** Official Metal Gear Solid 4 - MGS4 Thread **

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: gorcorps

Originally posted by: Ackmed
You're not discussing, you're crying. Either buy the game, or not. This is the kind of game MGS is, get over it

Christ man, he's just giving his own opinion. Just because it's a negative one doesn't mean he's 'crying'.

Except that, this is how MGS games are. Anyone who has played them, know they tell a story, with long cut scenes. There is no reason to cry about it, when its always how it has been. Either buy it, or dont. But there is no reason to cry about it.

There are people who haven't played the previous games who might be interested in MGS4. Like... me! :Q

Why would you even consider playing MGS4 without playing the previous games? That's just stupid. (aka: You're completely missing out on EVERYTHING you need to know about the games/story...Wikipedia does not count )

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: hans030390

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: gorcorps

Originally posted by: Ackmed
You're not discussing, you're crying. Either buy the game, or not. This is the kind of game MGS is, get over it

Christ man, he's just giving his own opinion. Just because it's a negative one doesn't mean he's 'crying'.

Except that, this is how MGS games are. Anyone who has played them, know they tell a story, with long cut scenes. There is no reason to cry about it, when its always how it has been. Either buy it, or dont. But there is no reason to cry about it.

There are people who haven't played the previous games who might be interested in MGS4. Like... me! :Q

Why would you even consider playing MGS4 without playing the previous games? That's just stupid. (aka: You're completely missing out on EVERYTHING you need to know about the games/story...Wikipedia does not count )

Well, I bought Halo 3 after having playing Halo for only a few hours (and I've still never played Halo 2). Didn't bother me too much. I didn't have the backstory, but the story still worked without knowing what happened in the previous games.

I'm not going to buy and play the first three MGS games, so my options are
1. Play MGS4 without playing the previous games
2. Not play MGS4 at all

Stupid? Really?

 

[pennylane]

mugs,
You should really consider playing at least the first game.

 

[maziwanka]

90 minute cut scene is garbage. plain and simple. use the disc space for something more valuable like gameplay. you are playing a damn video game not watching a fucking movie.

aside from that, i hope the game is good. the ps3 needs some good games for it

edit: just saw the debunked rumor. hope that's right

 

[randay]

lol. why even bother starting threads based on rumors? im pretty they turn out to be bullshit over 50% of the time.

 

[biggestmuff]

Originally posted by: fanerman91
mugs,
You should really consider playing at least the first game.

Are you going to let him borrow your NES cartridge?

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: biggestmuff

Originally posted by: fanerman91
mugs,
You should really consider playing at least the first game.

Are you going to let him borrow your NES cartridge?

I'm pretty sure he meant the first in the Metal Gear Solid series... not the first Metal Gear game The old NES games are pretty different compared to what the series has become (a much more cinematic approach).

mugs hasn't played ANY of the games. He and others should at least start with the first MGS before jumping on the bandwagon. The gamecube remake was excellent, so I'd recommend starting there.

And don't be scared off by MGS2. It's the worst of the three MGS games, although it is still an excellent game. MGS3 is almost as good as the first game. MGS2 was a little disappointing, but it was still very fun even though the story took a strange turn... I like to believe that it's almost non-canon, since it just became so stupid in MGS2. The story in MGS1 and MGS3 is not only coherent, but quite good.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: hans030390

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: gorcorps

Originally posted by: Ackmed
You're not discussing, you're crying. Either buy the game, or not. This is the kind of game MGS is, get over it

Christ man, he's just giving his own opinion. Just because it's a negative one doesn't mean he's 'crying'.

Except that, this is how MGS games are. Anyone who has played them, know they tell a story, with long cut scenes. There is no reason to cry about it, when its always how it has been. Either buy it, or dont. But there is no reason to cry about it.

