PS4 NewsSeriously, Why Is TLoU: Remastered Suddenly Cheaper? - PS4 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Seriously, Why Is TLoU: Remastered Suddenly Cheaper?

Over the weekend, Sony decided to drop the price of The Last Of Us: Remastered.

Okaaaay...why?

I mean, I'm not complaining or anything. And it's not like $10 is a huge price drop. However, this price cut didn't really come with an official announcement or explanation, and I'd just like to know what inspired the decision.

Is it because gamers everywhere were complaining about spending full price for what they called a "one-year-old game"? The idea of revamped versions of older games fetching $60 doesn't go over well with everyone; remember the fallout surrounding Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition?

I suppose that could be it. Or, is this a nod to a time when first-party Sony titles were $10 cheaper than third-party multiplatform games? Those times haven't disappeared forever, right? I'm just wondering why the price drop happened; it's not often that you see changes in prices a mere five weeks before the game becomes available for sale. It's worthy of discussion, don't you think?

Any legit ideas?

Related Game(s): The Last Of Us: Remastered

Tags: the last of us remastered, tlou remastered, the last of us ps4

6/22/2014 9:56:30 PM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous




New Comment System


Legacy Comment System (61 posts)


LimitedVertigo
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 10:19:32 PM
Reply

I imagine it's a combination of things. They're catering to the fans that think paying full price for an HD port is ridiculous. They're also trying to combat X1 any way they. I'd say selling one of the best games to come out in years for $50 will help move more PS4s.

Or maybe, just maybe, Sony read my email concerning future employment and this is their way of letting me know they read it.

Agree with this comment 8 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

telly
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 2:47:59 PM

If this were maybe $30 I'd consider buying it right away. No chance I'm spending even $50 on a game I spent $60 on just last year.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Deleted User
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 10:30:55 PM
Reply

I heard that it was because The Master Chief Collection embarrassed it in terms of content. Not sure I agree that that is the reason, but I agree that the MCC may be the best compilation since The Orange Box.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 5 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 10:36:53 PM

The difference being that The Orange Box contained several NEW games while the MCC is double/triple dipping. The MCC doesn't even come close to the incredible value The Orange Box offered when it first released.

Agree with this comment 7 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Deleted User
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 10:48:23 PM

I definitely agree there, though not being as enamored with Portal as many seem to be, the OB is superior to the MCC. Still, MCC is second to it, in my opinion.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Kryten1029a
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 11:08:28 PM

They're offering four full games along with the Halo 4 Spartan Ops missions for $60 at 1080p/60fps. That's not a bad value for the money given the number of hours that someone could sink into them.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 11:47:32 PM

"They're offering four full games"

That have already been played how many times? I'm not disputing that it's a nice collection of games. But it isn't even in the same league as The Orange Box.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Killa Tequilla
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 12:19:30 AM

Hey Limited, you... Listen, I only ever played Halo 4 on Xbox 360. Playing thru Halos 1-4 at upgraded graphics, with coop (online and offline), plus online multiplayer is an epic deal for me for the low price of only $59.99. Don't try to tell me otherwise.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 12:38:32 AM

"Don't try to tell me otherwise."

I haven't nor would I. This comment thread you've joined is in regards to comparing the MCC to The Orange Box. I mentioned that the MCC is "a nice collection of games". Why are you busting my juicy, yummy, balls?

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

wiiplay [Administrator]
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 12:55:20 AM

Juicy, yummy.... Mental images shall scar me!

Anyways, I myself am excited for the Master Chief Collection, having only got hooked on Halo 3.
However, I gotta agree with LV. Nothing beats The Orange Box in terms of value. I still play Team Fortress 2 to this day, whereas Halo 3 was left in the dust, so to speak.

Still, being a Halo fan that hasn't experienced the full story, I'm picking up MCC for sure.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 10:52:09 AM

I think I'm about due for another Orange Box play through.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 11:31:34 AM

^I replay Half-Life2 and its two episodes just about every year. I can't stand TF2. TFC was one of the first multiplayer games I really got into (Tribes being the first) and I hated what they did with the sequel.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 8:59:13 PM

yea, i could never get into Team Fortress. I know it's rep though. Isn't TF basically what put Steam on the map?
It's HL2 and HL2 Episode 2 that rocked things hardcore for me.
HL2 was like some game pulled 5 years from out of the future and given to us, PC side. It was something really special.

