Support NeoGAF

[Anuson.Phan]

I understand your disappointment but I cant say I fully agree, especially at the "insulted" part which I believe you said it sarcastically more, rather than literally. But you can be sure a lot of people considered MGS2 "insulting"" believing that this was the final Metal Gear and they now have to make sense of it, when the game left almost everything completely vague in its ending. Not until MGS3 and MGS4 were released, was until MGS2 became to make sense and earn the approval of a lot of people who hated the game before.

While MGSV is certainly not as complex and confusing as MGS2 was, it was never supposed to be confusing. It cant be confusing, the period in which the game takes plays doesnt give much room for Kojima to offer something like MGS2 as far as the topic we are discussing. MGSV didnt aim to confuse, imho it aimed at completing a full circle and what I liked about MGSV is that it has ripple effects towards the entire saga and characters in various ways. You come out of MGSV and you now realise in a sense what really went on with Big Boss and Venom Snake. Who was the villain and who died, how he ended up with 2 fortresses, how he came back to life and how operation intrude came to be.

You come off MGSV and you get a new perspective of the characters you met throughout the saga and the opinion you had about them. You get a sense of how much Hal was similar, yet different to his rather asshole dad. His acts in all previous MGS become even more heroic after you see what his father was.

You see how Ocelot's loyalty to Big Boss had him starting to mess with hypnosis and all that stuff to convince himself that Venom is BB and then become liquid through the same operation.

Or how Zero got sick and even then tried as hell to keep BB alive because he still believed he can mend his relationship with him.

And then there is Miller and the other characters that had ripple effects throught the series.

Apart from mission 51 the game imho does a good job of tying things up.

Yes the presentation lacks, and the pacing is really bad. But I believe this was inevitable due to the mission structured gameplay decision that Kojima made at the beginning. And yes tapes are the new codec and while it is a lot of times boring, it does offer a lot of important story info.

My point is I get the disappointment and the frustration, but I believe most of it is coming from the initial explosion. Once the dust settles in, and people start watching what each game does for the entirety of the story we call MGS saga, they will perhaps appreciate it more for what it is, and not for what people hoped or wanted it to be. Just like MGS2.

One thing I really appreciated in MGSV is the way the plot twist incorporates the player into the Saga by breaking the 4th wall. Its not like I wasnt expecting the twist. But the way it was handled, I appreciated it, hearing Kojima in a sense telling me that I am a part of MGS Saga and thanking me for all the years we were together on this trip. It was a glimpse of his genius, to me.

Am I fully happy with MGSV narrative? No, of course not, in fact I have a lot of objections myself and I enjoyed other MGS games more than V in terms of story. And certainly this is not some grade A writing, but it is not the "trash" people make it sound to be either. The core of its story fits, makes sense concerning the timeline, ties up quite a few things that were forever remaining a mystery and provides a decent send of by saying a big thank you Valkyre/Big Boss.

BRAVO

 

[Demoskinos]

that mission was just pure bullshit. the inability to return to ACC at all the first time you're forced into it was an awful decision. I didn't find it super hard, only took a few retries but man, not being able to return for your loadouts like the rest of the game was a bummer.

The even bigger bullshit is how it just arbitrarily ignores stealth camo and the chicken hat. Granted yes it would be super cheese to just be able to run up to the tanks and extract them without getting shot at but the fact that is the ONLY mission in the game that ignores them is just bizzare.

 

[LiK]

I understand your disappointment but I cant say I fully agree, especially at the "insulted" part which I believe you said it sarcastically more, rather than literally. But you can be sure a lot of people considered MGS2 "insulting"" believing that this was the final Metal Gear and they now have to make sense of it, when the game left almost everything completely vague in its ending. Not until MGS3 and MGS4 were released, was until MGS2 became to make sense and earn the respect and the approval of a lot of people who hated the game before.

While MGSV is certainly not as complex and confusing as MGS2 was, it was never supposed to be confusing. It cant be confusing, the period in which the game takes place doesnt give much room for Kojima to offer something like MGS2 as far as the topic we are discussing. MGSV didnt aim to confuse, imho it aimed at completing a full circle and what I liked about MGSV is that it has ripple effects towards the entire saga and characters in various ways. You come out of MGSV and you now realise in a sense what really went on with Big Boss and Venom Snake. Who was the villain and who died, how he ended up with 2 fortresses, how he came back to life and how operation intrude came to be.

You come off MGSV and you get a new perspective of the characters you met throughout the saga and the opinion you had about them. You get a sense of how much Hal was similar, yet different to his rather asshole dad. His acts in all previous MGS become even more heroic after you see what his father was.

You see how Ocelot's loyalty to Big Boss had him starting to mess with hypnosis and all that stuff to convince himself that Venom is BB and then become liquid through the same operation.

