f13.net

Comes out today.

Unlike some other people I really enjoyed the first one. I am fully aware of AC1's flaws, but I enjoyed the game anyway. I thought the free running was just great. Yes, the first one had some major annoyances and breaks with reality, but it was still fun. I cant wait to pick this one up.

Reviews:
Kotaku (http://kotaku.com/5405800/assassins-creed-ii-review-a-season-for-masterpieces). Liked it.
IGN (http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/104/1045745p1.html). 9.2 out of 10.
1up (http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3176964). -A.

I got to the first main city in AC 1 and stopped playing.

I did order the PSP Assassins Creed special bundle as I wanted a new PSP (mine is the original 1001 model). If I can further along in that I'll probably pick up AC 2 when Fry's has it on sale.

I really think its a shame how many people quit AC1 in the first city. The game really picks up in the second and third cities. I know that who "if it doesnt grab me, then im done" and I dont disagree, its just that at about the half way point the game really opens up and gets more challenging.

I heard the PSP version is not so hot. But YMMV.

I was really hyped on AC1, but didn't last long either. Cool world, style, story, main character though.. The gameplay was just limited, and the city areas started resembling one another. I always expected a sequel would be better though.... more time to diversify/flesh out content since everything else is out of the way. So I may pick it up.

I played all through AC1 and its biggest issue was repetition. What you did in the first city was pretty close to what you did in every city. All 9 of them.

I agree with Morfiend and UnSub.

(http://sidesalad.net/archives/DelmarFromOBrotherWhereArtThou.jpg)

The real kick to the groin from AC1 for me was the fact that they did not let you roam around the Holy Land in free roam mode after the campaign so I could collect the rest of the flags.  Instead, you had to replay a mission, which means your powers were gimped if you chose the early missions and you also had to sit through the long and unskippable cutscenes.

Otherwise, that game would have been just right.

This also was the one that required you to go through twenty something steps just to exit the game, wasn't it? It was a horrible implementation of an otherwise enjoyable game.
I'll probably pick this one up once I'm done with dragon age.

I picked up ac1 a couple of months ago for the ps3 and it was way better than I thought it would be. It's main problem to me was the really boring combat and that's solved by not using your sword. I kinda liked that the assassinations were largely the same thing only in harder to escape areas, rather than requiring me to learn some retarded minigame thing every time for the sake of "variety".

AC2's combat is relatively similar. They added a lot to it (disarms/being disarmed, I don't recall all the grab and beat the shit out of aspects either, mass brawls)

But well, it's AC. Which means in reality combat becomes a bad ninja movie, where your hero sits in a defensive stance, waits for one of the thirty dudes to attack him, and counter kills. Repeat until everyone's dead.

They fixed the blend mechanic to not be quite as exploitable/bullshit, and guards will chuck rocks at you if you slowly climb your way out of danger now. But overall, it's AC with a much more interesting city design set, and that's about it.  I failed my first assassination multiple times because it had a stupid "if you are detected game over" mechanic, instead of what I'd remembered of the first one being "if you're detected, fight."

The method you described is ONE way to do combat, I used it, but not all ways, And the rocks, they always did that.

Yes they did, but only after about the halfway point of the game. That was what I was talking about. The enemies get much "smarter" later on and it made the game more enjoyable for me.

Are the mission types more varied?  That was my main complaint on AC1

:crying_panda:

I don't mind repetition but something about this series says "Steam for $9.99" and no more.

It isn't just repetition I guess, but un-fun repetition.  I'm most likely going to wait until it's $20-30 used on Amazon anyways though (which for a single player game shouldn't take too long).

Does AC2 still have speed traps?  If not, it may be worth the $10 bargain purchase on Steam.

What, the dudes in the random wilderness that enforce the 2mph horse speed limit?

Alarm goes up faster if you're running, but I've yet to see anyone in a wilderness area. But hey, it's got fast travel anyways.

Yeah it's pretty mediocre. I like my new shiny white PSP, though :awesome_for_real:

Picked this up yesterday. Quick rundown of the first few hours.

The game starts much more slowly than the first one. More story driven, and much less repetitive. In the first 3 to 4 hours I think the only thing I have done multiple times is climbing up different buildings to unlock the map. This game, so far at least, seems a bit more combat oriented, but not a lot. And I feel that will change as I am just kind of getting in to the real game.