Last edited by Temjin001 on 6/23/2014 8:59:52 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 9:07:23 PM

I've been with Steam since for 11 years now and honestly I don't even remember what put it on the map. I'd say it was HL2. Speaking of that it's hard to believe it's been almost 7 years since that huge cliffhanger ending of Episode2.


Someday...

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SASSYGIRL82
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 10:47:32 PM
Reply

Still for $50 it ought to include all the dlc or make it $39.99

Agree with this comment 1 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Deathb4Dishonor
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 10:57:50 PM

I thought it was coming with all the DLC or am i wrong?? I swear i thought i read it somewhere that it was

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Cpt_Geez
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 11:14:32 PM

It does come with the dlc.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Cesar_ser_4
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 4:14:05 PM

Shut up Riley!

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

tes37
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 11:17:56 PM
Reply

Maybe they were expecting a higher amount of pre-orders than they've received so far and want to increase that number. I was undecided about buying TLOU again, but I might go ahead and get it now that they're twisting my arm.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 2:19:37 AM

That was my first thought too - that simply the preorder number were far less than expected, so they take that as a warning and try to do something about it.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 11:19:18 PM
Reply

Exclusives were once $10 cheaper?

They just didn't want to seem greedy when these super HD remakes already make people nervous.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 11:07:55 AM

Yeah, for a while there, first-party games from Sony were $50 as opposed to $60. I think it started in the PS2 generation.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 12:57:31 PM

That's awesome

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 4:56:11 PM

I seem to recall that Sony's exclusives clocked in at $39.99 during the PSX era. Jet Moto and Rally Cross were two that come to mind. This move by Sony just drove more nails into the N64's expensive cartridge coffin. It was part of Nintendo's epic fall from supremacy.

Last edited by Temjin001 on 6/23/2014 4:57:50 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Norrin Radd
Sunday, June 22, 2014 @ 11:54:19 PM
Reply

Perhaps sales projections simply indicated it would make more profit selling a larger number of copies at $50 than the profits generated at $60 but selling fewer copies. It could be just that simple.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Killa Tequilla
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 12:20:09 AM
Reply

Sometimes less is more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

BlinkBoy
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 3:09:22 AM
Reply

Here is my take on this.

By not telling anyone about the price change they managed to create this article from nothing.

The Internet buzz created by this might be stronger than a simple announcement.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Corvo
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 3:16:08 AM
Reply

Cause

They wanted too.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Vivi_Gamer
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 3:19:22 AM
Reply

In the UK this was the most expensive PS4 game, which in itself was joke as it is a remastered PS3 game. I bought The PS3 release of Final Fantasy X/X-2 HD's special edition for half the asking price.

Still, I am waiting until late next year for this until it is dirt cheap, if I feel the need to play The Last of Us again, i will be content with the PS3 version.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

wiiplay [Administrator]
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 4:45:07 AM

I never had an interest in this game, but I'll certainly pick it up for $20 in a few years time.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Big_Boss90
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 4:26:26 AM
Reply

To answer your question oh great and mighty one, because ND feels like making it 10 dollers cheaper geez.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

wiiplay [Administrator]
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 4:43:06 AM
Reply

They lowered it by $15 in Canada, which just goes to show how fudged up Sony's recent Canadian pricing policies are.
Seriously, instead of the absolutely ridiculous price of $69.99, they lowered it to the still ridiculous price if $54.99.

Is that extra $5 really that important? I seriously doubt any sane Canadians are buying into this HD remake of an HD last gen game bull, and if they are, they deserve to waste their money.

Gah, sometimes Sony just irritates me!

Agree with this comment 5 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

berserk
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 9:12:05 AM

" I seriously doubt any sane Canadians are buying into this HD remake of an HD last gen game bull, and if they are, they deserve to waste their money. "

Don t see the problem about buying that game if they never played it , i can agree if talking about those re buying that game at that price .

