Metal Gear Solid V: Gamescom Gameplay Demo

Doesn't make sense to give that high a score with that many cons, does it?

Also, wtf at "Disappointing graphics"?!?! I still think Ground Zeroes is gorgeous, and it's 60 fps ffs!
 
BossDarkseid said:
It doesn't have the poly count or texture size of some PS4/Xbox One games, but to me it's a moot point because it's not something the game would have, being a cross gen game and, if as many have said, the framerate is largely solid at 1080p/60fps...is that not impressive?
Click to expand...

To me it seems it is. Is it safe to say it will look like Ground Zeroes and all the trailers I've seen? If so I don't know what they're talking about.
 
BossDarkseid said:
I wonder what they mean by that? Perhaps there's not much room for upgrading characters etc? It seems sort of oxymoronic with "a well balanced gameplay and all around freedom", which to me, also seems at odds with repetitive situations because in a basic form a lot of missions etc are always samey but it's up to the player to approach how they want. Graphics, it's a crossgen game that's got a relative technical achievement, it's be expected.
Click to expand...

That reads to me like 40+ hours of doing the same things mechanically got tiresome. No staggered changes to the core ability set of Big Boss, unlike open-world games with levelling up systems (like Far Cry 3/4).

Of course that's just an interpretation, but I could understand that.
 
EatChildren said:
I'm most excited for Phantom Pain because the template for semi open ended gameplay with a strong set of character control was proved with Ground Zeroes. I love the idea of a game that feels distinctly Metal Gear in play yet offers a wider play space and cohesion between areas than previous Metal Gear games, all of which have been small in sized and partitioned behind area zoning. Ground Zeroes felt proper open, even with obvious objective locations bottlenecking you, as movement between areas had a strong sense of agency and freedom. That TPP is basically built around this idea is exciting to me, as it's still Metal Gear but something quite different and a logical evolution of the game design.

But I'm not without concerns too. The open world, though we've seen little, looks pretty boring to me with a lot of large, unused, and potentially useless playspace that also doesn't look particularly good. The footage shown has TPP look distinctly cross generation, lacking the scene density and convincingness of something like Wild Hunt, which too hard large stretches of nothing but managed to render them at high detail. TPP looks a bit empty and asset repetitive by comparison, which I guess is to be expected, as this is not a true current gen game unlike Witcher. So a part of me does worry that the choice to go open world wont be truly necessary in the long run, when they could have gone for a pacing similar to the past games only with much large and cohesive place spaces as evident in Ground Zeroes. Like a whole bunch of Ground Zeroes linked together through narrative.

I'm also a bit worried about Mother Base, largely because I feel RPG/stat systems don't have a place in action driven games like Metal Gear, but I remain optimistic because it looks better implemented than Peace Walker.

Narrative I'm neither here nor there. The story has long since gone off the deep. As long as it has its moments, very Metal Gear, I'm good.
Click to expand...

Good points.

I enjoyed Ground Zeroes and I think expanding what was established there into more of an open-linear approach a la Deus Ex would have worked really well for MGS. I don't want to trudge checkpoint to checkpoint through empty space with pointlessly shallow diversions along the way. Witcher 3 had more than enough of that for my taste, regardless of how beautiful the scenery was.

I feel the same about Mother Base. I have no interest in rpg/stat driven grind stuff in a game like MGS. I'm hoping there is no "true" ending locked behind pointless grind.
 
EatChildren said:
But I'm not without concerns too. The open world, though we've seen little, looks pretty boring to me with a lot of large, unused, and potentially useless playspace that also doesn't look particularly good. The footage shown has TPP look distinctly cross generation, lacking the scene density and convincingness of something like Wild Hunt, which too hard large stretches of nothing but managed to render them at high detail. TPP looks a bit empty and asset repetitive by comparison, which I guess is to be expected, as this is not a true current gen game unlike Witcher. So a part of me does worry that the choice to go open world wont be truly necessary in the long run, when they could have gone for a pacing similar to the past games only with much large and cohesive place spaces as evident in Ground Zeroes. Like a whole bunch of Ground Zeroes linked together through narrative.
Click to expand...