Or how Zero got sick and even then tried as hell to keep BB alive because he still believed he can mend his relationship with him.

And then there is Miller and the other characters that had ripple effects throught the series.

Apart from mission 51 the game imho does a good job of tying things up.

Yes the presentation lacks, and the pacing is really bad. But I believe this was inevitable due to the mission structured gameplay decision that Kojima made at the beginning. And yes tapes are the new codec and while it is a lot of times boring, it does offer a lot of important story info.

My point is I get the disappointment and the frustration, but I believe most of it is coming from the initial explosion. Once the dust settles in, and people start watching what each game does for the entirety of the story we call MGS saga, they will perhaps appreciate it more for what it is, and not for what people hoped or wanted it to be. Just like MGS2.

One thing I really appreciated in MGSV is the way the plot twist incorporates the player into the Saga by breaking the 4th wall. Its not like I wasnt expecting the twist. But the way it was handled, I appreciated it, hearing Kojima in a sense telling me that I am a part of MGS Saga and thanking me for all the years we were together on this trip. It was a glimpse of his genius, to me.

Am I fully happy with MGSV narrative? No, of course not, in fact I have a lot of objections myself and I enjoyed other MGS games more than V in terms of story. And certainly this is not some grade A writing, but it is not the "trash" people make it sound to be either. The core of its story fits, makes sense concerning the timeline, ties up quite a few things that were forever remaining a mystery and provides a decent send of by saying a big thank you Valkyre/Big Boss.

PS: Something that I type after every MGS is finished. This game, like MGS4 and all other MGS games established beforehand, really exposes Solid Snake as the ultimate Snake. As the one who didnt succumb to his genes, memes and vengeance. He was the weakest Snake genetically, but the strongest in heart and spirit. He was the one who suffered the accumulation of what his father/brothers had to suffer, and yet he was the one to keep going forward, to remain pure, to keep fighting not for his ego or personal goal, but the greater good. MGSV like all previous MGS games is , in a meta-way, an ode to Solid Snake. The best of them all.

Edit: for a few typos and the PS.

what a good post. I agree, this game changed my views of Big Boss. turns out Solid was the best one and that MGS4 being the end of the saga with Solid was the definitive end to the series.

 

[eso76]

Ground Zeroes is the better game.

Sure

 

[MG310]

So...did Liquid Snake just never meet Big Boss?

Spent his entire life hating him then died while being used by Ocelot to attempt to save his comatose body from the Patriots.

 

[Regulus Tera]

I only watched a MGS2 play-though and never looked into the lore/behind the scenes. Was Raiden supposed to be some meta commentary in that game?

Watch the whole thing: https://youtu.be/T-2YuPGYabw

 

[Berserker976]

I understand your disappointment but I cant say I fully agree, especially at the "insulted" part which I believe you said it sarcastically more, rather than literally. But you can be sure a lot of people considered MGS2 "insulting"" believing that this was the final Metal Gear and they now have to make sense of it, when the game left almost everything completely vague in its ending. Not until MGS3 and MGS4 were released, was until MGS2 became to make sense and earn the respect and the approval of a lot of people who hated the game before.

While MGSV is certainly not as complex and confusing as MGS2 was, it was never supposed to be confusing. It cant be confusing, the period in which the game takes place doesnt give much room for Kojima to offer something like MGS2 as far as the topic we are discussing. MGSV didnt aim to confuse, imho it aimed at completing a full circle and what I liked about MGSV is that it has ripple effects towards the entire saga and characters in various ways. You come out of MGSV and you now realise in a sense what really went on with Big Boss and Venom Snake. Who was the villain and who died, how he ended up with 2 fortresses, how he came back to life and how operation intrude came to be.

You come off MGSV and you get a new perspective of the characters you met throughout the saga and the opinion you had about them. You get a sense of how much Hal was similar, yet different to his rather asshole dad. His acts in all previous MGS become even more heroic after you see what his father was.

You see how Ocelot's loyalty to Big Boss had him starting to mess with hypnosis and all that stuff to convince himself that Venom is BB and then become liquid through the same operation.

Or how Zero got sick and even then tried as hell to keep BB alive because he still believed he can mend his relationship with him.

And then there is Miller and the other characters that had ripple effects throught the series.

Apart from mission 51 the game imho does a good job of tying things up.

Yes the presentation lacks, and the pacing is really bad. But I believe this was inevitable due to the mission structured gameplay decision that Kojima made at the beginning. And yes tapes are the new codec and while it is a lot of times boring, it does offer a lot of important story info.

My point is I get the disappointment and the frustration, but I believe most of it is coming from the initial explosion. Once the dust settles in, and people start watching what each game does for the entirety of the story we call MGS saga, they will perhaps appreciate it more for what it is, and not for what people hoped or wanted it to be. Just like MGS2.

