Recommended Posts

As much as I enjoyed the singleplayer I feel a bit underwhelmed. I feel like I missed something.

Same here. If it has robots trying to kill you I would expect a little more danger in the test. Only two parts has panels with spikes, how disappointing. Not even a level using propulsion gel to run between spikes, you run under some giant mashing pistons outside of the test areas.

I completed the co-op last night with a friend (split-screen).

... Just amazing. It's the best co-operative game I've played. Ever. And I'm obsessed with co-op games. :laugh: It had us scratching our heads a lot, so much fun to get things right

especially the test where you have to fling yourself at the other player! :D

Same here. If it has robots trying to kill you I would expect a little more danger in the test. Only two parts has panels with spikes, how disappointing. Not even a level using propulsion gel to run between spikes, you run under some giant mashing pistons outside of the test areas.

The points with the propulsion gel and spike panels was removed due to it relying more on timing rather than solving a puzzle.

I unfortunately have not been able to play this game much since it's release, I am on Chapter 5 or 6 right now, but I just have to say this is easily the worst loading implementation I have seen in a modern day game in quite some time. It really is awful, and I thought maybe it was just the PS3 version, but nope, PC version as well. Just is crazy how much loading is needed, especially when nothing about the game is visually impressive whatsoever. I just do not get why the loading feels like it is 2004.

I unfortunately have not been able to play this game much since it's release, I am on Chapter 5 or 6 right now, but I just have to say this is easily the worst loading implementation I have seen in a modern day game in quite some time. It really is awful, and I thought maybe it was just the PS3 version, but nope, PC version as well. Just is crazy how much loading is needed, especially when nothing about the game is visually impressive whatsoever. I just do not get why the loading feels like it is 2004.

I thought it felt pretty cool with the whole logo thing constantly changing based on where you are at in the game. That being said, the game didn't take nearly as long to load as some of the "visually impressive" games. The loading did seem a bit excessive (I honestly don't see why the game couldn't load the following chamber, or at least the first few rooms when you got near the end of a level), but at the same time, this game does have a concept that no other, even the most "visually impressive" games have. Portals.....that sole feature means the game almost has to have the entire level (or a large portion of it) loaded into memory at once, leaving less memory for preloading the next level. Imagine how much memory it would require to add portals that you can see through to any normal game. You would need to load nearly the entire level at once and wouldn't have room to preload the next area. I'm willing to bet Valve used load screens the way they did to keep memory usage down and performance up. In this game theres just too high a chance that the player will be able to see multiple rooms spread over a large distance that they can't unload parts of a level that the player has passed without being extremely careful, otherwise they will cause crap performance and potential crashes.

Not to mention, with propulsion gel and flinging yourself around, you tend to travel much faster in Portal than you do in most other standard games, so you would need to preload quite far ahead to keep up at times.

What exactly is it you don't like about the load screens, just their look or the amount of them? I think both are fine based on the way Portal 2 plays, even the look of them fits, it constantly changes as you go through the game to fit where you are in the story.

I unfortunately have not been able to play this game much since it's release, I am on Chapter 5 or 6 right now, but I just have to say this is easily the worst loading implementation I have seen in a modern day game in quite some time. It really is awful, and I thought maybe it was just the PS3 version, but nope, PC version as well. Just is crazy how much loading is needed, especially when nothing about the game is visually impressive whatsoever. I just do not get why the loading feels like it is 2004.

Yup, same as other Source-engine games. Valve really needs to work on that.

I thought it felt pretty cool with the whole logo thing constantly changing based on where you are at in the game. That being said, the game didn't take nearly as long to load as some of the "visually impressive" games. The loading did seem a bit excessive (I honestly don't see why the game couldn't load the following chamber, or at least the first few rooms when you got near the end of a level), but at the same time, this game does have a concept that no other, even the most "visually impressive" games have. Portals.....that sole feature means the game almost has to have the entire level (or a large portion of it) loaded into memory at once, leaving less memory for preloading the next level. Imagine how much memory it would require to add portals that you can see through to any normal game. You would need to load nearly the entire level at once and wouldn't have room to preload the next area. I'm willing to bet Valve used load screens the way they did to keep memory usage down and performance up. In this game theres just too high a chance that the player will be able to see multiple rooms spread over a large distance that they can't unload parts of a level that the player has passed without being extremely careful, otherwise they will cause crap performance and potential crashes.

