Metal Gear Solid: Portable Ops - Professional Review

Recommended Videos
Jul 11, 2008
319
0
0
This is my review of Portable Ops, which was published on the Electric Playground website:

As the past has shown, only good things can be expected from a Metal Gear Solid title. I was happy to discover that the handheld counterpart lived up to its predecessors. Hideo Kojima wouldn't have it any other way.

MGS has never failed to deliver quality gameplay. Somehow it always retained the same basic idea, while changing just enough to keep you from saying, "It's the same as the previous title." In Portable Ops, you once again take control of Snake/Big Boss in another epic espionage adventure.

Those who know the original Metal Gear games know that Big Boss became a great military leader. Well, now you can give him a head start by recruiting some "fresh meat for the grinder." Unlike any of the previous MGS titles, in Portable Ops you have not one, but up to four soldiers on the field at once. You can only control one of them at a time, while the other three wait in cardboard boxes until you choose to switch characters--a cheesy idea to the newcomers, but a classic tribute to Metal Gear's origins.

The best thing about recruiting soldiers is that they possess various special skills, such as the ability to run faster or an increased throwing distance. Other types of soldiers can be placed in various units to help you throughout the game.

I found the camera problematic every once in a while. Like in MGS3: Subsistence, the camera is fully customizable, which worked great for Subsistence. The problem is that the PSP is lacking a right analogue stick, therefore you're forced to rotate the camera with the D-Pad, and when you're running from the enemy, it's not that easy. I found myself having to stop every once in a while to adjust it, which gets bothersome. Every other aspect of this game plays great; even loading times are practically seamless.

The entire marketing campaign for MPO focused mainly on the online aspect of it. However, the game has a major story based single-player mode. Without giving too much away, seven years after operation Snake Eater, Big Boss has been captured by his former unit. He finds himself in South America, in a major military compound owned by the Soviets and you just know that there's probably a large nuclear equipped secret weapon involved. The story answers many questions about the MGS mythology and brings up many new ones.

MPO is the first MGS game to introduce non-linear, mission based gameplay as opposed to one continuous storyline. The missions include various tasks, such as recruiting an enemy soldier, or retrieving a valuable item. This makes MPO ideal for PSP, because it is possible to finish some of these missions in less than five minutes if you're on the go. At the same time, it is entirely possible to milk the mission to the fullest, capturing every enemy and retrieving any weapons and ammo that you wish to find. Optional bonus missions are included as well. Sometimes I find myself spending hours returning to old maps to recruit new soldiers.

The story mode has a lot of lasting value. I was also happy to see that--unlike MGS3--MPOs bosses do not resemble a sideshow attraction at a carnival. No more bee-shooting, lizard-tongued, photosynthetic astronauts. These guys look much more believable and use real weapons.

The one thing about MGS that has always been "hate it or love it" is its typical, fifteen-minute (or longer) cut-scenes. However, in this game, you'll find the cinematics pass by significantly quicker. Like the gameplay, they are optimized for a handheld experience. The cinematics are presented in an animated comic book style by Ashley Woods, the artist behind the official Metal Gear Solid comics as well as MGS: Digital Graphic Novel for the PSP.

The best part, however, is the voiceovers. After all, what would MGS be without the voice of David Hayter? Yes, the man behind Snake's trademark voice is back. The voice acting itself is as good as any MGS game. Unfortunately, the radio conversations lack voiceovers, but somehow, my heart will go on.

The graphics in MPO are detailed and attractive, on par with games like Syphon Filter: Dark Mirror. The 3D models and texture mapping was done very well. The level design was exceptionally well done as well. Each map is complex in its own way, giving you the means to sneak around behind crates, through vents, or on rooftops. And each map is fairly distinctive, not giving you that stale feeling of repetitive levels.

The in-game music is subtle, yet adds a lot to the atmosphere. The music in the cutscenes is as epic as always, highlighting the mood successfully and the sound effects are loud and powerful. There is no issue with sound. It's clean, crisp and without glitches.

Online multiplayer was the major focus of advertising for this game. I'm glad to say that MPO has a solid multiplayer aspect. No pun intended. There are four modes: Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, Capture Mission and Vs. Capture allowing six players at a time. However, the multiplayer mode is often very fast paced in contrast to Metal Gear's typical espionage nature.

In addition to multiplayer, MPO has another online aspect called Cyber-Survival. Here, you take one of your units, and send them into cyberspace where they will battle it out NPC style while you go on with your life. Check back sometime later. If your team wins, they bring back any enemy soldiers that were defeated and vice versa... it's a gamble. Although it's kind of weird, knowing that your team is playing online multiplayer without you.

Metal Gear Solid: Portable Ops delivers everything Konami promised and more. It brings tons of stealth action, a powerful storyline an extensive multiplayer mode, and it does so very effectively. Plus with a non-linear single player mode this game has tons of lasting value that'll keep you playing. Portable Ops is a must own for the PSP.


I'm not out to become a journalist or anything, but having a professional piece of published journalism is always nice, since I'm kind of a jack of all trades.
 

Gigantor

New member
Dec 26, 2007
442
0
0
I don't want to sound like a wannabe mod here, but the User Review section isn't here for people to promote their stuff on other websites. If you can, put the actual review here. If you can't, because the other website has the rights or whatever, don't come plugging it here. It's not sporting, particularly for the nice people who pay the bandwidth bills.

And I'm not sure I see the merit of pointing out that it's a "professional" review. That's a fairly broad term- is it supposed to mean that the opinions contained within will be more valid? Imagine if everyone who had reviews published came here and started up topics with the link in. It doesn't help build a community, it just builds up hits for another website at the expense of this one.

I'm not trying to come across as unfriendly (although it might look like I am), because it's great to get new people here. But if you want discussions about the review, post the review, maybe with some nice pictures and whatnot; just posting the link isn't the same thing.
 
Jul 11, 2008
319
0
0
Alright, my bad. Edited.

But there's actually a very simple difference between amateur and professional work: Professional work is paid.
And hey, the reason I mentioned it is simply because not every review does get published, and this was something I was particularly proud of, since, like I said, many were rejected.
This is essentially the same thing as someone posting a piece of art they had published in a magazine. I'm sure they'd be proud, too.
 

Gigantor

New member
Dec 26, 2007
442
0
0
Silent Biohazard Solid said:
Alright, my bad. Edited.

But there's actually a very simple difference between amateur and professional work: Professional work is paid.
And hey, the reason I mentioned it is simply because not every review does get published, and this was something I was particularly proud of, since, like I said, many were rejected.
This is essentially the same thing as someone posting a piece of art they had published in a magazine. I'm sure they'd be proud, too.
I got that a "professional" review would presumably involve some sort of money changing hands. My point was that, if I think a review is badly written, its being "professional" or not won't alter my opinion. It's not a label that's going to sway me, although it might make me a bit surprised people are shelling out for that sort of thing...

Happily, I don't think yours is badly written. It's well done, although I can't say if I agree with your conclusions or not because I've never even touched a PSP. My only complaint would be opening a review with undiluted praise of the series and the product you're reviewing. I know it sounds a bit odd, but it kind of sounds like you're biased. It's the same wariness I get when I see a review of Halo 3 (say) that starts out by saying they never liked the Halo series and the nerfing of the pistol in Halo 2 pissed them off. It feels like you're starting with your mind already made up.

But, yeah, other than that point which I can barely explain, and the way you said "epic" twice in the review (repetition bugs me) it's a well supported, thorough review. You got any more hanging about your hard drive?
 

wilsonscrazybed

thinking about your ugly face
Dec 16, 2007
1,654
0
41
Your post was edited:

Unquoted your text. The quote tool is for replying to other people, not drawing attention to the fact you've posted the same review elsewhere.

Removed references and links to the site it was originally published at. The Escapist has an advertising department if you want to advertise your blog or website.

Welcome to the site. /mod
 
Jul 11, 2008
319
0
0
Well, chances are, majority of people have played Metal Gear and already have an opinion about the series.
And although it might sound biased, I think it's fair that the readers know that I AM a fan of the franchise. That way they have a perspective of who is writing the review.

Yeah, I can look around. I actually have a concert review somewhere. I'll dig around. But most of the reviews I have written are about older titles. (Circa 2000)
 

Gigantor

New member
Dec 26, 2007
442
0
0
Silent Biohazard Solid said:
Well, chances are, majority of people have played Metal Gear and already have an opinion about the series.
And although it might sound biased, I think it's fair that the readers know that I AM a fan of the franchise. That way they have a perspective of who is writing the review.

Yeah, I can look around. I actually have a concert review somewhere. I'll dig around. But most of the reviews I have written are about older titles. (Circa 2000)
I understand the bias thing. It's just one of those "hard to put your finger on" things I have with reviews. I like to think the whole thing is an argument that you're forming, and you eventually come to a conclusion, and you're making your mind up as you go along, rather than making it up at the start. I know it's stupid because people are obviously going to have an opinion before they start writing- you'd hope so, anyway, or the review could end up a bit messy. It's just a personal OCD quirk, I suppose.

Older titles are certainly welcome. Retro reviews are always good if they can bring some new thoughts to the table.
 
Jul 11, 2008
319
0
0
Well, I guess I just write my reviews in that very basic way they teach people to write essays in high school. Have an overall impression at the beginning. Then break it down in the body, then restate it in the conclusion.