One thing I really appreciated in MGSV is the way the plot twist incorporates the player into the Saga by breaking the 4th wall. Its not like I wasnt expecting the twist. But the way it was handled, I appreciated it, hearing Kojima in a sense telling me that I am a part of MGS Saga and thanking me for all the years we were together on this trip. It was a glimpse of his genius, to me.

Am I fully happy with MGSV narrative? No, of course not, in fact I have a lot of objections myself and I enjoyed other MGS games more than V in terms of story. And certainly this is not some grade A writing, but it is not the "trash" people make it sound to be either. The core of its story fits, makes sense concerning the timeline, ties up quite a few things that were forever remaining a mystery and provides a decent send off by saying a big thank you Valkyre/Big Boss.

PS: Something that I type after every MGS is finished. This game, like MGS4 and all other MGS games established beforehand, really exposes Solid Snake as the ultimate Snake. As the one who didnt succumb to his genes, memes and vengeance. He was the weakest Snake genetically, but the strongest in heart and spirit. He was the one who suffered the accumulation of what his father/brothers had to suffer, and yet he was the one to keep going forward, to remain pure, to keep fighting not for his ego or personal goal, but the greater good. MGSV like all previous MGS games is , in a meta-way, an ode to Solid Snake. The best of them all.

Edit: for a few typos and the PS.

I think you misunderstood my point about MGS2's ending. I wasn't saying MGS2 was better because it was confusing, I was pointing out that people were left unsatisfied for wildly different reasons.

The sad truth is that there just isn't enough plot in MGSV for it to get analyzed to the extent MGS2 was.

I'd also like to address the bolded above. These "revelations" are answers to questions that did not exist before MGSV. It doesn't bring anything "full circle." It answers some questions, but the questions were raised in MGSV itself, and most aren't even answered in a satisfactory way. It doesn't serve the greater Metal Gear narrative at all, if anything it muddies things that were fine before. If MGSV ceased to exist, nothing in the canon would make less sense (this is also one of my problems with Peace Walker, though to a lesser extent, at least PW introduced a bunch of unique characters).

There's just less Metal Gear in MGSV than in all the other games. To a crippling degree.

P.S. Tapes are not the new codec.

 

[KOMANI]

The calm and respect that washed over people for MGS2 happened because we got passed Raiden and realized the powerful message it presented. It succeeds in its message and only stumbles a few times getting there.

Phantom Pain feels clumsy compared to 2. As of now, there's no replayability. Because of its structure, you can't just go back and do the missions all over without getting bored. No new game plus, no higher difficulty, no reason. Ground Zeroes has more replay value because of the trial records and because of how intimate it is.
The episodic approach for MGSV could have worked for each episode if they had something to say. It's 70% filler. Side ops pale in comparison to Peacewalker's.

The problem doesn't end with the story, the character assisination, the 0 character development, or the overly sexual depiction of Quiet... The problem is that despite the great game mechanics, there's no use for them. It's the same for MGS4. But what MGS4 has over V is a story pandering to its fanbase whereas V ignores its, and concentrates more on selling units.

 

[Clear]

Phantom Pain feels clumsy compared to 2. As of now, there's no replayability.

That's a funny thing to say considering the Metallic Archaea EX vid you posted showed a cumulative play time of 260+ hours.

Not to mention the fact that the original release of MGS2 has far less content than the MGS2 Substance builds most people will be familiar with.

 

[valkyre]

I think you misunderstood my point about MGS2's ending. I wasn't saying MGS2 was better because it was confusing, I was pointing out that people were left unsatisfied for wildly different reasons.

The sad truth is that there just isn't enough plot in MGSV for it to get analyzed to the extent MGS2 was.

I'd also like to address the bolded above. These "revelations" are answers to questions that did not exist before MGSV. It doesn't bring anything "full circle." It answers some questions, but the questions were raised in MGSV itself, and most aren't even answered in a satisfactory way. It doesn't serve the greater Metal Gear narrative at all, if anything it muddies things that were fine before. If MGSV ceased to exist, nothing in the canon would make less sense (this is also one of my problems with Peace Walker, though to a lesser extent, at least PW introduced a bunch of unique characters).

There's just less Metal Gear in MGSV than in all the other games. To a crippling degree.

P.S. Tapes are not the new codec.

Again I dont think I fully agree. How Big Boss did not die by Solid's hand and came back with a full fortress without anyone knowing, was certainly of my biggest problem's with Saga's continuity. I basically considered it a convenient plothole. Dont know if others dont see it as important as I do, but my opinion about Big Boss after MGSV was finished was completely different than the one I had before and whilst playing the game.

