• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

SPOILER: Metal Gear Solid V Spoiler Thread | Such a lust for conclusion, T-WHHOOOO

Status
Not open for further replies.
Again going back to that push/pull between toys and art.

MGS V is a great toy, its fun to play. Its very poor art; one's reaction to it probably depends a lot on what they wanted out of the experience.

This is a wonderful description of video games that I wish I thought of myself and why the medium as a whole is in some sort of arrested development.
 
Ok I am sure these questions have been asked 100 times and I apologize but what is this Mission 51 thing? Proven cut content? And why did it say Liquid was a clone of Big Boss at the end when they say the complete opposite in a tape

Mission 51 is a bunch of incomplete cutscenes and concept art put together on the collector's edition bonus disc, concluding the Eli/Mantis/Sahelanthropus storyline.

The tape said Liquid wasn't a clone because they were comparing his DNA with Venom, who isn't actually Big Boss. In the tapes Ocelot says he hypnotized himself to forget the real Big Boss, so he doesn't realize the discrepancy.

And what are the odds the Patriots would let their prized clone project escape into the jungles of Africa and become a child warlord? And that he'd then get found by Big Boss?

It really is a small world.
 
The tape said Liquid wasn't a clone because they were comparing his DNA with Venom, who isn't actually Big Boss. In the tapes Ocelot says he hypnotized himself to forget the real Big Boss, so he doesn't realize the discrepancy.

Are you fucking with me? Did they really use that bullshit plot device AGAIN?
 
This is a wonderful description of video games that I wish I thought of myself and why the medium as a whole is in some sort of arrested development.

Its a huge issue for game's criticism since most reviews only examine the toy side of the question, and are in fact largely incapable of looking at or analyzing art.

Proof is in the MGS V reviews; just try to count how many give perfect or near-perfect marks while explicitly discounting everything other than how fun it is to play. Like a toy.
 
sooo whatever happened to going back to camp omega?

And I was pretty disappointed that that one gamestop listing about how you get to go to Russia wasnt in the game. How could they even get misinformation like that
 
Ok I am sure these questions have been asked 100 times and I apologize but what is this Mission 51 thing? Proven cut content? And why did it say Liquid was a clone of Big Boss at the end when they say the complete opposite in a tape
Because you aren't playing as the real big boss
 
Its a huge issue for game's criticism since most reviews only examine the toy side of the question, and are in fact largely incapable of looking at or analyzing art.

Proof is in the MGS V reviews; just try to count how many give perfect or near-perfect marks while explicitly discounting everything other than how fun it is to play. Like a toy.

What are you talking about? I love anime, and comic books, and wrestling, and Fast and the Furious, and video game movies, and comic book movies, and action movies, and Michael Bay movies, and I haven't read a book since High School.... I'm totally qualified for this!
 
sooo whatever happened to going back to camp omega?

And I was pretty disappointed that that one gamestop listing about how you get to go to Russia wasnt in the game. How could they even get misinformation like that

Camp Omega was cut or an empty promise to begin with.
 
reminder all fobs hitting 0 nukes is impossible I promise you by day one some reviewer already had a nuke and signed off their last time.
 
Its a huge issue for game's criticism since most reviews only examine the toy side of the question, and are in fact largely incapable of looking at or analyzing art.

Proof is in the MGS V reviews; just try to count how many give perfect or near-perfect marks while explicitly discounting everything other than how fun it is to play. Like a toy.

The problem with trying to discount MGSV on the art charge, of course, is that art is entirely centered around subjective experience, so scores are idiotic to use to begin with if you go down that route. So I don't think this discredits the game in the way you appear to want it to.
 
reminder all fobs hitting 0 nukes is impossible I promise you by day one some reviewer already had a nuke and signed off their last time.

Well your base can be invaded even when you're offline though I'm not sure if you can build a nuclear weapon without creating a FOB.
 
Lmfao, first it was
"Wait for the day 1 patch"

Then it was
"Wait for 9/11"

Now it's
"Wait for TGS"
After that it'll be
"Wait for the playstation experience."

After that
"Wait for the VGAs"

After that
"Wait for E3."

It was funny at first but now it's getting kinda sad. :|
 
Its a huge issue for game's criticism since most reviews only examine the toy side of the question, and are in fact largely incapable of looking at or analyzing art.

