Metal Gear Rising: When It’s Better to Say Nothing At All

Posted on by
Reply

Hands down, I’m a fan of the Metal Gear series of video games. I was introduced to the franchise in 1997 with the release of Metal Gear Solid. It was the defining game of my childhood, and I’ve enjoyed every other game in the series.

It's been six months since this Metal Gear Rising screen was released.

Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance has been in development for longer than I can remember. I remember tipping it as one of the games to look for in 2010. Trailers were released showing the precision with which players could expect to wield Raiden’s HF blades. It was exciting to see such a new start for the franchise coming together.

But months and years have come and gone and not much has happened with the game. There was the leak and subsequent announcement that the game had been scrapped and started anew by Platinum Games. Having played Bayonetta I can say that it will be interesting to see how the game comes together. It will be a step in an unknown direction for MGS – outsourcing development of a game from the hands of Kojima Production isn’t something that is taken lightly. But I’m willing to give it ago.

So of course when a trailer was brought out last week, I was excited to see what was on offer this time.

I was disappointed. The video itself (embedded below) hasn’t really done anything to wet the appetite of eager fans. It’s done nothing. A few strange scenes thrown together have done little to excite gamers around the globe. It’s brought nothing new to the table, or hasn’t shown off some gameplay to incite interest. It’s simply brought eyes to the fading memory of the previous trailers, and it’s beginning to seem like Metal Gear Rising might be falling in to a state of vapourware.

However, the article did offer some hope, urging viewers to check back on the 30th of April, only a day away was of writing. I can only hope that Konami come up with the goods next time.

What do you think of the new Metal Gear Solid Rising: Reveangence trailer? Has it excited or disappointed you?

Also a quick reminder that my Live Below the Line campaign is still going! We’ve hit a bit of an uphill part, with no donations in the past couple of days. Only you can help us reach the target of $1000, which will go towards helping rebuild schools in Papua New Guinea! If you enjoyed this article, surely you can spare a few dollars toward helping those less fortunate! Donate to my total!

Why The Avengers has Set Itself Up For Success

Posted on by
Reply

The Avengers is out in cinemas on April 25

Whether you love or loath the recent Marvel comic book movie boom, it’s hard to argue that the amount of work that’s gone into setting up The Avengers has been huge.

The film is no gimmick – it isn’t something that’s been thrown together because of the immense popularity of the previous Marvel films. The Avengers was announced way back in 2005, and it had always been the plan to introduce each of the characters with their own movie before putting together the main event.

And part one of the strategy went off without a hitch. Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, and Captain America, while nothing revolutionary or special in themselves, were all fairly well received by critics. Thor and Iron Man 2 received fairly mixed ratings, all performed strongly enough at the box office to prove that the audience wanted more superhero movies.

There was thought put in to the casting across the films, with Samuel L. Jackson making cameo appearances in each film (aside from The Incredible Hulk) to frame the creation of the superhero group within the S.H.I.E.L.D. organisation across the whole franchise.

On the same topic of casting, there was the controversial dropping of Edward Norton (which I’m sure my partner is very disappointed about) in favour of Mark Ruffalo. If you believe the statement put out by Marvel Studios, Norton was not rehired for reasons “rooted in the need for an actor who embodies the creativity and collaborative spirit of our other talented cast members”.

Read that as you will, whether it is a chemistry issue or because Norton might have tried to hog the limelight.

And Marvel Studios hasn’t stopped there. There’s already bigger plans stretching far in to the future when The Avengers is released, with sequels to all of the establishing movies already being planned out, with even a second ensemble movie on the drawing board.

It’s this forging forward which met Harry Potter and The Lord of The Rings with such great success, with the studio not waiting to see how the franchise was going as a whole of the results of individual movies, but instead jumping straight in to production of the next film. This sort of treatment keeps the ball rolling, and doesn’t allow the audience to forget all about the film series in the mean time.

And so after a long lead up of five films building the momentum until The Avengers finally over, and the film premiering this week, the excitement is there. With the entire first day of screenings sold out at my local cinema, the movie is shaping up to be huge.

Are you excited about The Avengers? Let me know below!

My Live Below the Line campaign is going well, with donations heading toward $200! If you enjoyed this article, why not contribute $5 to my campaign?

Prometheus: Return of a Childhood Favourite

Posted on by
Reply

Prometheus will be in cinemas June 1.

