Shop now Shop now Shop now See more Shop all Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop now Learn More DIYED Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Shop now Shop now
Profile for AMR > Reviews

Personal Profile

Content by AMR
Top Reviewer Ranking: 110,283
Helpful Votes: 290

Learn more about Your Profile.

Reviews Written by
AMR (Ireland)

Show:  
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
pixel
Grand Theft Auto V (PS3)
Grand Theft Auto V (PS3)
Offered by inteci
Price: £17.28

2 of 3 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars Surprisingly disappointing, 14 Sept. 2014
I bought a cheap PS3 specifically to play Grand Theft Auto 5 as I didn't want to wait for the PC version and I have to say it has been a bit of a let down overall. I am a very big fan of the GTA series, particularly Vice City and San Andreas, so was really hoping for something that equalled or surpassed those games but for me it really hasn't come close. I think part of the reason I haven't really enjoyed the game may be down to the transition from PC mouse and keyboard to a PS3 controller, which really gives a lot less control and precision in combat situations but I think the main reasons are really down to the game itself.

There are plenty of good things about the game as well, so I'll go into those parts first.

For me probably the biggest improvement in the game has been the physics and the addition of car modification. Driving is a lot more fun compared to GTA 4 but in general a lot easier as cars can take corners much faster. Although I liked the driving in GTA 4 a lot, the physics made everything very floaty and the vehicles were always hopping off the road or flying into the air, which sometimes made controlling them rather annoying. GTA 5 physics seem a lot more realistic overall which makes driving the great variety of vehicles even more enjoyable. The AI traffic also seems to behave much more realistically and is generally easier to avoid hitting. Car modification is a great addition to the game as well, as is having a default vehicle for each character that he always has close by. The combination of these two features makes modifying the characters' default vehicles very satisfying because you know those vehicles will always be around to use no matter how much you wreck them or simply leave them in far flung parts of the city.

Having multiple playable characters and switching between them is also a nice addition to the game and it is done in a very smooth way that requires minimal loading time. Rockstar really have done a top notch job with it and I don't think it could have been done any better.

It's hard for me to talk about the graphics because, coming from PC gaming, they don't look that impressive to me, in fact they're probably inferior to GTA 4 PC version but that's hardly surprising. The improvements I have noticed are; less pop-in, improved lighting effects and longer draw distances. You can now see huge distances across the map and it doesn't look all glitchy like in GTA 4. The game also generally runs a lot smoother and looks a lot slicker and more realistic than GTA 4.

The world of GTA 5 is pretty good overall and it's very big but it doesn't actually feel all that big strangely. It's four or five times bigger than the San Andreas world but to me San Andreas actually felt like it was bigger. I think it may have something to do with the fact that GTA 5's world is all one contiguous landmass and has wide roads going right around the perimeter so there aren't many places that aren't easily accessible. It could also be because San Andreas had a much wider variety of terrain and climate, as its different landmasses represented areas that were hundreds of miles apart in real life. And whereas in San Andreas if you headed into the remote mountainous areas you felt like you were exploring a wilderness, there is no feeling of there being real wilderness areas in GTA 5. Nowhere really feels that remote and to me it doesn't feel like an adventure to explore the map. However in terms of content, detail and realism the world far exceeds that of San Andreas and is at least on a par with GTA 4, so it is an amazing technical achievement.

I'll move on to the parts of the game that I think where a let down.

Firstly and most prominently is the soundtrack and radio stations. It's strange to me how few reviews or people in general have mentioned the soundtrack, considering what a massive part it has been to previous GTA games but to me the GTA 5 soundtrack is a major disappointment. Of course Vice City and San Andreas set the gold standard for soundtracks in any game but GTA 5 has completely failed to carry on that legacy. In those games when I get into a car there is almost always a good song on the radio, whatever station it happens to be at, but in GTA 5 I could switch through the entire 15 music radio stations and not one of them would have decent music playing. Even the chat stations don't compare with those of previous GTA games and the humour is mostly puerile and lacking any subtlety or intelligence. It all seems to have been dumbed down massively to appeal to a wider, more mainstream audience. In previous GTAs the soundtrack/radio stations really brought the cities to life and made you feel apart of them but in GTA 5 the soundtrack/radio stations actually has the opposite effect and makes the city/world feel more detached and lifeless.

