Unknown One
Member
The intro is a crawling simulator. It is crap.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Metal Gear Solid V: Dissociative Disorder (Super Bunnyhop review and analysis)
- Thread starter Zombie James
- Start date
Dick Justice
Banned
Really? I thought that about V, where the most interesting stuff happens in the intro.
Also, the only issue with MGS3's intro is the amount of radio chatter, which you can easily skip. It's not a forced tutorial, so that alone makes it far better than V in that regard. If you feel guilty for skipping the cutscenes and stuff, that's your problem.
semiconscious
Member
never thought i'd live long enough to see something i'd consider to be kojima jumping the shark. but, thanks to that scene, i apparently have. such a whole other level of pure awful / epic fail
...The fact that it's such a divisive game alone is gonna assure that it won't be easily forgotten. That coupled with the circumstances surrounding its troubled development and the fact that it's the last MGS directed by Kojima (and perhaps the last AAA game published by Konami). For better or worse, people will talk about it. This isn't a Portable Ops situation.
Eh, for what it's worth, it was the most engrossing opening of the series for me the first time I got through it. It probably won't hold up that well on repeated playthroughs, but that's true of most scripted sequences. Still, I'll always find it memorable for that first experience, and that's what will stick with me.
The only intro I don't like is Snake Eater's, too much information being thrown at you at the same time and way too frontloaded with codecs and cutscenes. As a beginner in that game I felt overwhelmed. It wasn't until much later that I learned how to properly use CQC because the opening did such a poor job of easing you into it. Yes, you can skip it, but unless you're completely uninvested on the story then you won't do that on your first playthrough, and that's usually the one that you'll remember the most, not the one where you skipped half the cutscenes and steamrolled through the game to get the platinum trophy or something.
Dynasty8
Member
I'll probably get a lot of shit for this, but does anyone else think this game got a free pass from critics?
Konami was flying out "fans"/reviewers to come out to L.A... This special event for the game has me thinking that these reviewers were wined and dined and received a great experience while they were there. I know that they were playing the game 8 hours a day, but at the same time, this isn't how reviews normally work...am I right? It's almost like Konami gave them work to do along with a free vacation. I don't mean to sound all jealous...I really don't care and I'm hoping they enjoyed their time in L.A, but I'm still confused as to why this game got 10's all across the board.
It makes me believe that those who attended were seduced into giving the game a perfect 10. Maybe it isn't Konami...maybe it's the reviewers being so hyped up about this actually being Kojima's final/farewell game that that they were entitled to give it a 10.
Either way...don't get me wrong, the gameplay in MGSV is fantastic...but the story, the pacing, the fact that it truly is incomplete makes me second guess what led to perfect scores. There were so many unanswered questions, so many plot holes, a lot of unnecessary things thrown in. Basically, I agree with the SuperBunnyHop video.
Konami was flying out "fans"/reviewers to come out to L.A... This special event for the game has me thinking that these reviewers were wined and dined and received a great experience while they were there. I know that they were playing the game 8 hours a day, but at the same time, this isn't how reviews normally work...am I right? It's almost like Konami gave them work to do along with a free vacation. I don't mean to sound all jealous...I really don't care and I'm hoping they enjoyed their time in L.A, but I'm still confused as to why this game got 10's all across the board.
It makes me believe that those who attended were seduced into giving the game a perfect 10. Maybe it isn't Konami...maybe it's the reviewers being so hyped up about this actually being Kojima's final/farewell game that that they were entitled to give it a 10.
Either way...don't get me wrong, the gameplay in MGSV is fantastic...but the story, the pacing, the fact that it truly is incomplete makes me second guess what led to perfect scores. There were so many unanswered questions, so many plot holes, a lot of unnecessary things thrown in. Basically, I agree with the SuperBunnyHop video.
Berserker976
Member
George nails it again. I'm baffled by all the glowing reviews. The gameplay is indeed excellent, but it's definitely not close to flawless. That, coupled with the train wreck that is the "story" in MGSV makes me think some reviewers may just have been caught up in the hype.
Or maybe they just put a very different level of importance on certain parts of video games than I do.
Maybe a bit of both.
Or maybe they just put a very different level of importance on certain parts of video games than I do.
Maybe a bit of both.
Serpens007
Member
Chopper drops get quicker by upgrading it. Not only that, but paying attention to the gameplay tips grants you the incredible discover of fast travel. It is really great to see how quick you can do some side ops just because of fast travel.
Even on Mother Base, box delivery fast travel only takes like 10 seconds. Oh yeah, horribly long.
