Zero Punctuation: Metal Gear Solid 4

[Tempdude0]

Hopping into the fray again.

Just because it "isn't his kind of game" doesn't make his point less valid.

As far as the killing is concerned, it may not be the point of the game and the score may be contingent on how few you've killed, but the fact you can run around like a chicken with your head cut off kind of kills the "sneaking" aspect of the game. I realize that isn't what you're meant to do, but allowing you to disregard stealth whenever you feel like it disqualifies it as a "stealth game". Hell, you could be stealthy in the GTA series. Does that mean they're "stealth games" as well?

He's complaining that the story is presented in a poor manner and should not have to be skipped for any reason aside from having played through the game multiple times. That aside, he keeps referencing God of War because it manages to integrate story and gameplay well. The story may be relatively simple, true, but in regards to integrating story and gameplay MGS fails horribly. It seems intent on you watching a story unfold, not being part of an unfolding story.

Skipping a few, he's not referencing that. He's most likely referencing NANOMACHINES! and the general odd shit that pops up in the game, such as anything people say that's not related to what's going on. An example may be the medic from MGS 3 and when she would rant about movies. He's in the middle of a war zone, now is NOT the time to be discussing Creature from the Black Lagoon.

"Old eye-patch man in a flying octopus suit (with flames), screaming "STUPID MACHINES!!!" I believe this line goes toward general "...What?" feelings. It's just goofy.

Skipping again to the "80% fantastic, 20% sheer embarrassment" part. The idea isn't that he's tossing in jokes, its that he's tossing in jokes that kill the feel of the game. It's possible to integrate jokes into a serious story, but a little bit of subtlety is required and at times Kojima just throws subtlety out the window.

To the final point, the idea is that a game need not be constrained to a time limit, but parts of it shouldn't make you want to do something else. Take the scene from Super Paper Mario where you have to run around a wheel for 15 minutes. Something like that may serve a purpose in the game and may even be a joke/reference, but when you're sacrificing the point of a game (you know, playing it) for the sake of story/jokes/references/artistic vision, then it becomes a problem. If you need to be "hardcore" about something to appreciate it, then it has failed.

I'm not going to rag on you for liking the game, but I'm curious as to why people never seem to see the flaws in the things they like.

 

[Sandoggg]

Hopping into the fray again.

Just because it "isn't his kind of game" doesn't make his point less valid.

I don't play hockey games because I know I won't enjoy it. I'm not going to go get one and start complaining about things that I don't like in it. You want my opinion on fish? I hate fish. Smells like garbage. Too many bones, looks disgusting. It gives me a gag-reflex. Are my points valid? All in all, probably not.

As far as the killing is concerned, it may not be the point of the game and the score may be contingent on how few you've killed, but the fact you can run around like a chicken with your head cut off kind of kills the "sneaking" aspect of the game. I realize that isn't what you're meant to do, but allowing you to disregard stealth whenever you feel like it disqualifies it as a "stealth game". Hell, you could be stealthy in the GTA series. Does that mean they're "stealth games" as well?

it's a choice. it's not the fact that you are able to, it's the fact that you choose to. plus, how stupid would MGS be if the game was over once you were seen? When you are sneaking through a tight area and a guard sees you, being able to run around like a chicken with your head cut off is a much better idea than restarting the game. I'm even willing to bet that over half of the MGS players don't focus on being stealthy for their first run through the game. It's more of a challenge for later, and getting those great rewards.
Anyways, I'd classify MGS as an action game.. it just has the bit about espionage action in the title.

He's complaining that the story is presented in a poor manner and should not have to be skipped for any reason aside from having played through the game multiple times. That aside, he keeps referencing God of War because it manages to integrate story and gameplay well. The story may be relatively simple, true, but in regards to integrating story and gameplay MGS fails horribly. It seems intent on you watching a story unfold, not being part of an unfolding story.

I like that last sentence of yours. Honestly I was trying to be vague with GoW because I have never played it. I have just heard about how great of an action game it is. Not many games can rival the story of MGS though lol. At least in terms of volume.
So what would you have done? Make the game an RPG in which you choose Snake's responses? I really can't see much difference between games like MGS and DMC where you watch a couple action scenes and some talking in an FMV, and suddenly you're thrown into a fight again.

Skipping a few, he's not referencing that. He's most likely referencing NANOMACHINES! and the general odd shit that pops up in the game, such as anything people say that's not related to what's going on. An example may be the medic from MGS 3 and when she would rant about movies. He's in the middle of a war zone, now is NOT the time to be discussing Creature from the Black Lagoon.