The last two movies in the Alien franchise were crossovers Alien vs Predator 1 and 2. While I enjoyed both, it’s needless to say that the franchise is missing some much needed credibility.

With the return of Ridley Scott and what looks to be a refreshing new look at the universe, it might just be getting that kick in the pants it needs.

Alien has always been, in opinion, one of the best film franchises around. I was probably a little too young when I saw the original for the first time, but ever since it’s been a love affair. The first two movies are some of my favourite pieces of film making. It’s a pity about what happened after that.

The issue with the next few Alien movies is that they tried to change things a little too much. Ellen Ripley was the immortal heroine of the first two movies, and suddenly found herself in mortal danger in the third film. I’m all for killing off main characters, but when your main character is already set up as the sort of person who, amongst insurmountable odds, just keeps on living, killing them off is a little dissonant. Resurrection was, in my opinion, slightly better, but the entire feel and aesthetic of the first movies was ignored.

But with original director Ridley Scott back, Prometheus could really put the series back on the map. What it does, and what I like, is that it downplays its Alien influences. While it’s clear that its set in the same universe as the first four movies, it tells a different story from the well-trodden path already established.

“The keen fan will recognize strands of Alien‘s DNA, so to speak, but the ideas tackled in this film are unique, large and provocative” –Ridley Scott

Supposedly a major part of the film is the Space Jockey race. You’d remember these bad boys from the single scene in the original Alien that one appeared in – a giant humanoid creature sitting dead in what appeared to be a pilot’s seat, with a huge gaping hole in its chest. Indeed, in the trailers available thus far, a Space Jockey can be clearly seen at one point. There’s also a few pokes at the xenomorphs, with what appears to be ancient drawings and murals containing the infamous figure of one.

What does this all equal? Huge amounts of excitement! Bring on Prometheus.

What are your thoughts on Prometheus? Drop me a line below!

At the time of writing this, my Live Below the Line total is sitting at $131, over 10% of the way toward my goal! Enjoy reading my articles? Why not leave a donation to the Oaktree Foundation as thanks!

Live Below the Line

Posted on by
2

It’s been far too long (and I do mean faaaaar too looong) since I’ve been involved in a bit of charity. But there Is a cause which has caught my attention. It’s called Live Below the Line. It challenges fortunate people from all over the world to join in with the 1.4 billion people living off less than two Australian dollars per day. Even doing this for one day seems like an impossibility, but Live Below the Line will have me doing it for five whole days.

It’s hard to imagine, in a country like Australia where we have subsidised education, a solid welfare system and a strong economy, that people in the world, and so many of them, have so little finances to live off every single day of their lives. I’m just in the process of completing the purchase of a $15,000 car. It’s hard to imagine that what I spent with my partner in one day could feed someone living at the extreme poverty line for over 19 years. It’s ridiculous.

So I’m taking up the challenge, to see just a small snippet of what it’s like for those 1.4 billion people living under the most extreme poverty. And it will be just a tiny snippet, with me still having access to clean drinking water and transport; as well as having a safe home to live in.

I’ve set myself an ambitious target of $1000 donations. I intend to meet this target, and beat it! If you are feeling generous, contribute money to this good cause.

All money raised will go toward improving schools in Papua New Guinea, one of the poorest countries in our region.

If you’d like to help me raise money for this good cause, my profile on the Live Below the Line site can be found here.

Sexuality in Video Games – Why Does it Matter?

Posted on by
2

It seems this is getting enough press as it is, but I thought I might weigh in with my own opinions on the issue. It appears that EA and Bioware are currently copping more than a bit of flak over the possibility of gay romance and relationships in their games. Mass Effect 3 and Star Wars: The Old Republic are the big offenders at the moment.

Mass Effect 3

Of course, they forget to complain all the violence and everything else, don't they.

Of course, it’s worth noting that this isn’t a new thing that Bioware is doing. Dragon Age: Origins had the possibility of same-sex relations. It was a good game, regardless of what your stance on the issue is. I didn’t suddenly turn gay after having played the game, and after engaging in a same-sex relationship in-game(Zevran, you rogue, you!).

But what games these options have or haven’t been included in isn’t an issue. The inclusion of same-sex relationship content in itself shouldn’t be an issue. Anti-gay groups are claiming that EA have been pressured into including this content in their video games by LGBT groups. I have strong doubts regarding this possibility. Bioware, the company on the end of the current criticism, have always tried to do things a little differently. The implementation of relationships in a game, straight or not, isn’t something that commonly occurs, so the bill could be pushed both ways.