Even without that, chopper drops takes like 30 seconds. That's far less that the amount of time other open world games takes with its "fast travel" or normal traversing like AC or GTA.
Even more, just use your menu screen and go to the ACC after completing a mission. Easy? Quite easy.
I strongly disagree with you.
Chapter 1 was incredibly well paced for an 40 hours game. It was an MGS game, period. Chapter 2 gets a little more weird in the mission structure, but I welcomed it, it made things unpredictable.
By the standards of its own predecessors it solved the problems of pacing MGS3 had at his start, which was slow as fuck. MGS4 with a terrible pacing thanks to the lenghty cutscenes, or hell, even the MSX games and MGS with the horrible backtracking.
huh? Let me see, I got:
A Palace, a Villa, an Oil Refinery, a Power Plant, Villages, Mountains, Rivers, Waterfalls, Swamps, A James Bond-esque villanous hideout, Mother Base... I'm sure I'm missing other small things.
By the standards of its predecessors, only MGS4 gave really a sense of different and unique location. Every other game has only one to three different ambients.
Strictly subjective.
I hated The Pain and The Fear in MGS3. In MGS1, the fucking tank, Ocelot, and the first sniper fight with its chunky controls. You can ask about MGS2 bosses... I liked them for the most part, but most people will tell you they suck. Same goes for MGS4. And Peace Walker? Yeah, you get my point.
We have pretty good boss fights here, that really gave you different ways of approaching. Hell, some of them you can even go through without a fight, like, you know A STEALTHY approach would be.
And the Metal Gear fight, nnnngh, that was fucking awesome.
So, by what you are saying, I get you wanted scripted scenes? Because I had some pretty heav shootout levels because things went horribly wrong during some missions. The game allows nearly everything you pointed out. I really think you played a different game.
Increase in enemy difficulty was also present. But balanced with the gadgets and buddys. Also, they reacted to what you do. Security Cameras? checked. Automated defenses? I don't see if they really fit, at least they are on MB for FOB.
This game really gives you variety. I fought tanks while riding a horse half naked with rocket launchers while listening to Rebel Yell. The next hour I was sniping. The next hour I was infiltrating. You get my point. It's all in your hands.
I can undestand you here, but it wasn't my case. Goals went from rescuing, to espionage, to sabotage, to assassination (with non-lethal possibilities) to strictly stealth approaches.
Every mission even has it's own little backstory. Some of them are mere contracts for Diamond Dogs, dirty work, other are part of the revenge story, other makes them both one and the same. Every preview cassete tape made that goal and that why clear.
"10/10" gameplay isn't just mechanic, but how the whole world of possibilities came around.
Those last two lines of your post are just so wrong :/
I'm feeling this game is really a case of "I've had fun for 60 hours, but the game is dissapointing" type of negativity.
Nameless
Member
FantasticMrFoxdie
Mumber
Well, it's more a tutorial
A shame the trailer/reveal spoiled so much of the intro. Lost a lot of impact for myself
Dick Justice
Banned
People generally expect more from a Metal Gear game.
A little off-topic (or not?), but it always strikes me as amusing how most fans now throw MGS 2 alongside 1 and 3, when for a time a lot of people wouldn't even dare put them in the same sentence together. It's really a case of vindicated by history.
It strikes me as even more odd how it's only now part of the "masterpieces" and how it does things so much better than later entries, when it's probably got some of the worst objectives of any MGS game for a considerable portion of the Big Shell chapter and some clunky boss fights (fuck Fatman). It has the most compelling themes of the franchise, for sure, and one of the most intriguing plots before MGS4 ruined the mystique surrounding the story and all the theories/interpretations it spawned, but flawless that game is absolutely not. I wish it was, because its highs are some of the highest I've experienced in a videogame.
It strikes me as even more odd how it's only now part of the "masterpieces" and how it does things so much better than later entries, when it's probably got some of the worst objectives of any MGS game for a considerable portion of the Big Shell chapter and some clunky boss fights (fuck Fatman). It has the most compelling themes of the franchise, for sure, and one of the most intriguing plots before MGS4 ruined the mystique surrounding the story and all the theories/interpretations it spawned, but flawless that game is absolutely not. I wish it was, because its highs are some of the highest I've experienced in a videogame.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
I don't think anything nefarious happened, but I suggested something similar earlier in the thread. Especially for the reviewers who went to review events, I wonder how much time they had to really chew on the game and exit the "honeymoon phase" that so many of us go through with games. And as I said, the reason I suggest this is that my impressions of the game after a few weeks to chew on it are different than they were at the very beginning.