There are people who haven't played the previous games who might be interested in MGS4. Like... me! :Q

Why would you even consider playing MGS4 without playing the previous games? That's just stupid. (aka: You're completely missing out on EVERYTHING you need to know about the games/story...Wikipedia does not count )

Well, I bought Halo 3 after having playing Halo for only a few hours (and I've still never played Halo 2). Didn't bother me too much. I didn't have the backstory, but the story still worked without knowing what happened in the previous games.

I'm not going to buy and play the first three MGS games, so my options are
1. Play MGS4 without playing the previous games
2. Not play MGS4 at all

Stupid? Really?

You could also see Return of the Jedi without watching A New Hope or The Empire Strikes Back. It works on its own. You'd still be missing out on a lot of the storyline. If you don't care about the storyline, then it won't matter; the movie's story will still work, even though it will be a little spotty in some areas. You will probably really enjoy the movie without knowing any of the backstory.

Also, in this case, watching Return of the Jedi costs $60, and watching Empire + New Hope costs $30 total. It seems like it's not that much more to watch all three movies and get the full experience, but it doesn't really matter that much.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Thraxen

Originally posted by: Eeezee
I thought Oblivion had a good story... yeah, they can't MAKE you do anything. That's why it's called non-linear. The riding around thing did kind of suck... but the story was interesting.

What about San Andreas? That story was excellent.

Let's not kid ourselves here though. Games people call "non-linear" are indeed still linear. Sure, you can screw around doing other stuff all you want, but at some point, if you want to advance and finish the game, you still have to go do the next step in the main line of quests. GTA games are very linear as far as the main story arc goes. There may be some branching here and there, but not that much... and it's certainly not entirely non-linear. I think the more appropriate term would be say these games are not on rails... the stories are mostly linear.

There is no such thing as a non-linear main storyline. That doesn't make sense. If there's a main storyline that can be told, there must be a logical progression of steps that allows that story to be told.

The games, however, are non-linear. Oblivion ends whenever you want it to end. Even after the main storyline is over, the game doesn't end; there's more stuff to do, more areas to explore. The same applies to San Andreas. I can go around and do whatever I want until I get tired of the game and shelve it. And meanwhile, I didn't even have to finish the main storyline! Nothing forces you down any particular path. You can explore the entire Oblivion map without ever finishing the main storyline.

By your definition, there's no such thing as a non-linear game. I think it's useful to at least distinguish games like Oblivion as offering more than a linear approach.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: galperi1
looks like someone started a rumor. GamePro has debunked the 90 minute cutscenes deal

Link

I'd imagine the longest cutscenes are at the beginning and end of the game. Not sure what the problem is

Makes sense. Although he doesn't give any indication of how long the cutscenes actually are. Personally, I don't want to watch a cutscene longer than 5 minutes. I play games to play games, not watch movies. Believe it or not, you can develop a story during gameplay. :Q (Something that GTA IV, one of those terrible storyless open world games did pretty well)

You can skip over the cutscenes. I don't see the problem

And then you lose the story entirely. Losing the story entirely sucks, but so does sitting through endless cutscenes. Good developers don't seem to have a problem developing a good story between relatively short cutscenes and gameplay.

You just said you play games to play games. You don't have to watch the cutscene; you can just play the game instead. Do you dislike movies? I could understand the complaint if this was the case...

I really still don't see the problem with having cutscenes. I like them. I think they bring something unique to the table that you can't do with gameplay alone. I like watching short clips (youtube for example). I like playing video games. Why can't an activity consist of doing both?

If you really dislike cutscenes for whatever reason, the MGS series probably isn't for you... the developers have always gone for a far more grand, cinematic feeling. I like it. Revealing plot through gameplay is fine, but it's different. Each has its pros and cons.

I can't think of a game right now that reveals plot through anything that isn't some sort of cutscene. I was going to suggest Bioshock, but it uses the audio diaries to reveal additional plot, and those are essentially audio-only cutscenes. Most games that allow you to control the character during the cutscenes don't let you actually DO anything while in control. Every game seems to have some form of a cutscene that requires you to either watch or listen to plot details.

