• 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 Solid 4 |OT| No Place to Hide, No Time for a Legend to FoxDie

Status
Not open for further replies.

Orlics

Member
dabookerman said:
Saying too many cutscenes is a flaw is only valid if said cutscenes are unskippable.
If a non MGS fan wanted to play the game, then I would be under the assumption that the story means nothing to them, and there would be no harm done if they were to skip these life threatening cutscenes.

You could argue that the cutscenes are the only way to get all of the plot, and that Kojima could have had them edited better.

That's actually one thing I like about MGS2. It had long cutscenes, but I think MGS4's were even longer. MGS2 didn't reveal everything outright; it left clues that pointed to the answers to some questions, whereas MGS4 tried as much as possible to throw every single answer at the player. Kojima tied up all the loose ends, but I think he took it to an extreme.
 

NME

Member
supercake said:
My take on Liquid Ocelot

Just how do we know that Ocelot is The Boss and The Sorrow's son anyway? Is this just assumed and not even 100% confirmed?

It is revealed during a codec conversation in MGS3. Someone with youtube access can probably post it for you.
 

Torquill

Member
Orlics said:
The question of whether the flaws in the game are "glaring" or "nitpicky" is also a subjective issue, is it not?

Absolutely. I never mentioned anything about glaring or nitpicky though, so your question confuses me a little. I was dealing with the concept of it being a " flaw" at all, not the degree.
 

dagZ

Member
The main menu gives almost gives away the ending! if you dont press start and just watch it, he unloads the clip, checks to see if theres a bullet in the gun, and kneels, and points the gun to his mouth.
 
Orlics said:
You could argue that the cutscenes are the only way to get all of the plot, and that Kojima could have had them edited better.

That's actually one thing I like about MGS2. It had long cutscenes, but I think MGS4's were even longer. MGS2 didn't reveal everything outright; it left clues that pointed to the answers to some questions, whereas MGS4 tried as much as possible to throw every single answer at the player. Kojima tied up all the loose ends, but I think he took it to an extreme.

Well maybe, but then it's merely opinion if you feel his way of narrative wasn't up to the players standard.
I mean, he clearly didn't spell everything out, look at the shitload of discussion still going on.
 

ianp622

Member
jonhuz said:
Attempting Big Boss emblem. Regarding Act 1 where you meet up with the Mk II. The amoured tank that appears, can you destroy it (won't count as a kill), in order to get the militia on side. It would make the run to Drebin much easier.

You can get the militia on your side by tranqing the PMC's as well. The funny thing is they say great job and such just for hitting them, even if they haven't fallen asleep yet.
 

REV 09

Member
Durante said:
It's not just not a glaring flaw, it's not a flaw at all. That's like calling the 3rd person perspective in most recent action games a flaw, or (good) turn based battles in JRPGs, or the fact that you only control one character in Oblivion. All these are part of what the games in question are, and all may be disliked by some, but none are flaws (much less glaring ones).
What is the difference between games and film? interactivity. All of the examples that you gave still existed in the realm of interactivity. MGS4 is more a game and a movie mashed together. When it isn't interactive then it isn't a game. This is all about where you draw the line between games and film and for me, I would consider at least half of my experience thus far with MGS4 not to be a game. When i sit the controller down for multiple 45-60min time spans then it ceases to be a game. It doesn't cease to be enjoyable though, and I'm not really saying that the game is shit or really dogging on it. I'm just saying that when I choose to play a game instead of pop in a movie, i do so because of interactivity, and this is why imo it is a flaw for a game to have such lengthy noninteractive or at best pseudo-interactive segments. This isn't related to a genre or a series. This is related to a form of entertainment.
 

Orlics

Member
Torquill said:
Absolutely. I never mentioned anything about glaring or nitpicky though, so your question confuses me a little. I was dealing with the concept of it being a " flaw" at all, not the degree.

Nah, I was referring to the person whom the guy you quoted was replying to.
 

