Support NeoGAF

[JumpCancel]

People always crap on Twilight Princess for having a world with nothing to do in it. I found MGS5's to be even emptier.

Tell you what MGSV needed. Fishing. Or Pooyan. Or some charm. They didn't want it to be lighthearted due to "Becoming a Demon" but then we got little to none of that. It's just guy who rescues kids and animals and collects music.

If TPP had a 1/4 of the character that PW did, it would've helped significantly.

 

[Ishida]

Tell you what MGSV needed. Fishing. Or Pooyan. Or some charm. They didn't want it to be lighthearted due to "Becoming a Demon" but then we got little to none of that. It's just guy who rescues kids and animals and collects music.

If TPP had a 1/4 of the character that PW did, it would've helped significantly.

The problem is that the game failed even at that.

 

[SolidChamp]

I consider MGS3 to be one of the greatest games ever made having held my personal GOAT title for quite some time until TLOU came along. MGS2 solidified my reason for buying a PS2. MGS4 was my reason for buying a PS3.

And MGSV will go down as one of the most baffling, and most disappointing games I've played in some time. The very minute I learned it was using a mission structure similar to Peace Walker, I knew I was in trouble.

An "open-world" Metal Gear was always gonna be a bad idea.

 

[Ishida]

I consider MGS3 to be one of the greatest games ever made having held my personal GOAT title for quite some time until TLOU came along. MGS2 solidified my reason for buying a PS2. MGS4 was my reason for buying a PS3.

And MGSV will go down as one of the most baffling, and most disappointing games I've played in some time. The very minute I learned it was using a mission structure similar to Peace Walker, I knew I was in trouble.

An "open-world" Metal Gear was always gonna be a bad idea.

Personally, there is no game that has disappointed me more in my entire gaming life than MGSV.

 

[Mr_eX]

Most disappointing game I've ever played.

 

[Lunar15]

Seriously though, people keep saying story was bad but the gameplay was good and that we can divide it into those camps. But I'd divide it into 3:

Story = Bad (but who cares? Bayonetta has a bad story and I love it)

Gameplay = The mechanics were great and what most people love about the game. Snake feels great, his weapons are cool, and there's a lot of ways to approach each mission. It's a fun little sandbox, but my god does it show its limits when we get to the structure of the game, which is my next part:

Structure = This personally my biggest issue with the game. It's a mess. From repetitive missions (both main and ops), a really badly laid out open world that's pretty much just challenge maps with space between them, the really egregious real time timers on weapons, The constant intros and outros to missions, having to leave mother base and come back to initiate some scenes, the quarantine missions being poorly set up, and the fact that the game's structure (NOT narrative) has no gameplay payoff, are all just way too much for me to ignore. Upon arriving in chapter 2, it became immediately apparent that this game wasn't finished, and I'm not talking about it from a story standpoint. The game loves to waste your time.

I think these all have different weights for different people. Some can ignore story and structure to revel in the sandbox nature of snake's abilities. Some, like me, can ignore the story, love the gameplay, but have significant issues with the structure's inability to remain interesting. I think people can be pulled by any one of these three factors. I think you can have a game with mediocre gameplay mechanics, but a highly interesting structure that builds as you go. I think you can have a game with a great story, but not so great gameplay and structure, and have that be enough to draw in a specific crowd.

It's also important to note that I can bring up and talk about all of these elements without comparing it to past metal gear games. I judge a game on its own strengths, not what the rest of the series is.

 

[Alienous]

The problem is that the game failed even at that.

Yeah, that was annoying, because it was just cowardly.

Instead of that Kojima manages to do the opposite

Spoiler

by having you play as a character who decides to save the world, not because that's his mission, but because he wants to. Instead of being a demon you are the most heroic Metal Gear Solid protagonist.

 

[Kindekuma]

Are we just taking mechanics in a vacuum when we talk about the "gameplay" or are we also considering level design and mission variety?

Because the latter two are just as important, on top of the pacing and rewards.

I'm talking more about base mechanics, controls, etc. The actual stealth gameplay is amazing, I also like the base building aspect too.

The mission variety is pretty pathetic but there are some great missions like Ground Zeroes, 12, 13, 28, 30, 31, and 42. The one major main story mission that differs widely from others have you look for a photograph in some ruins. It's either extract this or destroy that. KJP teased a camera function with the MGO reveal trailer, why not incorporate PW's ghost photography or just "find evidence and send a photo to MB" like the opening of MGS2? There could've been so much more.

