-
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
tryagainlater
Member
....I have no idea how that's possible. I caught a million of those things trying to get all the other animals.
semiconscious
Member
...Can't say I agree with this opinion of mgs3 having so much more gameplaywise. You go into every base shooting it up because that's how YOU are playing the game. I don't disagree on some of the repetivness, but even then I'd say the gameplay is easily more varied in mgsv, it has to be given how much of a time sink it can be. I think you're being too dismissive of all the gameplay elements mgsv has to offer.
Good, you captured it alive.
Lol, yeah. Yoiu can basically set up 8 traps in Africa, and six of them usually are for gerbils
SJRB
Gold Member
Yeah these "omg perfect satire" posts are kind of lost on me; the guy is 100% right.
SJRB
Gold Member
Because they were at a special Konami-sponsored "boot camp" where they had 40 hours to plough through the entire game. Most of them had the chicken hat on to keep things going.
Needless to say not many of them played the game the way it was supposed to be played. If you blast through the story missions in 40 hours I'm sure your experience is totally different and you won't notice half the disjointed garbage that goes on.
Thus once again proving how irrelevant and unreliable videogame journalism is.
Dangansona
Member
I completely agree. Personally this is one of my favorite open world maps ever because it is a) realistic. The real world isn't gull of stuff to do every ten feet, and b) not bloated. I'm so incredibly sick of the Ubisoft formula that I basically don't buy open world games anymore.
Also at the end of the day I liked the story. Part of it was because I had low expectations the whole time from GAF and reviews that I was actually surprised how much story there was in the end. And what I really love is the direction and visual fidelity of the cutscenes. I want more story just so I can see more of that.
Are Metal Gear Solid games officially done now with Kojima leaving and Konami doing whatever the fuck they're doing?
Is there a chance for a Kojima-less Metal Gear game? As much as I love the guy and his role in crafting the series, I wouldn't be completely against playing an entry not made by him and maybe was a little more grounded.
Is there a chance for a Kojima-less Metal Gear game? As much as I love the guy and his role in crafting the series, I wouldn't be completely against playing an entry not made by him and maybe was a little more grounded.
Yeah, but why should I trust the review of someone using the chicken hut in order to beat the game? I mean, I never used it but I read that it pretty much kills the stealth in the game.
What's the purpose? It's really stupid, like reviewing a game by checking a Youtube gameplay of it, lol.
Konami still intends to make more metal gear. They're hiring for it currently.
Sumio Mondo
Member
Eh, I'd rate the previous game's locations way above anything we get in MGSV. Shadow Moses (MGS1), Groznyj Grad (MGS3), Arsenal Gear (MGS2), Camp Omega (Ground Zeroes) the Tanker (MGS2) and South America [especially the Vista Mansion] (MGS4) are all way above anything in MGSV.
I really, really miss indoor infiltration. Big time.
What about the guys who didnt attend the boot camp and still rated it highly. I love how they constantly get ignored because they dont fit in with the "tainted reviews!" narrative.
Depends on what you believe.
We got a rumor last week saying that they were done with all AAA game development except for PES.
This was later denied by a customer service rep who, in reality, probably had no idea.
But all of this also goes against Konamis own announcement a few months ago saying that theyre hiring for new MGS.
I don't know if a) makes for a good open world. GTA V's open world is realistic, Assassin's Creed Unity's open world is realistic. As far as territory occupied by a foreign army The Phantom Pain's open worlds are strangely peaceful when you aren't initiating anything, so I wouldn't say it's any more realistic than any other open world.
b), it is bloated, it just has the decency to doll out its content at a more considerate pace. If the Side-Ops in the game were available from the start, like is often the case in an Assassin's Creed game, the map would be a mess of icons.
But I do understand where you're coming from.
Don't forget Peace Walker's Costa Rica. Now that would be an open world I'd want to explore.
BIONIC-ARRRMMM!!
Member
"Skull Face, you're a legend in the eyes of those who clean up the battlefield."
I swear to god Twitch chat can be a goldmine sometimes lmao.
I swear to god Twitch chat can be a goldmine sometimes lmao.
SolidSnakex
Member
I've put a 100h into and and did all the Side-Ops and never got tired of it. Like I said, there's so many different ways to approach missions that even doing Side-Ops can always feel fresh. For awhile I was using Quiet to distract enemies during SO's where I needed to tank out armored units. I'd crawl along while the soldiers on foot were going after her/she was taking them out and Fulton the tanks or trucks out. But I lost her after Mission 43, which meant that I needed to employ knew strategies for those missions since neither D-Dog or D-Horse are particularly helpful in those instances. So I finally started incorporating Airsupport in missions, which isn't something I did at all before, and it completely changed my playstyle.
