Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain

[Phage]

The series is clearly designed to be 'arcade stealth'. It's basically the progenitor of that sub-genre. Despite this they offer a high amount of freedom as there are numerous ways to tackle every room. 3 in particular is heralded for allowing you to employ all manner of ridiculous shenanigans. Not many other stealth games let you poison a the guard patrol's food shack, causing them to vomit while you slip past.

So with that in mind in terms of stealth I would definitely rank these above most of the levels in the splinter cell games and pretty much every other 'stealth' game from the past 10 years, save maybe Blood Money. Not too sure how that could be 'at the bottom of the pole' unless you're going to straight face claim shit like DX:HR, new Thief, and Dishonored are better stealth titles than MGS.

That's not to mention the boss battles which are mostly all very fun and creative (except for 4's) - the addition of which put the gameplay of MGS above most other series for me personally.

But then again you've never played the games so I don't know why I'm even bothering lol

 

[Excidium II]

But then again you've never played the games so I don't know why I'm even bothering lol

Where the hell are you from, neogaf? What difference does it make whether I am the loser pressing the buttons or not if the situation being presented is the same?

Do I need to play it 7 times?

 

[Bigg Boss]

Were you even in puberty when MGS was out?

 

[Phage]

But then again you've never played the games so I don't know why I'm even bothering lol

Where the hell are you from, neogaf? What difference does it make whether I am the loser pressing the buttons or not if the situation being presented is the same?

Do I need to play it 7 times?

No, but you should have actual hands-on experience with a game before you critique its gameplay. Obviously for the sake of pure discussion, having completed the game would be preferable, but at the very least you should have some actual points to offer beyond "I watched someone play it".

That's like claiming an album you've never heard has terrible melody, a film you've never seen has poor cinematography or a book you've never read has bad prose.

Pretty basic stuff.

 

[sexbad?]

What I played of the horrible port of Ground Zeroes was not encouraging,

Ground Zeroes is unanimously agreed to be a fantastic port. It runs at 60 FPS on a wide variety of machines, and it's extremely easy to achieve very high graphics. It's also one of the better looking games of the past few years. A controller is preferable due to the third person nature of the title, but keyboard and mouse is actually extremely functional. So what was wrong with the port again?

I greatly exceed the minimum specifications, but even on the lowest settings the game runs like ass. When looking at more populated environments I would get about 30FPS, which with the reverse mouse acceleration was terrible. Menus don't use the mouse cursor. The flashlight and suppressor key binds are fake. They are the X and Y buttons on the controller, so they are by default bound to the X and Y keys. As I understand, they can't be rebound even though they appear to be in the menu. You also have to hold down a button to open one of the retarded gamepad menus before the keys actually do anything, and this isn't explained anywhere in-game. I quit before I tested the specifics of this because it was such a bad experience.

 

[Excidium II]

But then again you've never played the games so I don't know why I'm even bothering lol

Where the hell are you from, neogaf? What difference does it make whether I am the loser pressing the buttons or not if the situation being presented is the same?

Do I need to play it 7 times?

No, but you should have actual hands-on experience with a game before you critique its gameplay. Obviously for the sake of pure discussion, having completed the game would be preferable, but at the very least you should have some actual points to offer beyond "I watched someone play it".

That's like claiming an album you've never heard has terrible melody, a film you've never seen has poor cinematography or a book you've never read has bad prose.

Or saying shit tastes bad if you've just smelled it

 

[Phage]

I greatly exceed the minimum specifications, but even on the lowest settings the game runs like ass. When looking at more populated environments I would get about 30FPS, which with the reverse mouse acceleration was terrible.

There are people on 6 year old hardware that were effortlessly maintaining 60 FPS with high graphics. You are far outside the norm. Are you on an AMD cpu or a toaster? If not, there is likely a major problem with your computer that you should get checked out.

I mean I could bring up a huge swath of articles and forum posts of people celebrating how fantastic the game performs on PC if you really care enough.

Menus don't use the mouse cursor. The flashlight and suppressor key binds are fake. They are the X and Y buttons on the controller, so they are by default bound to the X and Y keys. As I understand, they can't be rebound even though they appear to be in the menu.

These are valid points. There are obviously plenty of third party work arounds if you do need to rebind the keys for whatever reason, but you are correct that the keyboard+mouse customization is lacking immensely.

You also have to hold down a button to open one of the retarded gamepad menus before the keys actually do anything, and this isn't explained anywhere in-game.

What?

I quit before I tested the specifics of this because it was such a bad experience.

So you quit your game after like 10 minutes. Aight, good use of money (unless you pirated, then whatever)

 

[Phage]

But then again you've never played the games so I don't know why I'm even bothering lol

Where the hell are you from, neogaf? What difference does it make whether I am the loser pressing the buttons or not if the situation being presented is the same?

Do I need to play it 7 times?

No, but you should have actual hands-on experience with a game before you critique its gameplay. Obviously for the sake of pure discussion, having completed the game would be preferable, but at the very least you should have some actual points to offer beyond "I watched someone play it".