Its enjoyable, but I wish Enzio could learn a trick or two from Cole (inFAMOUS) like being able to climb diagonally.

I never got around to picking up the first game, but I'm a bit more interested this time.

How open-worldy is the game? Does it have day/night cycles?

I've seen shadows move like time is passing, but I've only seen night cycles on set pieces. I may not be waiting around long enough, or they just don't happen.

It's open City, not open World <3 The countryside is far less "explore and collect shit" so far, and all the real exploration and missions take place in the city proper.

That said, it's as open-city as GTA, as far as "do side missions/events, go to mission icon for plot, or just wander around collecting shit and stabbing guards", minus the civilian rampages and thankfully the period means nobody calling your cel every 5 minutes.

And I agree with Yegolev.

I did finish and enjoy the first one. I briefly flirted with the idea of buying the Black or White editions, because I like sculptures and statues and that sort of thing, and the DLC, but then I decided I like paying discounted prices for my games more than that, so I decided to buy it when it hits the bargain bin instead.

This game is fantastic. Wonderful environment and atmosphere, I find it hugely immersive. Just running across the rooftops, exploring and climbing viewpoints has been really fun.

Frikken camera angles.  I'm not sure if I ended up spending more time staring at the wrong thing while trying to climb a tower or staring at nothing while jumping off of a roof.

I regret buying this for $40.  The fluid combat in Batman AA and climbing in Uncharted 2 makes Assassin's Creed 2 feel clunky.  I really like using face buttons to control different limbs which makes the contextual options intuitive but Batman and Drake manage to fight and climb like more of an assassin than Ezio.

I'd say Assassin's Creed 2 is a mixed bag, though largely positive. I avoided the first game because of accusations that it was repetitive, and didn't get a sense of that at all with this release. The environments are beautiful, the animations are excellent. The storyline keeps things moving right along, even if it is a little hard to follow. The combat is... decent... though it seems that constant counter-attacking is really the only way to fight.

What I didn't care for at all was the story. It turned my medieval parkour simulator into The Da Vinci Code, with liberal doses of Chariots of the Gods and Stargate thrown in for good measure. The random conspiracy theory bullshit struck me as a godawful attempt to emulate Deus Ex.

I did enjoy the Pope turning into a .

If mmos can get away with it why can't single player games  :awesome_for_real:

Just stumbled upon a disturbing report. I'm not sure if it's accurate, but I wouldn't be surprised if it is, given UBI's previous record.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=235290

So drop the connection while playing, and the game also drops? Are they really deliberately trying to fuck themselves with a splintered stick, or are they really just this incompetent? :oh_i_see:

Seems to be yet another positive argument for my decision to move away from PC gaming to console gaming. This in combination with the complaint of "every company now distributing its own launcher" (ie: in the case of Aion, launch Steam -> NC Soft Launcher > Aion), PC gaming seems to be killing itself.

But it isn't PC gaming killing itself, it's PC gaming development trying to something - anything - to reduce the rampant piracy of their games.

It's why PC gaming is eventually going to end up as the MMO- and casual-game platform (or any model that doesn't rely solely on players buying the game to start off with).

There needs to be some middle ground though.  I mean, I don't mind signing into things to play a game, its a minor inconvenience at worst to me, and I don't think that many people really mind it enough to simply stop buying the games that do it.  However, if you lose your connection mid-game and get kicked, in a SINGLE PLAYER game, thats going too far.  I think we are seeing a fairly specific line being crossed here, rather than a major problem with the industry.

Doing anything should not include pouring gasoline on your burning house though.  They are better off completely ignoring pirates, most of whom would not have bought the game anyways, than losing people who were going to pay for it.

Without going into Hyperbole territory here. I'm buying far fewer PC games thna I was just a couple of years ago, because I simply cannot be arsed with the DRM dance anymore. Instead, I'm not buying some titles at all (bioshock 2), and others are becoming console purchases. (GTA4, Mass Effect)

I wouldn't call it hyperbole, I've refused to buy Bioshock 1 due to activations, I've avoided spore due to copy protection (unfortunately I wasn't quick enough to stop a friend of mine from buying spore), I've avoided anno 1404 (and been vocal on the forums, to no effect), etc etc etc etc etc.

