Konami Adds "Paid" Insurance "Service" to Metal Gear Solid V Mulitplayer

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,374
381
88
I think that every announcement from Konami lately sounds like an April's Fool joke.
 

fenrizz

New member
Feb 7, 2009
2,790
0
0
That's a nice FOB you have there, it'd be a shame if something happened to it... *cracks knuckles*

Nothing Konami does surprise me anymore, sadly.
 

Gatlank

New member
Aug 26, 2014
190
0
0
The next update will grant konami the rights to clean your house of valuables if you dont buy their insurance.
 

martyrdrebel27

New member
Feb 16, 2009
1,320
0
0
Colt47 said:
So basically, they decided to include a "feature" that allows multiplayer antics to effect single player and didn't think about the fact some people would prefer just to play the single player mode without outside interference?
you can disconnect from the servers in the pause menu, and don't have to do any multiplayer stuff.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Eh. Vote with your wallet.

Fulbert said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Dark Souls the first major title to do this? Not to try and racket you out of your money but to ruin your single-player experience with mandatory multiplayer functionality, whether you want it or not?
And there you run into the biggest issue with any attempt to get change in the industry. It's okay when someone we like does it.

Scrythe said:
For everyone who says "Just stick to single player then", you have to understand that they specifically designed the game to be incredibly obtuse and grind-y to purposely test your patience and make you more susceptible to forking over "just a few dollars" to make the game less aggravating. This is the same thing free-to-play mobile games have been doing for years.
And something paid games have done for years, as well. And people said it wasn't a problem then, too. So at least they're being consistent.
 

Lil_Rimmy

New member
Mar 19, 2011
1,139
0
0
Bindal said:
Well, the free version would be to just not go online at all. Bam. Done.

I mean, why should I pay for playing offline when I can just... go offline straight up?
Yeah, I was about to say that. Can't you literally just turn the online component off? And then you can't get raided?
 

Lightspeaker

New member
Dec 31, 2011
934
0
0
CaptainMarvelous said:
Fulbert said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't Dark Souls the first major title to do this? Not to try and racket you out of your money but to ruin your single-player experience with mandatory multiplayer functionality, whether you want it or not?
Yeah, but in both cases you can just play offline... I mean... that's what I've been doing.
Seems cheaper than insuring my digital shit.
If anything playing MGS5 offline is basically entirely positive for me.

For one...I don't have PS Plus. Which means, as I understand it from reading the details when I started the game, I CAN'T take advantage of raiding other people and playing the multiplayer but they will still be able to raid me.

For two playing online seems to slow down the menus quite severely with extra loading time. So turning it off actually makes my game run smoother.


Disclaimer: I've not actually unlocked FOBs yet. So I dunno how significant the addition is. But thus far I've just been playing the entire thing with online turned off.
 

Nazulu

They will not take our Fluids
Jun 5, 2008
6,242
0
0
What is there to say that hasn't been said already?

All I know is if I hear about Konami dying or dead, I'm throwing a big party at mine, and you're all invited.
 

EHKOS

Madness to my Methods
Feb 28, 2010
4,815
0
0
The past six months I've had my PS3's network settings turned off. It's working out great.

The game though...


Nobody will notice if there's nobody to notice >.>
 

vagabondwillsmile

New member
Aug 20, 2013
221
0
0
Scrythe said:
For everyone who says "Just stick to single player then", you have to understand that they specifically designed the game to be incredibly obtuse and grind-y to purposely test your patience and make you more susceptible to forking over "just a few dollars" to make the game less aggravating. This is the same thing free-to-play mobile games have been doing for years.

While I've managed to complete games like CSR Racing without paying a single cent, not everyone has that level of patience. Constructing FOB's exponentially increases resource gains in single playr, but you absolutely have to buy MB Coins on order to build more than one. They also allow you to send more combat units out on missions. Again, in single player.

Even if one were to ignore the online component completely, it doesn't change the fact that they fundamentally changed some aspect of the single player experience to accommodate their nickel-and-dime scheme. Otherwise, you can just replay Mission 8 and Mission 9 for hours until you hit the resource cap, and then have to do it all over again when after upgrading.

Hell, they even made the maximum amount of GMP low enough to make you have to grind more for really expensive stuff. Without the cap, you could just farm GMP for a single day and be set for the rest of completion, but when you're capped at $5 million, you have to go back to farming often.

But going back to FOB's for a second: even if you're not playing, any FOB's you construct are still "online" to their servers, so anyone can attack them at any time even when you're not playing. So if you want to build your one free FOB, you still have to connect to their servers to collect the rewards/losses. You can't just build one and let it farm resources for you.

This was an absolutely absurd addition to an otherwise excellent game, and it's a real shame Konami is going so far to screw over their customers this way, and this is on top of cutting the ending out of the game, and their upcoming cosmetic DLC (The Tuxedo, goddamn Horse Armor, EVA outfit for Quiet, and probably more to come). I'm genuinely surprised they haven't tried putting the bandanna and stealth camo behind a paywall.
Welp. That does it then. I didn't know about any of this multiplayer garbage until just now. What was a must buy this holiday season for myself just became a must avoid. So bummed. #Fuckonami
 

WouldYouKindly

New member
Apr 17, 2011
1,431
0
0
Fox12 said:
It's like if a company owned Citizen Kane, but refused to ever make new physical or digital copies for copyright reasons. They're holding an important part of our gaming heritage hostage, and since they're doing fine financially, we don't even have the hope of seeing their IP's get bought out by other companies.
At what point does something become abandonware?

I'm not stupid enough to advocate piracy but it shouldn't be the only way to get your hands on an old game.
 

Fox12

AccursedT- see you space cowboy
Jun 6, 2013
4,828
0
0
WouldYouKindly said:
Fox12 said:
It's like if a company owned Citizen Kane, but refused to ever make new physical or digital copies for copyright reasons. They're holding an important part of our gaming heritage hostage, and since they're doing fine financially, we don't even have the hope of seeing their IP's get bought out by other companies.
At what point does something become abandonware?

I'm not stupid enough to advocate piracy but it shouldn't be the only way to get your hands on an old game.
I'm not sure how it works in Japan, but in America it's absurdly long, because Disney throws a fit every time Steam Boat Willy is about to enter the public domain. Historically, though, when the rights of a corporation come into conflict with the cultural heritage of the people, the corporation always wins. Konami could essentially hold onto this forever, if they so desired.

The thing is that companies routinely sit on copyrights they have no intention of ever using, just to guarantee other companies can't use them. It's a pretty common business routine. But they'll jealously pursue legal action against anyone who infringes on those copyrights, on the off chance that they want to use it later. The best chance we have is if Konami were to sell it to another interested Japanese company. I think it's illegal for them to sell to an American company. This seems unlikely, but it is possible.

I'm not a fan of piracy, but in situations like this...
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
CaptainMarvelous said:
Yeah, but in both cases you can just play offline... I mean... that's what I've been doing.
Seems cheaper than insuring my digital shit.
Bindal said:
Well, the free version would be to just not go online at all. Bam. Done.

I mean, why should I pay for playing offline when I can just... go offline straight up?
martyrdrebel27 said:
Colt47 said:
So basically, they decided to include a "feature" that allows multiplayer antics to effect single player and didn't think about the fact some people would prefer just to play the single player mode without outside interference?
you can disconnect from the servers in the pause menu, and don't have to do any multiplayer stuff.
Lil_Rimmy said:
Bindal said:
Well, the free version would be to just not go online at all. Bam. Done.

I mean, why should I pay for playing offline when I can just... go offline straight up?
Yeah, I was about to say that. Can't you literally just turn the online component off? And then you can't get raided?
To all of the above: no, there's no way to dodge being raided. Even when you're offline, your FOBs can and will still be raided, and whatever you lost will be subtracted from your game the moment you log back in.

The catch is that while you most certainly can turn the online mode off in the pause menu, the very first thing you do when you turn on the game is log into the servers. As such, the moment you turn the game on your status is updated and you lose everything that's been stolen.
 

Briantb

New member
Feb 6, 2014
78
0
0
martyrdrebel27 said:
Colt47 said:
So basically, they decided to include a "feature" that allows multiplayer antics to effect single player and didn't think about the fact some people would prefer just to play the single player mode without outside interference?
you can disconnect from the servers in the pause menu, and don't have to do any multiplayer stuff.
Even if your disconnect and not playing online you can get raided by other players. Plus by not using the FOB it makes it significantly harder to impossible to develop the best weapons and items in the game.
 

Sarge034

New member
Feb 24, 2011
1,623
0
0
Wow, this was the first Metal Gear game I was even interested in, "was" past tense. Good job Konami, you drove away my money. Real smert buisnes perkterc der gyzzzzzzz.

