Support NeoGAF

[frAntic_Frog]

It's a game for a very specific niche of gamers, giving it a 9.9 is the wrong message.

i dont agree
while its not a casual game like GTA4 or a OMG-TEH-WAGGLE game for grandmas, its still an action adventure game with stealth elements. its got shooting, explosions, robots, bossfights, over-the-shoulder, 70 different customizable weapons, monkey in diapers........not the most casual game, but FAR FAR FAR from a NICHE title. OKami was a niche title. God Hand was NICHE title. MEtal Gear, is NOT

 

[Frenck]

So basically he loved the game/s. Just not the story or the gameplay and especially not solid snake.

"Time to move on"

He explained it perfectly. Just read it again.

They are glad that MGS finished on a high note that's all.

@ frAntic_Frog

I didn't mean that it has to be accessible in order to be qualified for a 9.9. It's just a very polarizing game. I love the MG series but I can understand if someone just hates it and switches it off after 5 minutes.

It's been like that in the old MG games and if Eurogamer is right that might have carried over to MGS 4. It's clearly not for everyone. MGS 2 went over a lot of heads and both MGS 3 and MGS 4 seem to be pretty similar.

MGS 1 was short and sweet, not overly complicated and it could actually be finished even if you ignore the story completely. That has changed drastically since MGS 2.

 

[hauton]

An epic game deserves an epic official thread.

*salute*

 

[Pop On Arrival]

*nevermind*

 

[nelsonroyale]

Metal Gear seems to polarise people though, even though there's things I dislike about it I'm definitely one of those who would see past a lot of things and consider it holistically but perhaps that isn't fair on other games. It's really conflicting having a popular news source reviewing a game like MGS, they can either review it as someone who "gets" it or from the view point of someone who, say, doesn't visit NeoGaf. It would be tough for any reviewer, I'm just glad there's people who write about games and have an opinion rather than racing through a list of points they need to cover.

it does seem to be highlighted though...many games polarize people, it just seems this one does more than most...

I mean you could say SC is just as polarizing....considering the other aspects of the game

 

[Yoboman]

It's possible to love something and appreciate that this is the final part and that futhering the series with a 5th part should either be a complete restart or a bit of a departure. Much is made in the review that it will possibly remain a love/hate thing, and i'd go with the reviewer hinting for change.

the full phrase is "We love you, Snake. Don't come back."

We love you, Snake, we love the games until now, but perhaps it's time for change.

Finishing the Snake thread on a high prevents Solid Snake and Kojima's legacy from ever being tarnished.

:shrug:

F@lus, i dunno what you are trying to say. Eurogamers 8/10 doesn't concern me. I'll have my english language copy as soon as it turns up, and after talking to B.B and RP about it, i'm as syched for this as any other game.

It just seems that some of the reactions to -one- review and one specific comment are a bit OTT

Eurogamer has always struck me as a "if you're not doing it our way, you're doing it wrong" sort of site. It's not an objective fashion of reviewing, if it's not allowing you to move around while the scripted scene plays out like Half Life 2 or it [the story] is not subtle to the point of obscurity like a Team ICO game then it's being done wrong. It's a close-minded review

The review seemed to indicate they were going to tread the line between what people like and what people don't like about the series, yet it ended up quite callously catering to what people dislike about the series.

 

[DCharlie]

And is not better say "We love you, Snake. Farewell" or something like that? I mean something more "polite"?

you could, but that doesn't convey the notion that you don't want to see this particular character return.

but yeah.

it's not an objective fashion of reviewing

why should reviews be objective? they are opinion pieces by definition. Anyways, that's a whole new thread. Let's leave that here.

 

[BlazingDarkness]

Anyone? Epic OP btw!

yeah you thought right, that info is wrong there

 

[nelsonroyale]

There was a site posted near the beginning of this thread and the reviewer didn't award Metal Gear 4 a number or letter grade. It was just a write-up review with no senseless scoring attached to it. Gaming journalism really, really needs to get away from the whole "let's award games a number or letter score or we won't be considered legitimate journalists" mentality.

