• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Metal Gear Rising: Reviewgeance thread of reviews and EatChildren

Syriel

Member
I find it interesting that the game doesn't specifically teach dodge mechanics. So many people seem to have missed out on it.

The lack of instruction in MGR is odd. The first two tutorials are thrown at you, but later ones are just tucked away inside the VR Missions, so if a new player doesn't look there (perhaps assuming that the VR Mission content is all meant to be experienced post-play) they're going to miss out.

And the manual isn't any help. It's no more than a controller demo card that you see at conventions.

So, for someone who simply opens the retail copy, looks at the manual and plays through the game, it would be very easy to miss the dodge. You have to actually be digging into the game a little. While I would expect most on GAF to do so, the average gamer who picks his up at Best Buy probably isn't going to do that.

As a result, failure to convey that information is a fault of Platinum. If you're too lazy to include a proper manual, you need to ensure your tutorials are solid. Otherwise, the 90% of casual gamers that make up the majority of sales are likely to miss out. It would seem some reviewers did as well.

Mmhmm. My review was based on Hard mode. I feel like it's the only way to appreciate the game and it's underlying mechanics properly.

I've always believed that normal mode is how a game should be reviewed. The reason being is that "normal" is what the developer ostensibly tunes around. It's also the default, so it's what most players are likely to experience the first time through.

While I'll play favorite games on hard, if a game is not properly balanced for normal, then it deserves to be noted as a negative and scored appropriately, IMHO.
 

demidar

Member
I've always believed that normal mode is how a game should be reviewed. The reason being is that "normal" is what the developer ostensibly tunes around. It's also the default, so it's what most players are likely to experience the first time through.

While I'll play favorite games on hard, if a game is not properly balanced for normal, then it deserves to be noted as a negative and scored appropriately, IMHO.

Character action games usually are the exceptions. Higher difficulties are tuned to be harder by not only increasing strength of enemies, but things like aggressiveness, new moves, remixed enemy composition, stronger enemies appear earlier, etc. Not only that by character action games have an expectation of encouraging multiple playthroughs on harder difficulties by giving permanence to health/resource boosts, purchased moves, items, accessories and weapons (and their power levels).
 
I'm confused, which time is the actual total clocktime? The end game screen thing people are posting or the save file like when you load a save on ps3?
 
I find it funny, people like to mention how games hold your hand too much these days. Then this comes out and people are complaining it doesn't teach you enough. Just an observation that makes me chuckle.
 
Just played chapter 1. Here is my review:

DEAD ON. BULLSEYE. DEAD ON. BULLSEYE. DEAD ON. BULLSEYE. DEAD ON. BULLSEYE. DEAD ON. BULLSEYE. DEAD ON. BULLSEYE. DEAD ON. BULLSEYE. DEAD ON. BULLSEYE. DEAD ON. BULLSEYE. DEAD ON. BULLSEYE. DEAD ON. BULLSEYE. DEAD ON. BULLSEYE.
 
I find it funny, people like to mention how games hold your hand too much these days. Then this comes out and people are complaining it doesn't teach you enough. Just an observation that makes me chuckle.

There is a range. I don't need the game to openly tell me how to beat every boss and level with text and voices and shit, but I would like to at least know how to do every move that i can, preferably not all at once, and maybe setup areas where it clicks why and where you should use the specific move.
 

Dahbomb

Member
There is a range. I don't need the game to openly tell me how to beat every boss and level with text and voices and shit, but I would like to at least know how to do every move that i can, preferably not all at once, and maybe setup areas where it clicks why and where you should use the specific move.
Movelist is in the Help menu.
 
There is a range. I don't need the game to openly tell me how to beat every boss and level with text and voices and shit, but I would like to at least know how to do every move that i can, preferably not all at once, and maybe setup areas where it clicks why and where you should use the specific move.

That's what the move list is for imo. *beaten*
 

demidar

Member
Maybe not for an action game, but certainly to some people. Especially to fans of previous Metal Gear games, where the cutscenes alone could be six hours.

Ahahaha you're totally right. MGS fans are used to 20 hour games.

Me? I'm probably gonna spend around 50 hours on this game. Yum yum.
 

