@TheBlueDrew A lot of it's because of exactly that (he gave The Last of Us an 8.0 when so many reviewers were calling it a 10/10 masterpiece), but it's also partly due to how he can come off as quite pretentious a lot of the time, & there's probably still a lot of resentment over a few of his articles which managed to offend slews of outspoken nationalists &/or Islamophobes.

I like how it isn't so obvious where to free run any more. Getting rid of the white cloths everywhere & adding fog has certainly helped.

What of the actual combat though? He said that enemies are harder but we didn't get to see Kenway go into open conflict - other than when he killed four soldiers in a couple of seconds with the pistols, which certainly doesn't illustrate his point.

Still wary of Insomniac after Overdrive/Fuse, but this certainly seems to have a cool style to it.

@AgentMothman95 http://internetsarcasm.com/

Jesus Christ everyone shut up about Tom giving a lower review. An 8.0 is good. In fact it says 'great' under it. Stop being either fanboys or the idiots who think that anything below a 9.0 isn't worth buying.

Pachter's a moron.

I'll read the article in a minute; just had to fling abuse at a terrible analyst who gets completely undeserved media coverage before doing anything else.

He did better than most. He's left behind a legacy; contributed a creation which has the potential to be remembered by many for a long time to come.

That's something, at least. RIP.

@YoreLore Banning everyone who voices that they don't like what she's done wouldn't do her or the site any favours. People who don't like the comments sections tend to just put up with them, but people who get banned for abuse either come back with a vengeance or don't come back at all (the latter obviously giving the site much fewer views if they banned the many outspoken [transphobes? I dunno]). Plus both Carolyn & Gamespot would get a poor reputation from banning members whose offensive comments are directed at them, whereas they don't when that abuse is directed at other users instead.

@HerbalVideogame Didn't have anything to say about the actual content of the video other than being pedantic & pointing out the typo with 'foremost'. Don't think I need to check but who was the second question directed at?

@_huh Intolerant of intolerance. Now we're just getting silly.

But anyways, no. I'm more than willing to listen to people's reasoning. We can agree to disagree, or heck I might even agree to some extent. But being abusive & being ignorant do not qualify as giving reasons.