Moray

Member
REV 09 said:
What is the difference between games and film? interactivity. All of the examples that you gave still existed in the realm of interactivity. MGS4 is more a game and a movie mashed together. When it isn't interactive then it isn't a game. This is all about where you draw the line between games and film and for me, I would consider at least half of my experience thus far with MGS4 not to be a game. When i sit the controller down for multiple 45-60min time spans then it ceases to be a game. It doesn't cease to be enjoyable though, and I'm not really saying that the game is shit or really dogging on it. I'm just saying that when I choose to play a game instead of pop in a movie, i do so because of interactivity, and this is why imo it is a flaw for a game to have such lengthy noninteractive or at best pseudo-interactive segments. This isn't related to a genre or a series. This is related to a form of entertainment.

My other issue with the length of the cutscenes is that it makes it really hard to play this game for less than hours at a time. I usually only have less than an hour to play games each day and this game isn't conducive to that because of the cutscenes (wish you could save during them). The fact that you lose all your items you've collected since the last checkpoint when you save doesn't help either.
 
So like, I quit MGS3 in the seond level cause I hated it. I'm feeling myself getting caught up in the MGS4 hype anyway though and am thinking about getting the game. Here are the things I hated about MGS3.. please tell me to what extent MGS4 corrects these issues, if it does:

1. Too much time spent reading pointless blabbing. (I get the impression that in MGS4 I'll be mostly watching the blabbing instead of reading it, which I'll probably find more tolerable.)

2. Having to pause the game and access a menu just to take a look at where I am on the map. Does MGS4 have an option to put a minimap up, or anything like that?

3. My main gameplay complaint: The game was supposed to emphasize stealth and sneaking around. But the thing is, I found sneaking around without getting caught to be a) quite hard b) totally pointless, since when I did get caught, it was trivial to just run around stabbing everyone in the face. This totally ruined the experience for me. Why bother with the difficult sneaking, when I can just run around stabbing everyone? And the stabbing wasnt fun, so the game just broke down for me.

Thanks for any input.
 

burgerdog

Member
ianp622 said:
You can get the militia on your side by tranqing the PMC's as well. The funny thing is they say great job and such just for hitting them, even if they haven't fallen asleep yet.

You don't have to do either of those things, if you're going for big boss emblem and are starting from a completed game save then you'll have the M.E. disguise as soon as you get the mk.II.
 

Dragon

Banned
REV 09 said:
What is the difference between games and film? interactivity. All of the examples that you gave still existed in the realm of interactivity. MGS4 is more a game and a movie mashed together. When it isn't interactive then it isn't a game. This is all about where you draw the line between games and film and for me, I would consider at least half of my experience thus far with MGS4 not to be a game. When i sit the controller down for multiple 45-60min time spans then it ceases to be a game. It doesn't cease to be enjoyable though, and I'm not really saying that the game is shit or really dogging on it. I'm just saying that when I choose to play a game instead of pop in a movie, i do so because of interactivity, and this is why imo it is a flaw for a game to have such lengthy noninteractive or at best pseudo-interactive segments. This isn't related to a genre or a series. This is related to a form of entertainment.

The controller isn't useless during cutscenes, not only because of the flashbacks but if it's in-game I believe you change the viewing angle a bit right? Or zoom in. I've never tried it but people were talking about it earlier. I figure that's more interactive than a movie.

The concerns are legitimate but it's sort of expected at this point with MGS. There were certain areas that I wish were more playable, that I thought could be more playable, but overall I'm really happy with the way the game turned out.
 

Solo

Member
tha_con said:

Damn, you are hot for me.

Also, are you that dense to not realize that your posting habits in this thread are identical to mine, except for replacing my "pointing out flaws" with your repeated verbal fellatio of the game? That's dumb too, and I dont see you stopping.
 

Costanza

Banned
Moray said:
My other issue with the length of the cutscenes is that it makes it really hard to play this game for less than hours at a time. I usually only have less than an hour to play games each day and this game isn't conducive to that because of the cutscenes (wish you could save during them). The fact that you lose all your items you've collected since the last checkpoint when you save doesn't help either.
Um, there's save points during the longer ones.
 

