You're basically in it.
But really, it's still too early for a LTTP thread of that kind. I would guess it would get instantly locked since both this and the OT are still very active.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
SPOILER: Metal Gear Solid V Spoiler Thread | Such a lust for conclusion, T-WHHOOOO
- Thread starter MMarston
- Start date
- Status
You're basically in it.
But really, it's still too early for a LTTP thread of that kind. I would guess it would get instantly locked since both this and the OT are still very active.
SolVanderlyn
Thanos acquires the fully powered Infinity Gauntlet in The Avengers: Infinity War, but loses when all the superheroes team up together to stop him.
We have enough MGS threads as it is.
Edit: The spoiler thread seems to be a decent mix of reactions, actually. From "I love the twist" to "I hate the twist" to "The story was shit" to "The potential was there" to "The story we got was great" to "You need to listen to the tapes" to "The tapes are bullshit" to everything in between. Lots of conflicted reactions.
The three constants I've noticed in people's reactions are:
-Airtight gameplay
-Disconnect between mission design and story
-Inconsistent pacing and story placement
Edit: The spoiler thread seems to be a decent mix of reactions, actually. From "I love the twist" to "I hate the twist" to "The story was shit" to "The potential was there" to "The story we got was great" to "You need to listen to the tapes" to "The tapes are bullshit" to everything in between. Lots of conflicted reactions.
The three constants I've noticed in people's reactions are:
-Airtight gameplay
-Disconnect between mission design and story
-Inconsistent pacing and story placement
bistromathics
facing a bright new dawn
lol totally. though, is everyone on board with it being a pretty well-playing game? I know someone made a thread with "side-missions: the game" as the title at one point, but the game itself I thought was actually pretty good. I mean I am sad that the boss fights were basically all rocket-launcher-fests, I do think that was a dropped ball considering the variety in previous entries. But still, I thought it was a pretty great gameplay experience.
CheesecakeRecipe
Stormy Grey
There was actually a thread for this already, which was promptly locked as there's already been a lot of MGSV threads floating around as it is.
RedAssedApe
Banned
meh i liked the twist. but yeah this does seem like the backlash twist with all these inside jokes and such making fun of the game lol
MegaSackman
Member
I find it weird that the reviews aren't more polarizing... it should be 10s and 7s all over the place.
At least with the Raiden stuff it wasn't the stinger at the end and it was well integrated into the story. To me the raiden backlash seems to mostly come from just wanting be solid snake and not this whiny dude. Looking back it at though you understand its purpose.
I don't think MGSV will have a similar occurrence on how people view it years from now. The twist just brings up more questions than anything else.
RedAssedApe
Banned
testament to the gameplay
Someone early up summed up MGSV as a fun toy to play with and I think that fits. Even ignoring the story stuff because it doesn't bother me that much, there are plenty of gameplay mechanics that are just annoying. Pretty much all of Mother Base is annoying with it's F2P grinding aspects and how the open world is a waste.
But I can't front, I've put over 140 hours into the game and got 100% so it's damn good toy.
ComputerBlue
Member
Fulton simulator.
Really though the gameplay is fantastic. But even that can be picked apart to shit. You build MB, for what? Fulton soldiers, for what? You have hundreds of weapons, how many will most people use? I play mostly stealth no kill, so I haven't even touched 90% of the weapons. The intros and outros of every mission, being dropped off by a helicopter ever damn fucking time even when you want to clear side ops, or you can run or ride across a big ass, boring map. Cover system is mediocre since it's pretty touchy. Sandstorms are more annoying than useful. All that time spent in menus, sending soldiers out on missions is as pointless as sending out Assassins in AC games. In fact, this is an Assassins Creed game, without the good climbing mechanics since its hit or miss on what you can climb on, what you can't and when Snake will decide to slide down a 2 foot boulder. Instead of collecting shanty songs and feathers you collect soldiers and blueprints, cars and tanks. Waiting for shit to develop in fucking game time, give me a break. This is just a bigger, prettier Peace Walker with a shittier story and worse boss battles. Miller ever flaps his gums in your ear all the time, just like PW.
MegaSackman
Member
Yeah but... I don't know, Destiny had a terrific gameplay too back in 2014.