 

[Unknown One]

You sound like someone who enjoys challenge in their games, someone who finds value in a game that tests you SKILL. MGSV is on the opposite side of the spectrum: it tests your CREATIVITY. It needs to empower the player with tools that allow him to get the job done in a plethora of ways.

That's an accurate assessment. I do enjoy a challenge and I tend to utilize efficiency instead of creativity.

 

[SkylineRKR]

I easily put 40 hours into this, but I still felt this game was a fraud. Because it does not end. So, the final Metal Gear game does not bring any form of closure and it doesn't deal with the missing link.

PW had more story, though it was completely shit. And it had more diverse locales. MGSV is all about a middle eastern desert and an african jungle. Open world has its benefits but you will always lose out on great level design and this game is no different. There is nothing remotely good like the Tanker in here.

 

[Ishida]

Yeah, that was annoying, because it was just cowardly.

Instead of that Kojima manages to do the opposite

Spoiler

by having you play as a character who decides to save the world, not because that's his mission, but because he wants to. Instead of being a demon you are the most heroic Metal Gear Solid protagonist.

Yeah. I mean, who became a demon, exactly? Huey? I highly doubt that was the intended outcome.

 

[DukeBobby]

The core mechanics are undeniably brilliant, but the whole game is just a dull, bland slog. The mission design is insanely repetitive, and the main story is dreadfully paced with at least 2/3 of the missions being glorified side ops. Also, the story is completely forgettable and the characters even more so.

The game might earn a place in my top 10 due to the mechanics alone, but it is looking increasingly unlikely.

 

[Roni]

I had an idea for a simple mod for MGSV the other day. Killing child soldiers no longer results in a game over screen. Instead, each child kill gives you a huge amount of demon points.

Hope someone makes that...

 

[Alienous]

You sound like someone who enjoys challenge in their games, someone who finds value in a game that tests you SKILL. MGSV is on the opposite side of the spectrum: it tests your CREATIVITY. It needs to empower the player with tools that allow him to get the job done in a plethora of ways.

Even then the creativity is hampered by bad game design decisions.

A ranking system that presents you with a correct way of playing doesn't engender creativity, it stifles it. "Oh, I can't use this because it'll impact my rank", "I should probably play this way to get an S".

The Fulton system, and the non-lethality it encourages, again stifles your creativity. There are a ton of tools, but in my experience only a few that you feel at liberty to use. The game doesn't stop you, but it does discourage you from being truly creative.

 

[Clear]

Personally, there is no game that has disappointed me more in my entire gaming life than MGSV.

I think that says more about you and your expectations than the game itself.

 

[Xenoblade]

I thought the game was horrible. It's not a Metal Gear Solid game at all.

 

[Ishida]

I think that says more about you and your expectations than the game itself.

You don't say?

 

[Tagyhag]

I don't disagree.

It has fantastic gameplay, it's open world, the cutscenes are too spread out, and there's no memorable bosses.

It's a bad MGS game.

 

[Yopis]

MGS V doesn't have the best story in the series, but it's the best MGS game. Deal with it haters.

Few hundred people that didn't want the series to change. Haters scream the loudest. Game was awesome. Ran through 2 and Snake Eater last year for kicks. Had been years since I played them. Gameplay wise this was my favorite. GAF hates everything.

 

[Glendemonium]

Rising was a better Metal Gear game.

Hopefully Konami contact PG for the next MGS game.

Couldn't agree more.

Personally, I wouldn't mind Rising becoming part of the mainline series, PG did Raiden and co much justice. Next game should let players choose to go nuts with hacking and slashing, or stealth. Sort of a throwback to the Sons of Liberty.

There's so much room in Raiden's world there is no limit, hell bring back Rosemary and Otacon for nostalgia's sake.

I mean, we're kind of done with the legacy of Big Boss and Solid Snake's story is pretty much finished. Only so much ground you can cover now unless they start doing "alternate universe" or full on retcon the original games.

 

[Phoenix944]

The game is "horrible" ? Please...

 

[SkylineRKR]

Even then the creativity is hampered by bad game design decisions.

A ranking system that presents you with a correct way of playing doesn't engender creativity, it stifles it. "Oh, I can't use this because it'll impact my rank", "I should probably play this way to get an S".