Dragon

Banned
teh_J0kerer said:
So like, I quit MGS3 in the seond level cause I hated it. I'm feeling myself getting caught up in the MGS4 hype anyway though and am thinking about getting the game. Here are the things I hated about MGS3.. please tell me to what extent MGS4 corrects these issues, if it does:

1. Too much time spent reading pointless blabbing. (I get the impression that in MGS4 I'll be mostly watching the blabbing instead of reading it, which I'll probably find more tolerable.)

You can argue that some of it is pointless. Certain conversations especially, but it really depends on the person, some people like a little back story.

teh_J0kerer said:
2. Having to pause the game and access a menu just to take a look at where I am on the map. Does MGS4 have an option to put a minimap up, or anything like that?

There's a minimap when you equip a certain item.

3. My main gameplay complaint: The game was supposed to emphasize stealth and sneaking around. But the thing is, I found sneaking around without getting caught to be a) quite hard b) totally pointless, since when I did get caught, it was trivial to just run around stabbing everyone in the face. This totally ruined the experience for me. Why bother with the difficult sneaking, when I can just run around stabbing everyone? And the stabbing wasnt fun, so the game just broke down for me.

Thanks for any input.

I found MGS4 really hard to be stealthy at (I think I had like 80 alerts in my playthrough) but then again I couldn't do anything in MGS1 without getting an alert either. I guess I don't have a delicate touch. But you can play MGS4 either way really, you can be stealth or you can be Rambo, especially on the easier difficulties.
 

Solo

Member
One of the best things about this game that doesnt get enough love is the solid eye. It does a near flawless job of combining several elements of the previous games into one system (radar, NV, binoculars). Just one of the many gameplays elements that had me very impressed.
 
dagZ said:
The main menu gives almost gives away the ending!
if you dont press start and just watch it, he unloads the clip, checks to see if theres a bullet in the gun, and kneels, and points the gun to his mouth.
You should've spoilered the whole text, you fucking idiot. Shit piece of cock.
 
N

NinjaFridge

Unconfirmed Member
heh, i just found out last night that you can tranq the Gekkos
 

tha_con

Banned
Solo said:
Damn, you are hot for me.

Also, are you that dense to not realize that your posting habits in this thread are identical to mine, except for replacing my "pointing out flaws" with your repeated verbal fellatio of the game? That's dumb too, and I dont see you stopping.

I actually have been discussing the story and characters more than I have been dropping verbal praise for the game. I'm sure you'll reply, since it's obvious you're a fiend for getting 'the last word'. I'll let you do that.

*places Solo on the ignore list*
 

Solo

Member
Doesn't putting me on ignore effectively give you the last word? Well played, good sir, and I look forward to not conversing with you in the future!
 

Dez

Member
teh_J0kerer said:
So like, I quit MGS3 in the seond level cause I hated it. I'm feeling myself getting caught up in the MGS4 hype anyway though and am thinking about getting the game. Here are the things I hated about MGS3.. please tell me to what extent MGS4 corrects these issues, if it does:

1. Too much time spent reading pointless blabbing. (I get the impression that in MGS4 I'll be mostly watching the blabbing instead of reading it, which I'll probably find more tolerable.)

2. Having to pause the game and access a menu just to take a look at where I am on the map. Does MGS4 have an option to put a minimap up, or anything like that?

3. My main gameplay complaint: The game was supposed to emphasize stealth and sneaking around. But the thing is, I found sneaking around without getting caught to be a) quite hard b) totally pointless, since when I did get caught, it was trivial to just run around stabbing everyone in the face. This totally ruined the experience for me. Why bother with the difficult sneaking, when I can just run around stabbing everyone? And the stabbing wasnt fun, so the game just broke down for me.

Thanks for any input.

Basically all the things you disliked about MGS3 are the same or just slightly better in MGS4.

1. There's tons of pointless babble in MGS4, especially in the mission briefings.

2. You do have to pause to look at your map, though this time there's a radar and it shows the general direction of where you want to go.

3. Stealth is still optional, and yes, it's much easier to go through the game by shooting everything. This time however, the action is really fun.. though i still recommend forcing yourself to do stealth when possible.