As for the rest, the game has issues with its pace and scope. If this was a 15 hour Metal Gear rather than 115 hour Metal Gear, you can be sure that there would have been enough Metal Gear in it as you say. The problem is, and it definitely is a problem, that the game is huge, has way more missions than the story portion allows it to have and that the episodic nature/mission structure of the gameplay prevent it from having a proper pace/flow.

 

[Inferno313]

The calm and respect that washed over people for MGS2 happened because we got passed Raiden and realized the powerful message it presented. It succeeds in its message and only stumbles a few times getting there.

Phantom Pain feels clumsy compared to 2. As of now, there's no replayability. Because of its structure, you can't just go back and do the missions all over without getting bored. No new game plus, no higher difficulty, no reason. Ground Zeroes has more replay value because of the trial records and because of how intimate it is.
The episodic approach for MGSV could have worked for each episode if they had something to say. It's 70% filler. Side ops pale in comparison to Peacewalker's.

The problem doesn't end with the story, the character assisination, the 0 character development, or the overly sexual depiction of Quiet... The problem is that despite the great game mechanics, there's no use for them. It's the same for MGS4. But what MGS4 has over V is a story pandering to its fanbase whereas V ignores its, and concentrates more on selling units.

That's all totally subjective. Due to the open-ended nature of MGSV and the fact that progression continues into the end-game, I've had more fun replaying missions to complete all mission tasks, get all blueprints, and get S ranks than I've had replaying any portion of a previous MGS game.

 

[Death Metalist]

The calm and respect that washed over people for MGS2 happened because we got passed Raiden and realized the powerful message it presented. It succeeds in its message and only stumbles a few times getting there.

Phantom Pain feels clumsy compared to 2. As of now, there's no replayability. Because of its structure, you can't just go back and do the missions all over without getting bored. No new game plus, no higher difficulty, no reason. Ground Zeroes has more replay value because of the trial records and because of how intimate it is.
The episodic approach for MGSV could have worked for each episode if they had something to say. It's 70% filler. Side ops pale in comparison to Peacewalker's.

The problem doesn't end with the story, the character assisination, the 0 character development, or the overly sexual depiction of Quiet... The problem is that despite the great game mechanics, there's no use for them. It's the same for MGS4. But what MGS4 has over V is a story pandering to its fanbase whereas V ignores its, and concentrates more on selling units.

Yet I'm still playing it and unlocking things to experiment with. Whenever I thought this is the quickest way or best way to handle something, the game surprises me with something else that's better. It's just an endless series of finding better things, upgrading and then discussing with people I know on how they did this thing or I did that thing.

I'm kind of mind fucked when people say there is no replayability when everything you're doing in the game is beneficial to your MB developments,buddies and leveling up.

 

[LiK]

The calm and respect that washed over people for MGS2 happened because we got passed Raiden and realized the powerful message it presented. It succeeds in its message and only stumbles a few times getting there.

Phantom Pain feels clumsy compared to 2. As of now, there's no replayability. Because of its structure, you can't just go back and do the missions all over without getting bored. No new game plus, no higher difficulty, no reason. Ground Zeroes has more replay value because of the trial records and because of how intimate it is.
The episodic approach for MGSV could have worked for each episode if they had something to say. It's 70% filler. Side ops pale in comparison to Peacewalker's.

The problem doesn't end with the story, the character assisination, the 0 character development, or the overly sexual depiction of Quiet... The problem is that despite the great game mechanics, there's no use for them. It's the same for MGS4. But what MGS4 has over V is a story pandering to its fanbase whereas V ignores its, and concentrates more on selling units.

The replayability is there. You can replay old missions however you want with different loadouts and buddies (sans Quiet if you lost her) or do free roam.

Bored? That's subjective.

Also, the online MP isn't out yet so that will extend the playtime for many who are interested,

 

[KOMANI]

That's a funny thing to say considering the Metallic Archaea EX vid you posted showed a cumulative play time of 260+ hours.

Not to mention the fact that the original release of MGS2 has far less content than the MGS2 Substance builds most people will be familiar with.

Because I had to GRIND FOR FEUL AND SOLDIERS. I was convinced that the reason I kept losing the broken combat deployment battles was because I didn't have enough S- S+ soldiers.
The last 100 hours had me blast through side ops with a rocket launcher because I got tired of playing.

 

[Dick Justice]

Insulting?

I think how people are so sensitive about others dismissing their opinions is a very strong sign of how irrational and emotive the discussion is around this game.

Sensitive? Really, that's your argument? It's similar to discussion about Mass Effect 3's ending, where some people tried to dismiss critique by acting as if people were expecting a happy ending or some such bullshit. Broadly dismissing valid arguments because "lol you guyz are mad coz you wanted to play as Big Boss lol" is insulting.