 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Nov 25, 2007
16,904
9,594
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
This is amazing. I'm not even being facetious when I say that! I am honestly, legitimately amazed that Konami has the depleted-uranium cojones to actually do this. It's virtual extortion, and they waited until release day to patch it in so that everyone could get a surprise shank in their kidneys.

Refunds, people. Get 'em! Don't let Konami pull this off!
 

BarbaricGoose

New member
May 25, 2010
796
0
0
Scrythe said:
For everyone who says "Just stick to single player then", you have to understand that they specifically designed the game to be incredibly obtuse and grind-y to purposely test your patience and make you more susceptible to forking over "just a few dollars" to make the game less aggravating. This is the same thing free-to-play mobile games have been doing for years.

While I've managed to complete games like CSR Racing without paying a single cent, not everyone has that level of patience. Constructing FOB's exponentially increases resource gains in single playr, but you absolutely have to buy MB Coins on order to build more than one. They also allow you to send more combat units out on missions. Again, in single player.

Even if one were to ignore the online component completely, it doesn't change the fact that they fundamentally changed some aspect of the single player experience to accommodate their nickel-and-dime scheme. Otherwise, you can just replay Mission 8 and Mission 9 for hours until you hit the resource cap, and then have to do it all over again when after upgrading.

Hell, they even made the maximum amount of GMP low enough to make you have to grind more for really expensive stuff. Without the cap, you could just farm GMP for a single day and be set for the rest of completion, but when you're capped at $5 million, you have to go back to farming often.

But going back to FOB's for a second: even if you're not playing, any FOB's you construct are still "online" to their servers, so anyone can attack them at any time even when you're not playing. So if you want to build your one free FOB, you still have to connect to their servers to collect the rewards/losses. You can't just build one and let it farm resources for you.

This was an absolutely absurd addition to an otherwise excellent game, and it's a real shame Konami is going so far to screw over their customers this way, and this is on top of cutting the ending out of the game, and their upcoming cosmetic DLC (The Tuxedo, goddamn Horse Armor, EVA outfit for Quiet, and probably more to come). I'm genuinely surprised they haven't tried putting the bandanna and stealth camo behind a paywall.
This is why I don't reserve games. Fuckin' KNEW Konami would pull some shit like this. Sucks too, as MGS5 was easily my most anticipated game this year... until I read this. MGS4 was one of my favorite games, period, so... yeah... this bums me out. Whatever--I'll grab it for $7 on Steam a year down the road.

At least I have the new XCOM to look forward to.
 

Smooth Operator

New member
Oct 5, 2010
8,162
0
0
Digital protection racketeering.... that is just beautiful :D
I know the MGS faithful would not see a problem even if Konami literally came to their doorstep to collect the "insurance", but at least this is amusing everyone else who isn't stuck in shit creek.
 

Lil_Rimmy

New member
Mar 19, 2011
1,139
0
0
RJ 17 said:
CaptainMarvelous said:
Yeah, but in both cases you can just play offline... I mean... that's what I've been doing.
Seems cheaper than insuring my digital shit.
Bindal said:
Well, the free version would be to just not go online at all. Bam. Done.

I mean, why should I pay for playing offline when I can just... go offline straight up?
martyrdrebel27 said:
Colt47 said:
So basically, they decided to include a "feature" that allows multiplayer antics to effect single player and didn't think about the fact some people would prefer just to play the single player mode without outside interference?
you can disconnect from the servers in the pause menu, and don't have to do any multiplayer stuff.
Lil_Rimmy said:
Bindal said:
Well, the free version would be to just not go online at all. Bam. Done.

I mean, why should I pay for playing offline when I can just... go offline straight up?
Yeah, I was about to say that. Can't you literally just turn the online component off? And then you can't get raided?
To all of the above: no, there's no way to dodge being raided. Even when you're offline, your FOBs can and will still be raided, and whatever you lost will be subtracted from your game the moment you log back in.

The catch is that while you most certainly can turn the online mode off in the pause menu, the very first thing you do when you turn on the game is log into the servers. As such, the moment you turn the game on your status is updated and you lose everything that's been stolen.
So what you are saying is that I turn my internet off BEFORE starting the game, then I would be UNSTOPPABLE?!

But yeah, I really don't care enough about my bases to even turn online off :p