GTA IV has single handedly destroyed gaming journalism's credibility in my eyes. Even diehard fans of that series disagreed with the perfect 10's being freely passed about. The hyperbole in the reviews, the constant fellating, and the overall attitude of "let's hype this game up even though it doesn't need it" really sickened me.

The Eurogamer review criticizes Metal Gear 4 of being more of the same and awards it an 8. GTA IV, a game still plagued with problems that have persisted in every new installment of the franchise, was awarded a 10 by them. So maybe these reviewers should show some consistency and hold every game franchise under the same criteria.

I'm just sick of gaming media in general. There's an air of self-importance that seems to flow out of many gaming journalists that is extremely off-putting to me. If their not trying to suck their own dicks then they're needlessly hyping up games and generously passing out scores.

My point is that when journalists place such a huge emphasis on scoring then they destroy the hard work they put into writing the review in the first place. They might as well just post a number or letter grade and then sign their John Hancock onto it.

pretty much agreed.....some EXCELLENT games have been released the past year.... but this, bioshock, Orange Box, Halo 3, AC and GTA IV.....the mainstream in general overscores things by a wide margin.... Nothing objective is a 10...10 is a very subjective score...which may be added informally at the end of a review to detail the reviewers own enjoyment, but is in no way possible objectively

 

[mileS]

"The themes and desktops are awesome, not only that, but nearly every part of this thread has been expertly crafted and customized."

/Naked Snake

:lol


I can't post in here without thanking BruceLeeRoy and everyone else involved with making this thread. LEGENDARY THREAD confirmed. I've still got a lot of reading to do but after slowly scrolling through everything i'm fucking blown away at the amount of effort and information packed in this epic beast.

Screw a Metal Gear wikipedia page or a story FAQ... this thread has everything you'd ever need to know and sums up everything perfectly. Even after just finishing all three MGS games it still helps to read all of this, theres plenty of stuff that you can just straight up miss or not understand after beating these games a couple of times.

My GameBoner for MGS4 is hulk style exploding right now. Hype level is through the roof. I'm on vacation the week after the game comes out so I can easily see myself beating this game twice before the week is finished :lol

 

[thetrin]

So, how exactly is GTA not a polarizing franchise?

 

[Lince]

awesome OP and thread

review from meristation.com
link

10/10


+ the perfect game for Metal Gear fans
+ exciting, shocking, emotive
+ a movie perfectly mixed into a videogame
+ the art design and direction
+ brilliant visuals and sound
+ missions variety
+ new gameplay features improving the MGS experience
+ attention to detail, some of it only true fans will notice
+ the plot, answering every question about the saga

- tech./graphic. shortcoming (slowdown, loading between missions, some textures)
- if you haven't been following Kojima's work in MGS this might not be your game

 

[Annoying Old Party Man]

The person who wrote the review was obviously not a metal gear solid fan, and it shows.
I am not a metal gear solid fan myself (i LOVED the first playstation game but lost interest over the series after 2), and i had the same sentiments when i had to review the third game (also scored an 8).


The lunatic reactions here to a perfectly reasonable score (8 means very good - the text is also justifies the ratings) are silly and stupid, but that's how a series fanboy should react anyway - defending his beloved creation.

I wanted to see real progress in this final act of Kojima's epic mess, but i'm almost sure that significant advancements have been made at least in the interface side of things, so i'm sure that i will enjoy it a lot more than last time.

 

[Yoboman]

why should reviews be objective? they are opinion pieces by definition. Anyways, that's a whole new thread. Let's leave that here.

Because subjective reasoning often comes up horribly flawed

 

[Pug]

There was a site posted near the beginning of this thread and the reviewer didn't award Metal Gear 4 a number or letter grade. It was just a write-up review with no senseless scoring attached to it. Gaming journalism really, really needs to get away from the whole "let's award games a number or letter score or we won't be considered legitimate journalists" mentality.

GTA IV has single handedly destroyed gaming journalism's credibility in my eyes. Even diehard fans of that series disagreed with the perfect 10's being freely passed about. The hyperbole in the reviews, the constant fellating, and the overall attitude of "let's hype this game up even though it doesn't need it" really sickened me.