I could be wrong but I think he put it pretty nicely when he said this game is probably for the mainstream audience and not really for hardcore MGS fans, generally speaking it sounded like. People who aren't really that familiar with MGS seem to be really in love with it, not that there's anything wrong with that because it is really fun to play. The only people who seem to be really disappointed are some MGS fans who were probably looking for closure and possibly a decently told story.
I don't think so. You're right in saying it took some time for people to appreciate MGS2 for what it was, but that already happened after MGS4 came out.
I don't think so. You're right in saying it took some time for people to appreciate MGS2 for what it was, but that already happened after MGS4 came out.
Primethius
Banned
This is incorrect. You should replace "hardcore MGS fans" with "story invested MGS fans."
I'm a pretty hardcore MGS fan. I don't care for the MGS story. I doubt I'm alone in this boat.
I used to be a stoy invested fan until MGS4 came out lol. Bought a ps3 for that tripe.
Well I've never heard of that before.
MGS2 came out in 2001, MGS4 came out in 2008. That's 2 main games and quite a lot of time for people to change their minds about it and doesn't really contradict what I said. Though I should probably specify that I refer to everything from gen 7 and onwards as "now" or "recently". PS2 and before is like some ancient history and there's no middle ground
I'm a hardcore fan and consider myself fairly invested in the story and characters of MGS and I still loved V.
Primethius
Banned
Is it so hard to believe? I like some of the concepts that Kojima goes for in his games. For those reasons, I enjoy parts of 2 and parts of 3 in terms of the story.
But his execution leaves a lot to be desired. A lot. If the gameplay in MGS1/2/3 wasn't so top-notch, I wouldn't be here.
RSB
Banned
You are definetly not alone.
Well, I used to care about the story too, but then MGS4 happened. Since then I'm only interested in the gameplay.
MGS2 came out in 2001, MGS4 came out in 2008. That's 2 main games and quite a lot of time for people to change their minds about it and doesn't really contradict what I said. Though I should probably specify that I refer to everything from gen 7 and onwards as "now" or "recently". PS2 and before is like some ancient history and there's no middle ground
Yeah that's why I replied, you said "now" so I assumed you meant after MGSV.
Yeah it is kinda hard to believe actually, it sounded a bit like an oxymoron when I read it. The story of these MGS games and the way it's told is probably the most important thing about the series, or at least as important as the gameplay. I mean there's literally hours and hours of cutscenes and codec segments in past games. The way people have been talking here recently seem to suggest that the narrative never mattered in MGS in the first place and so it doesn't matter if MGSV is lacking in that department.
Jangowuzhere
Banned
MGS2 came out in 2001, MGS4 came out in 2008. That's 2 main games and quite a lot of time for people to change their minds about it and doesn't really contradict what I said. Though I should probably specify that I refer to everything from gen 7 and onwards as "now" or "recently". PS2 and before is like some ancient history and there's no middle ground
I'm a hardcore fan and consider myself fairly invested in the story and characters of MGS and I still loved V.
I'm in the same boat.
I don't like this idea that only "hardcore" MGS fans would be disappointed. I consider myself a hardcore MGS fan in both game and story, and I think MGS5 is amazing.
Are we in agreement that the grossly overrated reviews of the game are due to the drama surrounding it? (Poor Hideo Kojima getting his name taken out of the box! and the falling with Konami). My mind simply can't process the crap I was reading in some review quotes I saw.
I saw reviews praising the open world for fuck's sake, and a lot of them ended with some fanboy garbage like "thank you Kojima for creating this". This is way worse than the GTAIV situation back in 2008.
I saw reviews praising the open world for fuck's sake, and a lot of them ended with some fanboy garbage like "thank you Kojima for creating this". This is way worse than the GTAIV situation back in 2008.
Definitely don't see how you could say MGS3 is slow but an act that takes 40 hours to convey maybe 2-3 major events is incredibly well paced?
I definitely get ya, and I am being a little unfair on criticizing variety, but I guess where it blurs with me is in the realm of infiltration methods. I can remember swimming through parts of Big Shell, or rapelling down a wall in Shadow Moses, or skirting precipitous cliffs and dark caves in MGS3, etc etc. My only real memories of infiltrating in MGSV were just "oh there's the entrance, guess I'll crawl my way in and shoot whoever comes near me."
Obviously there are ways to mix it up and maybe I'm just a boring player, but I don't really have any especially fond memories of inflitrations that felt really special or out of the ordinary.
MGS has definitely had its fair share of annoying bosses but man - The End, The Boss, the Harrier jet, Solidus, Metal Gear Rex, Ninja, etc!!!! For me, the Sehlanthrapous fight was okay but it just didn't feel like there was much of a theme to the fight, you just shot it with rockets until it blew up, no interesting openings or feeling of total intensity.