The storyline, dialogue and characters while not being terrible, are not amazing either. They fall well below the standard of Vice City and San Andreas but are at a similar level to GTA 4. The Storyline seems quite similar in many ways to San Andreas but is much more hyperbolic, where instead of dealing with a few corrupt cops you're dealing with almost the entire FIB(FBI). Overall it's not terribly interesting, exciting or profound, though at least it doesn't try to be the latter - unlike GTA 4. The dialogue is at times funny but more often than not it seems over the top and pointlessly verbose, or else just slightly disturbing. It really makes it hard to relate to or like any of the main characters. For me the only likable character in the game was Franklin's friend, Lamar, as he was at least quite funny. GTA 4, while not being strong on the storyline, at least had likable characters and decent dialogue.

Despite some fairly major innovations, in terms of switching characters and heist preparation, mission gameplay doesn't really seem to have been massively improved overall. Most of the missions aren't any more diverse or interesting, mostly just combinations of driving, chasing, stealing and killing which all seem to blend into each other after a while. For me the GTA combat system takes away a lot of the enjoyment from completing missions as there is very little skill required. I think the main problem both GTA 4 and 5 have compared to Vice City and San Andreas is that there is really no sense of progression in the game, it's just basically a matter of completing each mission that comes up whereas in VC and SA you felt like each mission was accomplishing something bigger. Ok, GTA 5 does have preparatory missions for each heist but the overall arc of the game does not seem to be one of advancement or progression towards some overall goal, it's just about dealing with the various situations that arise.

So my overall impression of GTA 5 is that it is a significant advancement in terms of game design and technical production but that it has been let down by its artistic choices and writing, namely; soundtrack, dialogue and storyline. It seems to me that the GTA series has continued improving technically with each installment but has significantly regressed creatively the last two games. It now feels like a big budget film franchise that has spent millions on special effects that have wowed most people but underneath there is very little artistic merit. Previous GTAs had a particular artistic style to them, from Vice City's 80s pop art style, to GTA 4's gritty noir feel but GTA 5 seems devoid of any particular style or feel, it just feels soulless. I suppose artistic choices and creations are harder to judge and therefore harder to get right but I really hope Rockstar don't continue to let this major part of their games slide further and can turn it around in future.


Akasa AK-TC Tim Clean Sink
Akasa AK-TC Tim Clean Sink
Offered by Shiny Hardware Limited
Price: £6.49

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Akasa Tim Clean versus Arcticlean, 1 Aug. 2014
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
I previously used Arctic Silver ArctiClean which I was very happy with but I ran out of the thermal paste remover while still having plenty of the surface purifier left and so I didn't want to buy another to get only 30ml of paste remover. Akasa Tim Clean comes in 125ml, so it's more than four times more thermal paste remover than ArctiClean for the same price, though the ArctiClean does come with 30ml surface purifier too.

In terms of it's cleaning power I don't think it's quite as good as ArctiClean as I found myself having to use more of it than I would of ArctiClean and it seems to take take a little bit longer to get the paste off but it still gets the job done just the same.

The one real weakness in this product is the dispenser, as it lets out liquid far too freely for my liking. It seems to be a similar kind of dispenser to some face cleansers, the type you just tip up and a little stream of liquid flows out. The instructions do say to apply the cleaner to a cloth but I've always found it works better to apply the cleaner directly to the surface to start off with. Luckily I still had my old ArctiClean bottle, which has a dispenser like an eye dropper, so I just filled it up with Akasa's cleaner and used that instead.

So overall Akasa Tim Clean may not be quite as good as ArctiClean but it is still much better value.


5 x OSRAM DULUXSTAR LUMILUX 11W (=51w-60W Equivalent) 827 BC B22 B22d CFL Energy Saving Light Bulbs, Bayonet Cap, 600 Lumen, 10 Years, 2700K Warm White Lamps
5 x OSRAM DULUXSTAR LUMILUX 11W (=51w-60W Equivalent) 827 BC B22 B22d CFL Energy Saving Light Bulbs, Bayonet Cap, 600 Lumen, 10 Years, 2700K Warm White Lamps

5.0 out of 5 stars Nice warm lights, 1 Aug. 2014
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
These come on nice and quick, within about a second I'd say, and have a nice warm light from them. In fact I didn't know florescent lights could give off such a nice light, so they were a pleasant surprise.