Dahbomb

Member
Reviews are not saying 8 hours. They are saying around 5 hours.
The in-game timer does not count cutscenes and re-tries, only your "best" run through an area. So say it took you 30 minutes to figure out one area but you died and respawned earlier but this time it took you 10 minutes to go through the area, it will only count 10 minutes. It's basically a speed run timer.

Most people who actually clocked themselves said it took over 8 hours. I saw a stream of MGR being played before release and the stream was on for a good 8 hours throughout until it finally finished.

Most reviewers are just looking at the in-game timer screen at the end and then reporting on it. Check the review for Eurogamer, it took them 9 hours to complete which is more in line with how long it will actually take someone to beat the game.

I would say it's still short for a MGS game but not for an action game. It's about on par with DmC, longer than DMC1/ZOE2 and a bit shorter than DMC4/DMC3.
 

demidar

Member
The in-game timer does not count cutscenes and re-tries, only your "best" run through an area. So say it took you 30 minutes to figure out one area but you died and respawned earlier but this time it took you 10 minutes to go through the area, it will only count 10 minutes. It's basically a speed run timer.

Most people who actually clocked themselves said it took over 8 hours. I saw a stream of MGR being played before release and the stream was on for a good 8 hours throughout until it finally finished.

Most reviewers are just looking at the in-game timer screen at the end and then reporting on it. Check the review for Eurogamer, it took them 9 hours to complete which is more in line with how long it will actually take someone to beat the game.

I would say it's still short for a MGS game but not for an action game. It's about on par with DmC, longer than DMC1/ZOE2 and a bit shorter than DMC4/DMC3.

The explanation is in the goddamn OP, the very first thing your eyes will dart to when you open up the thread.
 

Pie and Beans

Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
Plenty of people not reading the OP. Thats a paddlin'?
 

Pimpbaa

Member
The explanation is in the goddamn OP, the very first thing your eyes will dart to when you open up the thread.

First thing I did was scroll down to the review numbers and read the reviews and then went to the last page and responded. Anyway I would have thought the reviewers would have accounted for this. Game journalism lol.
 

Pie and Beans

Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
I would have thought the reviewers would have accounted for this. Game journalism lol.

In the long chronicles of "just how shit are game journalists?" we can now mark "actually have no perception of time or how hours work" and instead believe anything they see on a screen suddenly. They also certainly dont research what the director of the game's studio has been saying recently.
 

demidar

Member
First thing I did was scroll down to the review numbers and read the reviews and then went to the last page and responded. Anyway I would have thought the reviewers would have accounted for this. Game journalism lol.

I'm just sayin' a little vigilance and reading would go a long way, even if it's just the OP. You gave the game a complete pass simply because you didn't read the first part of the OP.
 

Marlowe89

Member
Game Informer still can't review for shit, and I'm not saying that because they gave the game a 7.75.

(but while I'm on that subject, lol @ their ridiculous scoring system of ".25"s and whatnot)
 

Pie and Beans

Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
I'm just sayin' a little vigilance and reading would go a long way, even if it's just the OP. You gave the game a complete pass simply because you didn't read the first part of the OP.

Knowing games journalism is a joke and yet still rushing past everything else to those all important numbers awarded by them is some mighty fine paradoxical shit as well.
 
Game Informer still can't review for shit, and I'm not saying that because they gave the game a 7.75.

(but while I'm on that subject, lol @ their ridiculous scoring system of ".25"s and whatnot)

Yeah the original review claimed there wasn't a dodge move, which is factually wrong. It's since been updated with a throwaway line about the dodge being cumbersome.
 
Game Informer still can't review for shit, and I'm not saying that because they gave the game a 7.75.

(but while I'm on that subject, lol @ their ridiculous scoring system of ".25"s and whatnot)

However, this game bears the Metal Gear name, which carries certain expectations. If you have any hopes for this story building on Metal Gear lore or giving you a chance to reconnect with characters you care about, you will be disappointed. The new characters are uninteresting and poorly developed, and the old characters are practically non-existent. The plot doesn’t even address the most basic questions a Metal Gear fan would have, like why did Raiden leave his family to become a cyborg again? What is Otacon up to? Is Snake really dead? We get no satisfying answers.

Isn't that first question more or less implicitly answered, and the second and third questions something that are understandably left ambiguous since it's a spinoff game?

The whole review reads like he hated the game but couldn't give it less an a "7.75" because of the game reviewer scale.
 