I never buy buy games on impulse anymore, I always wait until at least the copy protection situation is uncovered, and preferably also until real humans have played the game and made comments on how good (or bad) it plays.

I'm also not buying console games as a replacement for games I think will work much better on the PC, this includes FPSes. I'm also getting depressed at just how hard the consoles are working at fucking up the UI for FPSes.

Mass Effect was bought for the 360 just because it looked like it was never coming out on the PC, and I figured I'd give it a try to see just how bad the UI was. I've played worse (GRAW, anyone), but I was still annoyed by my inability to use keyboard/mouse. So fuck that.

And yet consoles are slowly becoming more like PCs, with internet connectivity and hard drives. What's to stop piracy from just moving to consoles? (It's already happened with the PSP, apparently.)

The problem is that the pirates will have a cracked exe or dll that lets the game think it is phoning home without any actual internet connection while the paying customers are the ones stuck with ridiculous safety measures.

Once they become annoying enough people will find those patches. Once they have those resources discovered, a portion of them will say "Fuck it, why buy it in the first place" and be lost as customers.

They are not gaining customers, because every DRM can be broken if one is so inclined. At best they stay stable, at worst they are losing customers. And thats what is retarded about it.

I've avoiding titles on DRM grounds as well. BioShock 2 and Assassin's Creed 2 will be Xbox 360 purchases.

The issues is that ignoring pirates has only seen PC game piracy continue to escalate. Not saying that Ubisoft's approach is good - it really isn't - but it's the way things are going.

FAKE EDIT: Because MS has Xbox Live on a choke chain; don't know about Sony but I'd suspect it is the same. If consoles do go to full, open access for the internet, then they will suffer the same fate.

There is console piracy. I've played on modded boxes, played pirated games, played fully refit Xboxes with heavily modified OSs that had HDs stuffed with games. But that involves physical changes to the box and isn't that convenient and then you need to have access to someone selling pirated games / box mods (which is easy / hard depending on where you live). Difference with the PC is that all you need to do is download and install something and you've just got an $80 game for free without leaving home.

REAL EDIT: Sorry for turning AssCred2 thread into a piracy thread, y'all.

Apparently there's quite a lot of piracy going on for the various consoles as it is, it's just hidden by higher sales figures (so far). Prediction for the future: They'll kill off the PC as a primary gaming platform (done?), start complaining about piracy on the consoles, implement online activation there as well, kill off console as a viable platform.

(technically they've done the latter for me since they flat out refuse to allow KB/M or an equivalent controlling mechanism, but :uhrr:)

Edit: I'm no fan of "cloud computing" either, so fuck games for windows live titles right in their ears/eyes/whatever convenient orifice is available. Same goes with console games requiring I be online. Fuck that shit.

I guess this isn't such an issue for me.  I rarely buy single player games anymore to begin with so being online is hardly a problem for me, as the vast majority of the time I am playing multiplayer anyway.  Torchlight is the last single player game I bought, and I bought that on Steam.  I did buy Bioshock and Assassin's Creed and refrained from both sequels, but that was more because I found that the original games weren't very good.

Things that annoy me is: 1) Having to put a disc in the dive 2) Having a limited of number of installs 3)Installing 3rd party software unrelated to the actual game.

Things that don't annoy me. 1) Requiring an internet connection 2) Signing into an account associated with the game.  Etc.

I think the issue here is losing progress if you lose your connection.  Ideally you should be able to play single player games without an internet connection, but I just know that for me personally, it is at absolute worst something I would have to be against in principle if I was against it at all.  In practice, I am always connected to the internet when I am playing any games, and like I said signing into an account is far less trouble to me than having to swap discs.

I'm not hating on it, it's their decision.  But I can't play Splinter Cell Conviction on PC as I'm on wireless and sometimes, that shit goes down.  So, SCC PC for me.  I guess I'll have to go with the 360 version, which sadly will only tell them 'EVERYBODY HATES PC!  CONSOLE ONLY ROCKS!'

Ah well.

And then your internet connection is down for technical reasons and you can't play your games until it is back up. Because there are SO many other things you can do with a computer without internet.  :awesome_for_real:

Or you're at, say, a LAN party which is having issues with its internet connection up until 1-2 hours after the tournament starts, which means you're not going to be able to join any of the teams that entire weekend. That's just dandy, and surely not more annoying than keeping the disc in the drive. :grin:

Out of all the things they've done lately to curb piracy, requiring the disc be in the drive is easily the least annoying mechanism so far. At least that means if I don't get to play a game, then I can only blame my own fat lazy ass. Not Joe ISP, or Joe Publisher.