The Eurogamer review criticizes Metal Gear 4 of being more of the same and awards it an 8. GTA IV, a game still plagued with problems that have persisted in every new installment of the franchise, was awarded a 10 by them. So maybe these reviewers should show some consistency and hold every game franchise under the same criteria.

I'm just sick of gaming media in general. There's an air of self-importance that seems to flow out of many gaming journalists that is extremely off-putting to me. If their not trying to suck their own dicks then they're needlessly hyping up games and generously passing out scores.

EDGE tried it for an issue and each review was text only, saying that they did hide scores at the back of the magazine. I'd rather text only reviews as scores can never really reflect what you think about a game. Whats the difference between an 8.8 game and 9.2 game, what the hell is 0.4 in terms of a game or how it plays, its nonsense really. Thats why I can't beleive people get worked up about review scores. As for fans of the MGS games, do the review scores matter? You'd buy the game no matter anyway, wouldn't you?

 

[nelsonroyale]

you could, but that doesn't convey the notion that you don't want to see this particular character return.

but yeah.



why should reviews be objective? they are opinion pieces by definition. Anyways, that's a whole new thread. Let's leave that here.

reviews should attempt to be as objective as possible...

it just seems that magazine review alot higher than before.... Im pretty sure this is a fact.

 

[Yoshichan]

"The themes and desktops are awesome, not only that, but nearly every part of this thread has been expertly crafted and customized."

/Naked Snake

OMG :lol

 

[Yoboman]

The Eurogamer review is pretty good. I want the game even more now

I think there is some justification for the score too. It isn't a game for everyone. Some gamers won't even make it past the intro. It's a game for a very specific niche of gamers, giving it a 9.9 is the wrong message.

Since when were reviews supposed to cater to popularity instead of quality?

 

[pswii60]

Why's everyone so upset about the 8/10 from Eurogamer? They gave Halo 1 & 2 8/10, Gears 8/10, Resistance 6/10. All of which have gone against the grain.

Besides, it's the review text you should all be reading. Then you might understand why in the reviewer's personal opinion, he thought it deserved 8/10.

Fact is, if you're a MGS fan, this looks set to be the best game you could possibly imagine.

MGS is and always has been heavily cutscene driven: one of the reasons why Edge marked MGS2 down. While I enjoy the mix of story and action, we all have to accept that it's not everyone's cup of tea.

 

[itsinmyveins]

Because subjective reasoning often comes up horribly flawed

How do you review a game without being subjective?

 

[Truant]

10 in graphics?

Not so much, IGN. Not so much.

 

[SolidSnakex]

10 in graphics?

Not so much, IGN. Not so much.

So you've been lucky enough to play through it?

 

[Yoboman]

How do you review a game without being subjective?

See Greg K's style of reviews. Or most of Gamespot's pre-2007

 

[Roxas]

I really wish i didnt read the track listing on the OST

 

[syllogism]

awesome OP and thread

review from meristation.com
link

10/10


+ the perfect game for Metal Gear fans
+ exciting, shocking, emotive
+ a movie perfectly mixed into a videogame
+ the art design and direction
+ brilliant visuals and sound
+ missions variety
+ new gameplay features improving the MGS experience
+ attention to detail, some of it only true fans will notice
+ the plot, answering every question about the saga

- tech./graphic. shortcoming (slowdown, loading between missions, some textures)
- if you haven't been following Kojima's work in MGS this might not be your game

How can this be the perfect game for Metal Gear Solid Fans if it has tech/graphic shortcomings!??! Do metal gear fans like slowdown and loading and some textures?! This sounds like a SUBJECTIVE review.

 

[nelsonroyale]

Why's everyone so upset about the 8/10 from Eurogamer? They gave Halo 1 & 2 8/10, Gears 8/10, Resistance 6/10. All of which have gone against the grain.

Besides, it's the review text you should all be reading. Then you might understand why in the reviewer's personal opinion, he thought it deserved 8/10.

Fact is, if you're a MGS fan, this looks set to be the best game you could possibly imagine.