Osram are a renowned German light manufacturer so I'm sure they'll also last a long time, unlike some cheaper brands.

I bought these for £11, which I think was excellent value but I see they've gone up now, so not quite as good but may still be worth it.


HyperX Cloud Gaming Headset for PC/PS4/Mac/Mobile - Black
HyperX Cloud Gaming Headset for PC/PS4/Mac/Mobile - Black
Price: £49.99

14 of 16 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars One of the best, 1 Aug. 2014
Customer review from the Amazon Vine Programme (What's this?)
I've owned quite a few expensive headphones and gaming headsets over the years and I think this is definitely one of the best if not the best set I've ever owned. (I use these on PC only with Xonar DG sound card.)

The first thing to talk about is the sound, which is just fantastic. I also own a logitech G930 headset, which is Logitech's highest end headset but while it is very good it cannot compete with the sound quality of the Hyperx. I didn't think there would be that much difference between the two headsets but, with music at least, the Hyperx just blows the G930 away. The level of clarity and the balance of the bass just surpasses any other headphones or headset I've owned and it really has increased my enjoyment of music a lot. It seems that the larger driver in the Hyperx really makes a significant difference. For TV and film the Hyperx is also better than the g930 but not as noticeably so.

As for gaming the Hyperx is also excellent in terms of the clarity, quality and the strength of the bass. However as it's just a stereo headset it doesn't have much surround sound ability for FPS or adventure games, unlike my G930 which is top notch in that department. If it had surround sound capability I'd probably use the Hyperx headset all the time but instead I still use the G930 with surround sound games.

I don't use a microphone when gaming at all, so it's nice that it can be easily detached on the Hyperx, something I've not seen before on a gaming headset. However I have tested it using software and it seems to be a pretty good quality microphone and should do the job well for teamspeak, skype or whatever.

Comfort-wise the Hyperx is also excellent. The earcups don't fit as well over my ears as on my G930 but they are so light and snug that a little bit of pressure on my ears never irritates and instead they feel really nice and comfortable even after wearing them for several hours. In fact I think it's probably also the most comfortable headset/headphones I've ever had. The sound isolation is also very good, considerably better than the G930.

In terms of the build quality and aesthetics I think the Hyperx headset is also top notch. It seems to be made of a mixture of matte plastic and black aluminum on the earcup backings and leather for the headband. It all looks and feels pure quality and seems like it should last a long time. (I never thought I'd comment on the packaging in a review but I have to say I'm also very impressed by its quality.)

It also comes with a variety of leads and cables for extending the main lead and adapting it to other connectors, as well as alternative velour ear cushions, which can replace the standard leather ones that come attached.

Overall I think this has to be one of the very best gaming headsets on the market, so it's quite remarkable that they're going for only £60 when the high-end headsets go for at least twice that. I'm also fairly sure this is the same headset as the Qpad qh-90 which is going for around £20-30 more than these, which again shows what a bargain the Hyperx headset is. I suppose the lack of surround sound reduces their usefulness somewhat but for most purposes they really are superb.
Comment Comment (1) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Feb 5, 2015 12:04 PM GMT


Logitech G500s Laser USB Gaming Mouse
Logitech G500s Laser USB Gaming Mouse
Offered by 5-Stars EU
Price: £70.00

2 of 3 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars A let down, 7 July 2014
I'm a big fan of Logitech products but I have to say this is not one of them. I done quite a bit of research before buying this mouse and pretty much all the reviews were positive but I regret to say that after a month of use the G500s has not lived up to its reputation.

The first thing that bugged me about the G500s was how rough it is to mouse with on a hard surface. I bought the Logitech G440 hard mouse mat along with this and I found the G500s very rough and scratchy on it, so much so that I decided to buy some new feet/glides for it from another manufacturer. That solved the problem but I would've expected the logitech feet to be a lot better quality than they were. My old, much cheaper, Sharkoon fireglide mouse was far smoother than the G500s on the same surface.

The second problem I found, which has become the most annoying problem, is the mouse wheel, which has a number of defects as far as gaming is concerned. Scrolling with it is too free and there is very little definition between clicks, which makes it useless for changing weapons in an FPS for example. Then the middle mouse button is too rigid and it requires a lot more pressure to press than on any other mouse I've ever used. The combination of the loose wheel and the rigid MMB means that if you're using it in-game you're very likely to move the wheel and change weapons accidentally. For me I have always used the middle mouse button for secondary weapon which to me is the handiest for quickly getting out a handgun in a firefight but since I got the G500s it's anything but handy. Numerous times now I've been left cursing this mouse for giving me something other than what I wanted. I've tried changing the secondary weapon button to one on the side of the mouse but it seems like the twitch to press the MMB is hard wired into my brain at this stage, so I couldn't manage it.

The straw that has finally broken the camel's back for me with this mouse are the software problems that have continually cropped up. Quite a few times now over this past month, at least ten I'd say, the mouse has "forgotton" its presets for particular games. Usually restarting the game has solved the problem but once or twice I had to restart the computer to get it working properly again. It may not sound like much but it's quite a pain when in the middle of a multiplayer game your mouse suddenly stops doing what it's supposed to do, as you really don't want to restart the game to get the functions back again. Another recent problem that occurred was that the cursor started going completely haywire when I was playing Battlefield 3 and again the only solution was to exit and restart the game. This was a once-off but in my three years using my cheaper Sharkoon mouse I never got a similar problem like this and had far fewer software problems in general.

Things I like about the G500s are the ergonomics and the functionality of it. It has plenty of buttons and it has rather a convenient way of allowing you to program them to each individual game - if only they worked properly all the time. I also like the shape and feel of the mouse. Initially, I didn't like the "rough" surface but after a while I got comfortable with it and I actually prefer it now to my old rubberised Sharkoon. I also like the thumb rest design of the mouse which keeps your thumb off the mouse mat and reduces friction and stickiness.

Overall I have to say, despite its few redeeming features, for a Logitech product the G500s seems to be way below their usual high standards and for the price I would've expected much better quality regardless of the manufacturer. They seem to have set their sights high with good ergonomics and functionality but basic design problems let it down badly in my book.


Rosewood Combo Comb and Moult Stoppa, Small
Rosewood Combo Comb and Moult Stoppa, Small
Price: £11.93

0 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Quality grooming brush, 19 Jun. 2014
Customer review from the Amazon Vine Programme (What's this?)
I've used this a couple of times on our collie cross and I can say it is very good at getting rid of clumps and removing excess fur and hair. Although the prongs look like they could be sore on the dog they flex inwards as you're using it so that they don't dig in at all, so it's a really good design. The smaller comb is good for just finishing off and tidying up the fur after the the knots and clumps have been removed.

It also seems to be a well made product that will last for years to come unlike like previous brushes I've had, so all in all I think this is a very good little groomer.


Just Cause 2 (PC DVD)
Just Cause 2 (PC DVD)
Offered by Digitalville UK
Price: £6.50

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
3.0 out of 5 stars A good but flawed game, 23 Jan. 2014
This review is from: Just Cause 2 (PC DVD) (DVD-ROM)
I've played Just Cause 2 for over forty hours which would usually mean I really like the game and would probably give it five stars, however the more I played it the more obvious and annoying the flaws in the gameplay and game mechanics have become.

Just Cause 2 is not a "realistic" game in any sense and does not really try to be, so it would be silly to count that against it. Everything has a kind of comic book feel to it, from the storyline, to the vehicles and the look of the scenery. The scenery in particular is a bit disconcerting at times because distant locations appear far larger and closer than they would in real life but it's all done for dramatic effect.

There's no doubt Just Cause 2 has a lot of good points, like the massive and varied open world, the huge number of locations to discover and "complete", the innovative and very fun gameplay, the very well optimised graphics and the large variety of weapons and military vehicles. There is hours of entertainment to be had just roaming around from place to place blowing stuff up and trying to complete locations. The grappling hook is without doubt the biggest strength the gameplay has, it's been implemented in a way that allows you to have as much fun as you want and to use it in as many different ways as you want. It also makes travelling around and exploring so much easier and more enjoybale.

To me the game's biggest weakness by far is the combat. As i already said the game doesn't try to be realistic but combat in this game is weak and it gets progressively more jarring the more you play it. It really feels like the mechanics of the combat are very outdated and basic and it reminded me of much older games like Goldeneye and Vice City. The biggest issue is enemy spawning. The game basically increases the difficulty as you progress by spawning more and more enemies in a very unsubtle manner. So If I'm attacking a military base and clear one area, the moment I move out of that area enemies will spawn behind me and start shooting at me form there. There is no way to really clear military locations, you simply have to keep killing the enemies you encounter while blowing up the installations and then leave and lose your wanted level. Even when you "complete" locations, enemy troops still remain there and you still get a wanted level if you reenter completed military bases, which really takes away a lot from any sense that you're actually weakening the government's control of the islands, which is the overall goal in the game.

Another annoying part of the combat is that the better the guns you get the better enemy gets, thus nullifying any advantage you might gain from them. Even though there is plenty of weapon and vehicle progression in the game the advantage gained is usually wiped out by harder to kill enemies reacting much more aggressively. It seems the game constantly moves the goalposts just to stop it being too easy, which is a rather poor way of making it more difficult.

While the world is massive and diverse and generally very well created it doesn't really feel like a living world in the manner of Grand Theft Auto games for example. The roads usually have very few vehicles on them and the streets of the main cities have very few pedestrians. It really feels like the world is half asleep or else very underpopulated.
The vehicle and aircraft controls and physics are generally not very good either. Cars have a strange system of turning where pressing left or right means your vehicle sort of drifts left or right after you've pressed it, which makes precise driving impossible. Helicopters and planes are very easy to control but have generally very poor maneuverability, so you can't really get better at piloting them. You're basically as good after the first five minutes using them as you'll be after five hours.

The storyline is pretty nondescript. It's only got seven relatively short missions so it's not a major part of the game really. The characters and dialogue are all pretty one dimensional and forgettable. However I will say that the voice acting of the female leader of the Reapers faction is quite memorable, but only for how bad it is. Her accent sounds like it's supposed to be Indian but you can constantly hear an English accent coming through. I had to skip through any of the cut-scenes with her in it, it was that bad.

Overall I would still recommend this game to anyone who likes open world games, because despite its many flaws it does still offer a lot of enjoyable gameplay in one of the best open worlds I've experienced in any game. However Just cause 2 is also a very superficial kind of game, the gameplay is very fun but it lacks any real sophistication or depth.


Battlefield 4 (PC DVD) - Limited Edition
Battlefield 4 (PC DVD) - Limited Edition

25 of 33 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars Battlefield 4, A Skill-Free Zone, 17 Nov. 2013
I bought Battlefield 4 on a last minute whim, as I didn't want to miss out on the first expansion, and I've regretted it ever since. I've played most of the Battlefield games since BF1942 but I've never experienced anything like the problems I've had with this one, which many other people have also experienced. Yes there have always been bugs and issues here and there at launch on previous titles but this one has been pretty much unplayable and still is even after the first patch.

First and foremost of the problems is the frequent crashing that is well known about. For me it crashes after about half an hour of play and then every few minutes if I try to reconnect. There is also a persistent problem with the audio feed, which causes most of the audio to go missing apart from very close range sounds. Neither of these problems have been fixed by the first patch.

I could almost put up with these technical problems if the gameplay was good but there are so many problems with the gameplay as well, some old and some new, that really destroy it. The one that seems to have got a lot worse on BF4 compared to it's predecessor is that far more games are now totally one sided and dominated by a group of hardcore gamers who stay on one team for game after game. On these games no matter how well you play you basically have no chance to compete because there are constantly choppers,tanks and boats roaming around every control point shooting at you almost as soon as you spawn. This has been a problem since they introduced the continuous profile, as groups of players and clan members just want to build up their stats and not have a good and fair game but DICE (the developers) have never done anything to deal with it, and now it has got ridiculously bad. To me a simple solution would be to just balance the teams based on player rank but DICE don't seem interested in dealing with the problem at all.