I'd argue that knowing the area makes it even more fun because you can essentially set traps for enemies. That's also where the experimentation of different ideas come in since you know how to bail out if it fails. Like the guy that figured out that throwing smoke grenades into the back of a jeep can help you infiltrate a base.[/QUOTE]
Jim Sterling didn't play it at a Boot Camp. He played it at his own pace and still gave it a 9/10. This whole concept of of someone liking something more than you must mean that they're being disingenuous, didn't play it right, or were paid off is irritating.
Sumio Mondo
Member
I'm just one of those old school Metal Gear heads who much prefers indoor infiltration to the outdoor infiltration we've gotten now.
I do think Peace Walker had more varied bases and interesting level design than anything I found in MGSV, though.
Marty-esque
Member
I have played the old games many times. They are, of course, great, but that doesn't make me realize the gameplay in mgsv isn't great. They could have definitely had some more cameras and other challenges as well as more tighter areas like camp omega.
KOMANI
KOMANI
But the side ops were fun too
-kill 6 soldiers with one bullet
-take out all the Fulton balloons before they reach the sky
And there were tons more perfect stealth variations
Regarding Quiet, I agreed that showing her murder an innocent nurse to begin with completely coloured my take on her character.
As for my post yesterday, I can't believe I forgot to include
-The 'forced slow walk' section, where we didn't have money for a cutscene but let's pretend that this is 'interactive', yeah?
I had that all typed out and everything
I was really talking about the 'listen to all conversations' missions, which drive me crazy, and where you absolutely do have to stay within 100m, and that have multiple bugs affecting them, like prisoners breaking the scripting if you get too close. I mean, the objective is the exact same as Ass Creed. To listen to guys talk, and find ways to stay close enough without causing an alert.
As for my post yesterday, I can't believe I forgot to include
-The 'forced slow walk' section, where we didn't have money for a cutscene but let's pretend that this is 'interactive', yeah?
I had that all typed out and everything
I was really talking about the 'listen to all conversations' missions, which drive me crazy, and where you absolutely do have to stay within 100m, and that have multiple bugs affecting them, like prisoners breaking the scripting if you get too close. I mean, the objective is the exact same as Ass Creed. To listen to guys talk, and find ways to stay close enough without causing an alert.
TwoDurans
"Never said I wasn't a hypocrite."
Did you check with Richard Gere?
tryagainlater
Member
It's good enough for Sn4ke.
Zombegoast
Member
There is really no point of going gun blazing unless you get bored and decide not to build MB. I have played this game in stealth in my 100+ hours because it's simply the best option to go through any base in the game a long with using DD/Quiet and mark the enemies on screen to avoid or distract them and fulton the ones I want. The only "Variety" in the game are the ones in Chapter 2 where you have to play in Total Stealth(Which is still pretty easy) or that one mission where you start naked. Outside of that, the only variety is limiting yourself.
Well, Jehuty arm kinda falls under that. Also, the Stun Arms thunderbolts at Max level reminds me of the Tanegashima in another way.
Vincent4756
Member
So what does the water pistol do then?
TheDarkKnight774
Member
Just finished it. Loved it. The reveal is crazy Kojima at his best. Best gameplay in the series that never ever got old.
#3 in the series for me. I wish we could have seen the real chapter 2. But konami said send it out and it shows.
#3 in the series for me. I wish we could have seen the real chapter 2. But konami said send it out and it shows.
Agree to disagree. I think there's no way you can say that mgs3 has more variety than mgsv gameplaywise. And I love mgs3.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
I think saying, "but that's how you play it" is being reductionist when dealing with a legitimate critique of the game.
It's weird to me that in "the greatest stealth game ever," there's hardly any incentive to play stealthily. The game is an absolute cakewalk whether you go in guns blazing or stealthily. The only real advantage stealth has is in regards getting soldiers Mother Base. But by the second chapter I had pretty much developed what I wanted to try. So I just shot everyone guns blazing with no trouble and basically lost nothing. Compare to this first 10 hours of the game which was full of tense risk-reward calculations as you infiltrated bases. The game has a terrible difficulty curve.