That's like claiming an album you've never heard has terrible melody, a film you've never seen has poor cinematography or a book you've never read has bad prose.

Or saying shit tastes bad if you've just smelled it

Nice. Someone takes the time to humor you and explain what makes the games good in their opinion, and logically explains why you should indeed play a game before you critique its gameplay, and all you've got is the same ridiculous shit analogy our good friend alfons used last page.

You're a born codex shitposter. Well done

 

[Excidium II]

You throw the retarded argument used defend other classic gems and you expect me to respond seriously? This argument works because nobody sane is going to spend time playing a game just to prove a point

More than enough can be learned from just observing specially with a series that has been completely dissected over the years. You seem to believe the game magically changes into a whole different experience when one is pressing the buttons

 

[Phage]

Actually, 85% of my post consisted of explaining what makes the games enjoyable to me. The rest was what you chose to zone in on.

And yeah, I would say that the experience of playing a game differs when you fucking play it.

"Are you telling me that watching that movie is different than listening to it!?"
"Are you telling me that playing a sport is different than watching it!?"
"Are you telling me that having sex is different than jerking off into a fleshlight!?"

Yes, actually.

Anyways it's getting very late and I don't want to contract brain damage. Good night, and godspeed with your 750 shitposts per month insanity.

 

[Excidium II]

Too much emotional investment

 

[J_C]

I greatly exceed the minimum specifications, but even on the lowest settings the game runs like ass.

Shitty PC is shitty.

Menus don't use the mouse cursor.

True, but meh.

The flashlight and suppressor key binds are fake.I can safely say that you are lying because I played the game like 2 weeks ago and the keys are working. They are the X and Y buttons on the controller, so they are by default bound to the X and Y keys. As I understand, they can't be rebound even though they appear to be in the menu. You also have to hold down a button to open one of the retarded gamepad menus before the keys actually do anything, and this isn't explained anywhere in-game. I quit before I tested the specifics of this because it was such a bad experience.

You have to hold a button to bring up a menu. Oh the horror. !!!!!!! It is not explained in the game, but anyone with a higher IQ than 90 can figure it out.

 

[Declinator]

Preface: I have played and completed MGS1, MGS3, MGS4, and Peace Walker. I've also played a bit of MGS2.

-I'd say the story of MGS1 is about the same level as the story of Deus Ex or maybe a movie like Under Siege which is to say that it is a mildly entertaining story but nothing remarkable or truly memorable.

-On the other hand MGS3 is more like Moonraker: a low quality James Bond movie. Kojima could do with an editor that could trim all the pointless shit from the cutscenes and radio calls. If I have to look at Ocelot spinning that revolver one more time...

-MGS4 is just unrelenting crap, sometimes quite literally (Johnny.)

Camp and goofiness is all on purpose? It really is irrelevant whether it is on purpose or not. It is still shit that I don't want to suffer through but must if I want to see critical story bits. How about them long-ass sermons about nukes and what not? Have to suffer through them too. Nice one Kojima.

Now gameplay wise there is more light out there and I find the idea that you don't have to play them to accurately judge them to be mistaken to say the least.

-MGS 1 & 2 are not all that special and frankly I'd say they are grossly overrated but they are at times solid arcade stealth games. You aren't really missing out on all that much if you skip them.

-MGS3 has the camouflage mechanic which I found fresh and interesting. The Subsistence version also gives us the third-person view which improves things immensely. Some of the boss fights are very enjoyable and The End boss fight especially I would consider one of my all time favourites. This is the MGS game I'd recommend to anyone interested in stealth games. Shame that it has too many action parts and the stealth levels are largely far too simple and linear.

-MGS4 has automatic camouflage which I'm ambivalent about. In some ways an improvement and in other ways decline. The levels in the game are unfortunately most often set pieces for other people fighting and very simple to traverse stealthily. The latter chapters devolve into nothing resembling stealth but the stealth does come back for a bit very close to the end. Boss fights almost wholly uninteresting and the final boss is one of the most overrated bosses ever (simplistic slug fest reminiscent of the final boss in MGS1 that people probably appreciate more for the nostalgia that it evokes than anything else.)

Questions about Ground Zeroes:
Why is there no visibility indicator in Ground Zeroes? I like many of the changes in the game but this one I really don't. It is difficult to estimate how visible you are and what actually affects your visibility in the first place. Surely it isn't based purely on how far from the enemies' line of sight you are (taking stance into account of course)? Is Big Boss more visible on concrete than on sand? Do shadows have an effect?

 

[34scell]

The camo system in MGS3 and 4 is shit. Slows the game to a crawl and makes it too easy. In MGS2 I actually had to look for places to hide, rather than just crawl everywhere and shoot the enemy in the head.

 

[Akasen]

Holy Fucking Flying Spaghetti Monster of the Free Market, what the shit am I reading in here?