The Fulton system, and the non-lethality it encourages, again stifles your creativity. There are a ton of tools, but in my experience only a few that you feel at liberty to use. The game doesn't stop you, but it does discourage you from being truly creative.

For S, all you have to do is break the game and rush in. The worst offender is Traitors Caravan, once you know where they start you can simply go to the spawn area instead of going through all that shit.

I also saw a video of a D Walker rushing through everything in Mission 30 and grabbing S.

The game is also pretty short. The missions are in fact really small, but they're being stretched out with useless objectives. Once I got the hang of it by chapter 20 or so I really rushed through the game and my scores improved.

 

[bitoriginal]

I'm in the bitterly disappointed camp. Mechanics were outstanding but it wasn't the Metal Gear Solid game I was expecting, or wanted.

 

[Wasp]

Yeah, I agree.

Everything that makes Metal Gear Solid series awesome - the boss fights, the story, the music, Snake's personality, David Hayter - was absent in MGSV. That's why I would put it as my least favourite of the five main games.

 

[JumpCancel]

Only so much ground you can cover now unless they start doing "alternate universe" or full on retcon the original games.

You tell that to Konami. I can't wait for the shoehorned games to come.

I would love if their next game was amazing. Kojipro headed by a different director may not have been a bad idea. But with kojima and co gone, I doubt it would be anything but on par with Acid 2.

 

[Mr_Kuschels]

Heh.

Easily the best gameplay in the series. So many options, it's a true possibility space.

+1 I didn't like the other titles in the series, but I really enjoyed 5.

 

[Roni]

Even then the creativity is hampered by bad game design decisions.

A ranking system that presents you with a correct way of playing doesn't engender creativity, it stifles it. "Oh, I can't use this because it'll impact my rank", "I should probably play this way to get an S".

The Fulton system, and the non-lethality it encourages, again stifles your creativity. There are a ton of tools, but in my experience only a few that you feel at liberty to use. The game doesn't stop you, but it does discourage you from being truly creative.

Disagree, even the ranking system is pretty open. You can get S-ranks killing people, but the game does require you to move to extremes. Slow and methodical for stealth, quick and efficient for combat.

Even then, you don't need to get S-ranks at all. The game tries to support skill-based approaches as well and Kojima was aware of tools that broke the system too hard, hence why they hinder you in getting an S-rank.

But there's reason to play the game beyond the S-ranks, which are the side objectives, or even completing the game for the first time.

Your argument that tools prevent you from getting an S-rank and that there's a "correct" way to play the game tell me you're also a player that emphasizes effectiveness over creativity. So what if there's a "correct" way of playing? It's absolutely not like the "correct" way of playing is the only way of playing. Enjoy the game and play as you want, not as the game tell you to.

Like that sweet Fulton Ballista? Use it.
Want to role play some intense rescue scenarios with chopper fire support? Call it.

 

[JayEH]

Great game. Has its downfalls for sure but I love it still. Every Metal Gear is different and V continues the trend. But honestly it really is just another game with Metal Gear slapped on to the title. It's obvious Kojima wanted grander plans but was constrained by the Metal Gear IP. Maybe the game suffered because of this but I still enjoyed the end product. I hated the story for a good while. Now I've come to accept it and am ok with it. Of course it has a load of issues but I liked the idea of where it was trying to go. In the end it was worthy of being a Metal Gear to me.

 

[Sephiroth503]

Structure = This personally my biggest issue with the game. It's a mess. From repetitive missions (both main and ops), a really badly laid out open world that's pretty much just challenge maps with space between them, the really egregious real time timers on weapons, The constant intros and outros to missions, having to leave mother base and come back to initiate some scenes, the quarantine missions being poorly set up, and the fact that the game's structure (NOT narrative) has no gameplay payoff, are all just way too much for me to ignore. Upon arriving in chapter 2, it became immediately apparent that this game wasn't finished, and I'm not talking about it from a story standpoint. The game loves to waste your time.

This was the biggest thing for me. Very frustrating and in your face the whole time.

 

[Omnistalgic]

Found it utterly boring.

The gameplay systems are great, but the open world is boring, the missions are repetitive, the story sucks, and the post-release patches that turn the game into a Konami FOB protection racket are fucking disgusting.

First MGS game I've never bothered to finish. Sold it instead.

Powerful stuff...