I don't fully agree, the African jungle area looks dense with foliage and it's running at 60 FPS unlike The Witcher 3 which runs at 30 FPS and struggle many times to hit the target.
 
Alienous said:
That reads to me like 40+ hours of doing the same things mechanically got tiresome. No staggered changes to the core ability set of Big Boss, unlike open-world games with levelling up systems (like Far Cry 3/4).

Of course that's just an interpretation, but I could understand that.
Click to expand...

Well, even if it's interpretation, that I could understand. Still seems kinda at odds with the buddy system and Mother Base research but eh. Some won't touch too much of that. I think as long as the game doesn't promise freedom then pushes you into too many situations with restrictions I'll be ok with it. On replays however, time will tell.
 
Punished_Snake said:
I don't fully agree, the African jungle area looks dense with foliage and it's running at 60 FPS unlike The Witcher 3 which runs at 30 FPS and struggle many times to hit the target.
Click to expand...

There have been shots of what seems to be the Africa open world in the trailers (such as the Gamescom 2015 one) that look absolutely barren.

I've seen more barren than dense overall, from the footage we've seen, I think. Hopefully the African jungle is a fairly large area.
 
Literally the only real issue is the grinding.

It seems like the french are most upset at the story/cinematics not being like MGS4, a clusterfuck.
 
Punished_Snake said:
I don't fully agree, the African jungle area looks dense with foliage and it's running at 60 FPS unlike The Witcher 3 which runs at 30 FPS and struggle many times to hit the target.
Click to expand...

My point of comparison is biased, as I'm playing on PC, where Wild Hunt's foliage really shines. But I also feel it's an artistry issue too. I adore CDPR's environment artists, where the footage of TPP does look a little bit like Far Cry 3 and 4 do to me; like they got the tree/shrub brush and swept it over terrain rather than topography and foliage placement having a very natural look to it.

But admittedly we haven't really seen a lot, and I'm eager to see what it looks like when I'm playing, not controlled demos.
 
Alienous said:
That reads to me like 40+ hours of doing the same things mechanically got tiresome. No staggered changes to the core ability set of Big Boss, unlike open-world games with levelling up systems (like Far Cry 3/4).

Of course that's just an interpretation, but I could understand that.
Click to expand...

I could see that. MGSV starts you off with all of Big Boss' moves and abilities, as opposed to the near-omnipresent XP/upgrade systems in modern games. In place of that, you have Mother Base, which is an awful lot of work for something that doesn't grant your character any significant new abilities. Pretty much everything you get out of the whole Mother Base element of the game will be useless for a reviewer who has to just plough through the main story as quickly as possible.
 
Alienous said:
There have been shots of what seems to be the Africa open world in the trailers (such as the Gamescom 2015 one) that look absolutely barren.

I've seen more barren than dense overall, from the footage we've seen, I think. Hopefully the African jungle is a fairly large area.
Click to expand...

Did you watch this gameplay video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEqdbKg3K8Y

This is the first time they showed gameplay in Africa and it looks dense in my opinion.
 
EatChildren said:
I'm most excited for Phantom Pain because the template for semi open ended gameplay with a strong set of character control was proved with Ground Zeroes. I love the idea of a game that feels distinctly Metal Gear in play yet offers a wider play space and cohesion between areas than previous Metal Gear games, all of which have been small in sized and partitioned behind area zoning. Ground Zeroes felt proper open, even with obvious objective locations bottlenecking you, as movement between areas had a strong sense of agency and freedom. That TPP is basically built around this idea is exciting to me, as it's still Metal Gear but something quite different and a logical evolution of the game design.

