Support NeoGAF

[Thabass]

I disagree with it being a bad game overall. I think the gameplay and world design are fantastic. Not the best the series have had, but still excellent.

If you said it's the worst MGS story, then I would agree with you. Even though I liked the ending the rest of the story is bland. And I'm still waiting for Mission 51...

 

[Vagrant]

yeah and the benefits of extra soldiers can be rather overstated... extra combat, support, intel, medic, etc don't make that important of a contribution...

my first file was mostly tranq/fulton at least half, maybe upwards of 75%... my new one is basically full rambo, and while i'm 'less advanced' at, say, Mission 10 then my first one, i feel about the same at 'Hour 10' ... progress per hour doesn't seem that much difference. i mean, which is the 'best'? i mean, i dunno... there are so many other things to factor... i mean, also fuel?

farming missions very fast like Rambo also generates a lot more fuel.. so, what's better? faster fultons of B and A rank solders for your intel and support teams, or faster fuel? i'm not convinced that slowly fultoning everyone really unlocks 4/4 MB and FOB or S rank volunteers faster...

and most of those earlier soldiers are all going to be deleted anyhow

you could be better off completing the game 2-3x faster and unlocking S rank volunteers sooner

or just bum rushing through missions and farming fuel to get a 4/4 MB/FOB faster and then worrying about getting 1400 S rank soldiers after you finish the game much faster than if you tried to tranq/fulton everyone

point being, having played 250 hours or so one way and not i'm about 50-75 hours going full rambo... i don't find the difference 'per hour' in 'total progress' (so, story unlocks to higher Rank soldiers... Fuel... MB 4/4 platforms) to be that much... both seem viable.

Yep. If there was something of a "dominant strategy", it'd be closer to this. Soldiers usefulness is over prioritized by people. It's the same reason hundreds of your guys can die in the outbreak and it doesn't really affect your progress. People rely on repetitive play styles due to score/soldiers but really I doubt their game progress would be vastly different than if they went fast and lethal a lot.

 

[labx]

People not liking the game is fine. And many don't because of those ridiculous expectations mostly brought about because very few people played Peace Walker.

The issue is that instead of declaring one simply doesn't like what was released, people make a point of validating themselves by pointing out that it's not that they didn't like the game, it's that the game is bad. Which it clearly isn't...

Play every Metal Gear Solid. The architecture of the game is near flawless, with some curve balls made by the company I guess (Microtransactions, etc). MGSV is very good game. But, for my is a bad METAL GEAR GAME, because of the clusterfuck of story plot, I agree with you about the hype that this game made.. and like almost every expectations never meets the measure. I think that the main problem of the game is the open world trend and how it doesn't work with the plot.

Is my opinion... thats all.

 

[Vagrant]

You're getting too hung up on the scoring itself, mate. The benefits you get from fulton extraction, non-detection, resources, heroism, bonuses etc. still strongly benefit from an overall non-lethal approach because there's no reason not to gun for that if you're trying to avoid detection. The long term benefits are much better overall, and more importantly it's easier to do so because the starting kit is crazy good and lets you avoid confrontation better than most of anything else you get down the line. That is the main key you're ignoring here in terms of it being a dominant strategy.

I have no interest in competing for who gets the better score at a mission, I really couldn't care less.

You're the one saying you don't use non-lethal for score like it's the end-all be all. It's not much easier to do, the other ways are really easy too. There's negligible difference. Resources have nothing to with lethal or tranqing everyone. See KyanMehwulfe's post.

You're so hung up on a perceived min/maxing and optimum playthrough-style you deprived yourself of the fun, variety, and substance the game has.

 

[BriGuy]

I thought it was a lousy game with some really great mechanics. I actually think Ground Zeroes is the superior "game" between the two.

 

[NotLiquid]

By the way fuck that kid who I needed to upgrade the fulton balloon for.

You're the one saying you don't use non-lethal for score like it's the end-all be all. It's not much easier to do, the other ways are easy too. See KyanMehwulfe's post.

You brought up score first and you're the one who's so desperate to prove me wrong that you wanted to compete with me about it so yeah, no. Sorry. You got too hung up about that part while glossing over every other detail about the starting tool kit lasting you the entire game in letting you check off a plethora of boxes while so much of everything else is fluff.

You're so hung up on a perceived min/maxing and optimum playthrough-style you deprived yourself of the fun, variety, and substance the game has.

And here's the issue. The game doesn't give me a reason to do so.

I didn't bring up the JC2 comparison earlier for no reason. That game made concocting crazy schemes fun. You get rewarded for every bit of it. Gameplay and narrative encourages you to do it. MGSV doesn't.

Saints Row 2 is another example of a game that allows you to do crazy shit but it does so in moderation that allows you to enjoy the moments and feel rewarded for it by giving context.

And MGSV lacks that context. It's just not fun, and in terms of rewards its not worth it.

 

[Zombegoast]

MGSV just caters to gamer that likes X-Ray vision to see through walls and reflex mode to shoot make the game easier than it already is. I have no reason to play the game after completing all the mission because it barely has any challenge.

 

[Vagrant]

By the way fuck that kid who I needed to upgrade the fulton balloon for.



You brought up score first and you're the one who's so desperate to prove me wrong that you wanted to compete with me about it so yeah, no. Sorry. You got too hung up about that part while glossing over every other detail about the starting tool kit lasting you the entire game in letting you check off a plethora of boxes while so much of everything else is fluff.

Should I quote you bringing up score first? I feel like you're moving the goal posts. You said the level design favored one way to play it. I think that's incorrect and I have shown why.

By the way fuck that kid who I needed to upgrade the fulton balloon for.

Which kid are you talking about?

 

[Poimandres]

I think the game is pretty damn good. Is there any way to check how many hours you've played on PS4? I must be around 40, and I haven't even reached Africa yet. I'm kind of addicted to the game and I've mostly just been dicking around with side ops, fultoning everyone I can and developing new toys. Sure, it's repetetive but something about it just works for me.

Story wise? I have no idea whats going on, and don't really care to be honest. This is coming from someone who has played though MGS1 at least a dozen times back in the day. Meh.

 

[MDSLKTR]

MGSV just caters to gamer that likes X-Ray vision to see through walls and reflex mode to shoot make the game easier than it already is. I have no reason to play the game after completing all the mission because it barely has any challenge.

It's like you can't turn off these options and subsistence/extreme missions don't exist amirite

 

[JeffZero]

Yeah, I got to the end, turned it off, and returned it. Oh well.

 

[johnnydrama]

Very average game with great gameplay mechanics. Awful, unfinished story, barren open world, repetitive mission design, okay to terrible level design. I'm a huge Metal Gear fan and I wouldn't rate MGS V more than a 7/10.

 

[Solid Samus]

I loooooved the gameplay but the sheer amount of bullshit the game expects you to put up with in order to experience its best content just put it over the top for me. I just plain don't like the game anymore.

 

[NotLiquid]

Should I quote you bringing up score first? I feel like you're moving the goal posts. You said the level design favored one way to play it. I think that's incorrect and I have shown why.

EDIT: nevermind i should read what I write at 5 am and admit to being a doofus that did mention score first in a sarcastic quote

Either way, you latched onto the "scoring" aspect, ignoring my overall point as to why it's so effective and simple to run through the game with the most basic of tools you have from the start.

Frankly, at this point, we can only agree to disagree. I never said it was impossible to play it any other way, I said from the start that there's no reason for me to favor anything else when there are almost no downsides from going with a standard tranq gun/magazine/fulton playstyle. It's practically consequence free and there's a metric ton of benefits from doing so. I don't feel compelled to "be creative" because the game isn't designed interestingly enough for me to want to be creative, especially when it's a matter of completing incredibly specific objectives and when so many options are just gimmick ones that are novelties at first and annoyances afterwards.

 

[JackelZXA]

It's got some filler missions like Peace Walker did. It's a great metal gear game. (It's more like a 3d version of the msx games than it is like mgs1-3)

 

[Vagrant]

saw your edit, also my sympathies for it being 5am and being awake

I don't think that every game should have to funnel players into playing a certain way and be considered flawed if it doesn't. I'm of the opinion you get out of MGSV what you put into it. So yeah we can agree to disagree, but I stand by my points of there being plenty of viable rewarding ways to play the game.

 

[NotLiquid]

saw your edit

I don't think that every game should have to funnel players into playing a certain way and be considered flawed if it doesn't. I'm of the opinion you get out of MGSV what you put into it. So yeah we can agree to disagree on that.

Thats fine. Thats completely fine. I've said this but I had fun with MGSV in the moment. If you go back to the first OT you'll probably see dozens of posts of me being enamored.

I'm just not compelled to return to it anytime soon because of it's poor mission structure, poor story and how I'd rather do those creative and crazy things in games where it feels more rewarding to do them.

I like many mechanics, things and elements in MGSV, I truly do. But I feel like it could have been so much more.

 

[bomma_man]

I don't get why people say the level design is bad. Every mid to large outpost has a unique characteristic, and can be approached in half a dozen different ways, while remaining naturalistic and 'un-gamey' in appearance (ie not obvious knee high walls all over the place).

I can't help but feel that a lot of the critisim of the game is This Is Not The Game I Imagine In My Head Pre Release + I Play In A Really Boring Way + I'm A Cut Scene Masochist.

 

[Moon_frogger]

I can tell you the things I don't like.

-The spoilers in the credits was kind of a horrible idea. Like battlestar galactica intros

- Mother base was a disappointment. You can tell the had to cut out a lot of stuff. It's empty and boring.

-yeah, fast travel was kind of a problem

-story was decent, but unfinished. truly a letdown.

-overall didn't like the twist but don't hate it like some.

-the jeep ride. wtf, kojima?

-microtransaction horeshit. #fuckonami

-quiet. only major female character and she was pretty much a pair of tits and not much else. voice acting was superb though.

-really not a fan of the twist.

-sliding around while trying to climb hills


actually, probably a lot of other things now that I think of it. still my game of the year, easily.

 

[Cloyster]

I really hate this game. Never gonna play it again, and it's soured me on the whole series.

 

[SMOK3Y]

I haven't played V but to me mgs games havent felt like a mgs game since MGS1 (maybe 2 aswell)

 

[KyanMehwulfe]

MGSV just caters to gamer that likes X-Ray vision to see through walls and reflex mode to shoot make the game easier than it already is. I have no reason to play the game after completing all the mission because it barely has any challenge.

it's a lot more fun to turn all that off... i got to around mission 6 or 7 i think not even 10 hours in...first time I arrived at the palace (pre-mission 10 in free roam)... i looked at and i was like, awesome, this going to be a great inflitration... but then i marked everyone and i felt that, shit... there's just no tension with all these x-ray markers.... damn, markers are ruining this.

never went back... if anything, i use even more rules like 'tier 1 weapons only' or 'subsistence mode'

game is way more fun when it's challenging. once most enemies become S rank and can throw grenades 2x as Snake, mortars are almost homing, and soldiers can snipe at 200 yards with base AKs haha it's a lot more fun too

 

[JackelZXA]

Nah man, you brought up the whole non-lethal/lethal ranking thing in the first place and then latched onto merely the "scoring" aspect to begin with while ignoring my overall point as to why it's so effective and simple to run through the game with the most basic of tools you have from the start.

Frankly, at this point, we can only agree to disagree. I never said it was impossible to play it any other way, I said from the start that there's no reason for me to favor anything else when there are almost no downsides from going with a standard tranq gun/magazine/fulton playstyle. It's practically consequence free and there's a metric ton of benefits from doing so. I don't feel compelled to "be creative" because the game isn't designed interestingly enough for me to want to be creative, especially when it's a matter of completing incredibly specific objectives and when so many options are just gimmick ones that are novelties at first and annoyances afterwards.

There's no downside to going with any way you want to play. The scoring gives bonuses for lethal speed and non lethal silence. It's just however you want. Waiting for the game to order you to pull out a claymore or a rocket launcher...are you for real? I don't want to play linear call of duty campaign where my on screen prompts order me when to use the sniper rifle or whatever. MGS games have ALWAYS been about player choice. You're free to use the tools any way you want, because the game is explicitly designed to accomidate several styles of play. Ever put C4 on a guard's back in MGS1? (They make a joke on this in MGS2 when Pliskin is diffusing his C4 bombs)

Your way isn't "right", it's just your solution. You're just CHOOSING to not use anything else. So many of the tools allow you to handle things in so many different ways. They're not gimmicks, novelties, or annoyances, they're all fun and create different combat environments (and the dynamic difficulty system reacts to different tactics for each of the 6 icons in a region). I've done two full playthroughs of the game and both times I ended up playing differently. Sometimes I just want to call in an airstrike or just shoot a guy in the head with a shotgun so he isn't a problem. Sometimes I want to drop a jeep on a guy's head! Try it, it's awesome.

On my last playthrough I avoided the dispatch missions that weaken enemy supply routes because I decided I'd play it on a "higher difficulty". It's free to the player. Games don't HAVE to tell you what to do, and they never should. That's shitty to me. I don't want games to tell me how to play. I want to figure it out for myself.

It's a shitty Metal Gear game.

But it's also the best Ubisoft open-world game.... better gameplay by far than any modern Ubisoft game or combination of modern Ubisoft games...... ugh those games make me sick...

So I don't love it as much as the other MGS games.... but it's still a damn good game.

Also shit bosses.... very disappointed in those.

I'd say it's a pretty good Metal Gear game, it's just not much of a Metal Gear SOLID game. It's actually alot like the first MSX game in structure and story frequency. (It's also alot like Peace Walker, a game most people skipped)

As for bosses, I really like Quiet's boss fight when you don't use any supply drop cheats. Man on Fire is a really cool battle, even though he's not very difficult when you know the trick, Eli is fun even though he's kind of easy, and Sahelanthropus is one of the best mecha fights in the series. The skulls fights are kind of shitty depending on your loadout. If you're geared up with a Machine Gun then the mission 29 battle is actually alot of fun, and doing a non-combat, stealth run on the other skulls (Sniper and Mist Unit) are pretty fun. The Skulls battles do have some problems though.

I like half of the bosses that we have, which is about where every mgs game ends up. (I don't like fighting vulcan raven, ocelot, or liquid in mgs1, I don't like fighting vamp or fatman much in mgs2, i don't like fighting ocelot, the pain, fear, or fury in mgs3, i don't like fighting raging raven or screaming mantis in mgs4...) These games never have a full compliment. There's always problems with half the bosses in a Metal Gear game. Quiet's still a really fun boss, Man on Fire is still a really cool boss, Eli is a fun boss, and Sahelanthropus is a great boss in general. It's just most of the things about the Skulls bosses that aren't great.

 

[potatohead]

It's a shitty Metal Gear game.

But it's also the best Ubisoft open-world game.... better gameplay by far than any modern Ubisoft game or combination of modern Ubisoft games...... ugh those games make me sick...

So I don't love it as much as the other MGS games.... but it's still a damn good game.

Also shit bosses.... very disappointed in those.

 

[NotLiquid]

There's no downside to going with any way you want to play. The scoring gives bonuses for lethal speed and non lethal silence. It's just however you want. Waiting for the game to order you to pull out a claymore or a rocket launcher...what the fuck is that? Are we playing call of duty here? MGS games have ALWAYS been about player choice. You're free to use the tools any way you want, because the game is explicitly designed to accomidate several styles of play.

Your way isn't "right". You're just CHOOSING to not use anything else. So many of the tools allow you to handle things in so many different ways.

They're not gimmicks, novelties, or annoyances. Learn how they work. I've done two full playthroughs of the game and both times I ended up playing differently. Sometimes I just want to call in an airstrike or just shoot a guy in the head with a shotgun so he isn't a problem.

On my last playthrough I avoided the dispatch missions that weaken enemy supply routes because I decided I'd play it on a "higher difficulty". It's free to the player.

Games don't HAVE to tell you what to do. That's shitty. I don't WANT games to TELL me how to play. I want to figure it out for myself. :/

You make the mistake of assuming that I want the game to force me what to do when thats not what I'm implying in the least. I wouldn't have held the previous Metal Gears in high regards if that were the case. Hell, considering I brought Just Cause 2 up in this thread twice as a positive example of freedom in creativity, that's a pretty big straw man on your part.