I love gameplay focused games, but with this series, you kinda have to have the best of both worlds to appease fans. Hmm...guess Hideo really did run out of ideas, or planned for this to be a new chapter in the franchise and gave only bits of the story. Was really hoping this was the big finale, picked up the game for $40, so not that big of a deal, but I'm positive I'm going to be one of the ones disappointed, only less so, as my expectations are already low. I do play MGS titles for the gameplay, but it's second to the whacky story, amazing cutscenes, and unique boss battles.

 

[Shadow Ranger]

Weak entry for me, too (though I do want to play the real MGSV...PW).

The core game, once you're actually doing a mission, is fun, but the rest was just not very good.

Still pissed there was too much time wasted on chopper rides. Were KojimaProd being pretentious or just had no idea how to program a fast travel in (even the box travel on MB was slow!)?

I felt like Kojima looked at Ubi too hard and felt he needed to make his game like theirs. A terrible mistake. Bigger does not mean better. MGS3's focused, linear style made for a superior gaming experience. The 100+ hours spent in V far too many were traversing the barren land (and riding a god damn chopper).

The mission structure was also awful. Heuy missions were clearly relevant and important to the game. So why were they Side-Ops? The repeated missions in Chapter 2 were as if they were placeholders that should have been rearranged but they ran out of time, or something. It was all a bit messy.

Oh, and the cut mission. Yeah..

It was a disappointment overall, and as a result, I am curious to see how Konami move without Kojima's overly inflated ambition (that seemed too great even for him). I can't help but feel they saw MGSV's state and weren't happy with Kojima.

In the mean time, gimme MGR2,

Edit: Actually, this reminds me of Devil May Cry 4 a lot. The core gameplay is pretty good, but the rest being all over the place. *sigh*

 

[Ishida]

The constant intros and outros to missions

"Directed by Hideo Kojima"

"Featuring The Skulls Unit".

Fuck that noise.

 

[AzureFlame]

MGS1>3>4>2>>>5. IMO

Amazing gameplay tho.

 

[JKRMA]

Yep. Amazing gameplay and productions values but still a poor metal gear solid game. If you took the gameplay of mgs5 along with its amazing engine and performance and mix it with the story, characters and cut scenes of mgs4, it would be the bestest game evah!

 

[thesolidshark]

I love every single Metal Gear Solid game for entirely different reasons. Like Bloodborne, it took me a little while to get the hooks in my skin and start getting inventive. Once I started really nailing the stealth and head shots and gadgets and gizmos I got hooked! Not only in the game, but in the meta games! Tape collecting, MB building, S ranking. It took me a bit but I got there in a big way.

Yes, it feels more different than any other game in the series... but tonal changes aren't really new. In fact, I hear huge divides between MGS 2 and 3 fans based on what they wanted from an MGS narrative. This happens every release... it woudln't be an MGS game without fervent opinions flying around.

At the end of the day I've just decided that Kojima tries such different things in every title that every game won't be for every one. Actually, every MGS game isn't for every MGS fan. In that... I have become content.

(for reference I really disliked 4 until recently, I just had to appreciate it in a light different than I appreciated any of the other ones. I learned to love it because it kept me smiling with it's silliness, while I'd still criticize it pretty heavily.)

With the exception of your last point about MGS 4 (I liked it from the start), I'm in agreement with you. I've been a big fan of the franchise since the MSX/NES entries, and the points you make, especially the one's bolded, are one reason why I love the series so much. There's a different gameplay/narrative reason to go back to any game, even spin-offs.

I'd say OP should play more before deciding if he wants to keep up his claim, but somehow I don't see their mind changing with this one. I will say playing Peace Walker very much got me used to what GZ and TPP is, so adapting to the changes weren't as dramatic for me as with others who didn't play it. I wouldn't begrudge anyone who says they didn't like it or felt disappointed by it, it definitely has flaws at times, but I would disagree in calling it a bad game, or a bad MGS game. It's a different MGS or Metal Gear game in-general, as they all were. TPP by itself was a great game that I still enjoy playing, and will definitely replay again.

 

[FATALITY]

MGS1>3>4>2>>>5. IMO

Amazing gameplay tho.

i love you

 

[Wagram]

"Directed by Hideo Kojima"

"Featuring The Skulls Unit".

Fuck that noise.

Yeah I loved that missions were essentially spoiled before even playing them. It was a fantastic design choice!