 

[Inferno313]

Because I had to GRIND FOR FEUL AND SOLDIERS. I was convinced that the reason I kept losing the broken combat deployment battles was because I didn't have enough S- S+ soldiers.

Why did you feel compelled to do that if the game offered no replayability?

 

[Devilgunman]

Finished the Mission 45 extraction objective. Am I alone in thinking that is by far the hardest thing in the game? Cause man....I tried various things for an upwards of two and a half hours.

Finally got it though. Just need to make my damn nuke and capture like 8 more animals. And I'll have my Platinum.

That was basically "last boy" of this game. I just beat it too. Needed to call a battle suit drop to stand a chance. Who would have thought following Quiet would lead into such trouble?

 

[Sub_Level]

Not to mention the fact that the original release of MGS2 has far less content than the MGS2 Substance builds most people will be familiar with.

I wish that was true. Most people never go through the vr missions

 

[valkyre]

Because I had to GRIND FOR FEUL AND SOLDIERS. I was convinced that the reason I kept losing the broken combat deployment battles was because I didn't have enough S- S+ soldiers.
The last 100 hours had me blast through side ops with a rocket launcher because I got tired of playing.

that doesnt make sense really. Playing something you dont like for an extra 100 hrs of boredom is rather weird!

 

[KOMANI]

Why did you feel compelled to do that if the game offered no replayability?

I don't think of replayability if I'm not done "playing" the game. Then I can start think about "re-playing". Anymore amazing questions and critiques of my opinion on the game that has touched upon the sensitivity of some posters?

 

[Chariot]

that doesnt make sense really. Playing something you dont like for an extra 100 hrs of boredom is rather weird!

This happened to me with League of Legends for years.

 

[KOMANI]

that doesnt make sense really. Playing something you dont like for an extra 100 hrs of boredom is rather weird!

I have a secret to tell you. I hated the Evil Within... Yet I plantinumed it. There's footage of me playing it, cursing myself and the game. And I put a lot of time into it.
Maybe we misunderstand each other. Replaying a game doesn't mean playing it to its completion. It means picking it up months/years later and REplaying it.

 

[LiK]

I don't think of replayability if I'm not done "playing" the game. Then I can start think about "re-playing". Anymore amazing questions and critiques of my opinion on the game that has touched upon the sensitivity of some posters?

please don't make jabs at us who are questioning your opinions. that goes no where.

 

[Ashura_MX]

Probably already posted, but this is a good watch.

This I can agree with, except I dont have the time to play many games as I had back "when I was a kid playing MGS2". So I'm ok with the grindy nature of MGSV because the gameplay is great. The chopper scenes can fuck off tho.

 

[Inferno313]

Sensitive? Really, that's your argument? It's similar to discussion about Mass Effect 3's ending, where some people tried to dismiss critique by acting as if people were expecting a happy ending or some such bullshit. Broadly dismissing valid arguments because "lol you guyz are mad coz you wanted to play as Big Boss lol" is insulting.

I think there is a point to that though. While being disappointed that the game isn't what you were hoping for is totally valid, if we're trying to make a critical, qualitative analysis of the game, you have to take it as it's own work.

Marketing materials, fan theories, developer comments, evidence of cut content. All of those can be interesting things to look at, but when you're trying to make a critical argument on the quality of a work, it's disingenuous to not take a work at face value and factor in external information.

It's fine to be disappointed that the marketing made you feel mislead, but to argue that the game is a failure because it wasn't what you expected (as I've seen many in this thread do) isn't fair to the work itself.

 

[Red Blaster]

Because I had to GRIND FOR FEUL AND SOLDIERS. I was convinced that the reason I kept losing the broken combat deployment battles was because I didn't have enough S- S+ soldiers.
The last 100 hours had me blast through side ops with a rocket launcher because I got tired of playing.

i finished mission 46 with my mb levels in the late 20s

you certainly didn't "need" to do any of what you describe

 

[KOMANI]

please don't make jabs at us who are questioning your opinions. that goes no where.

Don't be the knight in shining armor for dumb questions

 

[Clear]

Because I had to GRIND FOR FEUL AND SOLDIERS. I was convinced that the reason I kept losing the broken combat deployment battles was because I didn't have enough S- S+ soldiers.
The last 100 hours had me blast through side ops with a rocket launcher because I got tired of playing.

Dropping it back to *only* 160 hours doesn't really help your argument!

Sensitive? Really, that's your argument? It's similar to discussion about Mass Effect 3's ending, where some people tried to dismiss critique by acting as if people were expecting a happy ending or some such bullshit. Broadly dismissing valid arguments because "lol you guyz are mad coz you wanted to play as Big Boss lol" is insulting.

Its less of an argument than an observation. And its borne out as being accurate by your raging response.

