You can select the guests, the setting (additional areas of the mansion open up during the game, such as the pool), whether or not it is a night or day party, and choose the general attire (you want a lingerie party in the mansion’s upper floor? Go for it).
Indeed, this is really the core of the game: throwing parties to get people to see how great being Hugh really is. To do these things you will generally need to throw parties – lots of parties. In any mission your main aim is to publish a magazine, but other objectives are thrown in to add some spice to proceedings, such as getting a certain person to appear on the cover, patching up staff relationships, or even paying some guy’s bail. Oh, and helping Hugh to become more famous.
Offering a mission-based campaign or a sandbox mode (for when you fancy doing it at your own pace), success in either comes through publishing a successful magazine and earning money. Shameless self-promotion aside, the game isn’t all about Hugh, per se, but about the Playboy magazine. In fact, if anything, the game is really nothing more than a celebration of Hugh’s life, with everything telling you how great Hugh is and what wonders he has achieved – there is a even a little thank you tucked away in the credits that thanks Hefner “for all he has done to better this country”. Playboy: The Mansion thrusts you into the shoes of Mr Hugh Hefner (literally, as you control an on-screen representation of him), father of the Playboy empire, and charges you with the task of emulating the respected man’s success. Is it a management, relationship or a party sim? More importantly, is it any good? Still, why is this relevant? Well, much like the fact that the magazine is hard to pigeon-hole, the game also suffers from a schizophrenic personality. In reality it is a bit of both, but doesn’t really fit in either category. not graphic enough), and the more prudish chap would probably be put off by the aforementioned naked ladies interrupting the interviews with the stars and articles full of social commentary. With its biting articles and broad coverage of topics, is it a magazine for the more sophisticated gentleman that just so happens to have pictures of naked women in, or is it one for the Dirty Macs brigade? The purists would argue that it is too arty to be porn (i.e.
0 kommentar(er)