Spoiler

Fucking hated it.

 

[Omnistalgic]

SNIP
This turned out to be much longer then I expected so TL;DR:
MGS V is to the "Philosophy of Mechanics", what Heavy Rain/Beyond was to the "Philosophy of the Tale". A poster-child of when a good philosophical intention made a bad game. In this particular case; with catastrophical consequences for the developer.
Nothing wrong with valuing either Story over Gameplay or Gameplay over Story, as long as gamers understand that there is pro's and con's to them both. And most importantly; Good Gameplay does NOT unequivocally mean Good Game, as a lot of gamers try to claim.

well said, and GAF we need an agree button. It doesn't have to even display the number of agrees, but anything will do!

As I get older, I find myself less inclined to play games simply because they are "Fun". I pick about 5 of those for the generation usually (Mario Kart, Smash, Gran Truismo etc...) a few Nintendo, Street Fighter and Virtua Fighter, and some of Capcom's stuff. Those last me the whole gen, so I don't need a bunch of "fun" games. Along with the indy titles, I get more than enough of that. So I'm definitely on the camp of wanting interesting, well crafted stories. I think because you are engaged with the controller, and sitting down for much longer than a movie, the medium is ripe for good storytelling. Just look at TLOU. On a movie level, that's a pretty much average plot/script. On a book level, some would even consider that weak or targeted at a younger audience. But it resonated with a lot of people in this medium. So yeah, I want more experiences like that, with great gameplay on top, but if there's no purpose for what I'm doing other than "this feels good", meh there's but so many titles like that I can play every generation.

 

[Vagrant]

My thoughts, posted back before the game came out:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=167246087&postcount=5192

Yep, still stand by it now. Anyway, I love metal gear and post almost exclusively about it because it's the only game series I care enough about enough to comment on, despite having almost every game system under the sun for as long as I can remember. I can easily say that MGSV, that is GZ and TPP together, is by far the the best metal gear game and truest to what the series set out to accomplish. The pacing issues, problematic tone, and unfinished nature of the late game content are inconsequential to the hundreds of hours of fun and brilliance in the meat of the game. No game is perfect and the pros of this one outweigh the cons, by a lot.

I think most posts declaring it a bad game and not metal gear are reductionist and miss the point of the MGSV, and don't get what it was going for. Every MG was an abstraction of infiltrate this base somehow, rescue some people, kill some people, blow up the thing and don't get seen. Technology narrowed the scope of what was allowed. Things like grandiose cutscenes that came later in MGS1 were a way to get around what they couldn't do (and indulge Kojima's desire to direct movies). MGS4 was a farewell letter to that aspect of MG. MGSV is the next step towards realizing that original goal, because it lets players choose and make the MG mission their own in a way that's impossible in previous games. The mission critical objectives are purposely simple to allow that. These objectives allow you you make each mission your own MG, you pick which way in, actually use the gadgets and weapons available to you, and what happens in it. If drama occurs it's gameplay related and unique to that player, everyone creates their own tiny MG narrative. Evidenced by all the stories that come out, crazy things that happened on missions, etc. No one is getting the same experience, and keeping it fresh is left up to the player rather than game director. Even the bosses in the game all had multiple way to bypass or defeat them (save the namesake). That's what I loved about the MGS3 bosses and it was here too. I can say the game didn't feel repetitive to me, because it wasn't. Most missions took on a life of their own due to my actions and the games dynamic systems reacting to them. Not everyone likes that, further not everyone is frankly even creative with gameplay enough to like it as much as a more polished guided experience. This game isn't for everyone and that's not a bad thing.

Spoilers for mission 46:

Spoiler

The big twist of the game shows this was the Kojima's intention. He was aware he was leaving it up to the player to make their own way and was asking a lot from them. Whether the game is good and interesting or not is up to the player putting in the effort to make it interesting. The reason it turns out the player isn't exactly the Big Boss of previous games, is because the player has so much increased agency in the missions of MGSV. And because the game expects you to help make it fun and interesting. So this time Big Boss is literally you. Yeah, they say medic, but really it's obviously you the player. This time you had a bigger role in determining how the game went every step of the way, just as BB says at the end. If the game succeeded in victory, Kojima is saying it was successful due to your contribution and not just his like in the past. You are co-Big Boss and you were the co-director of the game. You can even see this message in the intro. For that first part of the game, Kojima's Big Boss is leading you around, and the game is really linear. Then Kojima Big Boss leaves, and you the player take the reigns. Literally.

