Anyone think MGS4 is better now after V?

Ambient_Malice

New member
Sep 22, 2014
836
0
0
They're both good games, but they're both flawed in different ways. MGS V is a good game that drowns under open world busywork and repetition. Dragon Age 3 has similar problems. The logistics of MGS V make no sense at all. You blow the shit out of a base, and then 5 hours later, Miller sends you back to that "super hardened" base that currently has no working air radar or communication systems, to rescue a cookie cutter prisoner who will definitely help in the fight against Skull Face. This central plot mechanic was likely taken from Far Cry 2, where you roam around Africa doing random jobs as part of a quest to kind The Jackal.

It also suffers from Kojima's arguably misguided attempt to reproduce the style of George Miller, while also being obsessed with the idea of leaving a massive hole in the narrative for players to insert themselves. MGS V is a good game. I must point that out. It isn't "half finished". Snake barely speaks because Kojima has a hard-on for the Mad Max films where Mad Max barely speaks, the story is thin, and Max is a side character in his own films. MGSV is a game that doesn't respect the player's time. It requires huge investment for thin narrative rewards. Now the acting is superb and the production values are great, but the game has the fundamental problem of being too Japanese. Grinding+Putting the most important story points in an obscure epilogue is a frustratingly Japanese design trait.

MGS4 is a bloated game. It has an awkward ratio of cutscenes to gameplay. The story is really not very good. At all. I would go so far to say that Ocelot's scheme in MGS4 was probably the most retarded thing in the entire series, even if it did foreshadow Venom Snake. The game wallows in melodrama and feels excessively scripted moment to moment. It is, however, a decent game. It's well made for the most part. It provides closure to the Metal Gear Saga.

Of course then there's Peace Walker, which is a superior game to both MGS4 and MGS V. It is the real Metal Gear Solid 5, and was called Metal Gear Solid 5 during development. It balances narrative and gameplay and pacing far more effectively than MGS V. I consider the bosses in MGS V to be a terrible idea both narratively and structurally. Peace Walker abandoned human bosses, something that Phantom Pain continues. It is a stupid design trope to introduce a character, make you kill them, and then have a melodramatic cutscene about the boss.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,178
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
As someone who's only played the Metal Gear series up to 3, I've gotta ask...

...Are these games actually worse than the original Metal Gear? Because holy bum nuggets that was torture. :(
 

FalloutJack

Bah weep grah nah neep ninny bom
Nov 20, 2008
15,489
0
0

[HEADING=2]"Hmm?"[/HEADING]​

Why yes, I think it would be improved if our alliterating anarchist waltzed in with weapons of mass destruction and devastated the entire event. It would at least be funnier.
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
Hawki said:
As someone who's only played the Metal Gear series up to 3, I've gotta ask...

...Are these games actually worse than the original Metal Gear? Because holy bum nuggets that was torture. :(
Are you referring to all the Metal Gear games (which would make Metal Gear Solid the third game) or only the Metal Gear Solid series?
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,178
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Gethsemani said:
Hawki said:
As someone who's only played the Metal Gear series up to 3, I've gotta ask...

...Are these games actually worse than the original Metal Gear? Because holy bum nuggets that was torture. :(
Are you referring to all the Metal Gear games (which would make Metal Gear Solid the third game) or only the Metal Gear Solid series?
Heh, I can see that I'm alternating between terms there.

Answer is that the weakest game I've played in the series is the original Metal Gear (not Metal Gear Solid), whereas the last one I played was Snake Eater.
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
Hawki said:
Heh, I can see that I'm alternating between terms there.

Answer is that the weakest game I've played in the series is the original Metal Gear (not Metal Gear Solid), whereas the last one I played was Snake Eater.
Gotcha, and to that I can only answer that neither MGS IV or V are worse then the original Metal Gear (which is atrociously bad, by the way), but they are a far cry from the quality of MGS 1-3. As far as I am concerned Snake Eater is the high point of the series, being a good mix of gameplay and cinematics and largely free of the burdensome lore that would go on to drag MGS IV down.
 

dontlooknow

New member
Mar 6, 2008
124
0
0
For me, MGS4 is more MGS-ey than 5 - supper long cutscenes, awkward dialogue, tight (bordering on stiff) gameplay. Whether or not you see these things as bad is up to you - I happen to love the franchise as a whole - but the story of 4 felt like it strayed too far into self-parody for me. Sure, there were nice nods for the fans, but the bizarrely central role of Johnny-the-shitter and the baffling way that the Beauty and the Beast unit are characterised really unplugged me from the game and the law. Random dumps of exposition about the past horrors experienced by someone I just killed are not going to endear me to the universe the game's trying to create.

On the other hand, MGS5, while weird, managed to bend the franchise away from its trend enough to avoid references to previously establish lore becoming too cumbersome. I'm also an English Lit post-grad, so I might have had more of an affinity for 5 thanks to all the weird and interesting stuff about language/parasites/identity expression etc.

For the record, the games I most enjoyed would be listed as:
MGS2
MGS5
MGS1
MGS3
MGS4
Peace Walker
 

hanselthecaretaker

My flask is half full
Legacy
Nov 18, 2010
8,738
5,911
118
MGSV did make me appreciate MGS4 more. Say what you want about MGS4, at least is isn't a repetitive slog of mind numbing missions with barely any to no story context to them. The only thing MGSV did better was that it actually had more gameplay, MGS4 had like 90 weapons in it but it barely ever gave you the chance to use them. As for plot, yeah MGS4 was zany & cringey but then so is MGSV! MGSV was worst IMO because at least in MGS4 I knew who the villain was and saw the connection between the bosses and the themes of the bosses from previous games. MGSV had no BB, no Dead Cell, no Fox Unit, no COBRAS... It had ONE boss and boring fights against a group of stronger enemies.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
20,475
5,292
118
josemlopes said:
I never got what people liked about Ground Zeroes, the map is so shit, the close quarters is tiny with nothing to do and the open areas are really flat and repetitive. 5 at least has some cool areas here and there.
Well, it had a structure to it. Your mission felt vital, and the people you were extracting felt important to the story. It didn't feel like just one flat empty desert where you spent 80% of the game running around, with an occasional settlement, two of which at best were actually kind of cool. But then even those get re used over and over and over again until you're sick of them.

Ground Zeroes felt like it had a sense of direction. Phantom Pain was 30+ hours of aimless nonesense.
 

Hawk of Battle

New member
Feb 28, 2009
1,191
0
0
MGS4 allows you to actually pilot Metal Gear REX in a direct battle against a Metal Gear RAY. For this fact alone all other sins are forgiven.
 

Samtemdo8_v1legacy

New member
Aug 2, 2015
7,915
0
0
Hawki said:
As someone who's only played the Metal Gear series up to 3, I've gotta ask...

...Are these games actually worse than the original Metal Gear? Because holy bum nuggets that was torture. :(
As in this Original Metal Gear?

 

SweetShark

Shark Girls are my Waifus
Jan 9, 2012
5,147
0
0
Lunncal said:
4 is far and away the worst Metal Gear Solid game in my opinion.

The gameplay was delivered in such short, sparsely distributed nibbles that I don't even really feel like I got to play it at all. I don't actually think I had time to form a real opinion of it, I had always already passed through to the next huge cut-scene before I even started figuring out the basic mechanics. From the tutorials I gathered there was some kind of weapon modification system, and disguises and all sorts of cool sounding things. I never got a chance to use them.

As for those cutscenes, I felt that the story was also the worst in the series, even including the obviously unfinished story of V. It was all just pointless fan service and explanations for things that were better off not being explained at all. Being a totally insane fanboy of the series I enjoyed it anyway, but even to me it stood out as the worst of the bunch.

The whole huge subplot with "Johnny", the previously nameless joke character with diarrhoea...

Just... No... I love you Kojima, but that joke wasn't even funny to begin with...
Jonny will be always the Best Underdog I had pleaser to watch in the whole MGS series.
I was the only one I liked that *MAJOR SPOILERS OF METAL GEAR SOLID 4 BELOW*

He Married Meryl in the end LIKE A BOSSSSSZZzzzzzzzyyyYYEEEEAAAAAH!!!!

But I digress, MGS5 is better than MGS4. However even I said MGS4 is wrost, it is a good game [7/10].
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,178
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Samtemdo8 said:
Hawki said:
As someone who's only played the Metal Gear series up to 3, I've gotta ask...