 

[LiK]

i finished mission 46 with my mb levels in the late 20s

you certainly didn't "need" to do any of what you describe

I know someone who played completely offline so they never even touched the FOB stuff and still beat the game all the way through. definitely not required.

 

[Spaghetti]

i finished mission 46 with my mb levels in the late 20s

you certainly didn't "need" to do any of what you describe

yeah. i never grinded for anything in my first playthrough. unless i was already close to already having the means to develop a new weapon or a new platform on mother base, i wouldn't go out of my way to find resources or soldiers.

I know someone who played completely offline so they never even touched the FOB stuff and still beat the game all the way through. definitely not required.

i did that too. i didn't bother at all with the online components until my second playthrough of the game.

 

[valkyre]

I have a secret to tell you. I hated the Evil Within... Yet I plantinumed it. There's footage of me playing it, cursing myself and the game. And I put a lot of time into it.

Well trophy hunting could somehow explain it then. I personally still find it weird for people to invest a lot of time in things they dont like just to get the trophies, but hey it is your call. I on the other hand, if I am bored with something I simply cant bother with it and quit. I honestly wouldnt be able to spend a lot of time with something I dont like. It feels forced and becomes a chore and since I dont have much free time for gaming anymore, I really cant go throught it.

 

[LiK]

Don't be the knight in shining armor for dumb questions

wow, uncalled for. please keep suffering through your games and complaining about it here. you are so fucking sad. you definitely live up to your username.

also, ignored.

 

[valkyre]

I know someone who played completely offline so they never even touched the FOB stuff and still beat the game all the way through. definitely not required.

I as well havent played a single FOB stuff and never replayed a main mission or played the old main missions (subsitence/extreme etc). I just went through to the end without any of that, trying to keep a steady pace.

 

[KOMANI]

i finished mission 46 with my mb levels in the late 20s

you certainly didn't "need" to do any of what you describe

No, you're right. But I paid for a product, and I'm sure going to complete it. The game is not bad. I never said its horrible. It's not the evil within. In the Beginning it's a lot of fun, and spontaneous.., but by the end I wanted it to end,, like a marriage.

Dropping it back to *only* 160 hours doesn't really help your argument!

Wow, you figured me out, great job Columbo. Aren't you late for your job at NASA?

 

[KOMANI]

wow, uncalled for. please keep suffering through your games and complaining about it here. you are so fucking sad. you definitely live up to your username.

also, ignored.

Thank you. Killed 2 birds with one stone.

 

[LiK]

I as well havent played a single FOB stuff and never replayed a main mission or played the old main missions (subsitence/extreme etc). I just went through to the end without any of that, trying to keep a steady pace.

I ended up getting sucked into it. pretty addictive part of the game. if they didn't have those super long timers, it would've been more enjoyable. it dragged out that mode way too much.

 

[BadWolf]

After MGS2 I was left with questions about the story but moreso about the world view that the game presented through its themes, there were a lot of heavy ideas there.

MGSV on the other hand does a mind fuck that relates to the entire series in general, it was brilliant. I just sat there with my mouth open rethinking the whole series. It definitely felt like it closed the loop on the series and was the true final game.

It did everything from touching on Big Boss dying twice (MG1 and MG2), Miller and Ocelot picking their sides and 'weapons' (Miller supported the clone that he could use against BB and Ocelot supported the ones that he could use against the Patriots) to acknowledging the players involvement with the series and adding new angles to a ton of events and characters in the series.

I saw so many events and characters in the series in a new light after this game, Liquid killing Miller in MGS1, Psycho Mantis helping Liquid in MGS1, Ocelot supporting Liquid and Solidus, Zero, Heuy, Otacon, Paz etc. the list goes on and on.

The two phantoms idea added further depth to BB. After starting the legend, instead of just playing the same role again he aimed higher. So good.

And I'm really glad that Episode 51 was not in the main game because this way I can consider it not canon. It felt completely unnecessary, Episode 46 was the near perfect way to end the game and the series. The game ends with the attention on BB instead of Liquid, which was absolutely the right thing to do.

 

[Clear]

Wow, you figured me out, great job Columbo. Aren't you late for your job at NASA?

Well then, don't make daft assertions about lack of replayability when you've clearly replayed the game to death already.

 

[Berserker976]

Again I dont think I fully agree. How Big Boss did not die by Solid's hand and came back with a full fortress without anyone knowing, was certainly of my biggest problem's with Saga's continuity. I basically considered it a convenient plothole. Dont know if others dont see it as important as I do, but my opinion about Big Boss after MGSV was finished was completely different than the one I had before and whilst playing the game.

As for the rest, the game has issues with its pace and scope. If this was a 15 hour Metal Gear rather than 115 hour Metal Gear, you can be sure that there would have been enough Metal Gear in it as you say. The problem is, and it definitely is a problem, that the game is huge, has way more missions than the story portion allows it to have and that the episodic nature/mission structure of the gameplay prevent it from having a proper pace/flow.