 

[AzureSkies]

The game is currently only just over 2 months old. Let's not exaggerate here.

I meant 3 weeks

whoops

 

[CopperPuppy]

I shamefully haven't gotten around to playing this yet. Big MGS fan, so it's high on my to-do list.

I'll be honest though, the playtimes I've been reading on GAF seem extraordinarily high, which worries me a bit. And not just for people who adore the game and have poured hundreds of hours into it. It seems like the people whose opinions range from ambivalence to dissatisfaction also have upwards of 50 to 70 hours clocked in just to beat the damn thing.

Given the repetitive mission structure, I'm somewhat wary. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a lengthy campaign. What I don't enjoy is doing the same things over and over just to advance the story, spending 60 hours to complete a campaign that could have been 20 hours and not wasted my time. My gaming time is often at a premium, and almost everything I've read about MGSV - even from those who enjoy it - seems at odds with that.

Am I needlessly worrying here?

 

[labx]

I agree.

Even as a HUGE Metal Gear fan, I don't see myself playing MGSV again.

You stole my words... What a clusterfuck of plot.

 

[Ridley327]

I shamefully haven't gotten around to playing this yet. Big MGS fan, so it's high on my to-do list.

I'll be honest though, the playtimes I've been reading on GAF seem extraordinarily high, which worries me a bit. And not just for people who adore the game and have poured hundreds of hours into it. It seems like the people whose opinions range from ambivalence to dissatisfaction also have upwards of 50 to 70 hours clocked in just to beat the damn thing.

Given the repetitive mission structure, I'm somewhat wary. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a lengthy campaign. What I don't enjoy is doing the same things over and over just to advance the story, and spending 60 hours to complete a campaign that could have been 20 hours and not wasted my time.

Am I needlessly worrying here?

You can easily plan around the requirements to advance past a certain point where you're not having to repeat anything outright, but it's still going to be a pretty long path to get there in any event. I'd make sure you've got a good chunk of time blocked off.

 

[RoslindaleOne]

I expected more story scenes, but I love the game. I put in so much damn time in it.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

I find the walking around so annoying. There's not much to do between the point where the helicopter drops you off and where the mission task is...
You did the task and have to go back the whole way you came from.

And in the side tasks you do something, get picked up, load load load, back in the helicopter, select another side quest in that same area, load load load, walk walk walk..
Why is it not possible to get in the chopper and immediately select a new point on the map and the chopper takes you there?

 

[Flying Toaster]

I am waiting for my horse armor paid DLC from Konami!

 

[Ridley327]

I find the walking around so annoying. There's not much to do between the point where the helicopter drops you off and where the mission task is...
You did the task and have to go back the whole way you came from.

And in the side tasks you do something, get picked up, load load load, back in the helicopter, select another side quest in that same area, load load load, walk walk walk..
Why is it not possible to get in the chopper and immediately select a new point on the map and the chopper takes you there?

A legitimate issue, for sure. The quick travel system does help out somewhat, but it has its own limitations with it being tied to alert levels and requiring you to seek out BOLs from every major installation in order to go between them. It is at times much faster just to return to the ACC from the pause menu and touch back down again from the iDroid.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

Tell you what MGSV needed. Fishing. Or Pooyan. Or some charm. They didn't want it to be lighthearted due to "Becoming a Demon" but then we got little to none of that. It's just guy who rescues kids and animals and collects music.

If TPP had a 1/4 of the character that PW did, it would've helped significantly.

What the game needs is the feel of Act 1 of MGS4 embodied in open world. It needs more civilians, more signs of militia and mujahideen, more casualties and military activity. More sense of world in turmoil. More sense of battlefield.

It feels deserted, especially when you have only two locations. There are no major activities in Motherbase and no major feel of accomplishment. MGSV is a grind, something that MGS games in the past weren't.

 

[-Stryder-]

I agree, it's an awful metal gear solid game.

It's a great game on its own though, it's fun to play. Story is trash.

MGS games are suppose to play like shit and have over the top insane complete stories that are written awful.

 

[Cuzco]

I keep hearing this sort of thing. MGSV is the worst metal gear but the best far cry ever. If thats true I'm def gonna pick it up. Love me some far cry.