Revven

Member
Maybe not for an action game, but certainly to some people. Especially to fans of previous Metal Gear games, where the cutscenes alone could be six hours.

Uhm... I don't know about you, but MGS2 took me around 10 hours to complete. MGS4 took me around 10 hours to complete. MGS:TT took me only 10 hours to complete. MGS3 is the only Metal Gear game that took me 20 hours to complete.

MGS games are not long in the first place. The lengthy cutscenes give the illusion that they are, but in truth they are on par with games like Uncharted in length to complete.

I don't even know why length is factored into a game's review score. Review the game for what it is, not what you want or think it should be.
 

Dahbomb

Member
we can now mark "actually have no perception of time or how hours work" and instead believe anything they see on a screen suddenly.
I still stand firmly behind my opinion that if you put 2 groups of people in a similar situation, you will realize that most people do not have great time perception especially when it comes to games. The only reason why someone would be able to accurately tell you how much time they have played a game would be due to daily routine tasks like eating dinner on time or chores/job or the day/night cycle.

Someone should coordinate this into an experiment and find out how good/bad people's perception of time while playing games really is. I can say for myself that time flies by when I am playing games, 6 hours can feel like 3 hours if I am balls deep in a game.
 

demidar

Member
Isn't that first question more or less implicitly answered, and the second and third questions something that are understandably left ambiguous since it's a spinoff game?

The whole review reads like he hated the game but couldn't give it less an a "7.75" because of the game reviewer scale.

Man it's like you're asking him to, like, do his job or something. Don't make such unreasonable demands MC.
 

Pimpbaa

Member
I'm just sayin' a little vigilance and reading would go a long way, even if it's just the OP. You gave the game a complete pass simply because you didn't read the first part of the OP.

Not a complete pass, I said I would get it when the price dropped.
 

MechaX

Member
Uhm... I don't know about you, but MGS2 took me around 10 hours to complete. MGS4 took me around 10 hours to complete. MGS:TT took me only 10 hours to complete. MGS3 is the only Metal Gear game that took me 20 hours to complete.

Yeah, I absolutely do not understand why people are suddenly thinking that the games in the series are long. MGS3 is probably the longest by far with about 15-20 hours on most playthroughs without skipping text (and around 12 or so on my HD Collection playthrough). All the other games? 10 or less hours, even on first playthroughs (at least according to the saves I still have for MGS1/2).

I guess Portable Ops and Peace Walker are longer... But PO's time is mostly spent dragging bodies across bases and PW has a grind-worthy endgame.
 

SapientWolf

Trucker Sexologist
The lack of instruction in MGR is odd. The first two tutorials are thrown at you, but later ones are just tucked away inside the VR Missions, so if a new player doesn't look there (perhaps assuming that the VR Mission content is all meant to be experienced post-play) they're going to miss out.

And the manual isn't any help. It's no more than a controller demo card that you see at conventions.

So, for someone who simply opens the retail copy, looks at the manual and plays through the game, it would be very easy to miss the dodge. You have to actually be digging into the game a little. While I would expect most on GAF to do so, the average gamer who picks his up at Best Buy probably isn't going to do that.

As a result, failure to convey that information is a fault of Platinum. If you're too lazy to include a proper manual, you need to ensure your tutorials are solid. Otherwise, the 90% of casual gamers that make up the majority of sales are likely to miss out. It would seem some reviewers did as well.



I've always believed that normal mode is how a game should be reviewed. The reason being is that "normal" is what the developer ostensibly tunes around. It's also the default, so it's what most players are likely to experience the first time through.

While I'll play favorite games on hard, if a game is not properly balanced for normal, then it deserves to be noted as a negative and scored appropriately, IMHO.
DMC3 did the right thing and was punished for it. So normal will always be too easy. Except for Dark/Demon Souls, I guess.
 

MechaX

Member
DMC3 did the right thing and was punished for it. So normal will always be too easy. Except for Dark/Demon Souls, I guess.

Don't forget how Gamespot blasted DMC3: Special Edition because its default difficulty was too easy (Greg Kasavin reviewed both versions too, in which he said that Vanilla DMC3 on normal was too hard).
 
V

Vilix

Unconfirmed Member
Just finished chapter 1. Holy kanoly was that amazing. PG comes through again. The cutscenes aren't bad either. I can stomach the better than the usual Metal Gear fair.
 