MGS V has amazing gameplay and some great missions but many of them are simple, boss battles are flat, and some design decisions could be more punished by the press, so... is not that is perfect, right?
The gameplay itself saved this game in alot of ways. That is one of the reasons the scores aren't as over the place as people would expect.
Like I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the people were like "this story is shit....but hey at least I can have a horse literally shit on a guy at call"
edit: to be honest MGS is one of the VERY few series that is often given a pass on ALOT of shit that other titles could have gotten wrecked on. I realized that back in the reviews for MGS4 days.
Like I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the people were like "this story is shit....but hey at least I can have a horse literally shit on a guy at call"
edit: to be honest MGS is one of the VERY few series that is often given a pass on ALOT of shit that other titles could have gotten wrecked on. I realized that back in the reviews for MGS4 days.
Actually, I honestly feel like most reviewers let a lot of the games issues slide by. Opinions are opinions, but there comes a point when personal opinion supersedes objectivity. MGSV is not a game that is without flaw, and anyone who awarded it 10/10 should be ashamed because they simply didn't do their job.
For example; I absolutely LOVE Drakengard 3, but there's no way in fuck I would have ever scored that game above a 7. Critics need to set personal opinions aside and rate all aspects, rather than "oh i love the gameplay: 10/10!"
What bothers me most about the twist is that there was no lead up. You're just back to playing the epilogue again. Theres no big boss hits his head and comes to this realization, or big boss has intel of a doppleganger half way around the world, or miller questioning if he is the real big boss, since Eli doesn't share the same genes.
TheTylerRob
Member
I went through the entire game using the tranq pistol, silenced assault rifle (idk which one), one rocket launcher and the rocket punch that I barely used. I thought the gameplay was actually really repetitive. I played around with all of the more interesting options but none of them were as effective as just sneaking up behind guys and grabbing them or getting tranq headshots. I wish I enjoyed the game more but there really isn't anything else for me because the story was bad and there aren't any interesting unlockables. Do later side ops get more interesting? They seem to repeat more or less.
MegaSackman
Member
You know, even if I could agree with you I could understand a 10, even several, what I find weird is that is mostly 10s and 9s... it's like everyone from the press have the same opinion of the game,
SolVanderlyn
Thanos acquires the fully powered Infinity Gauntlet in The Avengers: Infinity War, but loses when all the superheroes team up together to stop him.
Any other game with characters named "Big Boss" or "Big Mama" or a 5 minute ladder climbing sequence or a strange juxtaposition between anime and reality with super gruff soldiers alongside red and white haired unrealistic looking people would likely get lambasted in one way or another, yes
ComputerBlue
Member
They're all the same.
Extract this dude part 15.
Eliminate tank unit part 12.
Clear mines part 10.
Rescue prisoner part 47.
X
Xpike
Unconfirmed Member
It's the Metal Gear brand, plus I bet most reviewers weren't real big fans of the series so they don't care about the lack of plot or charm from this game. They just see a big open world with more options than most AAA games and go tenouttaten
The Fulton had its day on the PSP.
The game should have focused on gaining troops via your actions, like supporting different sides of a battle. Something more natural than attaching balloons to every soldier.
It should be a case of Big Boss' actions on the battlefield inspiring loyalty in soldiers. "Complete this Side-Op and gain favour with ________" sorts of things.
A more grounded approach to this game, like a hybrid between the first two acts of MGS4 and MGSV as it is would have been cool to see.
The game should have focused on gaining troops via your actions, like supporting different sides of a battle. Something more natural than attaching balloons to every soldier.
It should be a case of Big Boss' actions on the battlefield inspiring loyalty in soldiers. "Complete this Side-Op and gain favour with ________" sorts of things.
A more grounded approach to this game, like a hybrid between the first two acts of MGS4 and MGSV as it is would have been cool to see.
I might be in the minority, but I think this is the most replayable metal gear title. Most of us have already spent more hours on this game then we have in the single player of any one of the previous titles. And since the gameplay is largely fragmented and mission based, I can sections I enjoy, or break up the sessions. It's not like the story is any good anyways
I'm sure I'd replay missions.
I'm talking about the grind of starting up a new save file.
TheTylerRob
Member
Ugh, so all you unlock is more grindy bs.
The Silver
Member
To this day I don't understand how MGS4 didn't get shitted on for those chapter installs.