I don't have access to a full game script of MGSV, but I'm willing to bet money that it is the shortest by a rather long margin. Yes, the pacing is a factor in how sparse the story feels, but it's not just the pacing, there is actually less story. If you were to link every cutscene in MGSV together, you might get close to the next shortest MGS game, but that doesn't tell you the full story. MGSV doesn't have a lot of dialogue in its cutscenes, there are minutes upon minutes of dead air. You don't get to know characters because they don't have anything to say, and the problem I have with the tapes is that, if they truly were the successor to the codec, they would provide at least a little relief from this problem. But there's no character building in the tapes, there's just dry exposition.

Now, about MGSV closing the "plot hole" of Big Boss surviving MG1. Personally, I never gave any consideration as to how it went down, because MG1 and MG2 were simpler games. It doesn't take much suspension of disbelief to imagine Big Boss just scurried out through a secret passage or something. The message at the end even confirms he survived somehow, but sure, you could say it answered that lingering question. Now think of all the things it could have answered, and told us it was going to answer: How did Liquid and Big Boss' relationship come about and evolve? What shit did Big Boss go through to turn him into a war-crazed despot? How did Big Boss' "war with Zero" start and progress? What made Zero lose faith in humanity and decide to build an AI? What was Big Boss' relationship with Gray Fox like? How and why did Big Boss return to lead Foxhound?

To me, all of these questions are far more compelling than: "How did Big Boss survive at the end of MG1?"

And the kicker is that MGSV not only failed to answer these questions, it turned some of them into utter nonsense. Apparently there was no "war with Zero" after all, and Big Boss just underwent some kind of character development while in a nine year coma that turned him into a bit of a dick for like, no reason.

 

[KOMANI]

Well then, don't make daft assertions about lack of replayability when you've clearly replayed the game to death already.

Because the game is broken into episodes, there's a misunderstanding of the word "replay". Yes, you need to replay missions to cover objectives you missed, s ranking them etc. But replaying missions and replaying the game are two different things. There's no reason to replay the game, and I've never replayed a mission because of how fun it was.
If you weren't quick to try and "expose" me for the validation that you're cunning, and came to me as a person, I would have shown you the same respect.

 

[akidnamededdy]

Yes and it didn't end up being genius until a few people started analyzing everything within the game, make long ass posts and videos about it. I'm not saying the same is going to happen with MGS5 BUT MGS2 didn't reach that status until many years later and only after the fact.

Edit: Valkyre's post actually seems like what most people felt like after MGS2 ended.

This is true, but keep in mind MGS2 came out nearly fourteen years ago. A lot of us who played it back then just weren't prepared to think about game stories in such a way.

Speaking personally, I was just barely out of high school at the time, and the twist pretty much confused and irritated me just like everyone else. Now that I'm older and more educated and experienced with this kind of analysis, the brilliance of MGS2's plot, its meta elements, and the role of the character swap within it all, is apparent.

I'm not an expert on this kind of analysis, but I just don't think there's anything on that level in V. Like all the other interesting elements in the story (the language stuff, child soldiers, etc), the twist just feels like it's there for the sake of being there. There's no depth to it, it's just mentioned and tossed aside. "You built the legend of Big Boss! During this very specific frame of time, though, and maybe some stuff we aren't ever going to get the chance to show you, and then the semi blank slate player insert you controlled here gets killed in the very next chronological game anyway. So uhh...be sure to buy MB coins?"

 

[Alienous]

I don't find any intrinsic motivation in replaying missions, though I understand others will think differently.

I completed all of the Side-Ops not because they are all fun to do but to clear the to-do list, and out of some self-imposed obligation to finish Metal Gear Solid games.

I'm sure there is replay value, it just isn't evident to me. I have no desire to do the missions again, partly because I know how they'll play out. I know where to find my targets, I know where to go, and difficulty options would help to force me to play differently.

Eh, but I got money's worth, anyway.

EDIT: God dammit, Kojima, where's my [EXTREME] modifier for the entire game.

 

[News Bot]

Among all the mess the story is there is something that bothers me: Quiet couldn't speak english, OK, but she could speak Navajo... why couldn't she use CT (we are asuming nobody else in the world speaks Navajo here) to explain things to BB & company? Couldn't she write? I feel like I'm seeing something very evident here or that I missed something.

Quiet is a terrible character all-round. Kojima was just determined to have her at any expense. The game actually "explains" why she doesn't write by throwing out a bunch of excuses like dyslexia, stubborn, etc. The truth is that Kojima is just a shitty writer and none of the co-writers helped alleviate it.

Once again..