 

[Alfons]

The best part is Phage that you are so invested in the series that when one says something about one aspect of the series sucks you assume that they're talking about every other aspect as well. That's not some fanboy faggotry at all.

And you always keep moving further and further back. First is "you just saw some video and you criticize the plot", then it's "the best parts aren't in the cutscenes", now it's " eight hours of cutscenes is only in the worst game". Isn't MGS3 considered the best one? Well, that shit has 5 hours of cutscenes, a significant improvement.

 

[Akasen]

I'm gonna be honest, all of you are doing a shit job at arguing.

0/10. Would not fap to this ever.

 

[Phage]

I'm gonna be honest, all of you are doing a shit job at arguing.

0/10. Would not fap to this ever.

u serious kid? I fucking curbstomped these babbies into dust so hard that I got off multiple times

 

[Alfons]

I'm gonna be honest, all of you are doing a shit job at arguing.

0/10. Would not fap to this ever.

u serious kid? I fucking curbstomped these babbies into dust so hard that I got off multiple times

Oh man.
If you'd suck your own cock any harder you're going to tear it off.

 

[Phage]

Oblivious to the very obvious jokes of MGR and oblivious to very obvious jokes in forum posts I see

I'll humor you one last time. MGS3 is indeed considered the best in the series by many fans. My personal favorite is actually 2, but that is a massive 'debate' in itself. Yes, MGS3 has somewhere between 3.5 and 5 hours of cutscenes depending on how many optional codec calls you take part in, and whether or not you move through the codecs quickly or let the voices play out.

With that said, the best part is still the gameplay. My statements are not mutually exclusive. That said, MGS3's story is pretty enjoyable when you realize it's made by some crazy japanese guy who has seen possibly every spy film ever and this is his goofy homage to them. MGS requires the ability to take blatant absurdism/camp alongside serious elements. If you can only handle one on your plate at once then you won't enjoy yourself. There are some minor meta narrative elements to dig into, but for the most part MGS3 tells its own story. The last 30 minutes (which comprise of the longest single cutscene) are universally considered pretty emotionally powerful, but obviously having the 9 hours of game beforehand to build up to it helps immensely.

One thing that's really great about MGS is you can skip all of the cutscenes fairly easily on replays, trying out entirely new difficulties and approaches. Once you skip the cutscenes / codecs the games are actually very tightly paced, which is why many fans will go through them again to see all the different ways of approaching things. (lethal, non-lethal, use X environmental hazard, use Y tools - plus every boss has 2 or more ways to beat it. The End in particular has a huge variety of ways to tackle it)

But yeah, for real Alfons , I'm done. You wasted hours of my life yesterday with this bullshit and you're trudging it up again. There's nothing to be gained here. First I was facetious, then I felt bad and explained specifically what is good (to me) about these games and all you've got to bring to the table is "lel poopy jokes" and spanish soap operas. The people who like the games will still like them. You will not gain any new insights because you have already made up your mind and now you're desperate for someone on the internet to validate your 'high brow video game tastes'. I guess ultimately I lost for wasting my time humoring you. Well played.

 

[Menckenstein]

I have (re)played every numbered MGS title along with Peace Walker and Ground Zeroes and while the gameplay post MGS2 is archaic shit, the story is literally fucking retarded, full of horrible inconsistencies and they're chock full of obtuse eyeroll-worthy exposition in the form of billions of cut scenes... I can't help but enjoy the series. Probably because I received brain damage from playing Daggerfall.

 

[WhiteGuts]

MGS2 is worth playing, if only for the mindfuckery of a plot it develops. But MGS3 is the better game. The survival and camo systems were amazing for their time.

 

[Alfons]

Phage stop trying and bullshit me faggot. You live for fellating yourself by spewing retarded shit into the internet. You jump from one topic to another like a coked up ADD kid. You argue against shit that was never even stated and somehow manage to type up entire scrolls doing it. When confronted with the fact that there was a game in the series that had 8 hours of cutscenes you say it's one of the worst games in the series. When confronted with the fact that arguably the best one has 5 hours you shift the goal post again. You pull so much shit out of your asshole that at this point it must be as wide as the grand canyon.

 

[Phage]

MGS4 being the worst in the series is due to a wide variety of factors. Nowhere have I ever stated that the abundance of cutscenes in MGS4 are specifically what make it bad. These things aren't mutually exclusive.

What other basic things do you need spoonfed to you now that you've soiled your pants again?

 

[Alfons]

MGS4 being the worst in the series is due to a wide variety of factors. Nowhere have I ever stated that the abundance of cutscenes in MGS4 are specifically what make it bad. These things aren't mutually exclusive.

See, this is a perfect example of arguing against something that wasn't stated. Who the fuck said that you said that MGS4 is bad because of the cutscenes? Do you have some form of reading Tourette? Whatever goes through your head at the moment you see in the text?

How many times did you say that you're done? 3 or 4? For fuck's sake motherfucker pick an angle and stick with it.