Proof is in the MGS V reviews; just try to count how many give perfect or near-perfect marks while explicitly discounting everything other than how fun it is to play. Like a toy.
Gameplay matters most in a game. That's the "art" part of a game, something that differentiates it from other mediums. There is nothing wrong in giving MGSV a perfect score for its gameplay alone. There is plenty wrong assuming that gameplay itself can't be art.
 
The problem with trying to discount MGSV on the art charge, of course, is that art is entirely centered around subjective experience, so scores are idiotic to use to begin with if you go down that route. So I don't think this discredits the game in the way you appear to want it to.
Everything is subjective when the rating a game; not just whether you consider it good art, crappy art, or not art at all.
 
It's strange putting 50 hours into MGS5 without ever building a FOB because I could never connect to the servers while playing the game. Now, I could probably create one, but when I hit this "mission" things were offline. Yay!
 
It was funny at first but now it's getting kinda sad. :|

Metal Gear fans in general:
tumblr_mbhkbxr0Zl1qdb4cxo1_r1_500.gif
 
The problem with trying to discount MGSV on the art charge, of course, is that art is entirely centered around subjective experience, so scores are idiotic to use to begin with if you go down that route. So I don't think this discredits the game in the way you appear to want it to.

Everything about entertainment is subjective. I'm subjectively claiming MGS V fails as art. I believe strongly in my claim and I invite you to agree but I never said its objective truth.

Gameplay matters most in a game. That's the "art" part of a game, something that differentiates it from other mediums. There is nothing wrong in giving MGSV a perfect score for its gameplay alone. There is plenty wrong assuming that gameplay itself can't be art.

Not at all what I said.
 
Everything about entertainment is subjective. I'm subjectively claiming MGS V fails as art. I believe strongly in my claim and I invite you to agree but I never said its objective truth.

Hiding behind opinion and subjectiveness is garbage as I've said in many other topics.
 
Gameplay matters most in a game. That's the "art" part of a game, something that differentiates it from other mediums. There is nothing wrong in giving MGSV a perfect score for its gameplay alone. There is plenty wrong assuming that gameplay itself can't be art.
That's certainly your opinion, but many people feel quite differently. Gameplay can certainly be art, but I think the issue many people have with MGSV is that the gameplay is great (not art IMO), but many other aspects of the game were lacking.
 
Everything is subjective when the rating a game; not just whether you consider it good art, crappy art, or not art at all.

No, everything is not subjective when rating a game. However, when it comes to "art" or the "experience" of something, it's definitely the most subjective it can get when it comes to reviewing something.

The claim that reviewers only analyzed MGSV as a toy is a lie, anyway. Reading the actual reviews shows that people like IGN or Gamespot (10/10) mentioned things other than how "fun" it is quite a bit. IGN's review in particular highlighted emergent narrative (war stories) as the driving force behind the 10 even though they found the static narrative lacking.
 
If that's the case, then a group of people should go out and steal then dismantle all the nukes out there.

Maybe that's how you get that ending.

I seriously doubt 0 worldwide nukes is the trigger for that scene.

You'd have to have every possible nuke stolen and then dismantled without a single person keeping one or building a new one.
 
Everything about entertainment is subjective. I'm subjectively claiming MGS V fails as art. I believe strongly in my claim and I invite you to agree but I never said its objective truth.



Not at all what I said.
You said MGSV fails as art, but what metric are we using to determine art in a videogame if not the gameplay itself being the most important one?
 
How did I not notice earlier that this FOB thing, stealing nukes and stuff is very similar to what Zanzibar Land does.(went around stealing nukes from countries until they were one of the few nuclear powers left)
 
No, everything is not subjective when rating a game. However, when it comes to "art" or the "experience" of something, it's definitely the most subjective it can get when it comes to reviewing something.

The claim that reviewers only analyzed MGSV as a toy is a lie, anyway. Reading the actual reviews shows that people like IGN or Gamespot (10/10) mentioned things other than how "fun" it is quite a bit. IGN's review in particular highlighted emergent narrative (war stories) as the driving force behind the 10 even though they found the static narrative lacking.
Okay, I'm curious. How can one objectively rate a game?
 