Ocelot WAS possesed in MGS2 by Liquid's actual ghost. It was supernatural. This comes from the MGS4 database itself.

And Vamp's powers were never explained to come from water. That was only an assumption by fans because water is always in contact with Vamp when he comes back to life, but there was nothing official.

The Database also says Big Boss was a Snatcher after MG1. We know this isn't true at all now. The mythology of this series is meaningless at this point because all established rules of narrative have been broken.

 

[Dick Justice]

Dropping it back to *only* 160 hours doesn't really help your argument!



Its less of an argument than an observation. And its borne out as being accurate by your raging response.

You have an interesting definition of "raging". Your post is essentially the equivalent of "umad bro?". Your tag is quite accurate. Guess that's another troll for the ignore list.

 

[Dixon's Jet]

No place for Hideo in mgsv.

 

[BadWolf]

I don't have access to a full game script of MGSV, but I'm willing to bet money that it is the shortest by a rather long margin. Yes, the pacing is a factor in how sparse the story feels, but it's not just the pacing, there is actually less story. If you were to link every cutscene in MGSV together, you might get close to the next shortest MGS game, but that doesn't tell you the full story. MGSV doesn't have a lot of dialogue in its cutscenes, there are minutes upon minutes of dead air. You don't get to know characters because they don't have anything to say, and the problem I have with the tapes is that, if they truly were the successor to the codec, they would provide at least a little relief from this problem. But there's no character building in the tapes, there's just dry exposition.

I have to completely disagree with this, they were extremely well voiced and overall very well written. Couldn't get enough of them personally.

They imo were not the successors to codec conversations but replacements to long cutscenes, you know, the stuff countless people endlessly bitched and complained about. To that effect they were a good replacement.

And tbh I saw that coming after PW and Ground Zeroes. If you go back to MGS4 and other games in the series you will notice that a lot of the cutscenes are quite long but they are mostly just long conversations between characters. Things that could easily have been done in tapes.

So sure, there are less cutscenes overall but when combined with all the story offered in the tapes, it feels about the same in terms of story content with the rest of the series.

 

[Freedom = $1.05]

MGS2 was crazy because

A) it hadn't been done before but especially in a AAA game

B) The internet wasn't filled to the brim with shitholes trying to spoil the game for you so many didn't see it coming and

C) Because you didn't know about the twist you spent like an hour or two waiting for the game to let you play as snake. Then a couple of other hours wondering hey, are we going to play as snake?, then it hits you: not only are you not going to play as snake but you're being force to play this sissypants with no posters in his room and a GF constantly nagging him because kojima wanted to subvert all expectations and oh by the way here's some philosophy 101 and tinfoil hat stuff about governing bodies that you didn't see coming either.

you really had to be there, it was truly something special.

No place for Hideo in mgsv.

except i had two Hideos on my base. two phantoms of a former developer from the series.

 

[Dick Justice]

I think there is a point to that though. While being disappointed that the game isn't what you were hoping for is totally valid, if we're trying to make a critical, qualitative analysis of the game, you have to take it as it's own work.

Marketing materials, fan theories, developer comments, evidence of cut content. All of those can be interesting things to look at, but when you're trying to make a critical argument on the quality of a work, it's disingenuous to not take a work at face value and factor in external information.

It's fine to be disappointed that the marketing made you feel mislead, but to argue that the game is a failure because it wasn't what you expected (as I've seen many in this thread do) isn't fair to the work itself.

I'm not even talking about marketing materials and that kind of stuff. I'm talking, yet again, about valid criticisms of the game's narrative (which I personally thought was an unfocused, unsatisfying mess).

 

[Red Blaster]

I don't find any intrinsic motivation in replaying missions, though I understand others will think differently.

I completed all of the Side-Ops not because they are all fun to do but to clear the to-do list, and out of some self-imposed obligation to finish Metal Gear Solid games.

I'm sure there is replay value, it just isn't evident to me. I have no desire to do the missions again, partly because I know how they'll play out. I know where to find my targets, I know where to go, and difficulty options would help to force me to play differently.

Eh, but I got money's worth, anyway.

EDIT: God dammit, Kojima, where's my [EXTREME] modifier for the entire game.

optional tasks son

some require you to play missions differently (for instance, the tanks in mission 8 only appear if you extract all the apcs before they leave the mission area)

 

[LiK]

I'm not even talking about marketing materials and that kind of stuff. I'm talking, yet again, about valid criticisms of the game's narrative (which I personally thought was an unfocused, unsatisfying mess).

I still find it strange when core missions are slapped into the Side Ops section. it's like it's trying to play around with the players' expectations but didn't do it that well. the best was still the one where you were going after Huey but ended up encountering Quiet. that was an unexpected fun surprise. the rest after that was poorly done.