The best takeway of Witcher 1 is how you can see CDPR treat an open world when it comes to weather and time changing the attitude and appearance of NPCs and monsters. I'm excited for Witcher 3 based on the story telling alone. There was alot of novel ideas and interesting characters in Witcher 2, and the choices presented where often grey enough that there didn't seem like a good answer, which reinforces the Witcher's path of neutrality.
After MGS1 Kojima didn't like that the English localization team had edited some of the dialogue instead of just doing a direct translation, and so in MGS2 you get awkward lines like "We've managed to avoid drowning".
The game has a post-modernist story that pokes fun at the action genre. The game itself has references to the post-modern book, City of Glass including having a character, Peter Stillman, share his name with a character from the novel. MGS1's story almost seems plausible in a science fiction mindset, but MGS2 completely throws that out the window. Vamp can walk on water? There's a secret group controlling everything and they are all dead? Revolver Ocelot is somehow being controlled by Liquid from beyond the grave? It is all insane twist and turns that never intended to have meaning, and fair enough Kojima didn't want to have a direct sequel to MGS2 for a very long time. And then comes MGS4, and all the answers become "Nanomachines, son" (And yes that's Rising and not MGS4)
Gameplay wise it was pretty good. The Shell's environments are a bit too linear, but the game was good in that it improved upon the base game of MGS1. You couldn't run and gun through the game, but you approached could fight it out for a bit in order to escape. Also the game probably had the best Director's cut with all of those VR missions and Snake Tales.
There really isn't any game that turns the flintlock era into a quick and fun experience and it doesn't help that there's a high chance of missing the target. The visuals they managed in this mod when it comes to cities is really impressive, including the character models that look like better versions of Napoleon Total War models. I can't wait to play this.
I don't like either of the new Trek movies just because they seem to be an affront to the basics of Star Trek. I like Edgar Wright but I think we'd get more of the same style over substance, but at least the story would be presentable. Conspiracy bunk aside, Orci is just a terrible writer.
Empire Total War has a beta co-op campaign that they promised would be in the final game, and then was promised to be patched in and never was. It's glitchy. Napoleon's online campaign is a mess, its more like two players vs. each other, and every battle is either autoresolved or the players fighting each other. Rome 2 and Shogun 2 improved this by having the players fight the CPU instead, and offered an actual co-op experience, but the games desynchronize so often that it isn't that good of an experience either.
As a fan of the series since Rome, it is easy to admit that there is no perfect Total War game, but it is a large irritant to see the series make the same damn mistakes and absolutely lie through their teeth about AI and gameplay improvements.
MTW2 was broken on release and had numerous bugs with unit stats, (shields would remove armor rating and double handed units could not attack cavalry) and still has broken AI that wasn't fixed.
Empire also had unresponsive AI that didn't know how to use ships for naval invasions. Also, one of the patches broke the battle AI which caused units to just charge, and every battle became large melees.
Napoleon and Shogun 2 were improvements, but the series also got more streamlined. Hopefully when they announce the new game this month they'll actually try to make a quality product again.
I'll watch some sports, but I wouldn't feel bad if I didn't watch any. On the contrary, I'd be embarrassed if I watched too many or was so into it that I cried at my team's loss; why get attached to a team that doesn't care about you at all?