At the same time, no game relies completely on cutscenes for plot development. They're usually important, but not everything is ever contained in movie-length tidbits.

 

[MmmSkyscraper]

Originally posted by: randay
lol. why even bother starting threads based on rumors? im pretty they turn out to be bullshit over 50% of the time.

Welcome to the internets

 

[Modeps]

Originally posted by: randay
lol. why even bother starting threads based on rumors? im pretty they turn out to be bullshit over 50% of the time.

It wasn't started based on a rumor. Shack was putting it out basically as a fact and it has now been shown to be a false story they reported on.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Also, in this case, watching Return of the Jedi costs $60, and watching Empire + New Hope costs $30 total. It seems like it's not that much more to watch all three movies and get the full experience, but it doesn't really matter that much.

It's not the cost, it's the time.

Originally posted by: Eeezee
You just said you play games to play games. You don't have to watch the cutscene; you can just play the game instead. Do you dislike movies? I could understand the complaint if this was the case...

I really still don't see the problem with having cutscenes. I like them. I think they bring something unique to the table that you can't do with gameplay alone. I like watching short clips (youtube for example). I like playing video games. Why can't an activity consist of doing both?

If you really dislike cutscenes for whatever reason, the MGS series probably isn't for you... the developers have always gone for a far more grand, cinematic feeling. I like it. Revealing plot through gameplay is fine, but it's different. Each has its pros and cons.

I can't think of a game right now that reveals plot through anything that isn't some sort of cutscene. I was going to suggest Bioshock, but it uses the audio diaries to reveal additional plot, and those are essentially audio-only cutscenes. Most games that allow you to control the character during the cutscenes don't let you actually DO anything while in control. Every game seems to have some form of a cutscene that requires you to either watch or listen to plot details.

At the same time, no game relies completely on cutscenes for plot development. They're usually important, but not everything is ever contained in movie-length tidbits.

I don't mind cutscenes, I just don't like long cutscenes. GTA IV for example - probably a minute and a half before each mission, so about 2 hours of cutscenes in the game? They did a fine job of revealing the plot, they were separated by a lot of gameplay, and they were bearable even if you have ADD.

The audio diaries in Bioshock were better than cutscenes, because you could still do whatever you want while they were playing. Pretty much every game reveals some plot outside of the cutscenes through the actions you are required to take and the things that happen in missions/levels/whatever. I have no doubt MGS4 does that too, it's just an issue of balance.

Maybe you're right, maybe MGS4 isn't a good game for me. I'll probably still rent it to give it a try though.

 

[Eeezee]

Gah, I couldn't stand to do anything while those audio diaries played. The noise of combat would often drown out the diaries. I frequently had to go back and replay them

I think you're right, you should probably rent MGS4 first. That is often the best choice

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Originally posted by: Eeezee
Gah, I couldn't stand to do anything while those audio diaries played. The noise of combat would often drown out the diaries. I frequently had to go back and replay them

I think you're right, you should probably rent MGS4 first. That is often the best choice

Truth. I actually hated them. I would be in combat, drown out the voices, and couldn't be bothered to try and activate them again.

MGS has such a convoluted storyline, that its almost impossible to figure it out without playing the games.

Seriously, from playing MGS4, how would you know what happened to Liquid? Who he is? Whats his relation to Snake? Revolver Ocelot? The Philosophers Connection with Eva? Who the Patriots are?

MGS is so story heavy, long cutscenes more or less needed in my opinion. And Kojima's excellent directing makes watching them enjoyable

 

[Eeezee]

I can agree with that as well, but I suspect a good deal of the backstory will be revealed in MGS4. For a comparison, MGS2 revealed some of the events of MGS1.

I think they'll include enough backstory for players to have a good idea of what has happened so far. That'll be insufficient for some of us, but good enough for most.

 

[DivideBYZero]

90 mins? Holy crap.