ComputerBlue
Member
Couldn't agree more. I was thinking the same thing the other day about how great it would have been if there were 2 or more fractions out in the open world battling each other. Instead it's just one common enemy.
I loved that in MGS4 if the militia saw you kill the PMCs they would be on your side, or if you dropped ammo for them they would thank you. But if you attacked them, they'd all see you as an enemy.
MegaSackman
Member
I thought about that too but... if you're not a fan and you play this even with so little or sparse story, wouldn't you think that the story is the most stupid thing as it can be? turning it into some low point for the game? I feel that this game has more problems that Batman Arkham Knight.
Don't get me wrong, I loved the game and I think I rank it middle in the series, and I'm probably aligned with a 9 score but I see a lot of flawed aspects in the game and find it surprising the whole unanimous love from the press.
bistromathics
facing a bright new dawn
All valid points. I think there's tons of great games where people (myself included) want or expect better things out of, though. At the end of the day, you get what you get, and I really don't have a high patience for stuff that turns me off. The amount of hours I have put into the game and the number of times I've been like "eh, I don't need to do this side mission but what the hell...lets roll, Quiet!" is staggering. I was sure I was done with the game but I logged in yesterday to do some base management and ended up playing it all day.
edit: the f2p stuff is definitely annoying, but there is still totally something there. the urge to just do a few more dispatch missions hits hard. and tbh it really didn't go as hard f2p as I feared. More like it tried to pull f2p mechanics into a normal game. Which I understand any resentment for. But I do think it is a viable mechanic to be exploited...not sure MGSV did the best job of that, but it really isn't microtransactioned to hell and back. Which I thought was totally a possibility.
Glitchesarecool
Member
How many reviewers actually sunk the time into the game to get to the story twists? I suspect most made it to 31 at the most. The gameplay eats up so much time and is so much the focus that one could easily do what happens with Platium games: don't focus on it, the game is that good.
Trouble is that this game has to fit into an existing timeline, and looking at it on a deeper level is what opens up the cracks. The game is amazing, I love to Fulton dudes and found the grind of materials and GMP minor. (Though passed a certain point, I just used CE to save some time and effort because I didn't want to participate in FOB). That is the point most reviews are focused on.
The discussion over how the game sours requires so much time investment that it's unreasonable to expect many reviewers to get to that point. Plus, it might not even matter to that particular reviewer. This game, mechanically, deserves all the praise it gets. Hell, I say the story is acceptable to good in Chapter 1.
I can only speak to Giant Bomb members actually completing the game and none of them seemed to think the story detracted from the gameplay.
some of them are legit challenging though which is good. Red Tank vs Fulton...FIGHT!
My post wasn't directed at anyone. But I dont think I'd mind the grind that much. I'm a bit of a minimalist. I spend money on developing shit that I don't plan on using. I'll get around to using some of those tools mainly to fuck around.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
The bold was a big problem for me. I quickly sunk into a routine with my stealth approach within the first five hours once I learned the systems. Once I got equipment like the suppressed tranq sniper it got even worse. Sure, the game throws some hitches your way with soldiers getting helmets, gas masks, body armor, flashlights and night vision goggles. But never did I feel truly at a loss or like I needed to scramble to find innovative solutions. Actually that was one thing that surprised me during my time with the game: just how easy it is.
That's not to say the innovative solutions/approaches are not there. I'm sure if you're a creative gamer, the myriad of weapons could be a hell of a lot of fun. But I'm just not oriented that way, so I probably missed out on using 85-95% of the weapons and equipment.
A lot of the other issues you raise I feel are pretty valid as well. The occasional inability of Snake to walk up a small ridge or rock is just aggravating. The cover system is just bad and probably led to messing up my stealth runs more than anything else in the game. The helicopter thing I might have let slide, but the problem became that the map was so boring, empty and repetitive that I didn't want to stay in the field and run across the map. It was a chore to traverse the world, and no, the cardboard box fast travel is not a good excuse. So I'd finish a sideop, go back to the ACC and need to get dropped off again. I saw that intro too many damn times.
I'm glad people are enjoying the game. I certainly got my money's worth with like 60 hours of gameplay. But I also sold it off as soon as I got the real ending. It definitely might end up in my GOTY list but I don't think it is my actual GOTY.