You're right, it does. I guess it's just hard to see the variety without the pacing - over such a long period of play it tends to blend together in my mind.
In the end you are mostly right about this. I don't mean to sound overly negative - I did get a good chunk of enjoyment out of this game - but in the end it feels like something is just missing. There's a certain sense of showmanship, pacing, and passion that seems absent in V, but present to varyng degrees in all the other games of the series.
the_batman
Banned
you crawl for maybe 5 minutes at most, bruh.
Felt way more than that. You are crawling while watching some npc's ass crack, then you crawl under beds where dumbass blind soldiers can't see 2 feet away from them, then you are limping, then you are crawling some more.
matrix-cat
Member
It was? The Chapter 1 I played had a bit of story in Missions 1 and 2, then filler missions with the absolute bare minimum story content to keep me interested until the
parasite outbreak at Mother Base
Huey gives up the location
Chapter 1 is terribly paced. I was dying for some kind of story check-in, or some tapes to listen to in the early-going, but the game was so stingy with that stuff until the very end, when all of a sudden every mission is unlocking like an hour's worth of tapes that it expects you to take your time listening to while also insisting that you go and fight the bad guy. Maybe ten or twelve out of Chapter 1's thirty-one missions are actually related to the overall story of the game; the rest is just context-free filler stuff like blowing up tanks for fifteen minutes or tailing one dude with a silly nickname to another dude with a silly nickname. Such a long stretch of nothingness, then a huge, overwhelming info dump right at the very end.
Sub_Level
wants to fuck an Asian grill.
And its crap.
And then the crap is multiplied by 2 when the game has a duplicate mission of the tutorial lmao
MaddenNFL64
Member
Yep, breath of fresh air, with all the damn "10/10 best ever" goin about. I enjoy the game, but the critics just glossing over every flaw and not even being remotely critical of this empty ass open world, bleh.
Primethius
Banned
Well, here's my perspective on the older games. I loved the gameplay and the boss battles of those titles. That was the thing I played those games for. I'm a huge fan of stealth games and I used to play both MGS and Splinter Cell quite heavily. The battle between the two for me always came down to the gameplay. The story was a non-factor.
With that said, some of the story segments were pretty good. Every now and then, I'd watch a cutscene and think to myself, "man, wouldn't it be cool if the game's story was as good as that throughout?" I'm thinking particularly of the fight with the Boss at the end of MGS3. It was the highlight of the game in terms of story and characterization. But it never maintains that quality, nor that consistency. MGS2 had bits and pieces of this near the end of the game too. Were the majority of those games like that, my opinion would be different. Alas, it tends to be a bunch of boring codec calls that I fast forward through and nonsensical cutscenes that I wish I could skip but I don't because it's my first playthrough.
MGS4 might be the pinnacle of everything I disliked about the story/narrative in the series. I absolutely hate that game. If I made a list of the worst games I've ever played, MGS4 would be up there simply because the drop off in quality from 3 to 4 was astounding. The game was a giant, fat waste of time. Awful story telling and some ridiculously boring, nonsensical cutscenes plagued the entire game.
None of this is a defense for MGSV's story mind you. However, I'm a believer in the less is more mentality in this case. The less of all the complaints outlined above, the better game the game is. It's disappointing of course that more people aren't enjoying it but because this is the MGS (hell, even Splinter Cell) dream game for me in a lot of ways (outside of the lack of boss battles), I'd have it no other way. I have about 120+ hours in the game so far, which is more then my completed Witcher 3 run. And I have no intention of stopping anytime soon. That's just how much I value the gameplay.
Moon_frogger
Member
the open world isn't full of distractions and collectible trinkets in every hill and valley...on purpose. It's there to facilitate a ground breaking mission structure. it's there to steer you towards the mission areas, which are so close together it's almost trivial. I guess if you're trying to play this game like skyrim then yeah.....but it was never trying to be skyrim or some ubisoft collectathon. It's an ope world done properly, in service of the game, not just for the sake of an open world.
Well you can believe it. I went along for the rides, but it certainly wasn't why I stayed or did multiple play throughs. It was the mechanics, depth, secrets and variety that kept me coming back.
Does that excuse this oddity that is MGSV in that regard? Nope. But I appreciate the level it's raised itself to as far as mechanics go for a stealth game. A new standard to me. The stories are terribly written crap for the most part, in my eyes. I personally can't understand why anyone would be about that stuff first, and gameplay second, but what do I know. I did actually like 3 for the most part, though. The Boss was great, and the story was much more cohesive and less butt than usual. I have a magical way with words, I know.