But I'm not without concerns too. The open world, though we've seen little, looks pretty boring to me with a lot of large, unused, and potentially useless playspace that also doesn't look particularly good. The footage shown has TPP look distinctly cross generation, lacking the scene density and convincingness of something like Wild Hunt, which too hard large stretches of nothing but managed to render them at high detail. TPP looks a bit empty and asset repetitive by comparison, which I guess is to be expected, as this is not a true current gen game unlike Witcher. So a part of me does worry that the choice to go open world wont be truly necessary in the long run, when they could have gone for a pacing similar to the past games only with much large and cohesive place spaces as evident in Ground Zeroes. Like a whole bunch of Ground Zeroes linked together through narrative.

I'm also a bit worried about Mother Base, largely because I feel RPG/stat systems don't have a place in action driven games like Metal Gear, but I remain optimistic because it looks better implemented than Peace Walker.

Narrative I'm neither here nor there. The story has long since gone off the deep. As long as it has its moments, very Metal Gear, I'm good.
Click to expand...

I don't think the large guard-free zones are anything to worry about. I've played enough open world games to know how engrossing that stuff can be. They don't need to look as good as the Witcher 3 to be good. There's probably enough guards patrolling those areas to at least keep you on your toes, anyway.
 
shocky2002 said:
Literally the only real issue is the grinding.

It seems like the french are most upset at the story/cinematics not being like MGS4, a clusterfuck.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't pay attention to the Jeuxvideo magazine review to be honest, even if it was a 20/20. In France, i think everyone is just waiting for the Gamekult and the CanardPC review, cause they'll take all the time they need for the review.
 
shocky2002 said:
Literally the only real issue is the grinding.

It seems like the french are most upset at the story/cinematics not being like MGS4, a clusterfuck.
Click to expand...

You haven't played it yet, so I don't know if it's fair to make that judgement.

None of the pros or cons in that list are surprising based on the impressions we have gotten from previews and an overall sense of what the game is in footage. There's a massive space between as many cinematics as MGS4 had and "50 hours to tell very little", so it could just be that the game is light on story, perhaps too light for the amount of control you are expected to get through.
 
I'd say these impressions fall in line with what I've expected. I think the world being really big is not going to be that important as we'll mainly be doing focused missions ala Peace Walker. It will be primarily the same few objectives recycled over and over again with small twists, made fresh by the fact that the AI change and we get more weapons through research. Story will be heavy in the beginning and the end, but throughout the game it will be fairly light.

I can see some fatigue setting in, but I think the systems will be replayable enough. I replayed GZ a lot, so I see this being fun. I definitely think fatigue will set in for a lot of reviewers, though.
 
matrix-cat said:
I could see that. MGSV starts you off with all of Big Boss' moves and abilities, as opposed to the near-omnipresent XP/upgrade systems in modern games. In place of that, you have Mother Base, which is an awful lot of work just for weapons and items, not significant new abilities for your character.
Click to expand...

Right.

A lot of the diversity of gameplay mechanics probably comes from high-level Mother Base upgrades, and those probably come with quite a lot of invested time in that part of the game.

So if you want a one hit dash punch you don't spend XP to unlock it, you equip it as a special arm. I could see that kind of thing hiding a lot of the mechanical richness.
 
Please if TPP has bad graphics then every single game that is not 60fps on consoles should get points reducted too.
 
EatChildren said:
My point of comparison is biased, as I'm playing on PC, where Wild Hunt's foliage really shines. But I also feel it's an artistry issue too. I adore CDPR's environment artists, where the footage of TPP does look a little bit like Far Cry 3 and 4 do to me; like they got the tree/shrub brush and swept it over terrain rather than topography and foliage placement having a very natural look to it.

But admittedly we haven't really seen a lot, and I'm eager to see what it looks like when I'm playing, not controlled demos.
Click to expand...

I played Witcher 3 on PS4 and the game looks great, but some trees models and grass in TW3 don't look very good especially the tree leaves, it is the density of the foliage and the wind effect that made it look great.But I got your point, Witcher 3 has more attractive art than MGS V.
 
stat84 said:
Please if TPP has bad graphics then every single game that is not 60fps on consoles should get points reducted too.
Click to expand...