That's just a side issue regarding difficulty though. The bigger problem is that the stealth gameplay doesn't evolve. Sure, the enemies start wearing helmets and gas masks. But for the most part, as far I saw, they usually kept doing the same thing. So now they were in the same spots with slightly less accessible weakpoints. The AI don't become smarter or harder. I barely saw any CCTV cameras in my gametime. I came across a minefield only a handful of times and they were really obviously laid out. In this regard, it wasn't just that the game was "easy," but that it became boring because the novelty wore off. Sure I can change what weapons I used (and I did), but that's not a good substitute for the game not changing towards me.
People have laid out suggestions before in this thread and I think they were good ones. Better patrolling routines for soldiers. More "traps" like claymores. Randomly patrolling helicopters. More simple attributes for soldiers (brave, coward, stupid, etc) to make behavior a bit unpredictable. There are all kinds of ways they could have made the stealth gameplay interesting throughout the game.
The boot camp is just a small part of the potential ways reviews could have been "tainted" or perhaps more nicely worded, "biased."
For one, you had reviewers storming through games at the review event in like 40 hours, some of them supposedly making extensive use of the chicken hat. That's one thing.
For another thing, we had the meme of "Poor creator genius Kojima" and "Fuck Konami" floating around.
And the key problem which is really the crux of the issue all around is reviewing practices in general. As far as I can tell, it seems like reviewers are under great pressure to finish games quickly to make sure their review hits when the embargo ends. That means reviews in general are rushed. Over the past few years I've become convinced that when trying to come to a conclusive "score" for a piece of media (TV, movies, games, music, whatever) we need to take serious time to digest it.
KOMANI
KOMANI
The buddies ruin the game as well. With the exception of dhorse and maybe dwalker.
When you know where the enemies are, or even if you can be saved from an alert, the tense gameplay from the first few hours vanishes.
I'm not a big fan of reflex mode either but I suppose it's necessary... Just not in FOBs.
When you know where the enemies are, or even if you can be saved from an alert, the tense gameplay from the first few hours vanishes.
I'm not a big fan of reflex mode either but I suppose it's necessary... Just not in FOBs.
I would say that you can only play the game one way is reductionist if anything. The game is definitely not above criticism. Also I don't agree with there being no incentive to play the game stealthily, I don't agree with that AT ALL. That alone is reflective of the fallacy that I was highlighting in my post. Compound this with the buddies that lend themselves to either playstyle. So I don't think I'm being reductionist at all.
Haunted
Member
I think the stealth gameplay is very good, with the various possible approaches. It's very clear to me that the devs were greatly influenced by games like Farcry (2, 3) and the standardised controls of western-developed third person shooters. And it shows by providing the FAR AND AWAY best core gameplay and controls in the series so far.
I think the AI is as stupid as any other in games and don't really understand the praise for it. It's fine and doesn't really get in the way, but I never felt surprised or impressed by the dynamic AI routine and it's still obviously easily outmanoeuvred when you've played any 3D stealth game in the last decade.
In fact, D-Walker substantially improved the game for me by providing both faster traversal and a brute force option for when I felt like it.
I think the AI is as stupid as any other in games and don't really understand the praise for it. It's fine and doesn't really get in the way, but I never felt surprised or impressed by the dynamic AI routine and it's still obviously easily outmanoeuvred when you've played any 3D stealth game in the last decade.
I mean you can turn off either to make it harder for yourself.
In fact, D-Walker substantially improved the game for me by providing both faster traversal and a brute force option for when I felt like it.
KOMANI
KOMANI
I do have it off, but I don't think it's fair that soneone who doesn't can infiltrate my base easier. FOBs should be an even playing field.
I don't think I share this opinion.
A lot of the 'limitations' in terms of the enemies are intentional, I imagine. Things like "better patrolling routines" don't translate well when you don't have vision cones and narrower play spaces; when you scout out a base you have to expect that your enemies will be more or less where you saw them, otherwise the stealth gameplay would easily devolve into almost getting seen and hoping you don't jump into the view of another enemy, or even being put into predicaments where being spotted is almost a certainty (with too many patrolling variable for a player to reasonably manage). How many times would you have been spotted by an enemy vehicle driving past a base if it didn't make such a noticeable noise? More elaborate enemy patrols would be like that, x10.
I would have liked to have seen the claymores used a bit more; as I understand it enemies are supposed to place those in the path they think you infiltrated from, to keep the player from choosing the same direction constantly, and having them more aggressively do that would have been good.