While games may or may not feature outrageous technology, plots and a whole range of other weird and wonderful features, they do try to include some aspects of regular humanity. And their are most certainly LGBT persons in “real life”. Florida Family Association (according to an article over at Games Industry International) said that the children who had never thought any way other than as a heterosexual, even if they continued to think this way, would have to “deal with” LGBT characters, despite the fact that these gameplay options only appear if they’re sought out.

I’m sorry, but this is a load of bull. Do straight people, and children, have to constantly “deal with” friends in real life who are of a different sexual orientation? Nope. I have plenty of friends who have different orientations to my own. It has no effect on me. To think that it requires constant effort to deal with smacks of homophobia. Perhaps these “family” groups should be focusing less on attacking ways of life they do not agree with, and more time reacquainting with public opinion and the ways of thinking prevalent in the public.

What are your thoughts on the flak EA and Bioware are copping over their latest games? Let me know below!

On the change of name

Posted on by
Reply

As you’ve probably (not) seen, the name of this blog has changed. Gone is the wanky title and all of that tomfoolery, it’s back to basics. After all, I am just one of millions of bloggers worldwide.

It’s been a long while since this blog has seen regular updates. There was a time when I somehow managed to writing a post every single day. It worked for a while, but ideas began to run dry, and I found that I simply didn’t enjoy the process anymore. I had other more pressing issues at the time, such as filling in as store manager at the job I was doing at the time. I was also hired as the Entertainment & Technology Editor at University of Newcastle-based Yak Magazine, a position I still hold today. It’s a fun gig, but is something that takes up a lot of the time I’d spend aimlessly blogging here.

So hopefully from today forward the site will start to build up again. I’m basing future writing on my own interests, beliefs and rantings. Technology is the game, but expect a few forays into my other interests from time to time.

What do you want to see me write about? Let me know below.

Next Generation Consoles Locking Out Used Games

Posted on by
2

I’m only a new player to the used games market. Previously I’ve stuck to only buying new games, for no real reason other than that it was what I was used to. But I have, like so many other gamers before me, discovered the joys of saving a buck or two by buying a pre-loved game.

News came out a few weeks ago that the next iteration of the Xbox will lock out used games, effectively nullifying the trade. This was followed up over the last couple of days with information leaking regarding a similar feature in the next generation Sony console.

This was disappointing to see. I’m not going to go on about how the companies don’t have the right to do something like this. They do, and it’s no different to what already happens with some PC games. But I feel that (and feel free to call me a wishy-washy hippie for thinking like this) it’s breaching the good faith and trust which gamers place in the big companies.

I’m sure that it will force some gamers to transition from buying used editions to buying the full ones. But for others, it will lock them out of being able to play games.

I’m sure that the absence of being able to sell their new game later (or perhaps receiving a much lower trade-in price) will also influence some gamers in what they purchase, especially if they’re not entirely convinced they’ll like a title.

Sure, this move might increase the revenue flowing back to Sony and Microsoft. It probably will do that. But if there’s a backlash toward this move, or buying new games is out of the economic reach of some gamers, the industry will suffer.

Do you buy games used? What effect will this rumoured move have on you and your spending habits?

UPDATE: I’ve been told on Facebook, (thanks Mitch for the tip) that it’s rumoured that GameStop will consider as drastic action as refusing to stock any PS4 products, whether it be the console, peripherals or games.

Michael Pachter told website Games Industry International that such a move would hurt GameStop to the point where they might decide not to stock the game at all.

“It would … hurt GameStop a great deal. If Sony unilaterally did this, I could see GameStop refusing to carry their console, and sales of the PS4 would therefore suffer.”

Why Bethesda Should Think Long and Hard About an Elder Scrolls MMO

Posted on by
1

The amount of rumour flying out of the mill regarding an MMO version of popular games series Elder Scrolls is simply ridiculous. It’s tipped that more information, or an announcement, will be given at E3. Besthesda is quite openly hiring staff for an upcoming MMO project. It’s fairly easy to connect the dots there. Although fans of the games must surely be salivating, I’m not.