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

wiiplay [Administrator]
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 12:21:45 PM

I simply want fair pricing. Right now, Sony's pricing structure is unfair and unethical. While I'm not saying that the game is bad, or that people shouldn't buy it. What I'm saying is that, for the price, it isn't worth the investment. $55 for a game that is already available for less than $30 at most retail stores just doesn't seem worth it. You're paying more than half of the games value just to get the PS4 version.

Also, while it is certainly a more accurate rate than what Sony has and will likely continue to charge, the simple fact that Sony is raising the price of these games and putting the blame on the Canadian economy angers me beyond words. Raising by $5 makes economical sense, but $10? They're getting undeserved net.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Nerull
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 3:02:46 PM

Not only that, but as far as I know the cut is just for the digital version. For those of us that still want a physical copy it's still 70 freakin bucks.
Looks like I'm going to have to wait longer until the price goes back down.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

jasondmzk
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 5:13:44 AM
Reply

I thought the answer was obvious and widely-reported: because Amazon undercut PSN by listing it for $49.99.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

ethird1
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 8:31:56 AM
Reply

Because barely any people are preordering it. That is why. Talked to a Gamestop employee about it.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

MRSUCCESS
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 8:42:20 AM

That's not representative of all locations & retailers.

Last edited by MRSUCCESS on 6/23/2014 8:42:35 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Gamer46
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 9:01:42 AM

Well, it's the same thing at the Gamestop near me. Sure it's anecdotal evidence, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's true for many places around the country. Whether Sony and the hardcore Sony fans want to admit it or not, not many people upgraded to PS4 to replay The Last of Us.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Tuesday, June 24, 2014 @ 12:06:01 PM

Yeah... and my gamestop said Lightning Returns pre orders were through the roof....

oops....

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Gamer46
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 8:59:16 AM
Reply

It should've been $50 from the start and even that's too much for a slightly upgraded port of a year-old game. Glad Sony is delivering on the promise of 'greatness awaits' and 'for the gamers' though, I mean, the reason I bought a PS4 was so I could play PS3 games.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 11:36:10 AM

You're really f'in annoying. Just admit you should have waited a year, already. And admit that PS1, PS2, and PS3 were the same stories as this gen. And please, don't post any more lists of games that you claim came out in the first years of those consoles that actually came out in year 2 (and in one case, year 3....)

Last edited by Underdog15 on 6/23/2014 11:37:11 AM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 11:45:55 AM

Underdog, I think you'll just have to start ignoring him. He's just as bad as blank guy. Only a moron buys a console on Day1 then complain about a lack of games.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SaiyanSenpai
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 2:18:40 PM

Agreed Underdog and Limited. This cycle is nothing new and you buy a console early as an investment in future fun - you know games that you want are going to come out on the system, so now you are ready for them. Stop whining and being such a negative Nancy, Gamer46.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 2:45:35 PM

Yeah, I said that once last week or 2 weeks ago or something. Then he and 2 other morons started listing all these games that came out in year one to prove me wrong.

At first, I was like... "damn... am I really that off?" So I looked into the list of games they gave and it wasn't even like a couple were wrong... almost ALL the games they listed released came out in it's second year. The red flag that made me start looking was the claim that FFX came out in the PS2's first year, and I know my SquareSoft Final Fantasies! lol

(It came out in NA 14 months after the NA release of PS2 and 16 months in Japan after the Japan PS2 release. They tried claiming the FFX Japanese version released half a year after the NA PS2 release to prove their point... stat-fixing in order to fake not being wrong.)

