🔒 EXCLUSIVE: Profiles/ - Full Gallery 2025

If you imagine a hopeless romantic, swap out “hopeless romantic” for “hopelessly searching for the ultimate gaming experience.”
That’s me.

I review games—occasionally.

The first game I ever played was 'Turok 2: Seeds of Evil'.
That’s why, after the 2008 remake of 'Turok' scratched an itch only it could, I’m looking forward to 'Turok: Origins' more than anything.

I'm a massive fan of what the 'Splinter Cell' franchise once was, and I can only hope the upcoming remake finally does it justice. Among the Tom Clancy titles, 'Ghost Recon: Breakpoint' has been the most satisfying so far.

As for 'Call of Duty'—I'm one of those hopeless cases who keeps buying it for the story modes, even though they’re always masterpieces too short to justify the price. Every single time.

Two of the best remakes I’ve played come from what was once a console-only franchise: 'The Last of Us: Part I' and 'Part II'.
Finally launched onto PC, both deliver third-person gameplay with brutal, satisfying melee, brilliant mechanics, balanced resource management, and survival horror so tightly written it showcases the razor-edge genius of the developers.

But this isn’t an official review. This is just me telling you what moves me as a gamer.

I’m into stealth. Horror. Survival. Crafting. Building. Open worlds. Shooters. Melee combat.
If a developer can combine it all without losing coherence, I’m all for it.
The more, the merrier—if it’s balanced.

(And yes, I’m secretly working on a few projects of my own. Whether they’ll amount to anything remains to be seen.)

Now, 'Assassin’s Creed'.
What a disappointment that franchise has become.

The first few entries were brilliantly conceived—tactile, skillful. Then someone decided to make traversal feel like autopilot: no balancing challenges, no grit, no real risk.
It devolved into a clumsier mix of 'Assassin’s Creed' and 'Prince of Persia' mechanics—honoring neither.
Not retro. Just backwards.

The latest title, 'Assassin’s Creed: Shadows', feels like two steps forward—after seven steps back.

Combat breaks its own immersion: enemies telegraph their moves too obviously, and unnatural color effects during fights wreck the realism. Worse still, the parkour is no longer visceral or earned; it’s a glide over the environment, not a gritty climb.

It’s too fast. Too frictionless.
That’s the franchise’s Achilles’ heel—and it spills into everything else.
'Shadows' feels oddly "souls-like" at times, and less like the historically grounded, blood-and-sinew assassin experience the franchise once promised.

I like 'Elden Ring' on its own terms.
But 'Assassin’s Creed' feels like it's suffering an identity crisis.

As for 'Doom'—whether the original, 'Doom 2016', or 'Doom: Eternal'—it’s simply not for me.
I’ve never found its brand of shooting and supposed horror even slightly scary.
If it leaned harder into survival horror rather than over-the-top adrenaline, I might be more interested.

I'm sure it's fun. Just not my kind of fun.

I’d much rather see a reimagining of 'Crysis', or something built in its spirit—genuinely fresh, genuinely satisfying.

I love strategy games too, and still dream of a true spiritual successor to 'Empire Earth'.

This, in sum, is what defines me as a gamer.
If you understand this, you understand me—as a gamer.