Please tell me someone called attention to these gems:

OPM: (70/100): "Sadly, the combat doesn't have enough depth to trouble the genre's best (it certainly can't touch Ninja Theory's DmC reboot), and there's a disappointing disposability about the whole experience. This is a project that has been rightfully and respectably salvaged, but one that can't quite cut it at the top."

PSLS.net: (3/10): "I played through the game on Normal, and on a number of occasions I considered either smashing my controller to bits, or quitting the game entirely and writing my review up until that point. I persevered, but I still ended up giving up at the final form of the last boss (at least I hope it was the final form, since I already beat many other forms). I did not complete the game. I did not finish the last boss. On normal."
 

Revven

Member
Yeah, I absolutely do not understand why people are suddenly thinking that the games in the series are long. MGS3 is probably the longest by far with about 15-20 hours on most playthroughs without skipping text (and around 12 or so on my HD Collection playthrough). All the other games? 10 or less hours, even on first playthroughs (at least according to the saves I still have for MGS1/2).

I guess Portable Ops and Peace Walker are longer... But PO's time is mostly spent dragging bodies across bases and PW has a grind-worthy endgame.

Yeah, it's really weird. I guess people have really foggy memories on how long MGS games really are (or... they really believe the cutscenes make the games longer than other games in the action/adventure genre...)

Whatever the case is, the fact remains: MGR is not out of line in how long it is compared to other MGS titles.
 

neojubei

Will drop pants for Sony.
Don't forget how Gamespot blasted DMC3: Special Edition because its default difficulty was too easy (Greg Kasavin reviewed both versions too, in which he said that Vanilla DMC3 on normal was too hard).

I remember both of those reviews. I don't think that man was happy with any difficulty level.
 

Dash Kappei

Not actually that important
I was bored and can't sleep, so here they are:

Multiplayer.it: 8.0/10; readers 7.4/10

+a successful spin-off, action is dynamic and fun
+Raiden's charisma is heaps and bound above his MGS2 persona, which will probably do good for the next main MGS installment
+story is well above average with some points that will spark interesting discussions in the MGS community
+cool blend of Kojipro's storytelling and Platinum's relentless action

•Die-hard MGS' fundamentalist aficionados won't like it
•Fell short of Platinum's previous work, especially Bayonetta
•Platinum didn't get the balance right between controls and on-screen action
•combat mechanics have too many shortcomings, were expecting much better from Platinum
-

Spaziogames.it: 8.0/10

+batshit insane, adrenaline-rushing spectacular campaign
+story is better than anticipated, above expectations save for some moments
+noteworthy soundtrack

•too easy on Normal difficulty with some badly implemented spikes
•combat mechanic is lacking
•short campaign
•visual and gameplay bugs
•bad camera
-

Videogame.it: 3/5; readers: 3/5

The game shines only with practice and the willingness to learn every little bit about the mechanics and explore the depth of its controls.
If you haven't got the patience or ability to do that... stay away from the game, maybe go for something like DmC.
When compared to Capcom's title, the latter offers a more complete package, more cohesive design and better accessibility, while Rising's combat mechanics offers unrivalled depth. Wherever your priorities lie in an action game, there's your choice between the two.
-

Buddha Gaming.it: 8/10

+Satisfying sword mechanic
+frenetic and fluid action
+Demanding

•Terrible camera
•Short on content
•Platinum played it safe, didn't take any risk to make something groundbreaking
-

Everyeye.it: 8.0/10; readers 7.7/10

GFX: 8
Gameplay: 8.5
Longevity: 7.5
Soundtrack, sfx, dub: 7.5

+game content WITH the VR missions (PS3) is nothing to scoff at
+solid gameplay
+variety is Rising's main appeal: bosses, weapons, many different enemies
+there's some epic moments in the story...
–...but it's a bit flimsy
–not up to P+'s standards as far as gameplay/combat mechanics go
–camera doesn't keep up
 
Final judgement I will reserve for later after I have played the full game but I totally called it that DmC would be the better game :3.
 

Nemesis_

Member
Final judgement I will reserve for later after I have played the full game but I totally called it that DmC would be the better game :3.

But you're wrong.

DmC is the better game on your first time through. Rising is above and beyond for multiple play throughs.
 
Top Bottom