Randomly patrolling helicopters, again, random elements can fuck with stealth quite significantly. I would have liked to have seen them more regularly, outside of Main and Side Ops, though.
The soldier attributes wouldn't work; you have to have some sense of certainty in how a soldier responds to your actions, and too many different types would just end up restricting how you play. Batman: Arkham Knight has that problem. The game toys with it, with some PMC soldiers refusing to be held up, but I think that's about as far as it should go. The emotions on the battlefield concept from MGS4 might have been worth exploring, but it probably would have been a gimmick more than anything.
There's a really delicate balance to making a fair stealth game that The Phantom Pain manages well, and a lot of the perceived shortcomings are for the greater sake of the gameplay.
I actually really appreciate that the game checks me for my playstyle. Like "Oh so you just gonna tranq and kill my men?get a load of this". Forces me to engage the enemy up close which also increases heroism(not that it matters). Or instead of adapting my gameplay, I can deploy my men to take out their supplies. I have not encountered noticable increase in surveillance cameras though.
crazyrabbits
Banned
- silently shorts out enemy equipment (radio transmitters, antennas)
- can be used to momentarily distract soldiers/Skulls
- causes Quiet to have a unique animation when fired at her
You are practically describing every single MGS game ever made. This isnt an MGS5 issue...its an MGS issue. They always focus on player choice and, because of that, the enemy routines and level design try to cater to both while never excelling at either.
Id even argue that the gameplay systems present in MGS5 are better than any MGS game before it for the simple reason that you cant just run to the next area and lose any chances of bodies (asleep or dead) being discovered.
All youre doing is listing things that neither of us can prove or disprove. Its all conjecture. Every last bit of it.
Is it REALLY that hard to believe that people actually like this game?
You dont agree with the reviewers. Does it really have to be more than that? Does there really have to be some sort of review "scandal"? Or can we just chalk it up to differing opinions and priorities?
Maybe im part of the problem. Im not a fan of this games presentation or story or character development or all of the other issues discussed to death in this thread. But at the end of the day, Id still give this game a 9. And I really dont know whats wrong with that.
I would like the enemy equipment response to how I play so much more if reverting it wasn't limited to Combat Deployment missions. Whose idea was that?
MGS3 allowed you to sabotage enemy rations and ammo depots. That should have been a constant option within the open world. "I think I'm going to infiltrate and blow up their defensive equipment storage before I take on this mission". That would be a meaningful way to interact with 'side' content facilitated by an open world, much more than harvesting plants.
MGS3 allowed you to sabotage enemy rations and ammo depots. That should have been a constant option within the open world. "I think I'm going to infiltrate and blow up their defensive equipment storage before I take on this mission". That would be a meaningful way to interact with 'side' content facilitated by an open world, much more than harvesting plants.
Yeah, you're wanting too many things out of an open design. The things you're naming would make it less fun, not more. Understanding those rules in a more closed area makes sense. Making it hard for the sake of being hard with this design would fall flat, I think.
The Subsistence missions do a good job of making me feel like what I was doing before was pretty easy. I appreciate that. There's plenty wrong with the game, but I do think overall, it's the best stealth I've played.
TheBoss1
Member
Just beat the game last night. This is (END GAME SPOILER)
. I'm still digesting it and don't know how to feel about it but I've come to the conclusion gamers want a straightforward and predictable story. It's no surprise that the 2 most revered games in the series had the most simple plots, especially MGS3. Trying to circumvent player expectations will cause an uproar (MGS2 & MGSV). I personally find the entirety of MGSV to be one of the best games ever made. Besides the story, everything is head and shoulders above the other games in the series. From cutscenes to the less anime voice acting to gameplay, I love it.
With that said, the story is definitely incomplete. I'm calling it now: Konami cut content from the game so they can sell it as DLC so expect some story content to be sold in the coming months. Remember when Kojima said he wanted to release the game in episodic format? After all the game is set up like a TV series and Konami wants to maximize their profits so what easier way than to cut shit and sell it separately. That $60 game will now become a $100 game.
MGS2 all over again. People wanted to play as the legendary protagonist but you played as a nobody aka Medic (Raiden)
With that said, the story is definitely incomplete. I'm calling it now: Konami cut content from the game so they can sell it as DLC so expect some story content to be sold in the coming months. Remember when Kojima said he wanted to release the game in episodic format? After all the game is set up like a TV series and Konami wants to maximize their profits so what easier way than to cut shit and sell it separately. That $60 game will now become a $100 game.
- Status