Jangowuzhere
Banned
Basically
I don't understand why the world needs pointless distractions. I thought we were all getting tired of the standard open world "sandboxes" that most AAA games are these days.
Well you're perspective is completely understandable, I just assumed whenever people said they were invested in MGS they meant they were fully invested, both story and gameplay. But yeah MGSV does have great gameplay, it's just a bit lopsided to me. A balance between both would have been even better than what we got I think.
Multiple play throughs or not, to me the narrative was always more memorable. MGSV doesn't even have any standout boss fights.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
I think there's an interesting question in play with the psychology behind what happened with some reviews for sure. Speeding through the game because of review events, pumping through the game to meet a review deadline (problematic with so many games other than this as well), MGS fanboyism, the “Fuck Konami" and "poor Kojima"memes respectively, all those things could have played into the reviews. I'm not willing to stick my neck out and say one single thing affected every review, but there certainly might be something there. And even though I feel the game was a overrated, I'm still not decided on how much I think it was overrated.
I disagree with this 1000%. The open world seemed entirely to me to be for the sake of having an open world. I never felt like the game would have suffered from having smaller sandbox areas like GZ, or hell, even just shrinking the damn boring-ass map down.
family_guy
Member
If they hadn't removed Ground Zeroes from the final product I would have rated this game higher. That's kind of the issue. The best this game has to offer was sold to us separately a year ago. The open world does nothing for the game. It's like if you took the Hitman games and before you could start your assassination attempts you had to drive to the airport, wait for your flight to depart, your flight lands, then you have to either get on the bus to leave the terminal or go to Hertz car rental and get your rental, and then drive to the assassination target's last known location...only to find he left with his military detail 15 minutes ago.
ComputerBlue
Member
I remember seeing all the comments on the first day about how it was the best intro of all time, which I disagreed on, I thought it was just okay, hated the crawling though. Then someone said the intro did in an hour what COD would do in 5 minutes and I couldn't agree more.
I've ripped this game apart, it's a shit Metal Gear, it really is, but it's still a good game, a great game actually. But I never want to play that intro again because it was just too long, with not enough happening.
MaddenNFL64
Member
There's absolutely nothing between outposts, it's lifeless repeated landscapes, with giant unscalable walls, which is shit design for a supposedly open world. I didn't ask for trinkets, or chests, but fucking something has to go on, please. Snake is the only catalyst for change in the entire damn game. No cross faction battles, no wandering patrols meeting in the middle of nowhere, duking it out. Nothing.
If Kojima wanted to steer us to objectives, cut the open world out, and build a bunch of ground zeroes sized levels.
Anyway, just glad someone with a voice said what had to be said.
Inferno313
Banned
The best part of this almost immediate backlash is that the (correct and appropriate) backlash to the backlash will be starting sooner than later.
Hellwarden
Member
Game is a solid 7 out of 10.
Fantastic gameplay that is critically undercut by a terrible narrative and boring objectives.
Fantastic gameplay that is critically undercut by a terrible narrative and boring objectives.
Primethius
Banned
I can't agree with this at all.
I've been doing a lot of perfect S-rank runs (no items, all objectives, no knock-outs) and I've really gotten an appreciation for the map size.
A recent one I'm doing is the Red Brass mission (7 I believe) and I essentially have to set-up and prepare all over the map if I want to execute the mission well. Shrinking the map would probably eliminate a few options and might actually make the way I'm trying to pull off the mission impossible.
And that's ultimately the way I see the map size of this game. It's the mission sand-boxes, but connected into an open world. I love it.
I hope so. Can't even believe there's backlash. This is one of the few games that got crazy good reviews and I actually feel like lives up to them.
Agree with all of this. Funnel us through story to the new objectives. Giant open levels still, but cut the open world. It really does nothing for the game if it isn't alive with factions, and chances for something meaningful outside of mission specific areas.
It's my game of 2015 so far and I have a hard time thinking something will top it. I still have major issues with it, though.
2 Slice Toaster
Member
History repeats itself, MGS5 will win GOTY for 2015. Twice.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Red Brass is the one with three commanders right? Looking at the zone for the mission:
I don't recall anything about the mission that makes me think the mission wouldn't have been just as good if it was a sandbox level of just that zone in the screenshot. Why do I need the rest of the empty map? It's deadweight.
Exactly. The open world does nothing to feel alive or particularly meaningful. The missions that need a big AO would have been served just as well by having large, open levels rather than the open world.
Similar threads
- Poll