Why don’t we need an Elder Scrolls MMO? The question I beg to ask is why we do need one. There’s no doubt that the last three games of the series, from Morrowind through to Skyrim have increased in quality to the point where the latest game is contender for one of the best RPGs ever made. Bethesda and ZeniMax have truly outdone anything they’ve done before (and this is coming from someone who couldn’t put New Vegas down). It averages between 92 and 96 on its three different platforms according to Metacritic, and received a bucket load of awards and accolades, including a few Game of the Year awards.

But what extra value will an MMO add to the series? Probably nothing. The genre is already oversaturated with games, including a huge number of enjoyable free ones. How will an Elder Scrolls flavoured one break through the pack and prosper? While I could never accuse Bethesda of doing anything of the sort, resting on the series’ laurels will not be enough. To take a chunk out of WoW, the many free MMOs and the growing Old Rebublic audience, the Elder Scrolls game would have to offer something that has never been done before if it wishes not to be branded as a soulless cash cow.

Of course, I’m not an idiot. I know while games companies surely must enjoy giving fans what they enjoy, they are businesses, like banks and shops, and their primary motivation must be making the money to continue existing; paying wages and bills; and producing games. And an Elder Scrolls MMO would surely ensure Bethesda’s existence for a long time.

But maybe it might be time to think of the IP. Continue making excellent games to the same quality as Skyrim. Continue telling the rich story of Tamriel. Don’t make the mistake of trying to push out an MMO. Keep it simple.

I’m more than happy to be proven wrong, however. If we see an MMO Elder Scrolls that fits perfectly into the game world, and brings a further advancement of the story from the previous games, bring it on. I just wonder how possible it will be to do this within the constraints of the MMORPG format.

Let me know what you think! Tell me what you’re looking forward to in an Elder Scrolls MMORPG

What Australia needs for the boxing day test

Posted on by
2

I missed the end of the second test against New Zealand. I’d been at work all day, and when I arrived at my parents’ house for dinner, I said to my dad, “the cricket finished today, I’m assuming?”

He nodded in reply, but I should have noticed something not so right about it. I didn’t bother to ask for a few moment whether Australia had won or not. The truth came to light soon enough however, and my worst fears were realised.

Now don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against New Zealand. I’ve always been insistent on the fact that, while inconsistent and at times terrible, they are a team that has far more ability than most people see. Of course failing to use this ability is a whole different matter, but I digress. Despite this capability I see in NZ to win tests, it’s still a disaster that Australia collapsed to the loss they suffered in Hobart.

Normally I’m one to say that “change for the sake of change” is a stupid idea, but it has to come to the point where the changes are no longer simply to change.

Just look at what’s happened with Australia’s bowling unit. Injuries to the likes of Mitchell Johnson (who’s had a few too many chances himself), Nathan Hauritz and Ryan Harris have uncovered talent in Nathan Lyon, James Pattinson and Pat Cummins. The fact is that Australia does have a huge amount of talent waiting in the wings, despite the old belief that there’s noone ready to replace the big names in the team right now.

But the batting order has sat in disarray for some time. While Simon Katich, a consistent player at the top of his game, was sacked, Ricky Ponting and Mike Hussey have been given chance after chance after chance to pick up their game and have failed to do so. Brad Haddin hasn’t been the force he once was for a while. If one player in the team performs poorly for a patch, it’s possible for the rest of the team to help carry the weight. But when half the batting order is consistently not performing, along with inconsistency across the board from Michael Clarke and Phillip Hughes, the batting order is on shaky legs. Sure, a few might deserve another chance, but to allow an entire team to flounder is planning for failure.

Therefore, in line with every other cricketing know-it-all blogger on the internet, I’ve picked my XI for the Boxing Day test against India. India’s been a bit shifty in the international arena. They were well and truly beaten away against England. But they’re still in a much better place than Australia is coming into this series. If Australia don’t have the best possible team they can have, it’s probably they’ll be beaten again.

I’ve always thought that David Warner is a future prospect in all forms of the game. Sure, he might like to hit a few (or a lot) over the top, but if you look at his technique and how he bats, he does everything pretty right.

Ricky Ponting, Mike Hussey and Brad Haddin all need to go. They’ve had ample chances.

So here’s how my XI would look, assuming all players are fit.

Australia: Katich, Warner, Marsh, Clarke (C), Tom Cooper, Watson, Paine, Harris, Siddle, Pattinson, Lyon, Khawaja (12th Man)

Note: This article was written and queued before the commencement of the ongoing tour match against the Indians. Tom Cooper seems to have stated a strong case in that match. He’s definitely one for CA to watch.