Last edited by Underdog15 on 6/23/2014 2:46:27 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 3:24:04 PM

Haha, that's some funny info, Underdog. I'm sure like the rest of the mindless trolls he will eventually make his way to N4G.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Deleted User
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 4:45:33 PM

Underdog:

All I really want to know is what kind of a no-life loser comes and tries and pick a fight 2 weeks after he was proven wrong? The fact is we all said "the first full calender year following the system's release" You didn't want to reply then because you had no reply to your absolutely ridiculous statement that this drought is par for the course of new system. What is happening here is unprecedented. The lack of full fledged generation games has NEVER happened. The lack of exclusives for a company, be it first, second, or third party has never hhappened. In the first fourteen months the PS2 had dropped Onimusha, DmC, Ico, MGS2, GTA3, SSX, TM Black, and FFX to name a few. Likewise, the PS3 had Resistance, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted, Folklore, Warhawk, and R&C:ToD. In the PS4's first 14 whats the game that defines it? LBP, Destiny, and Far Cry 4 are cross generational.

How about this: we'll stop ccomplaining about the lack of true current gen content and you, in turn, stay out of every post concerning the current gen until you have the money to step up like us grown folks, ok? Good. Now go run and cryto the man about how mean I am.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Gamer46
Tuesday, June 24, 2014 @ 12:51:10 AM

That was exactly it, first calendar year, 2001, FF X came out in 2001, so did all the other games that were listed. The giant corporation lovers can live in fantasy land if they want, bottomline is PS2's start blew away PS4's which is filled with nothing but cross-gen multiplats. As for when I buy a console, it's my money I'll do what I want with it and when I pay for a product I have a right to say something if I feel it isn't living up to the hype is certain aspects. I've written 2014 off at this point, but I'm looking at what's in store for 2015 and PS4 seems to be lagging behind Xbox One. I'm not an Xbox guy, I'm a PlayStation fan so I would like Sony to step it up a bit. The only guaranteed good exclusives are Uncharted 4 and probably Bloodborne.

Last edited by Gamer46 on 6/24/2014 12:55:34 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Gamer46
Tuesday, June 24, 2014 @ 1:11:58 AM

That was exactly it, first calendar year, 2001, FF X came out in 2001, so did all the other games that were listed. The giant corporation lovers can live in fantasy land if they want, bottomline is PS2's start blew away PS4's which is filled with mostly cross-gen multiplats. We had inFamous as far as an actual current-gen experience for this year and DriveClub in October. Not exactly stellar by any means.

It's also funny that some people are concerned about when others buy consoles. I had the money to buy a PS4 at launch and did so. Whenever a new PlayStation system is released I try to get it as soon as possible.

Last edited by Gamer46 on 6/24/2014 1:20:26 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Tuesday, June 24, 2014 @ 12:08:06 PM

Yeah, that's why I absolutely -LOVE- your year one argument. It's cute! :D By your guy's logic, if I release a console Jan. 1, 2014, any game that releases on December 31, 2015 would be "year one" in your books.

See the problem?

I suppose you think we're in the 20th century right now as well since it's not yet 2100.

As for you, Kid, you did not say the first full calendar year after the release, but even if you did, your point is still terrible as PS2, for example, released in March and October whereas the PS4 released in November and then March of this calendar year. So... by YOUR own argument, you must admit the first FULL calendar year after release would be all of 2015. I just can't accept you complaining right now 7 months after the earliest release yet think it perfectly fine to compare it to a console with games released 19 months after that console's earliest release. It's literally an entire year's difference!!! How in the world do you guys consider that a valid comparison?

You can't bend the rules to fit the argument you make and not allow that to extend to arguments you don't personally feel comfortable with. The facts are obvious and incredible... you're straight up wrong, man. If you follow the same timelines, each generation is within a month or two of one another in terms of release dates.

You can deny it all you want... this generation is mirroring the last 3 almost identically. Facts are facts and are still facts. I bring it up 2 weeks later after the last argument because I'm anticipating the response you and Gamer have been giving steadily for months prior. I'm shutting it down before you can say it.... again.... and again... and again and never return to see how wrong you are. Now I've got it out in the open and at the forefront for all to see, and I am content to know you have now acknowledged that I have presented this information to you. If you continue to refuse to accept it, I can laugh easily knowing you're just one of those types who would rather be wilfully ignorant than take a brief moment to admit you were wrong and be right for the rest of eternity. (which sounds terrible, to me, but different strokes for different folks I guess... whichever massages your ego, I guess .)