I do think that the whole nanomachine stuff got a little out of hand. Mainly in regards to Vamp. I still don't know how he can float on water and run up walls. But he is a badass.. Kojima definitely likes to make references. I don't know exactly how old he is, but those could have been movies he liked to watch as a kid, and for all the old timers out there playing his games, they'd get a kick out of hearing about those movies as well. Kind of liek the radio stations in GTA:VC, but as you said, less subtle. You people must not have played MGS, because I was so damn nostalgic walking around shadow moses while they played the MGS ending music.. I was tearing up.. it was amazing. and Otacon's call about switching discs was also amazing.

"Old eye-patch man in a flying octopus suit (with flames), screaming "STUPID MACHINES!!!" I believe this line goes toward general "...What?" feelings. It's just goofy.

well I guess this is just a new opinion to me, I've talked to a lot of people about the game and this is the first time someone has thought Solidus was weird and old.. Sorry you can't take him seriously.

Skipping again to the "80% fantastic, 20% sheer embarrassment" part. The idea isn't that he's tossing in jokes, its that he's tossing in jokes that kill the feel of the game. It's possible to integrate jokes into a serious story, but a little bit of subtlety is required and at times Kojima just throws subtlety out the window.

oops, kind of addressed this above. Yeah the story is serious, but just maybe try to appreciate the game itself a bit more. Who doesn't love easter eggs?

To the final point, the idea is that a game need not be constrained to a time limit, but parts of it shouldn't make you want to do something else. Take the scene from Super Paper Mario where you have to run around a wheel for 15 minutes. Something like that may serve a purpose in the game and may even be a joke/reference, but when you're sacrificing the point of a game (you know, playing it) for the sake of story/jokes/references/artistic vision, then it becomes a problem. If you need to be "hardcore" about something to appreciate it, then it has failed.

I'm not going to rag on you for liking the game, but I'm curious as to why people never seem to see the flaws in the things they like.

My point about being hardcore is that I'm admitting the game does not fit well with people who have very limited time for playing. I myself had an off day from work, and was allowed to laze about in my room all day and play through the game (and most of the night before..and late into that night..). So when a long cutscene came up, I wasn't annoyed. And now that I have that first run out of the way, I'm going to play through it again and skip the cutscenes for.. maximum playing time..?
You say that long cutscenes sacrifices the point of a game? I certainly knew what I was getting into when I bought this game. My friend who I'm borrowing the game from even told me when he handed it to me, "best movie ever." I smiled and took the game from him.
mgs4 has no flaws.....! but seriously. the cutscenes didn't bother me, the endings were long but cinematic, the controls took a while to get used to.. and i don't really know what else to say. this is a mgs game, that's how they go.

 

[Hollywooda]

GETS BETTER EVERYTIME I WATCH IT....

 

[m_jim]

Hopping into the fray again.

Just because it "isn't his kind of game" doesn't make his point less valid.

I don't play hockey games because I know I won't enjoy it. I'm not going to go get one and start complaining about things that I don't like in it. You want my opinion on fish? I hate fish. Smells like garbage. Too many bones, looks disgusting. It gives me a gag-reflex. Are my points valid? All in all, probably not.

But if a game is truly great, wouldn't it have a near universal appeal? When Tetris and GTA3 were released, they captured the minds of gamers of all stripes. Whether "it's your thing" or not, one could at least recognize the significance of it.

He's complaining that the story is presented in a poor manner and should not have to be skipped for any reason aside from having played through the game multiple times. That aside, he keeps referencing God of War because it manages to integrate story and gameplay well. The story may be relatively simple, true, but in regards to integrating story and gameplay MGS fails horribly. It seems intent on you watching a story unfold, not being part of an unfolding story.

I like that last sentence of yours. Honestly I was trying to be vague with GoW because I have never played it. I have just heard about how great of an action game it is. Not many games can rival the story of MGS though lol. At least in terms of volume.
So what would you have done? Make the game an RPG in which you choose Snake's responses? I really can't see much difference between games like MGS and DMC where you watch a couple action scenes and some talking in an FMV, and suddenly you're thrown into a fight again.

Is there a reason why you have to watch all the cool stuff happen in the cutscenes? I understand that not every game can integrate the story into gameplay (such as Half-Life). However, there is a problem when you are watching the high octane fight scenes in a game rather than playing them. A friend of mine summed it up best when we were talking about the game-to-cutscene ratio: "Come to think of it, the game didn't let me play it all that much."

 

[Tempdude0]

Nifty, a response.

What I was putting forward was the idea that someone can object to something and still remain correct despite bias. I, for instance, do not really enjoy first person shooter. However, I can still tell what is and isn't supposed to be in one. If a first person shooter decides to, say, crap out on controls or gives 90% of the enemies perfect head-shot aim then it isn't just that I don't like the genre but that those are legitimate issues.

I never said it wasn't a choice. I just said it was a poor decision to call it a "stealth" game. Right in the title it touts itself as one and I think it's a poor decision. I also agree that it's better to be able to recover from being seen, but the "chicken with your head cut off line" means running around in circles like an idiot. It's not just running away to recover, but being able to prance around like a 'tard and not die.

The problem is that Devil May Cry isn't heralded as having the most AMAZIN' STORY EVARR! It never tries to break away from the fact that it's a shallow "beat the bejeezus out of shit" game. MGS at all times feels like it's trying to break away from being a game and jump onto the silver screen. See, the cutscenes wouldn't be an issue if they weren't so damn long. The game could have taken a cue from Max Payne and had gamplay interspersed with dialog. At important fights, instead of going into a cutscene, the dialog could have just been done while Snake was running around fighting or hiding or whatever he had to do. Just make sure the villain can't die while this is going on. Ideally, it should only take maybe, five minutes or so to do the back and forth deal. Granted, it shouldn't use this all the time, but it would be a way to cut out some of the cutscenes and would have put more focus on keeping only the needed information present instead of running off on a tangent like the game loves to do.

Once again, I've played the older games and watched this one but nostalgia doesn't cloud my judgment. The running on walls and floating on water are fine as they are, considering some of the other things in the game. The problem I have is that for every subtle reference, there's three other blatant, shoehorned in ones.

See, that's the thing. The main villain, if meant to be taken seriously, shouldn't have a scene that's going to make him look utterly ridiculous. It'd be like seeing Jon Irenicus in a tutu at one point in Baldur's Gate II. It kills the idea of the villain as a serious threat because, for the rest of the game, all you'll be able to see is the proverbial "tutu scene"

I love easter eggs as much as the next guy, but they're meant to be HIDDEN, not held out in front of the viewer while the narrator goes "See, see? We're referencing something! Isn't this just awesome?" As I stated, all Kojima lacks in that regard is a degree of subtlety.

My personal likes and dislikes don't get in the way of what I'm saying here. You can love the game like you do, but you've got to admit that what people have called flaws ARE flaws. Long cutscenes destroy immersion. Fans tend not to experience this because they have their love of the series to keep them involved. Any casual player, even one who's played the previous games is going to get annoyed at the abundance/length of the cutscenes. Even knowing what your in for is no excuse for the game. It's a game and as such gameplay is meant to be the focus. If a game gives you bad controls or, in this case, seems to not want you to actually do anything...It's just trying. MGS never wants to let you actually run around and do things. In fact, the parts you play seem more like the game is humoring you while waiting to get to the next part of the movie. In short, the game is more like a movie with interactive intermissions.

Like I said earlier, if that's your thing, bully for you. You've found something that makes you happy. That doesn't mean the object of your happiness is stupendous or even well done. It just means you enjoy it to the point where the flaws don't get to you.

To m_jim

No, universal appeal isn't necessary for something to be great, however the last sentence there is right. Objectivity should come into play when looking at the merits of something, and if the game/movie/book is truly great, even those who don't enjoy it can look upon it and go "Yeah, it's not my thing, but dammit...It's well done."

The last paragraph is about right as well. As stated earlier, it isn't just that the game is riddled with cutscenes, it's that it actually seems hesitant to let you play. Think about the way people describe the experience. Everyone seems to describe the game as if it's a person. Actually, that's another good analogy.

Imagine you and a buddy are working together to tell a story. Now, he spends most of the time talking, only allowing you to get a word in here and there to help describe what was going on. He even goes so far as to cut you off mid sentence so that he can get back to talking and telling it how he wants to. That buddy is Metal Gear Solid 4.

 

[raunchy]

rofl the fanboys are certainly getting all defensive and suffering from serious bouts of denial. this is great

 

[raunchy]

btw, MGS4 is nothing more than a fanservice psuedo-game designed to appease the legions of hardcore Kojima worhippers so they can take solace in the fact they devoured its haphazard story with shit-eating grins throughout

 

[Sylocat]

This thread is the same with any game yahtzee reviews. Yahtzee beats on game, a whole bunch of ignorant people that want to seem cool agree with him. Flame war's and epic fail ensue.yawn,

I wish everyone who ever posted in a ZP comments thread would read this post before they open their mouths (er, keyboards).

I like to joke about implementing a rule that says ZP threads should be locked after the first 1000 comments (and possibly a rule that says that if your first post is in a ZP thread, you have to ask permission from the mods to post in the other threads), but now I'm starting to wonder if it might actually be a good idea.

 

[PEWPEWGreenLaser]

I just have one thing to say about this thread...

tldr

 

[Tempdude0]

This thread is the same with any game yahtzee reviews. Yahtzee beats on game, a whole bunch of ignorant people that want to seem cool agree with him. Flame war's and epic fail ensue.yawn,

I wish everyone who ever posted in a ZP comments thread would read this post before they open their mouths (er, keyboards).

I like to joke about implementing a rule that says ZP threads should be locked after the first 1000 comments (and possibly a rule that says that if your first post is in a ZP thread, you have to ask permission from the mods to post in the other threads), but now I'm starting to wonder if it might actually be a good idea.

The problem is that a few of us are actually discussing it in a civil manor while managing to use actual arguments as opposed to "MGS suxz, lol" or "MGS is great, your stupid." Granted, it's going all WALL 'O TEXT, but these last couple pages are starting to see more rational discourse. While it has taken a while to get to this point, I figure that as long as people manage to avoid making idiotic statements there shouldn't be any issues.

Also, to PEWPEWGreeLaser...It's a forum, what were you expecting? In order for people to debate a topic there needs to be more than single sentence posts.

 

[Ryuuken]

Yahtzee, MGS is definitely one of my favorite game series, but you do make some very valid points about MGS4.

The controls are poorly designed for the action sequences because for the most part (save the rail shooting parts and the boss fights), your supposed to sneak around and not get caught and have to fight off an army of guards. This was one of my major problems with MGS 2 and 3. If you were spotted, it was relatively easy to escape the guards or just mow them down with powerful weapons. MGS4 is not so much the case.

You mention that when your given the tranquilizer gun, the stealth gameplay is broken over the knee with a sickening crack. I wouldn't go so far as to say a sickening crack. I would think of that as more along the lines of a sneaking game were your given an RPG and assault rifle to just go blow shit up to get through your enemies. While you CAN do this, you wont get very far in the game. To quote from your Silent Hill: Origins review, "You're not Tommy Testosterone".

As for the story...it's hit or miss. Some people like it, some people don't. It honestly depends on the person. While I think it's one of the most interesting stories in gaming history since Silent Hill and Shenmue, I do agree that some of the cutscenes can get pretty ridiculously long (though the nice feature of being able to pause the cutscenes so you can use the bathroom or get something to eat is nice...that bothered the hell outta me in the first 3 games).

Despite these reservations I have about the review. I must say, well done. And as always, hilarious.

Don't stop doing what your doing!

 

[Cid Silverwing]

Can't exactly blame you for being dialogophobic but being the one you are that deprives you of your right to flame MGS4 for the uberheavy Hollywood movie/game hybrid that it is.

Saying that MGS4 is bloated with words is like flaming Resident Evil 1 through 3 for being full of zombies. That's the exact point of MGS4, there's heavy (if rather intolerable at certain times, I can't disagree completely) dialogue in many places which makes it a story-oriented game. And yes, the game leans more towards Action than it does Tactical Espionage, I certainly don't give two fucks about it anymore since the players are given like 30+ weapons complete with a weapons shop that resupplies you on the spot wherever you go.

 

[raunchy]

yes i see how you pointed out the obvious, as did i

 

[Cid Silverwing]

I was talking to Yahtzee, not you.

 

[Tempdude0]

I hate to jump back in over such a minor thing, but some of us, Yahtzee included aren't "dialogophobic" We just understand that writing is supposed to be somewhat succinct. A little extra here and there, or even a lot extra here and there is tolerable. MGS goes beyond both and proceeds to beat you upside the head with information, a good chunk of it not even important. Now, don't get me wrong. I appreciate nifty extras as well, but keep them where they belong. Don't try to shove every damn bit of information into the main part of the game.

The radio, or whatever that thing was from MGS 3 was the best way of delivering those extra tidbits. If you wanted, you could go to an easily accessed screen and learn as much as you please at your leisure. That's how all extras should be conveyed, in a manor that doesn't force you to hear about things that essentially aren't important while in the middle of something actually important.

Take one persons example. Tolkien is a great writer, but in the middle of say, a battle, he'd dick off for a page or three about some soldiers boots. That's nice and all, but now is most assuredly not the time to include that. It breaks the flow and kills any immersion.

Further, just because something is expected doesn't make it good. Resident evil is expected to have terrible writing. Just because I expect it to have bad writing doesn't make it suddenly stupendous, it just means I have a heads up.

As far as that excess dialog making it a "story-oriented" game, I call bullshite. A story oriented game has quite a bit of dialog, true, but it doesn't need to go to excessive levels. In the middle of playing say, Baldur's Gate, they don't decide to dump every working of the world, the pantheon of gods, and the various politics found in different areas of the realm. You can find out the information if you want, but it doesn't cram it all down your throat.

...Incidentally, Yahtzee doesn't actually check the forums as far as I know. At least I've never seen a post by him here aside from the post starting the threads for his videos.

 

[Valtiel]

Thank you Yahtzee, thank you for the well-deserved brilliantly executed evisceration.

I actually liked the PS1 version of Metal Gear Solid, back then it was only a little bit over the top. But since then... talk about your hallucinogen-induced plot.

"Several gunmen shy of a grassy gnoll." - LOL

[email protected]
[email protected]

 

[m_jim]

btw, MGS4 is nothing more than a fanservice psuedo-game designed to appease the legions of hardcore Kojima worhippers so they can take solace in the fact they devoured its haphazard story with shit-eating grins throughout

While Yahtzee is merely an egotistical nerd with major aggression problems, an expectation that it is the responsibility of the world to provide for him and no desire to consider any other viewpoint than his own. You see what I did there?

yes i see how you pointed out the obvious, as did i

Dude, I'm pretty sure he was talking about that mile-long run-on sentence.

 

[Sandoggg]

But if a game is truly great, wouldn't it have a near universal appeal? When Tetris and GTA3 were released, they captured the minds of gamers of all stripes. Whether "it's your thing" or not, one could at least recognize the significance of it.

I personally think that universal appeal does not beget a brilliant game. A 40/40 rating from famitsu will not get everyone a ?truly great? game. Tetris was the first of its kind, a fun simple puzzle game with endless replayability. GTA3, while the third in the series, was essentially a brand new game. While the theme might have been the same, the gameplay itself was improved 1000%, while the improvement from MGS3 to 4 was large, but not at that scale. If anything, I?d say MGS as a series could be recognized for significance, while the MGS was obviously the most groundbreaking.

Is there a reason why you have to watch all the cool stuff happen in the cutscenes? I understand that not every game can integrate the story into gameplay (such as Half-Life). However, there is a problem when you are watching the high octane fight scenes in a game rather than playing them. A friend of mine summed it up best when we were talking about the game-to-cutscene ratio: "Come to think of it, the game didn't let me play it all that much."

First of all, fighting in the matrix games will never look as cool as the fights in the movie. Are you telling me that, for example, in the last fight, you?d rather have had a fifth round of fighting rather than watch the intro fight scene? I hope you know what I?m talking about..

Secondly, remember the part where [spoiler.. I suppose. Not that anyone here will mind anymore] you are holding off suicide Gekko?s while Raiden duels with Vamp? I only got to watch that whole fight while I had my friend fight the Gekko?s.
This shows me a few things. 1. I?d rather watch an epic cut scene fight than kill random baddies, 2. while playing the game, it?s very hard to pay attention to anything else.
Those two points that I came up with in 5 seconds should be enough reasoning that listening to a story, for those who care about it, is hard to do while actively playing the game. The one exception to this is the informative types of dialogue. I hate getting codec calls from Otacon telling me to go here and do this. Thankfully, Otacon does just talk while you continue playing most of the time, but there are a few times when he gives you a call. That?s the kind of game interruption that I don?t like.

I never said it wasn't a choice. I just said it was a poor decision to call it a "stealth" game. Right in the title it touts itself as one and I think it's a poor decision. I also agree that it's better to be able to recover from being seen, but the "chicken with your head cut off line" means running around in circles like an idiot. It's not just running away to recover, but being able to prance around like a 'tard and not die.

Funny you should phrase it that way, because to get awarded with the ?chicken? emblem at the end of the game, you need to finish with over 500 kills, 50 continues, over 35 hours played, and a high amount of alerts and recovery items used.
So, looks like that sort of gameplay is, for certain people, intended. No one is stopping you from taking the gameplay seriously. You can play like a chicken, or you can play like big boss(the emblem on the other side of the spectrum). If you?re finding the game too easy, up the difficulty, my friend.

The problem is that Devil May Cry isn't heralded as having the most AMAZIN' STORY EVARR! It never tries to break away from the fact that it's a shallow "beat the bejeezus out of shit" game. MGS at all times feels like it's trying to break away from being a game and jump onto the silver screen. See, the cutscenes wouldn't be an issue if they weren't so damn long. The game could have taken a cue from Max Payne and had gamplay interspersed with dialog. At important fights, instead of going into a cutscene, the dialog could have just been done while Snake was running around fighting or hiding or whatever he had to do. Just make sure the villain can't die while this is going on. Ideally, it should only take maybe, five minutes or so to do the back and forth deal. Granted, it shouldn't use this all the time, but it would be a way to cut out some of the cutscenes and would have put more focus on keeping only the needed information present instead of running off on a tangent like the game loves to do.

I really don?t see the issue with long cutscenes. If you are playing through the game for the first time, I?d assume that you?d watch the cutscenes and enjoy them. If you?re playing subsequent times, skip them. That?s what I?m doing. You can?t rag on a game for having a flawed extra, imo. It?s like saying (this is the first thing that game to mind) that Tekken Tag Tournament is a near perfect game, but the extra bowling game is terrible, the TTT as a whole sucks. If you got the game for the story, you?ll watch the cutscenes. If you enjoy playing for ?chicken? emblem, skip the cutscenes and get back to shooting everybody you see.

Once again, I've played the older games and watched this one but nostalgia doesn't cloud my judgment. The running on walls and floating on water are fine as they are, considering some of the other things in the game. The problem I have is that for every subtle reference, there's three other blatant, shoehorned in ones.

I?ll agree the Psycho Mantis scene was a little ridiculous. I enjoyed it, but it was waaaay out there. MGS has always done things integrating aspects of the playstation system.. like when people literally tell you to press the X button, doesn?t make sense in game but.. well. That?s how they do it.

See, that's the thing. The main villain, if meant to be taken seriously, shouldn't have a scene that's going to make him look utterly ridiculous. It'd be like seeing Jon Irenicus in a tutu at one point in Baldur's Gate II. It kills the idea of the villain as a serious threat because, for the rest of the game, all you'll be able to see is the proverbial "tutu scene"

I hate to pull this card on you, but in the long run, you and Solidus are not enemies. The story is a bit more complex than ?kill the bad guy? But I?m not getting into that. And that?s where it?s your opinion that calls Solidus ?ridiculous?. I?ve already stated my own opinion, so there really isn?t anywhere further that we can take this. Also, I don?t see how you can compare tutu?s and a power suit with snake arms.

My personal likes and dislikes don't get in the way of what I'm saying here. You can love the game like you do, but you've got to admit that what people have called flaws ARE flaws. Long cutscenes destroy immersion. Fans tend not to experience this because they have their love of the series to keep them involved. Any casual player, even one who's played the previous games is going to get annoyed at the abundance/length of the cutscenes. Even knowing what your in for is no excuse for the game. It's a game and as such gameplay is meant to be the focus. If a game gives you bad controls or, in this case, seems to not want you to actually do anything...It's just trying. MGS never wants to let you actually run around and do things. In fact, the parts you play seem more like the game is humoring you while waiting to get to the next part of the movie. In short, the game is more like a movie with interactive intermissions.

Actually, in the paragraph just one above, they do.
I?m playing through on my fourth time currently, and I feel more out of the loop without cutscenes. I skip them and suddenly I?m somewhere else and I forget what has happened. And for the last time, anyone getting annoyed with the length of the cutscenes can skip them, although the abundance is starting to get old, especially for a guy doing speed runs. I?m sorry you feel that MS4 failed as a game. For me, MGS4 was a great experience, and continues to be. It?s funny, but I do the same thing with lots of movies. The Matrix: reloaded, was a pretty good movie to me. I rarely don?t enjoy a movie. I even sat through Spiderman 3 and liked it for the most part, although I hated how Venom?s voice didn?t change, and a couple parts of the movie literally made me stand up out of my seat (in the theater) and wave my arms at the screen because I really didn?t know how to respond to peter parker doing the emo hair flip. But back to the point. When I watch the matrix reloaded again, I skip to the fight scene with the smiths, then I skip to the fight scene in the chateau, then I skip to the car chase scene. Now, on my fourth, third, and second plays through of MGS emblem hunting, I skip all the cutscenes. I?m still having a great time, just like the fights in reloaded will never get old. My first time through MGS4 was cinematic and amazing. As of right now, it?s just a fun game. I really can?t ask for anything else and wish you could just stop complaining about everything. I honestly think I?m just an easygoing kind of guy. It?s a blessing, I suppose, not to get annoyed by every little detail.

Like I said earlier, if that's your thing, bully for you. You've found something that makes you happy. That doesn't mean the object of your happiness is stupendous or even well done. It just means you enjoy it to the point where the flaws don't get to you.

Ignorance is bliss. I love my life.

No, universal appeal isn't necessary for something to be great, however the last sentence there is right. Objectivity should come into play when looking at the merits of something, and if the game/movie/book is truly great, even those who don't enjoy it can look upon it and go "Yeah, it's not my thing, but dammit...It's well done."

Parents everywhere were cringing as GTA3 came into their homes. No one likes everything. Except maybe some shitty party game on the wii.

The last paragraph is about right as well. As stated earlier, it isn't just that the game is riddled with cutscenes, it's that it actually seems hesitant to let you play. Think about the way people describe the experience. Everyone seems to describe the game as if it's a person. Actually, that's another good analogy.

Imagine you and a buddy are working together to tell a story. Now, he spends most of the time talking, only allowing you to get a word in here and there to help describe what was going on. He even goes so far as to cut you off mid sentence so that he can get back to talking and telling it how he wants to. That buddy is Metal Gear Solid 4.

For the life of me I can?t understand how you think the game is ?hesitant? to let you play. Most adventure games have a set path. You must honestly be thinking that MGS4 is an RPG. It?s not. If MGS4 were a person, you?d both be running around in a hostile environment, he?d tell you to go that way, you?d see a bad guy and kill him, then you?d enter a building and he?d talk to some people, then you?d leave and he?d tell you where you were going and so on and so forth. This is not elder scrolls. You do not have ultimate freedom to do anything however you want in any order. This is not GTA in that you can ignore story completely and run around all 5 Acts and kill people until you get bored.

btw, MGS4 is nothing more than a fanservice psuedo-game designed to appease the legions of hardcore Kojima worhippers so they can take solace in the fact they devoured its haphazard story with shit-eating grins throughout

I think fanservice is a pretty good description actually. Seeing as MGS has not (yet) sold out to other systems. I always appreciate that.

Yahtzee, [?]

You mention that when your given the tranquilizer gun, the stealth gameplay is broken over the knee with a sickening crack. I wouldn't go so far as to say a sickening crack. I would think of that as more along the lines of a sneaking game were your given an RPG and assault rifle to just go blow shit up to get through your enemies. While you CAN do this, you wont get very far in the game. To quote from your Silent Hill: Origins review, "You're not Tommy Testosterone".

It is worth noting, although Yahtzee wouldn?t give a flying @#$% about this even if he knew it, that on the highest difficulty you cannot purchase nonlethal ammunition. Thus, if you want to go around tranq?ing everyone you see, you?ll be out of luck after not too long.

As for the story...it's hit or miss. Some people like it, some people don't. It honestly depends on the person. While I think it's one of the most interesting stories in gaming history since Silent Hill and Shenmue, I do agree that some of the cutscenes can get pretty ridiculously long (though the nice feature of being able to pause the cutscenes so you can use the bathroom or get something to eat is nice...that bothered the hell outta me in the first 3 games).

?Some people like it, some don?t?
Simple and true. Yet I will continue to dance around this conclusion with all that are willing.

 

[Aries_Split]

AWESOMENESS

Awesome Post is Awesome.

Also, if all the metal gear solid 4 fans are running around enjoying there game, why is it the Gears of War and Halo fanatics can't simply leave them alone? Instead they feel the need to criticize the game they love.

You know what? Who gives a flying fuck? At the end of the day, the MGS4 fans will still be having an awesome fucking time playing one of the greatest games ever made, and the haters will be scratching their heads, wondering why.

 

[Tempdude0]

Once again, it's not about difficulty, it's just poor word choice on their part. Even on the most difficult of settings can you run about flailing your arms about and shooting willy nilly. I don't care that you're given the option to do this, but at no point are you REQUIRED to be stealthy. For a game to ever call itself stealth oriented it must once in a while shoehorn you into being at least a tad subtle. Incidentally, I never said anything in that portion about taking the game seriously. I don't, primarily because it doesn't take itself seriously half the time, but that's neither here nor there.

Just because you personally don't see the problems with long cutscenes doesn't mean they aren't a problem. You seem to be misunderstanding what people are saying. It's not that people will watch them once and then skip them on subsequent playthroughs, it's that they want to skip them the first time because they're so god damned lengthy. Also, you've once again misunderstood what I was saying. It's not that the extras are an issue, it's that the extra information was thrown into the main portion of the game and NOT left as extras. Take the Tekken Tag Tournament reference. What if, between each round, you were forced to bowl. That would be tedious, boring, and serve no purpose whatsoever. That's how the cutscenes in Metal Gear Solid 4 are. They throw in extra shit that serves only to lengthen the cutscenes and are, at times, not actually related to what's going on or what will go on in the future, thus said information serves no point. You know, I don't think you're even paying attention to what I'm writing here. The story itself is the problem. It's poorly written and delivered in an equally grating manor...and you're focusing on a misinterpretation of what I've written, even when it's not related to what was written. Oye.

What I'm saying is that how they do it breaks immersion and lacks subtlety. Those are not selling points. They are, in fact, bad things to do.

Derp derp derp not bad guy hurr hurr hurr...He's set up as one until the inevitable quintuple agent angle is played. Regardless of what he is in the end, he was set up as a villain first and foremost and as such was meant to be imposing. This is where the tutu and power suit come into play. They look ridiculous. It's the Mike Tyson effect. Sure, you know he's going to kill you when you do it, but you just can't help but laugh at his voice. Same thing with the other examples. They're villains and bad and they're out to get you, oooooooooo scary, but they look like idiots which completely kills any fear or intimidation. Incidentally, I know the story. It doesn't negate the point I was making in the slightest. If Satan himself appeared before you and announced his intent to kill you, you would be far too preoccupied with the fact that this malevolent and powerful evil entity is wearing a frilly, pink, ballerinas costume to really register the threat.

That's nifty and all, but saying "Oh, you can skip them" doesn't make my point any less valid. So what if the option exists. On the first time playing you should WANT to skip the cutscenes. You shouldn't be tempted to go off and make a snack or read a book while it's playing because it drags so badly. Why do people think that the option to skip them means the cutscenes are fine? I can skip parts of Batman and Robin, does that make it a good movie? Oh, and playing the "stop bitching" card doesn't net you any points, it just means you can't make a good argument. Just because you don't have standards doesn't make something good, it just means you can ignore the problems it has. I've gone into that before, do I really need to explain the concept again?

Key word being ignorant...That's, not a good thing.

Why are you bringing up GTA 3? At what point did I bring that up, and not everyone has to like it, you lackwit. I'm tired of your shoddy understanding of basic writing. I even said that not everyone had to like it. Here's a solid example. Tolkien. Not everyone likes him. In fact, some absolutely hate his writing, but everyone seems to be able to understand what he contributed to modern fantasy and respect him for it. Even those who just believe he collected the ideas can admit that he at the very least made them more easily accessible to people. There, happy?

Once again, the point flies over your head. How often did you play between cutscenes, and what were the length of those cutscenes? How often were you just about to hop into something that looked like fun, or ran around a corner, or did something that appeared as though it would lead to doing things only to run into another mini-movie? That's what I meant by hesitant. Infinite options aren't needed, especially in a game like this. I'm not sure why you're equating the two when that wasn't anywhere near what I was pointing out.

Let me make it simple. The game leads you from place to place. Fine, that's the way these games run. However, instead of letting you play through most of it, it keeps interrupting you. Think about the whole "eat your vegetables" thing. "You watch your cutscenes, young man, before you can go out and play...And don't give me that look, they're good for you."

...Uh, fanservice isn't really meant as a good thing. It's used to describe something hollow or lacking that's done primarily for the sake of people already willing to put up with anything that's done by a particular game/show/whatever.

Skipping to the last part, yes, some like it and some don't. That doesn't mean you can't look at it without letting those feelings get in the way.

Moving on to Indigo_Dingo

And here's the rub, games really can't have universal appeal. Their very nature almost disallows this. The biggest stepping stone is in doing what people have done with writing. Moving to the point where you can separate personal preferences while deciding if it's well done. With games there really isn't a set criteria for "how to do things right." or at least "how not to do things." that take everything as a whole into account.

Moving on to Aries_Split

I'm not a big fan of Halo and have never played Gears of War. Just getting that out of the way first. As for why we "can't leave them alone." Well, and I know this is going to be hard to understand, but when people debate...That's talking about something, they may disagree. People will then explain why they believe they are correct. This area is here for the sake of talking about the video and the game itself. Do the math.

"You know what? Who gives a flying fuck? At the end of the day, the Batman and Robin fans will still be having an awesome fucking time watching one of the greatest movies ever made, and the haters will be scratching their heads, wondering why."

Here's to hoping that edit will make you realize just how idiotic you sound. I'm all for people liking what they like, but don't tout your taste as being super special awesome and don't play up the people who dislike it as idiots. It's possible to both understand AND dislike something.

Ha ha, referenced that terrible movie twice.