 

[JackelZXA]

You make the mistake of assuming that I want the game to force me what to do when thats not what I'm implying in the least. I wouldn't have held the previous Metal Gears in high regards if that were the case. Hell, considering I brought Just Cause 2 up in this thread twice as a positive example of freedom in creativity, that's a pretty big straw man on your part.

I don't understand what your complaint is then. (i also didn't use a straw man) The game's mechanics are great and switching between the different tactics is really fun. There's so many mechanics when you're using the support calls from mother base and the buddies that add tons of variety to the experience. There's more room for creativity in this game than there's ever been in the series. What is your complaint? I'm just replying to that post in particular, I didn't go through the whole thread, so if you said something earlier and I missed it...sorry if I clumsily jumped in on some moot point.

I just saw the stuff about tranquilizer+magazine and it's a conversation I've had with some friends already. It's such a boring way to play the game, and then they complained that the game didn't have enough to do. It blows my mind how people will just rely on the first thing that works and then complain when the game doesn't force them to use the other things.

It's a conversation I've had in so many games and I'm always just saying the same thing every time "Just use more stuff and don't worry about consequences, it'll be fine. You can play it again." Even in JRPGs, I'm someone who'll flagrantly use half of my expendable items, even the mega elixers, and people look at me like I'm crazy. The thing is that you'll never need more than a couple to get through even the hardest boss, and if you do, then you're probably playing poorly. Just use mega elixers, just use grenades in a shooter, just use air strikes in metal gear. Just use your spells in castlevania even though it "wastes whatever", it'll be fine. So many people are just way to conservative when they play games and that just seems like a way to not have fun playing videogames.


I do agree that the game has a problem with filler missions, and that's something that is a result of what happened with the game. You can spot when you get a filler mission, because it's usually just a group of missions that have to do with some whatever stuff, and then a story mission happens after you do them all or something. The 3 missions after you save Kaz are all filler missions, then you have the honey bee mission. then you have 4 filler missions and then the Huey mission.

The Kaz mission was set up where you had side missions that took you to several other bases if you wanted to, but the main bit of that mission was save Kaz. The 3 missions that follow could have just been side objectives to honey bee, and the missions between honey bee and saving Emmerich could have been side objectives to saving Huey. I kind of wish the game had been truncated and missions that didnt matter either lumped in like with the kaz mission, or thrown into a separate mission list, like Ground Zeroes's side ops.

Afghanistan is really just: Kaz, Honey Bee, Quiet + Huey. Then Africa is: Oil Field, Caravan, Children, Devil's House, Eli, Code Talker/Skullface. I would have really loved just having like....10 missions that were 2-4 hours long like the Kaz mission and endgame of chapter 1 were, and then you just have abunch of optional missions that are more involved than the random side ops in the world, but less expensive than the full on cinematic main missions. That would have made a good chapter 1. (wouldn't have minded if some of those filler missions had just been moved to chapter 2, since there's alot of cinematics in chapter 2 as is, but not alot of missions) It's where you realize the game hit a snag when Konami pulled the plug and Kojima had to spend like a year scrambling to tie up what's there and make a shippable product that manages to be amazing, but sadly wasn't what it could have been if Konami had put their trust in Kojima.

But then again this was done because they lost a substantial amount of time and budget on the game, and had to make due with what they could. It's kind of tragic that we're stuck with half a game, but I still like what's THERE. I just wish there was more (and that the filler had been structured differently, or at least we'd be able to replay all of the between mission cutscenes like the on base stuff with quiet or whatnot. Give us a new game plus option or something, konami.)

 

[matrix-cat]

Yeah, I found it extremely disappointing. I'd never argue that it isn't a good game; apart from a heartbreaking lack of good bosses I don't have a single complaint about the sublime gameplay. However, everything else is just a real drag. The story is both terrible and poorly told; nothing happens from Mission 3 to Mission 27, then the game has to cram in the entire story in the last four missions. Skull Face is introduced as the villain and then weakly killed off in a cutscene like twenty minutes later. Chapter 2 is so disjointed and worthless it doesn't even merit discussion.

I got to the point where I was considering going for the Platinum Trophy, but the Fuel Resources grind just killed any desire I had. It was taking three hours of realtime gameplay to process enough fuel to finish off a single fourth platform at Mother Base, and I still had like seventeen hours before my Nuke would be ready, and... just, fuck that. I'm looking for a fun video game here, not a second job.

I really dislike all this monotonous grinding that Peace Walker brought to the series. I don't need that shit. There's no reason MGSV had to be a 100 hour game rather than a 15-20 hour one. It doesn't have any more story or unique gameplay ideas than a traditional MGS game (in fact, I'd say it has less and fewer), but for some reason all that shit is spread out over two needless chapters and dozens and dozens of hours of repetition. 150 near identical side missions, 50 story missions of which maybe half are relevant to the overall plot, endless grinding to make bars fill so you can move on to filling longer bars. I'd dearly love to see Konami take MGSV's gameplay and just make a traditional MGS sneaking mission, weapons and equipment OSP, but I imagine they'll Assassin's Creed the series and just make MGSV all over again every year with one or two minor differences.

 

[ForsakenLotus]

For me the gameplay was so good that I wanted to keep playing the game, and the main missions sometimes were great both gameplay and story wise. Of course, once you get to the ending a lot of people, myself included, are disappointed with how they try to wrap things up so suddenly, then have a second chapter that feels rushed and unfinished and leaves out what was obviously going to be the ending.

But there are some great moments in the game, and some great levels.

As far as the open world aspect of the game, I agree. I've heard some really high praise for its open world design and, quite frankly, I don't understand why. Don't get me wrong, I love how there are small outposts everywhere and large bases and how they are all connected. I love the missions where you travel between several bases; however, there is a severe lack of variety. It's literally a map of enemy bases. Where are my small villages of normal people (to rescue?), where are my unique areas like a wildlife park, where is all the flavor?

Imagine if the game had half of the open world crafting ability of Rockstar even if it was relegated to areas outside of the larger base. It would be phenomenal blending such polished gameplay with a believable, interesting world. Instead it just feels like a cardboard cutout.

Still, despite some major issues, I can't help but love the game for what it does so, so right.

 

[Azzanadra]

A bit off topic, but even gameplay-wise, MGSV is quite alien from its predecessors. There's no more alter phases, no health or stamina bars, no miscellaneous items like magazines and rations, there's regenerating health, no more scrolling side-inventory screen, no more first person view on cutscenes, no button mashing sequence, only like one real boss fight, no codec... there's probably more I missing.

Also, why did they ditch the living battlefield idea from MGS4? it would have been PERFECT in this game, and in Afghanistan at least, it would made perfect sense from a story point. If anything, the lack of rebel soldiers was jarring.

 

[old manatee]

MGSV just caters to gamer that likes X-Ray vision to see through walls and reflex mode to shoot make the game easier than it already is. I have no reason to play the game after completing all the mission because it barely has any challenge.

You can turn off markers and reflex mode in the options..

 

[JackelZXA]

A bit off topic, but even gameplay-wise, MGSV is quite alien from its predecessors. There's no more alter phases, no health or stamina bars, no miscellaneous items like magazines and rations, there's regenerating health, no more scrolling side-inventory screen, no more first person view on cutscenes, no button mashing sequence, only like one real boss fight, no codec... there's probably more I missing.

Also, why did they ditch the living battlefield idea from MGS4? it would have been PERFECT in this game, and in Afghanistan at least, it would made perfect sense from a story point. If anything, the lack of rebel soldiers was jarring.

The dynamic difficulty system is kind of a good replacement for the living battlefield that didn't play out in MGS4. You can sabotage the enemy to make the game easier or remove problems, or you can focus on other areas of resource gathering and end up with a more challenging second half. It blew my mind to find out that if you play a certain way, the game will randomly spawn security choppers that just fly around the world on patrols. I got that to happen for me on my second playthrough and it was the coolest thing to happen to the game. I kind of wish they'd had a similar system to just add more tanks and patrol groups to patrol the roads. It could have really felt like combating a group that was fully militarizing if they'd gone full on into that aspect. (I feel like they wanted to do that, with how walker gears start showing up in missions. It would have been great if more of the open world side ops were active at the same time. It feels like a lost opportunity to just have those cycle in more dynamically. I'd love to see a PC mod that just activates them all at the same time, how fun would that be?)