Not to mention, with propulsion gel and flinging yourself around, you tend to travel much faster in Portal than you do in most other standard games, so you would need to preload quite far ahead to keep up at times.

What exactly is it you don't like about the load screens, just their look or the amount of them? I think both are fine based on the way Portal 2 plays, even the look of them fits, it constantly changes as you go through the game to fit where you are in the story.

Umm, okay, did not expect such a detail response over loading times, as I do not really think they are something that would need defending and/or should be defended. In this day and age there are many different ways to approach said loading, and Portal 2, and as Ayepecks pointed out, the current iteration of the Source engine on a whole, does not do a good job at loading. Really is plain and simple. For someone like myself who only has 20 minutes here, 45 minutes there to play the game, it really gets quite annoying when my guesstimate would be that 15% of that time is spent looking at loading screens.

But to answer your question, the look of them is fine, no problem there, and I could actually care less what a loading screen looks like as it has no affect on gameplay for me at all. But I do like the look of them. It is the amount of them that is ridiculous.

And I don't know, maybe the game gets super wide open after Chapter 5 or 6, but I do not see any massively huge levels yet? They are relatively small levels as far as levels go. I have not gotten to any gels yet, so maybe they open up, but as of now, I see absolutely no reason for all of the loading, as things have been pretty simplistic, and the Material Emancipation Grid makes sure the portals get reset after each level.

The only really wide open level so far is the Chapter I am on which is

The Escape

and it literally stops in between doors to load, or just right in the middle of the level itself, and does not even use elevators as the excuse to load. So it just totally breaks the immersion of the entire level. And actually in the Chapter I just mentioned I was on above, there are no elevators in between test chambers, just a pretty wide open back end. And there is also no Material Emancipation Grid. So why do my portals all of a sudden rest themselves just because the game had to load? Wherever I last left by Blue Portal, that is where my Blue Portal should be no? But that is not the case, at least from what I have seen, loading also wipes out the portals, which to me is a terrible inconsistency in the game itself.

Just feel the loading is terribly handled. It fortunately does not destroy the experience, however it is worth noting IMO as it is that much of an issue.

I agree that the evolution of the logo in the loading screens is neat, but honestly, that could be implemented just as well with loading screens only between chapters, instead of having loading screens about 5-10 times a chapter. The fact that Valve hasn't improved upon its loading system is extremely frustrating, given it's been the exact same since Half-Life 2's release in 2004.

It's definitely possible to update the loading system in an engine without making a completely new engine -- happens all the time. Look at what Epic did in Gears of War. The original was very similar to the Source engine's loading system, but Epic updated it to include a streamlined background loading system in the sequel. The biggest weakness of the Source engine isn't the graphics (which I honestly think are fine, even if they are dated -- still look good to me), it's the loading system. I'm not sure whether it's a complement or an insult to say the biggest problem with Portal 2 is the loading system, but it is extremely annoying.

I'm not really sure how anyone can argue the loading system in the Source engine isn't extremely dated. I just don't see how it's even up for debate, personally. Valve needs to fix it by Half-Life 3, which I'm guessing will use a brand new version of the Source engine.

Umm, okay, did not expect such a detail response over loading times, did not really think they are something that would need defending or should be defended, in this day and age there are many different ways to approach said loading, and Portal 2, and as Ayepecks pointed out, the Source engine on a whole, does not do a good job at loading. Really is plain and simple. For someone like myself who only has 20 minutes here, 45 minutes there to play the game, it really gets quite annoying when my guesstimate would be that 15% of that time I am looking at loading screens.

I saw a TellTale Games employee tweet something about this that was quite illuminating. Portal 1 loaded just as much as Portal 2 does, the difference is Portal 2 has loading screens whereas Portal 1 was just the last rendered frame with a minimalist LOADING overlay.

As cool as P2's loading screens were, they probably should've stuck with the old style loading. If not sprucing it up a little first.

Portals.....that sole feature means the game almost has to have the entire level (or a large portion of it) loaded into memory at once, leaving less memory for preloading the next level. Imagine how much memory it would require to add portals that you can see through to any normal game. You would need to load nearly the entire level at once and wouldn't have room to preload the next area. I'm willing to bet Valve used load screens the way they did to keep memory usage down and performance up. In this game theres just too high a chance that the player will be able to see multiple rooms spread over a large distance that they can't unload parts of a level that the player has passed without being extremely careful, otherwise they will cause crap performance and potential crashes.

Here's the thing: if the engine was built well, you can still have multiple levels in a map and only copy the parts of the map that the user can access at any given time. That is maybe only the current room or level. Then you just teleport the rest of the map geometry in when the user is done with the current level.

As far as I know, the Source engine is fairly good with Z-culling (removal of non-visible objects), so having many levels in one map should not pose a processing problem.

Umm, okay, did not expect such a detail response over loading times, did not really think they are something that would need defending or should be defended, in this day and age there are many different ways to approach said loading, and Portal 2, and as Ayepecks pointed out, the Source engine on a whole, does not do a good job at loading. Really is plain and simple. For someone like myself who only has 20 minutes here, 45 minutes there to play the game, it really gets quite annoying when my guesstimate would be that 15% of that time I am looking at loading screens.

But to answer your question, the look of them is fine, no problem there, and I could actually care less what a loading screen looks like as it has no affect on gameplay for me at all. It is the amount of them that is ridiculous.

Loading screens took maybe 10-15 seconds for me, but I am on a SSD....much less overall than 15% of my playtime....most levels took at least a few minutes to solve, to me, the 15 second load times every few minutes were not bad at all, but again, that's on a SSD, I have no clue how the load times are on standard HDDs.

And I dont know, maybe the game gets super wide open after Chapter 5 or 6, but I do not see any massively huge levels yet? They are relatively small levels as far as levels go. I have not gotten to any gels yet, so maybe they open up, but as of now, I see absolutely no reason for all of the loading, as things have been pretty simplistic, and the Material Emancipation Grid makes sure the portals get reset after each level.
The last few chapters do seem a bit longer than the first few honestly. It goes from old-style Portal type puzzles, to all these new elements (light bridges, gels, t-beams or whatever they are called, etc) all mixed together. The levels themselves are generally very large, but they do generally take a bit of thinking and what not to work through. In terms of raw time spent, you will spend more time thinking and doing and less time loading in the later levels than you do in the first 4 chapters or so. The first few chapters fly by compared to the last few.

It mainly "slows down" when you get to the gels in the old factory area (or whatever you want to call it), the gels alone add a brand new element compared to the first game (the lasers are new, but not very different from the energy orbs in the first)...light bridges, while new, are quite easy to use, bridge goes in one portal and comes out another. Gel on the other hand, you need to use in the right places for it to be effective. One of the later gel levels actually took me about 5-10 minutes to finish, and I knew exactly what I had to do from the beginning, I just had a hard time getting the portals placed in a way that I could do it.

The only really wide open level so far is the Chapter I am on which is

The Escape

and it literally stops in between doors to load, or just right in the middle of the level itself, and does not even use elevators as the excuse to load. So it just totally breaks the immersion of the entire level. And actually in the Chapter I just mentioned I was on above, there are no elevators in between test chambers, just a pretty wide open back end. And there is also no Material Emancipation Grid. So why do my portals all of a sudden rest themselves just because the game had to load? Wherever I last left by Blue Portal, that is where my Blue Portal should be no? But that is not the case, at least from what I have seen, loading also wipes out the portals, which to me is a terrible inconsistency in the game itself.

Just feel the loading is terribly handled. Does not destroy the experience at all, just worth noting IMO.

I can understand where you are coming from, honestly, Valve should have put an Emancipation Grid before every load screen just to stay consistent. In terms of open levels, Chapter 6 (

The Fall

) is really where the levels open up a bit and start getting longer. It's also where you first start using the gel. There are still load screens between every portion, but generally speaking you spend more time in each section (space between load screens) than in the previous chapters, unless you already know the solution. I might actually do a speed run later knowing the solutions. One of the longest times I spent searching for a solution was during one of the gel-based puzzles. Granted I for some reason temporarily forgot I could portal from 1 platform to another, it still took me a few minutes to set up the solution (which was really stupid and easy) to actually finish it.

Completed SP! Little bit too short, considering I paid ?30 for it. I fully expect some more levels (missing the advanced test chamers from the first game). They really need to fix the loading issue, it breaks the game up.

Loading issues? How are they issues if they are meant to be there? Smaller levels = smooth running game, why bother keeping test chamber 1 loaded when your in 17?

One thing that annoys me is the inability to load specific levels like portal 1, a few times a mate has asked me "How do I solve this?" (he was playing it on my 360 earlier, his game and HDD) had to go play 4-5 test chambers into a chapter then he has already done it >.<

One thing that annoys me is the inability to load specific levels like portal 1, a few times a mate has asked me "How do I solve this?" (he was playing it on my 360 earlier, his game and HDD) had to go play 4-5 test chambers into a chapter then he has already done it >.<

Exactly. I'm trying to an achievement for Chamber 10 and I have to load up chapter 2 and play all the way through the first 9 chambers to get to it. It would be nice to give you an option to choose specific test chambers after you have beaten the game.

Loading issues? How are they issues if they are meant to be there? Smaller levels = smooth running game, why bother keeping test chamber 1 loaded when your in 17?
Constant loading breaks up the game experience for me. They need to do background loading or something to reduce the amount of loading screens you get. I whizzed through most of the puzzles, it gets really annoying to have a load screen every 5 minutes. Especially in the latter levels where you are out of bounds, every other door seems to incur a load screen.

Completed SP! Little bit too short, considering I paid ?30 for it. I fully expect some more levels (missing the advanced test chamers from the first game). They really need to fix the loading issue, it breaks the game up.

i just finished it too and i loved it and I completely agree. i mentioned it earlier that gabe newell needs to be kicked in the balls for the amount of loading in this game and I stand by that statement. there is just way to much loading. something needs to be done about it or I guess it just may be a limitation of the old engine it's using. Games like this would really benefit with the seamless type of loading that halo does (which was able to do it on a last gen console nonetheless).

brilliant though, now hurr up larry so we can do co-op :p

i just finished it too and i loved it and I completely agree. i mentioned it earlier that gabe newell needs to be kicked in the balls for the amount of loading in this game and I stand by that statement. there is just way to much loading. something needs to be done about it or I guess it just may be a limitation of the old engine it's using. Games like this would really benefit with the seamless type of loading that halo does (which was able to do it on a last gen console nonetheless).

brilliant though, now hurr up larry so we can do co-op :p

I got up to Chapter 7 last night, so I am almost there I think?

If not, I do not need to beat SP to play CoOp. Not really necessary, and I definitely want to play it with someone who has never played it before so we are both figuring it out together. In fact, not 100% sure about this, but I think tonight I may be able to play some CoOp, I think tonight is mainly my wifes night of TV so I can go upstairs and game on my PC. Will know a lot later on today, like when I get home, but there is a good chance.

I got up to Chapter 7 last night, so I am almost there I think?

If not, I do not need to beat SP to play CoOp. Not really necessary, and I definitely want to play it with someone who has never played it before so we are both figuring it out together. In fact, not 100% sure about this, but I think tonight I may be able to play some CoOp, I think tonight is mainly my wifes night of TV so I can go upstairs and game on my PC. Will know a lot later on today, like when I get home, but there is a good chance.

You might want to finish SP before you beat coop.....while coop doesn't have much of a story element to it, the ending cinematic does tie in a bit with what happens at the end of the SP campaign. It's not a huge tie in, but you could probably guess how SP ends based on the end of the coop. You might not have to worry much about it though, coop is pretty long overall....it took my friend and I about 3 nights to beat it at about 2-4 hours a night, depending on how long you play it, and how good at puzzle solving you and your partner are, you probably won't beat it in a single night.

You might want to finish SP before you beat coop.....while coop doesn't have much of a story element to it, the ending cinematic does tie in a bit with what happens at the end of the SP campaign. It's not a huge tie in, but you could probably guess how SP ends based on the end of the coop. You might not have to worry much about it though, coop is pretty long overall....it took my friend and I about 3 nights to beat it at about 2-4 hours a night, depending on how long you play it, and how good at puzzle solving you and your partner are, you probably won't beat it in a single night.

Cool thanks for the heads up. (Y)

I would only have about 2 hours to play if I can indeed play, so as you said not much to worry about as far as beating it, at least speaking for myself :laugh: . The most important thing to me is playing the CoOp with someone who has also not played it so we both have fresh eyes so to speak, so if I take the risk of ruining some of the story in order to play with someone else who has not played it yet, I can live with that. But again thanks for the heads up, it is good to know.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • 10 games join Xbox Free Play Days this weekend by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe Another Free Play Days offer has just landed, and this one is a unique one. On top of offering 10 games to jump into for Xbox players, all the titles are from a single publisher: No More Robots. The promotion has games like Little Rocket Lab, Spirittea, Descenders Next, Let's Build a Zoo, and much more. Almost every game in the selection does need an Xbox Game Pass Ultimate, Premium, or Essential subscription, so keep this in mind when browsing. Many of the titles are Xbox Play Anywhere titles though, so both Xbox console and PC players can jump in. Here's how the announcement blog post described some of the available titles: There is one game that's available to all Xbox players without the need for any subscriptions, which is Descenders. Here are the announced games and the platforms they are available to play on: Little Rocket Lab (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Spirittea (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Soccer Story (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Descenders Next (Game Preview) (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Let's Build a Zoo (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Hypnospace Outlaw (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Slayers X: Terminal Aftermath: Vengance of the Slayer (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Nowhere Prophet (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) Family Man (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One) Descenders (Xbox Series X|S, Xbox One, PC) To easily find the titles on Xbox consoles, first head to the Store, then in the sidebar, find the Home section. In there, open the Subscriptions tab. The Free Play Days collection will show up in this area. This week's Free Play Days promotions will end on Sunday, June 7, at 11:59 pm PT.
    • It STILL has horrid theme support. Hard to look at for me. The white is too bright, and the black too dark. I'm using classic outlook for the Dark Grey theme. It's just right for me.
    • inb4 someone leaves the usual "what an unfortunate name" comment
    • Cuktech 10 Ultra charger review: big display, four ports, 110W total power by Taras Buria Cuktech recently announced a couple of Ultra-branded chargers, including a desktop 300W charger, which I reviewed a few weeks ago. For those who do need that much (or who do not want to spend that much on a charger), Cuktech also offers the 10 Ultra, a traditional wall charger with similar features. Four ports, a big display, and up to 110W of power output. After using it for a few weeks, here are my impressions. Disclaimer: Cuktech provided the review unit without any editorial input or pre-approval. Like the 30 Ultra, the 10 Ultra arrived in a box made of nice cardboard with quality print all over it. Inside, besides the charger, you will find a 240W 6A charger, which, this time, is fully braided. While Cuktech always bundles high-power cables with its chargers and power banks, they are usually regular and unassuming. This time, the cable is much nicer, matching the charger's $59.99 price tag. The charger itself measures 67 x 76 x 33 mm or 2.6 x 3.0 x 1.3 inches and weighs about 250 grams. Considering the charger has four ports and a big display, I would say the compact size is quite impressive, albeit a little hefty. The overall design is similar to other chargers from the manufacturer, minus the chrome Cuktech logo next to the four ports. The Cuktech 10 Ultra has retractable prongs for better portability. Its front side is covered with piano black plastic housing two elements: a capacitive button with backlight and a quite large display for various charging stats. Ports are downward-facing, and I have mixed feelings about such a design. It is not the most convenient when you frequently connect and disconnect cables. It makes you bend over to find the right port to connect, and it is a no-go with outlets mounted closer to the floor. On the bright side, design like this eliminates clutter and sagging, especially when using four cables at once. Plus, you get plenty of space for a big display. Ports include two high-speed USB Type-C ports, one Type-C for less demanding devices, and one classic USB Type-A. The first two ports deliver full 100W, while the third is capped at 45W. As for the Type-A port, its maximum output is 18W. In total, the charger delivers 110W of power, but in my testing, I managed to squeeze 117W when charging two power banks and a tablet. Quite impressive. Type-C1 Type-C2 Type-C3 Type-A Single-port 100W 100W 45W 18W Two ports 80W 20W - - Three ports 65W 20W 20W - Four ports 65W 20W 10W 10W The charger can detect handshake protocols and balance power across all four ports according to each device's needs. As such, power is not limited to the values in the table above. You can have two ports charging at 55W, three ports at 45W + 20W, and more. For some reason, Cuktech is not listing the supported protocols, but a quick test showed that it is compatible with PD3.0, PPS, QC5, DCP, and UFCS. When you connect a compatible device, the charger automatically detects its charging standard and displays it on the screen, for example, Apple 6A or Samsung 3A. Speaking of the screen. The main highlight of the 10 Ultra is its 1.57-inch display with a maximum brightness of 700 nits and 160-degree viewing angles. The display takes up most of the front, and it shows various charging-related information, including total output power, current temperature, power distribution across ports with watts, volts, and amps, a screensaver, and more. You can toggle between the different views by tapping the button, and holding it changes the screen orientation (portrait or horizontal, plus flipped) according to your socket position. The screen is very nice. It is sharp, vivid, and the fonts are easy to read. As for settings, you can change the following: Keep the screen on or off Lock the screen orientation (hold the button to change the screen orientation) Keep the USB Type-A port on Toggle power modes The charger has three power modes: AI: standard mode that automatically allocates power to each connected device. Power Priority: prioritizes power for high-demand devices, such as laptops or power banks. Balanced: splits power evenly across connected devices according to their needs I was skeptical at first, but after testing a few devices in different modes, I can see the benefit of these three modes. The most useful is power priority, which gives the first Type-C port more power. When I was charging a 100W power bank (port 1) alongside a 140W power bank (port 2), Power Priority split the total output about 75-30. Balanced mode, as the name suggests, splits the total output between the two ports more or less equally. As for AI mode, the charger uses its brain to detect which device needs more power. In my testing, it figured out that the 140W power needs a bit more juice. As I said, I expected this to be more of a gimmick, but the three built-in modes turned out quite useful. For example, you can prioritize your laptop while giving other ports a little less power, but still enough to charge at acceptable speeds. Unfortunately, unlike the 30 Ultra, this charger cannot display the battery level of the device being charged. This small feature turned out to be very useful when I was testing the 30 Ultra, as it allowed me to see my phone's battery level without picking it up. Like other Cuktech chargers I tested, the 10 Ultra one proved itself reliable and well-made. It uses Gallium nitride semiconductor technology to reduce the charger's size and improve efficiency. It is also better at dissipating heat, but I have to say that when charging two power banks at 117W total, the charger got hotter than what I would call comfortable (hold it for a few seconds, and you start feeling a burning sensation at your fingertips). However, the built-in thermal indicator remained below the temperature threshold, with the screen reassuring that the device operated at "High performance" (I tested it in a 21 °C / 69 °F room). Overall, the Cuktech 10 Ultra is a solid choice. If you need four ports and you like to nerd out on various stats, it is a very easy recommendation. It will take care of your laptop, phone, tablet, and power bank without breaking a sweat, plus the build, material, and cable quality are top-notch. The mode switcher is handy when charging different devices with different power needs, too. I cannot say a display is a must-have in a charger, especially when it makes you more conscious about where to plug it, but it is a neat addition if you have a socket at your table or bed level, so that you can actually use the display and its features. The more important fact is that despite its size and quality, the display does not make the charger that much more expensive than similarly powerful chargers from competitors. Plus, you can save 10% on the 10 Ultra with a promo code on Amazon. Buy Cuktech 10 Ultra charger - $53.99 on Amazon with a promo code As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Last week I was investigating an issue with contacts and tried using the new Outlook. In the real (Classic) Outlook, you can easily go to any Outlook folder and present it in a Table View, then customize the columns to show/sort any field, which was exactly what I needed. But of course, the new Outlook doesn't have this feature at all. I gave up. Oh, and can we possibly stop claiming the new Outlook has PST support? What it really has is the ability to use the real Outlook in the background to pretend to have PST support. There is no PST support without the real Outlook installed.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      mobandz earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Apprentice
      fernan99 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • One Month Later
      nothanks earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      B2Proxy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      MadMung0 earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      476
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      247
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      79
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      76
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      60
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!