I think the very core gameplay is really excellent. Of course in my mind, that's ignoring everything around the gameplay like Mother Base, the boring open world, mission structure, etc. But at a core level? Yeah the gameplay is really good.
That said, I'm still kind of surprised and annoyed at how much of a free pass the game's existing issues had.
MGS4 also had half-hour long cutscene breaks and dissapointingly short gameplay segments. The only all-around great metal gear solid game was the 3rd one.
It's definitely NOT a 10/10. It's got lots of problems beyond just the normal little open world issues (wonky context sensitive prompts, boss sliding down small hills all the time, etc.).
The overall pacing and presentation is atrocious. You can't even really argue it's presented in the way it was to be less obtrusive and heavy-handed with the storytelling since (a) you still have to listen to it to unlock later missions; and (b) the story presented in the cut scenes is only barely coherent without the tapes to flesh it out.
The base management is slightly better, but the timers and necessity for grinding fuel makes what would've been a pretty fun little management element into a chore.
Lastly, side-ops start to feel same-y after you've done a few dozen of the them. The challenge missions that are inexplicably included in Chapter 2 would have been much better as side missions to break up the extract/destroy rut you end up in.
---
The core gameplay really saves MGS V from being a major disappointment. It's the best in the series. But even that can only go so far. I can't help but think that this would have been much better if the open world was scrapped and the game was just a sequence of bases like Camp Omega and the major bases from TPP.
This being a spoiler thread, I think the focus here is the story and how bad it is especially for those invested in the series for many years. Even then some people like the twist or don't mind that it's not story heavy compared to previous titles. From a purely gameplay perspective this is the most refined metal gear title ever. There are some strange game design choices for sure. I like this game more than mgs4, personally. But id also have been harsher on mgsv than most reviewers.
bistromathics
facing a bright new dawn
That's kind of a good point. I mean it was neat that it was an open world, but I definitely never played it like an "open world game" until I'd already beaten it and happened to have a couple side missions right next to each other.
MegaSackman
Member
Agree, 4 is probably the worst numbered one.
PedroPanache
Member
I feel like I've played the video game version of The Life of Brian. The real messiah is off doing cool stuff somewhere else and I'm stuck here with Venom and Expository Ocelot. Venom, you're not the messiah, you're just a very naughty boy.
ComputerBlue
Member
That's 100% besides the point though. You can hate or love MGS4 as a whole or for whatever other aspects, but my argument is that in 5 you only fight one single enemy, just dudes standing around guarding some random outpost for no reason at fucking all.
How great would it have been if there were enemies fighting one another. That would not only create a larger dynamic to how you approach certain outposts or bases, but it could have also created some amazing random events in a barren open world. More so, it could have used what MGS4 built, is that soldiers would be on your side if they saw you attacking their enemy, just like in MGS4.
Disagree. 4's ridiculousness was pure Metal Gear, and the gameplay was so varied. Agreeably, the game didnt force you to us most of the mechanics, but they were there.
RedAssedApe
Banned
a review is an opinion though. if the reviewers thought the gameplay was so good it transcends the other things mentioned as flaws (i.e. story) i don't see any problems with that. 10/10 doesn't mean a game is perfect. coming from the other side, a lot of sites gave TLOU perfect scores and you see plenty of people saying that they loved the story but the gameplay was average.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
As someone who has only played about half of MGS1 and knows only the barest of details regarding the plots of the other games: yes.
Which is disappointing. There have been other series where I've jumped into them late but still felt impacted and drawn in. Didn't feel that here.
these ideas...characters....story beats.."move your controller over to the other slot", etc
Like on paper THIS ENTIRE series...looking like all sorts of crazy shit to the point you have to question the mind of the people who came up with it....and hell even in execution, it still looking a little funny but yet here we are.
I will most likely come back to play missions. No way in hell am I redoing the entire game from scratch.
MegaSackman
Member
You know what's weird? I can even accept someone saying that MGS 4 is the best Metal Gear ever (not saying that's your case), even if I consider it the worst, but I couldn't do that with 5... maybe I don't feel it like a proper Metal Gear... I don't know what it is.
I'm pretty sure the embargo for that game prohibited reviewers from discussing the extent of the installs.
- Status