Onced

I've played 3 or so hours of it. It's mindless fun, but if what's on offer is indicative of the final product, it may not hold my attention long. Hoth itself is great fun - if you're Empire. It's so hilariously one sided against the Rebels. I'm not sure if it is because of lack of teamwork or unlocks, but I've yet to see a single Rebellion victory. It's definitely in need of some tweaks (especially controls, the turrets/vehicles handle terribly).

I enjoy seeing it grow and how my decisions subtly impact the overall look and feel of the base. It feels very sterile however. There's a few events that happen from time to time, but beyond that it's fairly empty. I also don't like the troop morale system (I really don't want to walk around a base punching people for 10 minutes). I much prefer the Mess Hall mechanic.

After mission 14, you'll receive a side-op that's called 'Visit Quiet'. After that, you'll gain the ability to use her as a buddy.

@ch3burashka: I prefer to think about it like this: MGSV is by all accounts a massive title. Kojima himself had concerns that people wouldn't manage to get through the content. In that regard, would it be appropriate to stuff it full of cutscenes?

I don't know if you liked MGS4 or not, but I found it to be too exposition heavy. A lesson learned in Peace Walker is that showing, not telling, is more important. I have strong hopes that a combination of briefing files/cutscenes will be a better solution.

Video analysis of preview here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZInpN4yx3K4

A French gaming magazine recently got their hands on a preview copy of MGS V: TPP. The reviewer played through 30 missions, which took him about 5 days to complete. The reviewer stated he felt he needed more time to fully appreciate the depth of the game.

He gave a short list of pros and cons.

Pros:

• gameplay is solid, very fun
• heaps of varied missions
• heaps of content

Cons:

• not enough cutscenes
• takes awhile to unlock non lethal weapons
• grinding of Mother Base required to unlock content later in story
• Open world doesn't have much life.

As someone who LOVES Peace Walker, the cons seem to be quite positive in my mind. What do you think?

I think the old adage of "the only game that will kill WoW is WoW" is coming to pass. There has been some serious executive mismanagement of WoD (and arguably MoP). Players are now treated as a 'cyclical base', content is deliberately withheld - and don't even get me started on PvP.

My cynical view tells me this is all due to the money-men at the top. Everything about Draenor that hasn't been inexplicably removed due the nebulous excuse of 'scarce resources!' has been par excellence. The leveling, the raiding and the art direction is the best that WoW has ever seen.

It's unlikely Warcraft will keel over soon. But unless something is done about upper management and their policy of drastic cost-cutting, WoW will end up little more than a shallow reflection of itself.

The RPS interview was predatory and self indulgent. While there's definitely value in ensuring accountability in game development, it shouldn't come at the price of vehemently poisonous hit-pieces that effectively kick a man while he's down. The piece didn't strike me as hard hitting journalism, but more akin to a vulture desperately trying to get his pound of flesh. This exchange legitimately made me feel for him:

Peter Molyneux: I literally work sixteen hours a day. I literally work sixteen hours a day. I don’t do that just to lie to people, I do it because I believe I’m doing. I totally believe in what I’m trying to make. Yeah, and you can rile the backers up and get them to ask for their money back and you can say, ‘Oh, you’ve broken your promises,’ but I’m still doing it. I’m still working on it. I’m still putting every ounce of my energy. I’m still not going to my son’s play because I had to work on Godus. I’m still getting shouted at by my wife because I’m not home. Do you know what time I got home last night? Two-thirty in the morning.

RPS: I don’t–

Peter Molyneux: Do you know what I was doing? I was dealing with the shit that all of this has come up, rather than working on Godus.

RPS: But–

Peter Molyneux: I’m someone, I’m defined by what I do in this industry and I love it so much. And, you know, it emotionally hurts me to have someone like yourself be so angry with me and really all I want to do is make a great game. That’s all I’ve ever wanted to do.

RPS: Do you think you can make a great game?

Peter Molyneux: I think I can try.

Molyneux is a relic from a bygone era, much of his greatness has faded. It's truly sad to see such a pivotal, revolutionary character laid low.

My comment was directed towards the quoted poster, who claimed that females consistently dominate professions that are unskilled in nature in relation to educational disparity. I was attempting to redress this claim by highlighting women's involvement in tertiary-educated professions is not as dire as he/she suggests. I'm not trying to tackle the tricky nature of employment statistics, just showing that females of today are more empowered in educated professions than the poster submits and certainly more than history has allowed.

@impartialgecko:

Just jumping on the bandwagon here.

In my country (Australia) women are extremely prevalent across an incredibly diverse set of professions. Coming from someone who was studying to be a healthcare professional, implying that women are "relegated" to the role of a nurse is incredibly short sighted. I think you may undervalue or are ignorant of the education and training that goes into creating adept nurses. To continue your example of healthcare, not only do women make up the majority of allied health (speech pathologists, psychologists etc.) but they're increasingly common -- and often outnumber their male colleagues -- in specialty areas of medicine. This is not symptomatic of a culture which elevates males above females.

Of course it's just not in the health industry in which women thrive. Other areas such as law are filled to the brim with capable, bright women. Without any disrespect, your claim that "the only industries that come to mind are fashion and cosmetics.." is extremely reductive of women's achievements. Society at one point was very sexist, where extremely motivated women were held underfoot of a male dominated world. But this is no longer the case. An equally intelligent and motivated woman is capable of reaching the same height as a man. While there exists areas in which men and women are naturally (I understand that may be a controversial word, but I mean no offense) drawn, this should not be a flash point for criticism. Differences, so long as they are not damaging, should be celebrated.

I'd like editorial staff who aren't immediately put on the defensive when their profession is called into question. In recent days there have been some extremely valid points regarding impartiality of the gaming press. Some of the community outpourings have been heard (albeit tentatively) by some, but others are actively deriding the concept. I'm speaking of tongue-in-cheek comments of "I did X am I still impartial?". It reeks of insecurity in the face of a paradigm shift and it feels incredibly regressive.

The mantle of journalism to either find a place or vanish completely from games media. It's a title that's tacked on and removed when appropriate. You can't try to persuade your audience, claim you adhere to standards, then suddenly throw your hands up in the air and go "but we're not journalists!" when shit hits the fan. That's straight up disingenuous.

Shifting the focus of games media back to games. I don't need opinion pieces of politically charged issues splattered all over gaming sites. I honestly don't need to hear how terrible some of the community is because scandal number #2524443 happened overnight. What I need is a competent, functioning body of professionals who understand their audience, improve their own practice and remain as close to objectivity as possible.