As for you, Gamer, "It's also funny that some people are concerned about when others buy consoles. I had the money to buy a PS4 at launch and did so."

That's all well and good. My point is that you should have known there would be a year one drought with 5 minutes of google searching. And if you decided to buy one anyway, that's fine, but to then turn around and whine about what you should have known to happen..... it just comes across as someone who was not able to make a good personal investment decision. I don't see what's so hard for you to grasp.

Last edited by Underdog15 on 6/24/2014 12:21:32 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Tuesday, June 24, 2014 @ 1:13:36 PM

As for "no-life loser" (it makes me giddy to know I pushed you to the point of name calling. I'll chalk that up as a win! *kisses*), it's not really about trying to pick a fight, nor is it because of trying to start something 2 weeks after the fact. There's another guy on this site named "PSNFrench". He thinks immunizations are bad for kids.

Sometimes people are so incredibly ridiculous that it's impossible to forget their point of view. This issue is something I'll always remember you and Gamer for.

Last edited by Underdog15 on 6/24/2014 1:14:48 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Deleted User
Tuesday, June 24, 2014 @ 7:30:35 PM

Well, I think when you refer to someone as a moron just for having a different viewpoint, seems like you're itching for an internet showdown. That's sad. Seriously. Guess what, my man? It doesn't really matter. My response was in response to your baiting, for which I am truly ashamed for having been sucked into. So you seem to have put a lot of thought into this and since this a day or so removed as a news article, meaning it might as well be non existent, feel free to copy and paste the next time someone irritates you so with their thoughts and desires for great gaming on a system they purchased. You may get a few thumbs up, a little of that validation you desperately seek. Like my father always says, "There's no sense in throwing good words after bad ones" so I'm done. You win, whatever that means to you.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

berserk
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 9:07:00 AM
Reply

I m certain they simply saw it don t make sense to pay same price as when it was out a year ago .The work to enhance it to what it is on ps4 can t compare with all the work they did for the ps3 version .

20 less then the original price is what it should be at .

Anyway ,don t think anyone that did nt get to play it on ps3 care how much it is and i think they mostly did the remastered version for those people .

Last edited by berserk on 6/23/2014 9:07:58 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Gamer46
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 9:09:24 AM

They should care how much it is though. Even if I hadn't played the game before, $60, even $50 is simply too much for a year-old PS3 game.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 10:19:09 AM
Reply

maybe it's because a bunch of people did what I did last week. switch my TLoU pre-order over to Destiny?

.... btw I really do want TLoU. I just can't afford both right now

EDIT: I remember thinking that what with the beta and all starting in mid-july and the game officially launching on Sept 9th, I wasn't really going to have time for both, especially when I'll be taking a math course as well. woo hoo for linear algebra



Last edited by Temjin001 on 6/23/2014 10:21:50 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 11:32:57 AM

University level? I always assumed you were around the age of World and I. Oh wise one.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 2:18:26 PM

I think he's same age but he's training for a new career so he's in schoolio.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 3:00:41 PM

im 35 and i was a slacker working retail management for too long and waisting free time on video games so i'm getting through school late.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

LimitedVertigo
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 3:23:13 PM

Ohhh well congrats Tem! But don't forget what matters most...the games :)

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Monday, June 23, 2014 @ 6:35:22 PM

yea, gotta have my games!

but thanks LV. I'm not done yet though. Got another year before I can be congratulated =)
but even then, don't think of me as a wise one. The first thing I learned in school was that I practically don't know much about anything (other than videogame history and how to play Tekken and Ninja Gaiden). Right now I can at least say I know a bit about computer programming at the academic level.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Pro
Wednesday, June 25, 2014 @ 8:10:58 AM
Reply

If you played it shut up and don't buy it if you haven't shut up and enjoy it Gamers are divas -_-

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

Who's the best game character?
Mario
Nathan Drake
Master Chief
Sonic
Sackboy
Kratos
Donkey Kong
Solid Snake
Lara Croft
Link

Previous Poll Results