 

[tryagainlater]

Very average game with great gameplay mechanics. Awful, unfinished story, barren open world, repetitive mission design, okay to terrible level design. I'm a huge Metal Gear fan and I wouldn't rate MGS V more than a 7/10.

Yes, this is how I feel. The whole thing about being able to approach an outpost from any angle means very little where most of the main areas are just a bunch of shacks in the back arse of nowhere.

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

Also, why did they ditch the living battlefield idea from MGS4? it would have been PERFECT in this game, and in Afghanistan at least, it would made perfect sense from a story point. If anything, the lack of rebel soldiers was jarring.

Cause it would have interfered with all the bland traversing through these open spaces that had a whole lotta nothing.

 

[matrix-cat]

Also, why did they ditch the living battlefield idea from MGS4? it would have been PERFECT in this game, and in Afghanistan at least, it would made perfect sense from a story point. If anything, the lack of rebel soldiers was jarring.

What, you didn't feel the presence of the rebels in everyone's favourite mission: Blow Up Tanks for Fifteen Minutes? Or the poignant late-game redux: Blow Up Tanks for Fifteen Minutes [EXTREME]? You've gotta protect those rebels, boss! You can't let the tanks get past the invisible line!

 

[Elios83]

It's a different game from past MGS titles.
But gameplay wise for me it's a masterpiece. It really seems like you're infiltrating a military base while you're playing and it's a major accomplishment.
Issues are well known, rushed second chapter, open world is kinda useless outside of the military outposts where the missions take place and the idea of the

Spoiler

vocal cord parasites

was sooo so dumb.
But overall it's a great game,things could have gone worse considering the last year of development was really troubled.
Also I feel like the only game in the series that made all the fans happy was the Psone game, all the sequels have strong critics.

 

[swazzyswess]

What, you didn't feel the presence of the rebels in everyone's favourite mission: Blow Up Tanks for Fifteen Minutes? Or the poignant late-game redux: Blow Up Tanks for Fifteen Minutes [EXTREME]? You've gotta protect those rebels, boss! You can't let the tanks get past the invisible line!

hahaha.... that tank mission is actually where my slowly creeping sense of dread about what MGSV was going to be turned into full-blown despair.

 

[charsace]

It is one of the best. MGS story has always been complete crap. MGS5 gives you more game play, the game play has also been improved, and less cut scenes.

 

[Rats Off To Ya]

It's a great open-world sandbox with minimal story.

Metal Gear shouldn't be an open-world sandbox with minimal story.

Played about 30 hours of it, got myself spoiled on the big twist (ugh) and haven't touched it since. Not a strong desire to go back.

This is the first time in my life I have been decidedly down on a Hideo Kojima project. It's not a nice feeling.

 

[zswordsman]

One of the weird moments where having fantastic gameplay isn't enough to overcome a mediocre story.

It just feels incomplete, all these tapes that you collect are awesome and had this been mgs3 we would have seen them as actual cutscenes.
Also after finishing the game, the ending just lacks so much that it saps any will to replay it.

Gameplay is top notch and extremely fun but mission variety lacks severely compared to peace walker, there aren't even any quirky missions (kaz island trip, ghost camera missions etc).

Maybe mgsv would have been better if it had the story structure of mgs3 but with open world areas like ground Zeroes. Something with a solid story and no trash collecting (tapes) but that gave you enough space and option to tackle a problem.

 

[IAmRandom31]

I agree to a point. The controls were divine no doubt. But MGSV was the first MG I ever got bored of and didn't even finish. The story plain sucked and outside of the intro was the worst of the series. The side missions got pretty mundane as well eventually and the base stuff was, while cool to see build up, poorly implemented. Loved the Zoo type areas though

 

[Soodanim]

I agree. It was fun to infiltrate the bigger bases, but it didn't feel like I was infiltrating anything important more than twice.

Spoiler

OKB Zero made me think it was going to get very MGS-y from that point but it was a one-off, and the airport base kind of felt like that but it's too big and open to be difficult.

I think the tapes would be much better if Kaz and Shally didn't get to talk over them every fucking time they wanted. Just pause the tapes for us while Kaz waffles on about some shit, then let us listen to the story in peace after. Otherwise you have no choice but to listen during side ops or free roam, but that defeats the object of having tapes if you can't multi-task them.