MGS is and always has been heavily cutscene driven: one of the reasons why Edge marked MGS2 down. While I enjoy the mix of story and action, we all have to accept that it's not everyone's cup of tea.

yeah, I agree with that to some extent, but the review does come across as an argument that he is scrambling to construct, under the knowledge that his opinion will be unpopular....

personally I think the 10 scores for this game are also probably inaccurate (as they are for other games), its obvious they are scoring this highly in response to current scoring trends (well I scored this game a, so...)

 

[SamuraiX-]

There was a site posted near the beginning of this thread and the reviewer didn't award Metal Gear 4 a number or letter grade. It was just a write-up review with no senseless scoring attached to it. Gaming journalism really, really needs to get away from the whole "let's award games a number or letter score or we won't be considered legitimate journalists" mentality.

GTA IV has single handedly destroyed gaming journalism's credibility in my eyes. Even diehard fans of that series disagreed with the perfect 10's being freely passed about. The hyperbole in the reviews, the constant fellating, and the overall attitude of "let's hype this game up even though it doesn't need it" really sickened me.

The Eurogamer review criticizes Metal Gear 4 of being more of the same and awards it an 8. GTA IV, a game still plagued with problems that have persisted in every new installment of the franchise, was awarded a 10 by them. So maybe these reviewers should show some consistency and hold every game franchise under the same criteria.

I'm just sick of gaming media in general. There's an air of self-importance that seems to flow out of many gaming journalists that is extremely off-putting to me. If their not trying to suck their own dicks then they're needlessly hyping up games and generously passing out scores.

My point is that when journalists place such a huge emphasis on scoring then they destroy the hard work they put into writing the review in the first place. They might as well just post a number or letter grade and then sign their John Hancock onto it.

Awesome post man. Truly beautiful. It's like you strangled me and ripped the words right out of my throat. Gaming journalism has slowly, but very surely been going on a downward spiral the past couple of years. I still remember the days where I would actually base whether or not I would buy a game based on reading several reviews from trusted websites. Now it's just a fucking pissing contest between those sites that involves just following the trend of scores or scoring a game just to stand out among all the other numbers.

It really is sad because there are plenty of others out there who CONTINUE to base their video game purchases on journalist reviews, not knowing how truly fucked up and inaccurate these sources have become.

 

[Yoboman]

Why's everyone so upset about the 8/10 from Eurogamer? They gave Halo 1 & 2 8/10, Gears 8/10, Resistance 6/10. All of which have gone against the grain.

Besides, it's the review text you should all be reading. Then you might understand why in the reviewer's personal opinion, he thought it deserved 8/10.

Fact is, if you're a MGS fan, this looks set to be the best game you could possibly imagine.

MGS is and always has been heavily cutscene driven: one of the reasons why Edge marked MGS2 down. While I enjoy the mix of story and action, we all have to accept that it's not everyone's cup of tea.

Why do you presume we're complaining about the score and not the text?

 

[Mash]

reviews should attempt to be as objective as possible...

Untenable option which is fortunately becoming apparent and done away with. I like 1Up's style where you get to know the reviewer's character and gauge it that way.

 

[Shake Appeal]

How do you 'objectify' an opinion?

I mean, Oli even makes clear at various points in the review that if you already love the series you are going to love this one. What exactly are people complaining about? That they won't be able to print out the metacritic score and frame it over their bed with pride? Grow the fuck up, GAF. The game is clearly dazzling, mindblowing fan service and will satisfy your every wish and desire for a next-generation Metal Gear game. You will adore it. Not everyone will, or does. That is not a crime.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Why's everyone so upset about the 8/10 from Eurogamer? They gave Halo 1 & 2 8/10, Gears 8/10, Resistance 6/10. All of which have gone against the grain.

Besides, it's the review text you should all be reading. Then you might understand why in the reviewer's personal opinion, he thought it deserved 8/10.

The text is exactly what people are taking issue with, not the score. So i'm not exactly sure what you're trying to get at.

 

[Delriach]

This thread is amazing...

 

[Absinthe (Permed)]

Why's everyone so upset about the 8/10 from Eurogamer? They gave Halo 1 & 2 8/10, Gears 8/10, Resistance 6/10. All of which have gone against the grain.