To me, MGS3 is one of the best games ever. MGS4 is excellent, but not as good. The story isn't as tight, characters aren't as memorable, bosses not nearly as clever, and the actual game is much shorter.
 

tha_con

Banned
Decado said:
How do you destroy the armoured vehicles in Act 1? I couldn't figure out how to climb on them or anything.

The best way is to get back from a nice distance after putting everyone to sleep and then hitting it with the RPG. You won't get any kills or alerts this way, and the Militia will still be on your side.
 
Dez said:
To me, MGS3 is one of the best games ever. MGS4 is excellent, but not as good. The story isn't as tight, characters aren't as memorable, bosses not nearly as clever, and the actual game is much shorter.

Are you playing on a SD TV by any chance?
 

jjasper

Member
One criticism I have that I haven't seen mentioned is why did they not do a split screen in act 1
when the PCM's start going crazy and have you trying (unsuccessfully) try and shoot Liquid in on screen and have all the crazy meltdowns going on in the other
 

Torquill

Member
REV 09 said:
What is the difference between games and film? interactivity. When it isn't interactive then it isn't a game.
I disagree. I think it's a defintion that exists on the level of the work, not on a moment of the work.

What is the difference between film and normal photographs? Movement. Does a movie cease being a movie for any period when nothing is moving on the screen? Does it count as long as they are swapping different pictures even if the pictures are identical?

What is the difference between film and television at this level? Is a sit-com a film? Is a film not a film when it's on televisions? Is film cinema? Does an opera cease being theature if you watch it on film?

There is interaction in the PRODUCT so the PRODUCT is a game. I think when you try to granuralize it othe point where it ceases being a game for any moment you aren't giving input, you start running into problems.

Video Games share a lot with visual entertainment and borrow a lot from film (and theature) just as film had it's share of trouble in the beginnin by mimicing theature too closely. THat doesn't mean it wasn't a film.

EDIT: I can't spell theatre. I kept the mispellings as evidence of my crime.
 
Dez said:
3. Stealth is still optional, and yes, it's much easier to go through the game by shooting everything. This time however, the action is really fun.. though i still recommend forcing yourself to do stealth when possible.


I dont get it.. isnt this series supposed to be about sneaking? If sneaking only leads to getting caught and being forced to easily kill everyone, whats the point? The Thief games do this right: sneak or die.
 

Blablurn

Member
jjasper said:
One criticism I have that I haven't seen mentioned is why did they not do a split screen in act 1
when the PCM's start going crazy and have you trying (unsuccessfully) try and shoot Liquid in on screen and have all the crazy meltdowns going on in the other

it would be lame if they had used it in the beginning. it's more epic in the end.
 

jjasper

Member
DangerStepp said:
Is there any point in the game where lying on your back and crawling/shimmying becomes useful?

If you get knocked down and have some bad guys around you it is easier to shoot lying on your back than to get up.
 

DangerStepp

Member
Firewire said:
Yes.....its right there in Act 1.
To throw a grenade? That's it?

jjasper said:
If you get knocked down and have some bad guys around you it is easier to shoot lying on your back than to get up.
True, but I was referring more to moving around the environment on your back. The only use I've found thus far is throwing grenades. The problem is that it want to use it effectively if there's a specific situation that calls for it.

I'm the kinda guy that loves to use everything at my disposable if possible.
 
teh_J0kerer said:
I dont get it.. isnt this series supposed to be about sneaking? If sneaking only leads to getting caught and being forced to easily kill everyone, whats the point? The Thief games do this right: sneak or die.


Increase the difficulty? This game gives you the option to sneak or go in guns blazing. While I will agree, Thief is the best "Stealth" series and Shalebridge Cradle is whack, Thief isn't MGS or vice-a-versa.
 

dalyr95

Member
Decado said:
How do you destroy the armoured vehicles in Act 1? I couldn't figure out how to climb on them or anything.
Turn left from where you enter the Militia base to the corpses which have the RPGs, there's a vent there that brings you beside the APC, and you can shoot it without being noticed. Also those barrels are explosive
 

jaaz

Member
I, for one, am not the least bit surprised to find some people complaining about the cut scenes. After all, many of these same people are from the same generation that believes Cloverfield was the greatest movie ever made, have never and would never play an adventure game if their life depended on it, and "DO NOT WANT" any semblance of an actual, mature story interfering with their run-and-shoot style of game playing.