I bought more PC games than console games in the last year and would say I more fully enjoyed the games I played on the PC (Sword of the Stars, X3:TC, Dawn of Discovery, etc...).

That said, if a game was clearly developed for the console market (Assassin's Creed II, Mass Effect II) then you can be sure I played it on a console.  I've never been happy with console games on a PC so I don't bother.

Was looking forward to playing this on my PC (half a year after all the bloody console gamers), but now it's just not going to happen. Not a chance. :/

Oh, I mean frothing frenzy material by hyperbole, and I do the exact same thing as you with copy protection. The only exception to impule buying is your $5 steamers, but then again when i do that I'm at my PC and google is only a browser tab shift away. I pre-order on occasion (BFBC, AVP) but there's always the out of cancelling it if it's shit (AVP again). I bought Bioshock only after Ubi loudly announced that they were dropping the DRM. Bioshock 2 might have had the same result for me, but with GFWL involved as well, it can suck a dick. The first one wasn't good enough to get me to complete it anyway, so I'll skip it on console. Spore and Sims 3 I'd have pirated if I could have cared enough to do so. But I didn't, and don't.

I probably would buy MW2 on the console to give it a runthrough, but only when it gets cheap and considering how much MW1 is still selling for, that may never occur. I'm happy to buy games on the console for multiplayer though, even if the PC is "better" in situations where my wife's PC won't run the thing anyway (L4D2, Borderlands). ME I actually own three copies of now. Retail disc, Steam without the DRM, and the 360 version with DLC included. I may even crack the shrinkwrap on one of them this year. I do agree with the UI fucking, though.



There's huge amounts of piracy on console. A couple of years ago, every PS2 was chipped, and before that, so was every PS1. Cracked 360s are all over the place, and that apparently includes ones with alterable bioses (or some such) so you can toggle "pirate mode" on and off so you can still play online (will have to ask that one of my former students who modded his 360 if his still works online). Cracked Wiis are also commonplace. Not sure about PS3 - Blu-Ray might have been it's piracy saviour for the time being? PSP is a pirate heaven, and apparently nobody I know who owns a DS doesn't have an R4 card or the like...



This. Exactly, and perfectly put. I'd be doing this right now if I didn't have an enormous backlog of games and no time to play them in.

PS3 was supposedly only cracked a couple of months ago. Was big news.

Back in Asia one of the reasons why console's were popular was piracy. No hassle with playing lots of games.

If my internet is dead, I'm probably not using my computer. So, this is a pretty big non-issue for me. Also my net's been down once in 6 months, and I have Comcast. That's what I get for living in the heart of the city, instead of in the shitty suburbs of Atlanta where the net dropped once a week.

I made that mistake once this year (with Borderlands), and I'll be making sure not to fall for that crap again.  In general though, I just don't play very many games that console players like anyway.  One of my friends recently moved towards the xbox, and he has been prodding me a little bit to get one, and I honestly can't think of a single reason I'd want one to be honest, when I sit down to play a game, I'm just never going to choose to play my hypothetical xbox instead of my PC.

Console can't do strategy games or FPS right, so who cares? They can do some RPGs well, and they excel at action and sports.

It depends very much on genre and what the game is developed for. 1st person, the PC is better by far, though console is passable if you have no other option for a specific game. 3rd-person interestingly works well on both.

It also depends on the comfort and social aspects. I prefer sitting on my nice chair at my desk (where I am now) but then again I like to play epic games on an epic-sized screen, and clearly multiplayer works very well with the lounge room atmosphere. (Though we also PC-LAN here as well - depends on the game.)

I tend to follow "best tool for the job = best format for the game" as much as I can though.

Two of best games on consoles are strategy imo.. Civ Revolution (admittedly, not as good as PC.. but it's cool enough), and valkyria chronicles if you want to call it strategy. Some shooters aren't bad either, single player at least.

Stray has a decent point here. Japanese Games. They're pretty much all on console, shy of a few that eventually get PC ports done for them. And even those are developed for whichever console first.

I'd like to see RTS games like supreme commander ported to the console, even if only to watch console gamers get completely curbstomped due to the higher pace PC gamers can keep up.

There's a reason strategy games like civ revolution works on console, it isn't fast-paced, and it allows for a suckier controller to be used. Same goes with 3rd person games, they can easily mask the inadequancies of the pad by using autoaim and context-sensitive controls like ducking behind cover if you run towards something. God I hate that with a fucking passion.

Yeah, well, if the game is obviously better suited to KbM then I never buy it on a console.  This means almost all FPS & strategy games.

Supreme Commander is on the 360, I believe.. but it's apparently not a good port.

A few others as well.. I've not played any of them. I'm sort of tempted to check out C&C: Red Alert because it looks funny. The reviews don't seem too bad either.

There's also Halo Wars, but I think it's not been reviewed well. Plus, I haven't played a Halo since the first one, so I'd rather not bother skipping the "storyline" if I'm even going to play another Halo at all. Kind of disappointing that they didn't get Bungie themselves to make Halo Wars too...... seeing that they made one of best strategy games of all time.

As for 3rd person.. you're kind of a glass half empty guy, I guess. Where you want to lambast the games for their targeting, I see a control scheme more naturally suited towards acrobatics, combos, and all of that good shit.

Wait, what? SC is actually on the 360? :ye_gods: I wonder how awful that is to play, but I feel no desire to test it. I'd probably just rage incoherently after 10 minutes.

I'm lambasting the games for their targeting, because they still haven't moved away from that.  mass effect is still a shooty game, and the only thing they did with the 3rd person perspective was make you press space to run, which also ducks behind cover, and is used to jump OVER the cover if I'm already IN cover. And that bleeds over to the PC version.

Games like Heavy Rain is probably games I would love to play on the console, but they keep insisting on shoehorning traditional PC-games (with tactile controls and lots of possible buttons to use) onto the consoles (with awkward controls and limited buttons to push). For me, it just ends up with a frustrating mishmash of bad controls, bad UI design and awkward in-game design choices.

And it's doubly frustrating because if they insist on making games with the old-school way with a few monor changes, it would be so easy to fix it all by having custom controllers designed to cater to the particular type of games they want to bring over.

I've got assassin's creed sitting next to me, along with mirror's edge. Assassin's Creed I've actually never fired up (360's dismanteled at the moment), but I spent a bit on mirror's edge. Never enough to actually get proficient with its controls, yet enough to notice how they had a separate button for doing a 180. That's quite telling.

Hmm, yeah I forgot Mass Effect qualifies as 3rd person. I have some complaints about it as well.

Off the top of my head, I think Uncharted is a good example of 3rd person shooting, with other controls more naturally suited for consoles. [edit] Umm, by this I mean the experience as a whole makes up for the targeting being less than ideal.

I was actually thinking of Saints Row 2, which didn't use a cover mechanic, nor did it use autoaim. (might have a slight aim-assist, I'm honestly not sure, but definately not like the full-on aim-assist in a lot of other games..)

This game's pretty rad. I had a lot of misgivings on buying it because of the first one, but the story is a lot more engaging/varied. Although Ezio is sort of guido douche, he's sorta of cool too. I mean, at least he talks. HOWEVER, it does kind of make me want to revist the first now too. Has anyone done that that didn't like the first? Was it better the second time around?

I got the first and never made it out of the second major area (Damascus poor, I think).  Then I bought II on a whim, played about an hour of it and realized it was fcuking awesome so I put it on hold and started the first one again.  Oddly, I'm finding the first one to be a damn fun game now.  I really can't figure out what my issue was with it to begin with.

I found the first one to be really fun; but that's because I derived huge enjoyment from the free-running/jumping/stabbing malarkey and wasn't too bothered that the missions mainly asked me to do nothing but run jump and stab people. It was repetitive, but for me the thing being repeated was fun, so I was happy. I think the first section of the game lets the rest of the game down though, it's definite the weakest portion.

I think I'll revisit it too..

BTW, have any of you played the Prince of Persia remake? No one seems to talk about it here. It's not bad.. although it's a bit on the handholding side of things (i.e. easy). It shares some tech with AC though, so it might appeal. It's just more platform heavy.

It was fun for a while, but I never could finish it, even if to see if the prince got the (hot) princess.