Besides, it's the review text you should all be reading. Then you might understand why in the reviewer's personal opinion, he thought it deserved 8/10.

Fact is, if you're a MGS fan, this looks set to be the best game you could possibly imagine.

MGS is and always has been heavily cutscene driven: one of the reasons why Edge marked MGS2 down. While I enjoy the mix of story and action, we all have to accept that it's not everyone's cup of tea.

I personally think they grade too harshly and a part of me thinks that they intentionally do it for recognition. A 6 for Resistance is an utter travesty worthy of scorn.

It's like I said, gaming journalism has placed itself in this shitty position. They've trivialized their words by placing an emphasis on scores. As a result, no one cares about the text anymore.

 

[hauton]

I don't mind the 8/10 score really.

Eurogamer is so far down on my totem pole of reviewer respect I'd sooner take a Geocities Halo fansite's review.

 

[Mecha_Infantry]

I think there is some justification for the score too. It isn't a game for everyone. Some gamers won't even make it past the intro. It's a game for a very specific niche of gamers, giving it a 9.9 is the wrong message.

am not compute

so you are saying unless the game is popular then it cant get a high score? wtf?

 

[kbear]

10 in graphics?

Not so much, IGN. Not so much.

It says in the graphics summary that they were taking the art style into consideration. Of course it's not a 10 technically or whatever... there are lots of games with better graphics, but they say:

boasting as much style as technical expertise.

meaning art style counts as well, as it should.

 

[FirewalkR]

Just wait till the US GAFers wake up.

Hahaha the fun should start in little over 3 hours (assuming Eastern American gamers wake up at 9AM).

Anyway, mods (that is you, Evilore), is there any way to show some kind of an award icon next to the thread in the thread list, perhaps on the same spot left of the title where the "read/unread/locked" symbols go? Because this game clearly deserves a thread title that relates to the game itself, without the usual jokes that usually appear in later in the life of official threads, but at the same time this thread deserves to be called something like "Metal Gear Solid 4 Official Thread of Best Official Thread EVER". So, how about giving it more recognition, as it truly deserves?

 

[Pop On Arrival]

I was in a similar situation just a couple of months ago and right away I thought: "I need to keep my calm, I need to play MGS4 first".

Sucks, eh? Let's try our best not to get our shit killed before we beat the game. :lol

 

[DCharlie]

So you've been lucky enough to play through it?

well, doesn't look like it's a prerequesit for everyone shouting down Eurogamer, at least we've actually seen big chunks of it running!

that said , technically it doesn't look outstanding, but the art direction looks phenomenal, so for me i'd say it's at the top of it's class.

ha ha, ironically talking to people who have played it to completion, i doubt anyone here is actually prepared for the full game.

 

[Rainy Dog]

There was a site posted near the beginning of this thread and the reviewer didn't award Metal Gear 4 a number or letter grade. It was just a write-up review with no senseless scoring attached to it. Gaming journalism really, really needs to get away from the whole "let's award games a number or letter score or we won't be considered legitimate journalists" mentality.

GTA IV has single handedly destroyed gaming journalism's credibility in my eyes. Even diehard fans of that series disagreed with the perfect 10's being freely passed about. The hyperbole in the reviews, the constant fellating, and the overall attitude of "let's hype this game up even though it doesn't need it" really sickened me.

The Eurogamer review criticizes Metal Gear 4 of being more of the same and awards it an 8. GTA IV, a game still plagued with problems that have persisted in every new installment of the franchise, was awarded a 10 by them. So maybe these reviewers should show some consistency and hold every game franchise under the same criteria.

I'm just sick of gaming media in general. There's an air of self-importance that seems to flow out of many gaming journalists that is extremely off-putting to me. If their not trying to suck their own dicks then they're needlessly hyping up games and generously passing out scores.

My point is that when journalists place such a huge emphasis on scoring then they destroy the hard work they put into writing the review in the first place. They might as well just post a number or letter grade and then sign their John Hancock onto it.

Good post Absinthe. But I think the GTAIV reviews were merely the final straw not the single handed destructive blow.