On the other hand, some of us (perhaps the older crowd--who knows) want to view cut scenes so that we can understand and appreciate what we are doing in the gameplay, why we are doing it, and so that we can relate to and care about the character that we are playing. Any good movie director will tell you that if you can't make the audience care about what happens to the characters in your movie, you've failed.

Play any style game that you want, which may very well mean that MGS4 is not for you. But to criticize and label as "flawed" a game like MGS4 that actually dares in this day and age of mindless action shooters to blur the line between a movie and a game by using a number of cut scenes to tell a story and make the player care about the character they are playing, just shows naivety and immaturity.
 

Firewire

Banned
DangerStepp said:
To throw a grenade? That's it?

If I remember correctly you had to crawl under a car at one spot and under a collapsed wall at another. I'm sure there are more instances that will come into play, but due to limited playing time I'm only early on in Act 2.
 

Steroyd

Member
jjasper said:
One criticism I have that I haven't seen mentioned is why did they not do a split screen in act 1
when the PCM's start going crazy and have you trying (unsuccessfully) try and shoot Liquid in on screen and have all the crazy meltdowns going on in the other

Focus would be diverted from what is actually happening on the battlefield. Act 4 spoiler:
(I still havn't seen the Raiden - Vamp fight proper. :'(
 

Moray

Member
jaaz said:
I, for one, am not the least bit surprised to find some people complaining about the cut scenes. After all, many of these same people are from the same generation that believes Cloverfield was the greatest movie ever made, have never and would never play an adventure game if their life depended on it, and "DO NOT WANT" any semblance of an actual, mature story interfering with their run-and-shoot style of game playing.

On the other hand, some of us (perhaps the older crowd--who knows) want to view cut scenes so that we can understand and appreciate what we are doing in the gameplay, why we are doing it, and so that we can relate to and care about the character that we are playing. Any good movie director will tell you that if you can't make the audience care about what happens to the characters in your movie, you've failed.

Play any style game that you want, which may very well mean that MGS4 is not for you. But to criticize and label as "flawed" a game like MGS4 that actually dares in this day and age of mindless action shooters to blur the line between a movie and a game by using a number of cut scenes to tell a story and make the player care about the character they are playing, just shows naivety and immaturity.

Well call me naive and immature but I would much rather read a book to get a good story than to try and wade through the convoluted and seemingly shallow "mature" story that MGS4 is presenting. You seem to be confusing mature themes with a mature story.

It may not be a fair criticism of the game since much of its popularity is indeed because of the cutscenes and such, but stereotyping people like that isn't helping discussion, especially when you throw the ageism in there. And by calling these days the "age of mindless shooters" you're ignoring games like BioShock that integrate a "mature" story in a more interactive fashion.
 

Torquill

Member
jaaz said:
I, for one, am not the least bit surprised to find some people complaining about the cut scenes. After all, many of these same people are from the same generation that believes Cloverfield was the greatest movie ever made, have never and would never play an adventure game if their life depended on it, and "DO NOT WANT" any semblance of an actual, mature story interfering with their run-and-shoot style of game playing.

To be fair, and this is related to my previous post, I do not think the cut-scene represents the ultimate expression of game story-telling. It doesn't exploit any of the things that make games unique as a medium. Same problem with early film having no camera movement or edited shots, they hadn't figured out how to exploit the medium yet.

Or, to put another way, I wouldn't equate cut-scenes as the only way to express story. It is certainly the way MGS generates story in many cases. I dont' mind them. What bothers me more are the monologing exposition dumps :p.
 

burgerdog

Member
Steroyd said:
Focus would be diverted from what is actually happening on the battlefield. Act 4 spoiler:
(I still havn't seen the Raiden - Vamp fight proper. :'(

YES! Somebody needs to make a video of that so I could actually SEE IT!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom