Speaking as someone who doesn't own a PS3 (or any current generation console), I thought I'd throw in my utterly irrelevant thoughts now that the game's been out for three fucking months. I've played the previous MGS games, and I like the series quite a bit (not so much MGS2, though). I wouldn't go to the level of calling myself a fanboy, though. I don't plan on getting a PS3, and I doubt I'll ever get another console again, even if it means missing out on MGS4. This is partly due to a lack of money, and partly due to the fact that I'm mostly a PC gamer.
So, why am I posting if I haven't played the game? Well, mainly to talk about the shit these games take for their storyline. Much of this criticism is valid - perhaps even most of it. The story is often convoluted and at times devolves into boring wankery (with MGS2 being the worst offender). The mixture of realism and boss-fight sillyness can be off-putting for some (though by the time MGS3 rolled around, I'd gotten used to it). In the end, however, I find it quite interesting the majority of the time - I don't mind watching cutscenes as long as they're entertaining, and generally, these games hold my interest.
My favorite of the lot is MGS3 - its story was more straightforward and contained far less wank than MGS2 had in it (though a couple of the bosses were fairly ridiculous, but then again, what do you expect? It's an MGS game). I never felt like I didn't know what the fuck was going on, like in Sons of Liberty. This is not to say that the plot twists didn't surprise or interest me - they just weren't confusing, frustrating, and self-indulgent like in MGS2. I had a good idea of what was happening and what the stakes were. I'm playing as Big Boss - I know who he is. I'm working for the CIA - I know who they are (unlike, say, the Patriots). I'm going into Russian territory to kill my boss and rescue a scientist who has designed what is basically an early version of Metal Gear - I know what that is. I'm doing this because Khrushchev is pissed - I know who he is (even if they don't pronounce his name right). The consequence for failure is thermonuclear war - I know what that entails. And hey, Revolver Ocelot is in it. The gameplay is better than previous installments, and the environments are expansive and show a great deal of variety.
Really, if MGS4 is anything like that, then I'd probably love it if I ever had the inclination to go out and buy it. If it's more like MGS2, then it's still not all that bad (and, in fact, is better than most other games out there). And hey, let's not forget the first installment. That was great, too.
Really, when it comes to sheer mind-numbingly retarded story elements, none of the MGS games have ANYTHING on Metal Gear 2 for the MSX. I mean, this is a game where Snake has to fight toxic HAMSTERS that kill him in ONE HIT. You kill them by luring them out with some cheese and shooting them. And Metal Gear has a penis. And you defeat Big Boss using a lighter and some hairspray. I wish I was kidding.
So anyway, that's my worthless, marginally on-topic opinion. Why did I post this here? I don't know. Fuck off.
So, why am I posting if I haven't played the game? Well, mainly to talk about the shit these games take for their storyline. Much of this criticism is valid - perhaps even most of it. The story is often convoluted and at times devolves into boring wankery (with MGS2 being the worst offender). The mixture of realism and boss-fight sillyness can be off-putting for some (though by the time MGS3 rolled around, I'd gotten used to it). In the end, however, I find it quite interesting the majority of the time - I don't mind watching cutscenes as long as they're entertaining, and generally, these games hold my interest.
My favorite of the lot is MGS3 - its story was more straightforward and contained far less wank than MGS2 had in it (though a couple of the bosses were fairly ridiculous, but then again, what do you expect? It's an MGS game). I never felt like I didn't know what the fuck was going on, like in Sons of Liberty. This is not to say that the plot twists didn't surprise or interest me - they just weren't confusing, frustrating, and self-indulgent like in MGS2. I had a good idea of what was happening and what the stakes were. I'm playing as Big Boss - I know who he is. I'm working for the CIA - I know who they are (unlike, say, the Patriots). I'm going into Russian territory to kill my boss and rescue a scientist who has designed what is basically an early version of Metal Gear - I know what that is. I'm doing this because Khrushchev is pissed - I know who he is (even if they don't pronounce his name right). The consequence for failure is thermonuclear war - I know what that entails. And hey, Revolver Ocelot is in it. The gameplay is better than previous installments, and the environments are expansive and show a great deal of variety.
Really, if MGS4 is anything like that, then I'd probably love it if I ever had the inclination to go out and buy it. If it's more like MGS2, then it's still not all that bad (and, in fact, is better than most other games out there). And hey, let's not forget the first installment. That was great, too.
Really, when it comes to sheer mind-numbingly retarded story elements, none of the MGS games have ANYTHING on Metal Gear 2 for the MSX. I mean, this is a game where Snake has to fight toxic HAMSTERS that kill him in ONE HIT. You kill them by luring them out with some cheese and shooting them. And Metal Gear has a penis. And you defeat Big Boss using a lighter and some hairspray. I wish I was kidding.
So anyway, that's my worthless, marginally on-topic opinion. Why did I post this here? I don't know. Fuck off.
![[Gavo]](https://eg-forums-escapist-data-bucket.fra1.digitaloceanspaces.com/data/avatars/l/33/33764.jpg?1620201950){kind=avatar}