 

[Yoboman]

While we're heading that way. My opinion is that the gaming media needs to evolve into a medium with more "reviewers" and less "review sites" with reviewers catering to their "scale". Take Yahtzee, although he is over-the-top and I disagree with him half the time, he is uncompromising and a one-man-operation, you know what to expect from him and that's consistency. He is purely subjective, but because it's a one man deal, it works as it should

The movie industry is already like this

 

[nelsonroyale]

Untenable option which is fortunately becoming apparent and done away with. I like 1Up's style where you get to know the reviewer's character and gauge it that way.

hehe, I've review books etc myself, and generally you strive to perhaps argue from a certain perspective, with a balanced argument, acounting for both sides of the story...

the eurogamer review fails on that account....though of course so do many of the positive reviews...

 

[itsinmyveins]

See Greg K's style of reviews. Or most of Gamespot's pre-2007

And how are they objective? You can point out broken stuff in a game -- bugs and etc -- and be fairly objective on that part since slowdowns isn't really a matter of liking, but in fact a downside and a negative effect of having a lot on the screen at the same time or whatever. But that's pretty much it.

In the end it's always a subjective score based on a persons reasoning on mechanics of the game and how much he/she enjoys it. Some people might think the controls are flawed while other likes them, for instance.

Same, of course, goes for design and etc.

The main thing you can do is present your reasoning and why you think this and that about a game.

 

[Shake Appeal]

A 6 for Resistance is an utter travesty worthy of scorn.

It was originally rated higher (they reviewed all the launch titles at the time of the US launch), and then rescored when the European launch of the PS3 finally occurred. I can't remember if it was two different reviewers but I suspect it was.

Eurogamer aren't aspiring toward some 'objective' buyer's guide (although their review score criteria, which I imagine none of you have read, makes some suggestions about what a score entails for the consumer), they're recognizing the different tastes and opinions of the differing, opinionated staff under their umbrella.

Some of you are far, far too upset about what one man, Oli Walsh, thinks of a game that you are clearly going to love and enjoy. Think about what you are doing, and take a few deep breaths before hitting submit.

 

[Forsete]

That is one kick ass OP. Only MGS4 is worthy of such a OP.

 

[Truant]

It says in the graphics summary that they were taking the art style into consideration. Of course it's not a 10 technically or whatever... there are lots of games with better graphics, but they say:

meaning art style counts as well, as it should.

As was I.

 

[nelsonroyale]

well, doesn't look like it's a prerequesit for everyone shouting down Eurogamer, at least we've actually seen big chunks of it running!

that said , technically it doesn't look outstanding, but the art direction looks phenomenal, so for me i'd say it's at the top of it's class.

ha ha, ironically talking to people who have played it to completion, i doubt anyone here is actually prepared for the full game.

yeah, I definitely dont think the game is the most technically advanced...but the artistry is incredible... that is part of the reason GTA IV justifiably scored high in graphics....personally I think the artistry in MGS is easily one of the best in gaming....probably the best Ive seen in a next gen game... I love stream lined dynamic designs though

 

[Nemo]

Holy shit! This thread will be legendary!

 

[DCharlie]

yeah, I definitely dont think the game is the most technically advanced...but the artistry is incredible... that is part of the reason GTA IV justifiably scored high in graphics....personally I think the artistry in MGS is easily one of the best in gaming....probably the best Ive seen in a next gen game... I love stream lined dynamic designs though

i was taken by the street to street battle sequences personally - looked awesome, can't wait to play through.

 

[Absinthe (Permed)]

It was originally rated higher (they reviewed all the launch titles at the time of the US launch), and then rescored when the European launch of the PS3 finally occurred. I can't remember if it was two different reviewers but I suspect it was.

Eurogamer aren't aspiring toward some 'objective' buyer's guide (although their review score criteria, which I imagine none of you have read, makes some suggestions about what a score entails for the consumer), they're recognizing the different tastes and opinions of the differing, opinionated staff under their umbrella.

Some of you are far, far too upset about what one man, Oli Walsh, thinks of a game that you are clearly going to love and enjoy. Think about what you are doing, and take a few deep breaths before hitting submit.

That's even worse because they didn't have the balls to stick with their original score.