...Are these games actually worse than the original Metal Gear? Because holy bum nuggets that was torture. :(
As in this Original Metal Gear?

Yes.
 

Benpasko

New member
Jul 3, 2011
498
0
0
It's tough, MGSV has a lot of problems (even more post-patch cycle, they butchered that game), but I genuinely think it has the best stealth gameplay engine ever. The core gameplay was so strong that it kept me playing for 50 hours before I dropped it after the dumb death of Skull Face. Whereas 4 is the opposite way around, it's got all that juicy plot you love from Metal Gear, but the gameplay suffers.
 

EHKOS

Madness to my Methods
Feb 28, 2010
4,815
0
0
No, but then again I valued that V was more grounded in reality. 4 seemed...alternate universe-like, I could accept everything that happened in V because there was a lot of explanation behind it that, while completely ungrounded in reality, sounded like it COULD make sense. 4 was all over the place, everything was coming to a climax, and it made the whole game feel stressful. Also, V was simply more fun to play for me, and I HATE stealth games.
 

hanselthecaretaker

My flask is half full
Legacy
Nov 18, 2010
8,738
5,911
118
BlackBark said:
MGS V is one of the biggest disappointments in gaming for me and is definitely the most forgettable in the series. I liked the quirkiness, humour and characters of 4, but I agree that the gameplay was lacking.

MGS V had great stealth/fighting mechanics (in a completely different league to 4), but it had no character at all, and the overall gameplay was extremely flawed as well, such as the pointless open world, the bases being used over and over for missions, the side quests all being pretty much exactly the same, etc.

MGS V is just...not a good game at all. I can't see how anyone managed to finish it. You see pretty much all there is to see of the gameplay in the first 10-20 hours and there is no reason to keep playing the game beyond that, as there is no story to drive it forward or keep you interested. That's how I felt, anyway.

I can see why people don't like 4...but I can't see how anyone could think that what was essentially a Far Cry clone was better...

That's the first time I've read of MGSV being compared to Far Cry. They're not even the same genre, so not sure how the comparison was drawn?

In any case, I think it's a combination of Konami's bs and Kojima's ego that led to MGSV being disappointing on some fronts. Basically, gameplay mostly took a big step up with the exception of CQC options, and the story felt more like unfinished filler for the first time in the series.
 

josemlopes

New member
Jun 9, 2008
3,950
0
0
Casual Shinji said:
josemlopes said:
I never got what people liked about Ground Zeroes, the map is so shit, the close quarters is tiny with nothing to do and the open areas are really flat and repetitive. 5 at least has some cool areas here and there.
Well, it had a structure to it. Your mission felt vital, and the people you were extracting felt important to the story. It didn't feel like just one flat empty desert where you spent 80% of the game running around, with an occasional settlement, two of which at best were actually kind of cool. But then even those get re used over and over and over again until you're sick of them.

Ground Zeroes felt like it had a sense of direction. Phantom Pain was 30+ hours of aimless nonesense.
Ah, ok, so it isnt necessarely for replayability but for the fact that the "story" in it is cool (a good MGS story moment). Yeah, I can get that, Ground Zeroes got me hyped on the story when I played it (fiddles and all included).

I always thought that people really liked the level design in Ground Zeroes, something that I didnt really apreciate.
 

BlackBark

New member
Apr 8, 2010
94
0
0
hanselthecaretaker said:
BlackBark said:

That's the first time I've read of MGSV being compared to Far Cry. They're not even the same genre, so not sure how the comparison was drawn?

In any case, I think it's a combination of Konami's bs and Kojima's ego that led to MGSV being disappointing on some fronts. Basically, gameplay mostly took a big step up with the exception of CQC options, and the story felt more like unfinished filler for the first time in the series.
Well, the reason it reminded me of Far Cry (I'm referring to Far Cry 3) was due to the repetitiveness of the activites. The open world is basically just a set of enemy bases, which aren't always that varied, where you have to complete very similar objectives over and over. To be fair, this is a problem in most open world games, but this falls into the category of being way too repetitive, just like Far Cry.

Yeah, I agree with your points. I also think they could have done a lot more with character interaction. There was a lot of wasted potential there...