- Complete mission
- Watch 1 min of cut scene
- Bake cake
- Continue with mission 2

!

 

[bl4ckfl4g]

some site reported it as fact but it was just rumor and supposedly not true.

 

[warcrow]

While reporting MTV Multiplayer?s week-long series about game reviews I?ve heard from members of the gaming press about restrictions publishers place on game reviews. I?m familiar with some of these. It?s common for a publisher to specify plot details that they don?t want revealed in reviews.

What I heard about print reviews for ?Metal Gear Solid 4? was different.

I?ve been told by two gaming media sources who asked to remain anonymous that Konami representatives had been asking print reviewers to keep some technical details out of their reviews, namely the length of the game?s cut-scenes and the size of the game?s installation on the PlayStation 3.

Such details wouldn?t have been plot spoilers, but perhaps the publisher was concerned that they would be viewed as negatives?

Konami representatives declined to comment to me about any of this, as did editors of a few major video game magazines.

A couple of weeks ago, gaming blog Kotaku posted back-to-back links about the two supposedly off-limits topics. The size of the game?s installation was spotted on the ?MGS4? box. The other was a disputed report about the length of the cut-scenes.

So that technical information ? accurate or not, I don?t know ? is getting out there. And that information about the game has been acknowledged by Eurogamer, which ran an ?MGS4? review that mentions both things.

Whether Konami really has put these limits on reviewers and if such limits are tolerable to game reviewers is something I can?t answer. It?s something worth keeping an eye on as print reviews of ?MGS4? start trickling out.

http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com...le-mgs4-review-limits/

Nice--PR control.

 

[yours truly]

yep, reviews are up, ign scored it 9.9.

sounds pretty good

 

[XBoxLPU]

The IGN review was just ODD. It sounded like Konami had wrote the review. Ugh!

GTAIV got 7 pages and MSG4 got a very brief 3 pages with very little detail

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: XBoxLPU
The IGN review was just ODD. It sounded like Konami had wrote the review. Ugh!

GTAIV got 7 pages and MSG4 got a very brief 3 pages with very little detail

I have a feeling the US IGN won't review it till the day its released or right before, that way it can get away with including the lacking details.

GTA IV got an abnormal amount of pages. Very few games tend to. MGS4 will from some places, and I'm wondering what IGN will do. I mean, details will help make it a little longer, but the depth of GTA IV is just insane and does warrant a long review. A game like MGS4 though, won't need so many details, and really can't unless spoilers are going to be introduced. The most important aspect is how much it can compare to others and they go into the detail about that. That is important to the series, and pointing out how it betters than the previous ones is about all that's needed. The more vague reviews are better imho, because it tells you why its good, and in some aspects how, but it doesn't spell out every nuance. Makes playing the game so much better, because seeing the detail makes you feel like you're the only one who has at the time you do.

+

 

[venkman]

I've played MGS 1 and 2, for the first time, over the last couple of weeks to get the gist of the story. It was pretty good until the end of MGS 2 when it all seemed to take a giant left turn into wtf-ville. If someone can please explain to me what happened in that last super long codec conversation between Raiden, Col Campbell, and Rose? Overall, i really did enjoy the stories and gameplay of both games. MGS1 was a better imho. I'll be picking up MGS3 from gamestop tomorrow.

 

[Shadow Conception]

I loved the cutscenes in MGS2, and I welcome these longer cutscenes.

If you're complaining about how MGS4 is no longer a game, rather a movie, you have to realize that Kojima's games are usually half-movie/story and half-gameplay. Both of which are EXTREMELY well-done, making the series my favorite out of all video games.

 

[TecHNooB]

Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
I loved the cutscenes in MGS2, and I welcome these longer cutscenes.

If you're complaining about how MGS4 is no longer a game, rather a movie, you have to realize that Kojima's games are usually half-movie/story and half-gameplay. Both of which are EXTREMELY well-done, making the series my favorite out of all video games.

Hooray!