I seriously doubt 0 worldwide nukes is the trigger for that scene.

You'd have to have every possible nuke stolen and then dismantled without a single person keeping one or building a new one.

Maybe it's for certain PF brackets or something. So only small pools of players that cooperate would get it. Either way, the whole situation is dumb, we don't even know if it's actually achievable in-game, so whatever :lol

Edit:
Also, if you watch the video, Ocelot says in the ACC after the "credits" that somebody broke the peace and made another nuke so you have to go after them, or something to that effect.
 
Okay, Kojima has always had a juvenile aspect to all his games when it comes to women, but Quiet is the first character in this series to make me roll my eyes with pure disgust.

She is literally being horribly tortured with shock rods at Mother Base, and the camera does all it can to focus on her breasts and crotch as much as possible. Same thing happens when life killing salt water is splashed onto her. I thought I was watching a snuff film during that scene.

She "dies" to a soviet soldier in mission 45, the soldier takes then her pants off and is prepared to rape her dead corpse. It's just an excuse to get Quiet into her panties. All so the camera can focus on her ass with slow mo shots every 10 seconds while she murders everyone. The transition from horrifying death/possible rape to sexy bad ass sequence in probably the worst tonal shift I've seen in an MGS game to date.


To top it all off, she's not even all that interesting as a character. She makes for an interesting plot/gameplay device, but I really didn't care when she had to leave Mother Base. She could have been so much more interesting, but we really didn't get anything with her.
 
Maybe it's for certain PF brackets or something. So only small pools of players that cooperate would get it. Either way, the whole situation is dumb, we don't even know if it's actually achievable in-game, so whatever :lol

Yeah I doubt it as well. The guy on twitter was adamant but wouldn't be the first time someone official from twitter was wrong about this game.
 
Hiding behind opinion and subjectiveness is garbage as I've said in many other topics.

I would say the simple fact that we're here, on a message board about video game discussion means we all believe at least somewhat in a shared, communicable appreciation that goes beyond individual - or subjective - interest.

But I just wanted to respond to that dude playing the "subjective" card.

You said MGSV fails as art, but what metric are we using to determine art in a videogame if not the gameplay itself being the most important one?

You're gone way too abstract; I don't even know what you're saying anymore. I can tell you I never divided gameplay and art. If you think I did you should take another read.
 
Okay, Kojima has always had a juvenile aspect to all his games when it comes to women, but Quiet is the first character in this series to make me roll my eyes with pure disgust.

She is literally being horribly tortured with shock rods at Mother Base, and the camera does all it can to focus on her breasts and crotch as much as possible. Same thing happens when life killing salt water is splashed onto her. I thought I was watching a snuff film during that scene.

She "dies" to a soviet soldier in mission 45, the soldier takes then her pants off and is prepared to rape her dead corpse. It's just an excuse to get Quiet into her panties. All so the camera can focus on her ass with slow mo shots every 10 seconds while she murders everyone. The transition from horrifying death/possible rape to sexy bad ass sequence in probably the worst tonal shift I've seen in an MGS game to date.


To top it all off, she's not even all that interesting as a character. She makes for an interesting plot/gameplay device, but I really didn't care when she had to leave Mother Base. She could have been so much more interesting, but we really didn't get anything with her.

Still trying to decide if Quiet or B&B's are worse. Probably Quiet, the rain scene gives her an edge
 
Damn, backlash is hitting this game hard. It's too bad the game ends on such a sour note that you're inevitably left feeling unfulfilled by it.

I was definitely disappointed in the story and the cut content but with some more time, I still feel like I played one of the best games of the year.

It's exactly how I feel. There are disappointments regarding story but this is by far my favorite game of the year so far.
 
It's not very different. What's your point?

I don't see why people are getting bent out of shape about it then.
IMO the game got good reviews because the gameplay is really good.

I didn't like the story because it had no impact on the overal story, didn't really explain anything and the twist was pretty pointless. The story was clearly in the background here and playing was more important. Which is very not MGSlike.

But as a non MGSfan playing the game without these expectations I think most would find it fine. And I think the reviewers were doing just that. Reviewing the game as a just another game and not an MGS game compared to the others.

Not sure if my point comes across
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom