if they aren't.
trog
Posted 10:15am 28/5/09
PA guys seem to agree that this game has its ups and downs as well:
Infamous is a decent game, and that's the whole of it. Ironically enough, it lacks spark: it lacks impetus. Whatever power it does exert grounds out after a few hours, so that by the tenth hour I was twiddling my charged thumbs wondering if there was some other mutant that could torment this grey town. It's cool to shock dudes, true. That's a good Goddamned thing, because you're going to be shocking a lot of fucking dudes.

There's a lot about the game that is incoherent. A game based on truly beautiful, fully realized art that (unlike their previous efforts) never seems to inform the gameworld. Some water kills you outright, some water doesn't. It's a game about urban traversal where the platforming has been trivialized by a kind of capricious magnetism, which sometimes negates or just disregards your input. As a result, Cole can climb virtually anything, almost automatically - marquees, exposed girders, modern art - everything except chain link fences, something any normal person could climb.
It's a pretty carefully phrased post; I had to read it a few times before I decided he was saying it was a little on the average side - it ends with a comment about game journos which I assume means most other sites are blowing over this game, but I haven't looked around so no idea.
Steve Farrelly
Posted 11:13am 28/5/09
pixem, that's based on our feedback and run-ins with hardcore Sony elite whenever we review an exclusive sony product. And yes, in said contact, the parties have looked beyond physical flaws of games to proclaim them the best thing since sliced bread.

I used to be a hardcore Nintendo nut and would do the same thing with Nintendo products... now I've seen the light and game across the board
Steve Farrelly
Posted 11:16am 28/5/09
case in point - this is a comment from the news post for this review at News 4 Gamers:
1 - no name site, no credibility

"probably an xbot with his own website.. i played the game, definitely not a 6.. well, xbots would give ps3 exclusive low scores to up their self-esteem..

poor xbots, i see this all the time in sports forums.. when their home team is losing they talk a lot of crap about the other teams players.. like those cavs fans bashing howard for the incident with mo williams.. saying he is not a superstar because of the technical for taunting.. got off topic there.. i'll end now"
Spook
Posted 11:37am 28/5/09
uhoh, this wont get steve game review of the year
trog
Posted 12:33pm 28/5/09
PS3 people definitely rage more when they see low scores for platform exclusive titles. They certainly don't then go and give us props when games get good scores. Confirmation bias!@#
groganus
Posted 01:09pm 28/5/09
i was pretty keen to play this, but with some many people whinging about the annoying little things like not climbing fences and siht its kind of turned me off..
trog
Posted 01:16pm 28/5/09
Oh, I just got the most recent PA - I guess that's relating to the game
BillyHardball
Posted 01:29pm 28/5/09
6.9 is not bad? I'd say the only game that has come close to a 9 for me would be Quake, or maybe Doom, when I was young enough to think that games were the duck's nuts.

What sort of scale are you using? How did you land on 6.9 after you list the pro's vs cons? Does the scale ever drop below 5? (looks like there are more bad than good features.) Is a 6.9 for one game going to mean that a 6.9 on a different game will be the same?

How the hell can anyone write an "objective" review? It's totally unfeasible in terms of gaming reviews. Even "disgruntled gamer" has based his/her own review as a comparison to a different game.
Bottom line is that although I'll admit that it has its flaws, but in the end it is an infinitely more fun and good looking game that GTA4 was (Game of the Year 2008 scoring 98 in Metacritic) with a better story and unmatched platforming.

So, they are saying that, objectively, the game has flaws, but compared to a different game, it's better? What personal investment does this guy have in a video game to need to reply like that? Clearly, disgruntled gamer is a 1/12 case, IYKWIM.
greazy
Posted 01:39pm 28/5/09
Screw the hates Steve. What I look for in a review is honesty. That's why I enjoy watching Yatze or whatever the angry British guy is called.
pixem
Posted 03:58pm 28/5/09
Just so people are clear the score is fine with me if that is your opinion, never said it was wrong. Its a review.

My only interest is in the comment quoted, I don't know any hardcore PS3 or Xbox fans. My only experience with console gamers is for to tell me they are an Xbox fan when they know I have a PS3, but never go on to bash it or me which I would consider fairly normal. I guess I'm not in a position to have the reverse and have a PS3 owner comment on my choice if I had an Xbox. I guess in your position you are exposed to it a lot more from both sides, if there is one. I just don't understand it, I would assume the hardcore pride induced console gamers are common to both sides? They just chose differently which side to die for? Or is there one type specific to one brand, and they would only chose that brand because of who they are?

I guess its the whole I'm a Mac I'm a PC where people tie their personality into inanimate object choices. Just seems odd.

Sorry to have maybe gone OT as well. That PA comic is pretty funny too. Those fences caused me great annoyance.

last edited by pixem at 15:58:13 28/May/09
sony1978a
Posted 08:52pm 28/5/09
LOL AT ASUGAMERS 6.9????????

I DONT KNOW WHY, BUT EVREY TIME YOU GUYS Review A PS3 GAME,YOU PROOF TO ME THAT THIS WEBSITE IS OWNED BY 360 FANS.
Game Spot gave it 9, Game Trailers gave it 9. IGN gave it 9.2
I swear if this game was on 360 you guys would give 9.
Do me a favor stop Reviewing PS3 Games.

Shame on you FAN BOYS
ctd
Posted 08:56pm 28/5/09
MORE LIKE AUSXBOXGAMERS
fpot
Posted 08:56pm 28/5/09
Irony... of... someone... called... sonu1978a... signing up... just to have a whinge about a subjective review score... and then calling people fan boys... too much... overload....
ViscoS
Posted 12:39am 29/5/09
They didn't like it as much as other sites; big whoop, you obviously aren't going to listen to Steve anyway so what's your issue?
trog
Posted 09:48am 29/5/09
LOL AT ASUGAMERS 6.9????????I DONT KNOW WHY, BUT EVREY TIME YOU GUYS Review A PS3 GAME,YOU PROOF TO ME THAT THIS WEBSITE IS OWNED BY 360 FANS.Game Spot gave it 9, Game Trailers gave it 9. IGN gave it 9.2I swear if this game was on 360 you guys would give 9.Do me a favor stop Reviewing PS3 Games.Shame on you FAN BOYS
I assume you didn't read everything else in these comments before posting :(

6.9 is a pretty good score; it's almost 70%. That's way above average.
weedy
Posted 12:22am 30/5/09
I thought it was an interesting game so downloaded the demo for my PS3 i found the game play extremely boring - needless to say i spent longer waiting it for to be installed then i could bare playing it... the only good thing about it is u can pretty much climb on anything you like but that wears out in 5 minutes of game play, so many awesome games comin out soon save your money for OFP2, BF1943, Fight Night 4... and all the other ones i have lined up which i cbf lookin up right now

360 or PS3 makes no difference this games crap
Donovan
Posted 08:57am 21/6/09
Im glad I found this site. I have always been a huge Sony supporter even though I own both a PS3 and 360. I get most multi-platform games on the PS3 cause I like the controller more. Anyways, I've been dissapointed with some of Sony's exclusives lately, and I was searching for a game website that felt similarily to me about inFAMOUS' shortcomings. I should have known I was going to have to come to Australia! I agree that this game had good intentions and was fun at times.I could tell that the developers at Sucker Punch are skilled, but it lacked in a lot of areas and wasn't polished. Nice review Steve!
Midda
Posted 10:30am 21/6/09
I've been playing this for the last few days, and it's pretty cool so far. I just got the gliding ability, which makes jumping from building to building more interesting. I have to say though, the cutscene animations are awful, it's like they didn't even try. Which is strange, because the in-game animations aren't too bad, but those cutscenes... Fucking terrible, the worst I've seen in a long time.
Khel
Posted 01:16pm 21/6/09
Yeah, I've noticed that too, and it has lots of people turning on the spot without their legs moving
Commenting has been locked for this item.
34 Comments
Show
 
Log In
User:  
Pass:  

Advertise with Us | Download Media Kit | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
© Copyright 2001-2014 AusGamers™ Pty Ltd. ACN 093 772 242.
A Mammoth Media web development / Australian VPS Hosting by Mammoth Networks