That's not how it works.

Different reviewers will have different impressions. So to this person things like story and graphics were valued, where maybe the benefit of something like 60fps wasn't as important or obvious to them.

You just have to take these reviewers on face value and assume there isn't any malicious intent. The "disappointing graphics" were just something this particular reviewer found to be a negative.

Betty said:
Ha, you're right, Jeux Video Magazine gave MGS4 18/20.

MGS4 > MGSV guys.
Click to expand...

Review-wise I'm certain that will be what the reviews for both games will imply, even if it isn't the case, like with GTA 4 having a higher metacritic than GTA V.
 
Alienous said:
Right.

A lot of the diversity of gameplay mechanics probably comes from high-level Mother Base upgrades, and those probably come with quite a lot of invested time in that part of the game.

So if you want a one hit dash punch you don't spend XP to unlock it, you equip it as a special arm. I could see that kind of thing hiding a lot of the mechanical richness.
Click to expand...

The diversity not only comes from new items and weapons but is sort of the crux of why it's an open world game in the first place: your freedom to tackle objectives however you want. They've shown what, three different videos of beating the same mission in entirely different ways? You have so many different methods at your disposal that the game can essentially be a stealth game, action game, or any combination of the two despite the "limited" character abilities.
 
Alienous said:
That reads to me like 40+ hours of doing the same things mechanically got tiresome. No staggered changes to the core ability set of Big Boss, unlike open-world games with levelling up systems (like Far Cry 3/4).

Of course that's just an interpretation, but I could understand that.
Click to expand...

I guess but the way I see it, MGSV offers more gameplay options then FC3 or 4 totally leveled up can even dream of offering. Just cause you get them over time doesn't mean it's better.
 
Fancy Clown said:
The diversity not only comes from new items and weapons but is sort of the crux of why it's an open world game in the first place: your freedom to tackle objectives however you want. They've shown what, three different videos of beating the same mission in entirely different ways? "
Click to expand...

Six, plus variations on those.
 
Iceternal said:
One is a website the other one is a paper magazine.

And it's the same rating system as in the French school system.
Click to expand...

Oh interesting, didn't know that.

Betty said:
Ha, you're right, Jeux Video Magazine gave MGS4 18/20.

MGS4 > MGSV guys.
Click to expand...

jon-stewart-popcorn.gif
 
What I'm getting out of the story analysis (of it being straightforward and not crazy) is..

Big Boss is definitely Big Boss and there ain't a Raiden ruse
Quiet is probably not Chico
Skullface does exist, and he isn't a figment of BB's mind

..unless there really does exist a 'true ending' and the French guy didn't get it, IMO the above is very likely to true
 
Alienous said:
That reads to me like 40+ hours of doing the same things mechanically got tiresome. No staggered changes to the core ability set of Big Boss, unlike open-world games with levelling up systems (like Far Cry 3/4).

Of course that's just an interpretation, but I could understand that.
Click to expand...

Did MGS games ever have character leveling up system? Is it some sort of requirement for open-world game? Curious since I didn't play many open-world games.

I think the leveling up system for this game is more of your R&D stuff...you level up better gears, items, weapons. I think it's fine thing.
 
I think it'll be fine if the game is 40 hours long. I don't believe the "grindy" claims. Games with vastly inferior gameplay seem to manage "the grind" okay, so why can't MGSV, an open world that's probably at least as fun to play as single zones in MGS2/3 and thus vastly better than most open world games?

MGSV will probably be one of the first games to have an open world with gameplay that's as great, nuanced and deep as top-of-the-line linear games. I don't understand the concern at all.
 
This kind of thing is exactly why developers are so reluctant to go for 60FPS. The Last of Us on PS3 almost never hit 30, and it won best-looking game awards left and right. Shit like AC Unity on PS4 got lauded for its graphics, never mind that it ran sub-20 all day long. Meanwhile a genuine, 60FPS locked open world game is, "Meh, you can see the cross-gen roots".
 