Did they patch it and I not notice?

I have the urge to replay the game but with markers etc turned off from the very beginning instead of late game. I've posted before about how much better it makes the experience - it feels more like an MGS game when you can't track everyone and it gives NVG/sonar a proper use.

 

[Roni]

Cause I greatly enjoy games and believe the medium to be a true source of inspiration in more ways than one.

Unfortunately MGSV is too devoid of context for me to appreciate its style that lacks in substance.

For someone who enjoys games, you sure like treating them like work. Or at least with the same attitude I hope you have at work...

 

[KSai]

I have to dismiss OP's opinion since he didn't play Peace Walker. I loved that game. Ground Zeroes was fun too, and I'm glad that Phantom Pain feels like it's never going to end. I'm enjoying being a mercenary who never leaves the battlefield.

 

[JumpCancel]

I have to dismiss OP's opinion since he didn't play Peace Walker.

Peace Walker is my joint favorite MGS with Sons of Liberty.

I feel the same as OP.

 

[Houndi101]

My shameful vidya confession that's not worth it's own thread:

If Konami makes Metal Gear remakes without Kojima on Fox Engine

Spoiler

I will play them

Hell if they just make a new Fox Engine Tactical Stealth Espionage game

Spoiler

I will play it

 

[Chola]

I don't get why people say the level design is bad. Every mid to large outpost has a unique characteristic, and can be approached in half a dozen different ways, while remaining naturalistic and 'un-gamey' in appearance (ie not obvious knee high walls all over the place).

I can't help but feel that a lot of the critisim of the game is This Is Not The Game I Imagine In My Head Pre Release + I Play In A Really Boring Way + I'm A Cut Scene Masochist.

YEP, people have no idea what they are talking about

Its a different kind of Metal gear

Major bases are superbly designed with multiple entries, shortcuts etc.

Also AI learns from your playstyle giving gameplay lot of dynamics.

Missions are not restrictive like other open world games, there is not a lot of fail states, the game doesn't end immediately if you fail, it challenges you in a different way and lets you deal with your mistakes. Side task lets you play the mission in a entirely different way.

Yes, the game has few problems like very limited life forms(most of them are invisible), world is kind of dead outside of major bases, too many side ops that doesn't add anything to the game

Overall, MGS 5 is an incredible game

BEST SANDBOX game ever made.

gameplay feels fresh even after 175 hours

Now i understand why ubisoft are scared to change up their formula.

 

[Footos22]

I agree OP. Played and finished all previous entries, loved them all. even got all the mgs4 emblems before there was a trophy patch.

It's boring, i played till about mission 11 and just couldn't stick it any longer. nearly every mission is a rescue as well. I haven't got it in me to just plough my way through the main story as feel like ill be missing out on too much.

First game in a long time that i just cant be bothered to even finish. looks shit on my trophy list but sometimes you just know when your done.
Even ground zeroes was a better game to me. All that helicopter to and froing is such a massive waste of precious time. why cant it just spawn you there like when you chose a mission on ground zeroes. feels like you spend most of your time in that fucking helicopter.

Mehcanics and the amount of ways you can do things is phenomenal but everything outside of that is pretty mediocre. Story, the way its told to you, Kiefer sutherland sucks when he does bother to say anything. i might go back to it one daywhen there is nothing else left to play thats doesnt waste your time. so probably never.

No point in the ranking system either when you can just rush through all guns blazing and still get an S easily.

 

[Nibel]

It's a game with the possible most incredible gameplay this year but surrounded by some of the worst shit from story to pacing.

And yeah, I agree OP. I prefer the more 'focused' MGS games I think.

 

[rocK`]

It's the most fun I've ever had *playing* an MGS game (ignoring Revengeance), that's for sure. Unfortunately, I don't come to this series primarily because of the gameplay.

And Kiefer is lame, I agree. I don't think he sucks as Big Boss, but there was zero reason to replace Hayter. Sticking with Hayter might have made it so that Big Boss talked more throughout the game instead of being an awkward mute, too. Although...

Spoiler

I suppose the ending is a real convenient explanation for this.

That's the point...

 

[the_batman]

when i realized that it's basically a souped up Peace Walker..