But get this: some versions of it has NO DRM whatsoever. They said it was an experiment, and I went out and bought it just for that reason alone, to try to help UBISoft choose a less fucked up partyline.

That worked well.

Now that I'm pretty far into it, I'd say it's only fault is the lack of difficulty. Not as easy as PoP, but it's still too forgiving.

I don't remember the last time I played an Ubi game on the PC, so I can't complain about DRM. I can't even think of anything I'd want to play from them on a PC other than Ghost Recon.

DRM servers fail, hilarity ensues:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/4721051016/m/7481010838/p/1

Borrowed the PS3 version off my brother over the weekend. Left the system running while I went to make some food and it would seem my HDMI died. Other than that, much improved over the first one.

That's amazing.  I figured we'd see a downtime a few months down the road, but a few days?  Makes me wonder who the real pirates are. 

Cool, creative ending... seems like they have a lot planned for more sequels. They just need to up the difficulty. Sometimes it's too easy to forgo stealth and assasination and just take on 5 dudes toe-to-toe. Too easy to beat ass, too many health pots, too bad ass armor, weapons... etc.. Really, I only assassinated when the mission req was to not be detected.

Also, I noticed Jade Raymond hardly did any promotion for this one. Heh. She's still the producer though. Look what you bastards did! Scaring a cute girl like that... Meh.  :why_so_serious:

I think they're still balancing it. The first, at times, was terribly painful to play. It wasn't that it was really hard, but that it just punished you for the slightest mistakes. Seems they took it too far back.

Good.

I'm all down for not only cute, but enthusiastic people to talk about games. There is a good in it somewhere... I mean, on one hand, there are booth babes promoting games at shows, who probably don't know or care much about it. And on the other hand, there are a lot of slovenly dudes who, half of the time, don't even seem to want to talk in interviews (the BF:BC guys come to mind recently). Or cocky fatasses like.... no wait, he's gotten enough shit. nvm

We've been over this a lot, so I'm going to elucidate on my reply without going on an entire rant...  It's one thing to have a good looking developer out there talking about a game they are passionate about in an enthusiastic manner.  Then there's what happened with AC1.

I was never quite sure "what happened" with AC1 other than Ubi knowing they had a pretty face, who also happened to have a functional lead position over her team. Nor do I mind promoting looks in general. It's great. Half of the world is looks and appearances and all that shit. The other half is more abstract/cerebral/what have you. I acknowledge both. So.. in my view, I think they had a fortunate situation. She happened to be both. Can't blame them for trying.

Actually, I think the big issue wasn't with Jade being the face of AC1. It was with what the "fans" did with that fact.

If by "fans" you also mean the gaming press and the Ubisoft hype machine,  then yes.

The handsome-ish male lead designer having a thick French accent didn't help their cause either.

I can't quite explain it but for some reason this game is just not catching me. I keep putting it in, playing a bit, and then finding something else I need to do.

I've had moments where I felt I was doing very redundant tasks. Solution was to cut out treasure hunting and just running to the ! marks, but I can see it not grabbing everyone. It has that Pre-conviction Splinter Cell appeal.

Edit: Anyone else find the muggers very annoying?

Oh Yeah, I agree! It's really terrible to read a print interview with someone who has an accent. It's all like "sooo ve vwere traying to set up ze geme soo thet Altai-aire hed too clamb zee buildeengs, no?" in the written text, since journalists never interview people with any kind of accent, and always transcribe phonetically.

I couldn't understand the last interview I tried to read from a DICE dev about BF:BC2, it was all Swedish chef gibberish. "yurgen flurgen" etc.

 :roll:

Game had way too many superfluous goals and turned money into something that wasn't valuable. That actually might purposely done thematically, with the game about how you slowly find money to be meaningless in your pursuit of revenge and saving the world from the Templars, but I'm willing to say they stumbled into it.

One magical thing about the internet is that is shows moving pictures too. Assassin's Creed used a good number of videos to promote itself. Jade's videos got more hits than the french man.

I didn't say that was the only reason, but even journalists would rather take the phone call from the person they can understand.

And remember: internet==death of print.  :grin:

Yes.  It was certainly the accents which account for that difference.

It was her boobs and the fact that the majority of gaming is male and love to whack it.

Can we stop talking around that point now?

You need to put spoiler alerts around stuff like that.

I don't think it became an issue until Unsub started trolling/acting really dense.