Alienous said:
You just have to take these reviewers on face value and assume there isn't any malicious intent.
Click to expand...

No offense but I think that's terrible advice. If anything you should be overly cautious when reading reviews. There's just too much gift-giving and favors in that industry.
 
matrix-cat said:
This kind of thing is exactly why developers are so reluctant to go for 60FPS. The Last of Us on PS3 almost never hit 30, and it won best-looking game awards left and right. Shit like AC Unity on PS4 got lauded for its graphics, never mind that it ran sub-20 all day long. Meanwhile a genuine, 60FPS locked open world game is, "Meh, you can see the cross-gen roots".
Click to expand...

I'd take 60fps any day. I hated the fact that The last of us ran at ~30fps.
 
Just saw the same guy gave Watch Dogs a 19/20.

Well, that's it for me. This review is not important for me. Next.

matrix-cat said:
This kind of thing is exactly why developers are so reluctant to go for 60FPS. The Last of Us on PS3 almost never hit 30, and it won best-looking game awards left and right. Shit like AC Unity on PS4 got lauded for its graphics, never mind that it ran sub-20 all day long. Meanwhile a genuine, 60FPS locked open world game is, "Meh, you can see the cross-gen roots".
Click to expand...

So true.
 
Fancy Clown said:
The diversity not only comes from new items and weapons but is sort of the crux of why it's an open world game in the first place: your freedom to tackle objectives however you want. They've shown what, three different videos of beating the same mission in entirely different ways? You have so many different methods at your disposal that the game can essentially be a stealth game, action game, or any combination of the two despite the "limited" character abilities.
Click to expand...

I think Far Cry 4 is a good game to compare the two different approaches to game design.

Far Cry 4 presents the player with a lot of options, similar to MGSV. You can take down a base stealthily. You can take it down from a distance away with a sniper. You can take it down by storming in and going 'guns blazing'. You can lead animals into the base. You can silence communications before going in and killing everyone. You can take a plethora of vehicles, even an air vehicle, into the base (etc).

What Far Cry 4 does differently (seemingly) is that it layers its game mechanics as the game goes on, at a fairly natural pace. Your gameplay -> XP -> new gameplay mechanics -> more gameplay (...) .

So when you play Far Cry 4 you feel a lot more like a badass by the time you finish the game. You're grabbing people, dragging bodies, using guards as human shields, throwing knives, jumping on armoured enemies from above, walking through fire (etc).

Compare that to what MGSV seems to be doing. It looks like you are given all of your base mechanics as soon as you leave the tutorial. You can do things like pull a soldier off of a ledge and multi-chain takedowns from the get go, whereas these are upgrades in Far Cry 4. It seems that MGSV does have a similar level of additional mechanical diversity, but that it is given to you via Mother Base, rather than been something intrinsic to the game flow. Do you want more health? There's probably an armour for that you can develop. Fire resistance? There's probably a camo. One-hit CQC takedowns? Your bionic arm can be customized to do that.

So what you have is this element of the game (Mother Base), which is almost adjunctive to the core experience, dictating that progression of game mechanics. Because of that (particularly in a 'rushed' review) I could see how feeling like you aren't doing anything differently in hour 40 of the game, than you were in hour 2, could be a qualm someone would have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Metal Gear Solid Δ: Snake Eater - Gameplay Trailer
2 3
115
1K
Killer8 replied
Metal Gear Solid Delta Opening Intro Cinematic
2
90
1K
Liopleurodon replied
METAL GEAR SOLID DELTA Tokyo Gameplay Demo 20mins
37
3K
Rocco Schiavone replied
Metal Gear Solid Delta: Snake Eater: Special Guest.... Bomberman Trailer
3
101
Danny Dudekisser replied
Metal Gear Solid Δ: Snake Eater will have two camera modes
18
168
HRK69 replied
Top Bottom