Another big problem that's far worse than BF3 is spawnkilling. It was a problem at the start in BF3 but they introduced spawnprotect which seemed to largely solve it, however there doesn't seem to be any spawn-protect in BF4. On top of that it seems that you physically spawn a split second before you can actually move or see what's going on, so it's actually like a reverse spawn-protect effect. The enemy seems able to see you before you can see them and many times I've been killed before even being able to move. On many games being spawnkilled accounted for more than half of my deaths, which is pretty ridiculous.

As well as these problems there are still quite a few other technical problems that are interfering with gameplay. Hit detection is still not quite right and since the patch I keep getting a distracting blur effect over the screen quite frequently, which I assume is something to do with network smoothing.

As for the single player campaign, it's a very short, very silly(story-wise) and not very challenging. The BF3 campaign was actually quite a lot better in my opinion, it at least had some decent believable characters and dialogue whereas the BF4 campaign seems like it was made for children.

Good points about the game are the graphics, which are very good and generally run very smoothly for me on my mid range graphics card on high settings. The game physics have also been upgraded and give more realism to collapsing buildings and water effects - especially the giant waves on Paracel Storm, which are amazing. The map designs generally seem quite good to me, despite the criticism they've received. It seems that they've basically designed a new version of the most popular BF3 maps and added some new types like Siege of Shanghai, that have added height as a new dimension. However all the hopping about on skyscrapers does seem a bit too much like a platform game to me.

It's a pity DICE did not put the same thought and effort into the gameplay and technical side as they've evidently have put into the graphics and physics, if they had this would probably have been a top game from launch. As it is, it's a very flawed and pretty much broken game. Maybe future patches will fix the many problems but I'll not be wasting my time with it until they do.

Update:15/2/14
I decided to give Battlefield 4 another go over this past few weeks knowing that most of the bugs have been fixed and so on, and also to see if my original assessment of the game was too critical.

Most of the bugs have indeed been fixed so I was at least able to have some constant game time without interruption and gauge how the gameplay compares to battlefield 3, as I've been playing that instead this past couple of months. Overall I still think Battlefield 4 is a much inferior to Battlefield 3 in terms of gameplay, though quite a lot better in terms of graphics, but to me the former is far more important.

I will say that I no longer think battles are more one sided in BF4, compared to BF3. I think I got that impression because the Battlelog service wasn't displaying the battle info for each server for some time after launch, so I was often joining battles that were well advanced and quite one sided.

The main reason I still think BF4 is inferior to BF3 is that the gunplay is much less sophisticated and Battles are much less tactical. In BF4 you just basically have to point and hold the trigger to kill at short to medium ranges, with pretty much every gun, however if you do the same in BF3 you'll likely miss most of your targets because your gun will end up pointing at the sky. In BF3 each gun has to be mastered by judging how long you can hold the trigger and still fire accurately, over short, medium and long ranges. When you do master a gun, particularly assault rifles, you can genuinely become lethal at all three ranges but not in BF4. In BF4 assault rifles are now pretty much useless at longer ranges as they are so inaccurate - unless you want to fire single shots, which is very unlikely to get kills. On there other hand, pretty much every automatic gun is lethal at short and medium range, which effectively means all combat boils down who sees who first or who has the more powerful gun.

The other part of gameplay that I think is inferior is the tactical element, as combat in BF4 is generally far more random than BF3. In BF3 I generally always have a good idea where to go to encounter enemies and there are plenty of larger battles involving 10 or more players. However in BF4 (in the bigger maps) far more of the combat involves just a few players and its far more sporadic and piecemeal. Players are usually much more spread out across the map, so you never know when you're going to encounter enemies. The Battles don't have the same team-game feel to them as BF3, they just feel like a load of players running around a big map haphazardly encountering each other.

Much of the criticism I've read about BF4 has been about how it has become more of an arcade shooter, similar to Call of Duty, which initially I wasn't sure about but I now think is true. The game has been dumbed down a lot compared to BF3, which basically means any inexperienced player can buy the game, start playing and get plenty of kills. Plenty will think that's a good thing as BF3 can be a particularly punishing game for new players, since they cannot compete with the skill level of experienced players. However to me that's what makes a good game, you may be rubbish when you start playing but you can advance your skill level and start to dominate weaker opponents. I want to be able to master gunplay like I did in BF3 but BF4 simply doesn't allow me to do that, so I don't think it will have any lasting appeal for me like BF3 has had. I have given it an extra star because it is at least a largely bug-free game now, and the graphics are noticeably better than BF3, especially the lighting.
-That said, the maps are still very "sticky", in the sense that you seem to get caught on the tiniest obstructions constantly, particularly debris of various kinds. Also jumping over broken walls and the like is still very frustrating as it usually take two or three attempts to get over - even completely destroyed walls. So the game is still not as bug-free as it could be.
Comment Comments (4) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Feb 20, 2014 2:33 PM GMT


Philips Series 3000 Beard Trimmer QT4013/23 Cordless, with Self Sharpening Titanium Blades
Philips Series 3000 Beard Trimmer QT4013/23 Cordless, with Self Sharpening Titanium Blades

12 of 15 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent, for the money., 24 Oct. 2013
Customer review from the Amazon Vine Programme (What's this?)
Before I got this trimmer I had the Remmington Barba beard trimmer which I was happy enough with, however I now prefer this Phillips model. The main reason for that is that the Phillips gives me a cleaner more even stubble compared to the Remmington and takes less time overall. The Phillips has a slightly narrower head than the Remmington but it's still quicker because it tends to take fewer passes of the same area to get an even cut, while still producing a better finished trim than the Remmington.

The Phillips also has the advantage of being easily washable, as you can remove the head and and run it under the tap. The battery life also seems to be very good, significantly better than the Remmington, and I think I've only had to charge it three times since I got it which must be close to a year ago.

The only slight downside with the Phillips trimmer is that the on/off switch has become a bit sticky and a few times it wouldn't turn on properly. This was rectified by removing the head casing and cleaning it out, so no big deal really.

Overall I'm pretty happy with this Phillips trimmer and would recommend it over the Remmington. Despite the fact it's a bit more expensive it's definitely a superior product in a quite a few ways and well worth the slightly higher price at the time of review.
Comment Comment (1) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Feb 21, 2015 1:10 AM GMT


Keysonic KSK-6001UELX Compact Gaming Keyboard with Blue Backlight UK Layout
Keysonic KSK-6001UELX Compact Gaming Keyboard with Blue Backlight UK Layout
Price: £29.99

3.0 out of 5 stars Good while it lasted, 30 Sept. 2013
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
I've had this keyboard just over two years now but it has now become faulty and unusable. However for the two years I've had it I've been very pleased with it. It has an excellent backlight, it's a nice compact size, it has been quiet and comfortable to type with and it has a very stylish, elegant look. The size of it was the main reason I opted for this keyboard as I didn't want a giant gaming keyboard taking up my whole desk and it has always been very convenient to just push to one side and use the desk for other things.

The other reason I bought it was because it was still a "gaming" keyboard and had anti-ghosting keys. I have done a fair bit of gaming on it and, for the most part it, it done its job. The only slight issue was that the W button could be a bit unresponsive at times and I'd have to press down harder to make it work.

That brings me on to why it has stopped working, because the W button actually came lose during gameplay and basically made it unusable for gaming. Then I noticed the amount of dirt and "stuff" underneath the keys and decided I needed to clean under there and proceeded to take off more keys to do the cleaning. The keys popped off easily enough but i noticed just how fragile looking the bits of plastic for holding them on are and sure enough when pressing the keys back on a couple of these bits of plastic broke off and left me with even more unusable keys. I tried gluing the plastic bits back on and it appeared to be successful until I tried using them and found them very unresponsive and they'd stick when I pressed harder. It also seems to be impossible to get replacement keys for Keysonic keyboards which means my keyboard is effectively done for.

While I like the design of this keyboard a lot I think the build quality leaves a lot to be desired. For nearly £30 you'd expect good build quality and longevity, considering you can pick up decent gaming keyboards for about a tenner, but the build quality/longevity does not match the price tag. I'd almost consider buying another one of these if they were cheaper but £30 is just too much. It's a pity because I was very happy with this keyboard but now I'll have to go looking for something else.


Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5