Zero Punctuation: Metal Gear Solid 4

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NEXT
 

Sometimes it helps to put things in short points ey.

- Stop trying to turn opinion into fact. You can't. Even if the whole of world population says game X is pants, it's still opinion. That's by definition. Everything that follows is opinion.

- People like the story of MGS4 because it's essentually a big drama in a video game, the culture of which does not produce drama on the scale that MGS4 has done. Admit it, all the games work you up very nicely to the conclusion.

- But oh my god lordy lordy is the story so badly contrived and put together in places you'd need to be completely blind deaf and dumb to see that it turns into one big mess.
BB - Hi Snake, don't kill yourself yet.
SS - Why not?
BB - Because I need to suddenly out of nowhere explain everything that's gone on.
SS - But if you know me and my character, I don't care. At all.
BB - But I have to, suddenly and out of nowhere! Otherwise how will the player know?
SS - Sigh.

(20 minutes later, with an even more contrived cutscene about x that goes into a mini-cutscene with y in which you enter a mini-cutscene about y about obvious plot-devices that are there for convinience)

SS - Ok thanks for that, but you still haven't really convinced me to change my mind and live. Not really.
BB - But I have, in completely hidden, mysterious and wishy-washy ways.
SS - Oh, ok then.
BB - Oh, I'm dying! Give me 20 minutes here, I have to forcefully die slowly to camp up the scene.

So, so, so contrived and forced. Personally I like all loose ends being tied up, but not in forced and contrived ways. Here's a good comparison, you know Bill and Ted 2, the movie? You know where they can all go back in time and in the final confrontation the bad guy is like, ha, I went back and gave myself a gun! But Bill and Ted went back and screwed the gun over! But the bad guy went back and put a cage down! But Bill and Ted went back and got a key! Yeah.

- Here's another example, Snake / Ocelot fighting with exactly the same moves. Yeah I guess you can say it makes the fight feel more epic, but more stupid contrived elements. Thought we were trying to keep on the lines of reality.

- As for the game, well there isn't much there. Let's ignore the cutscenes etc, and think about the game. There's not a lot is there. If I said, well you can do the game in 5 hours, I guess I would hear "well you can do Super Mario Bros in 5 minutes, what's the difference!". The difference is this was to be an epic game, and it should be (as was percieved to be) epic in the GAME part of the game, not just the MOVIE part of the game. There's some really nice original elements to it, I like how we go split screen for some encounters, and that as usual there's a link between what you're doing and the character, such as mashing triangle to attempt to replicate the pain that Snake goes through in the microwave room (as mentioned, I thought MGS strived to tie up all loose ends, what happens to his face being completely fine!). But in the end, MGS4 is overhyped. Yep, that's my opinion, but there's some good reasoning to why I have that opinion.

...I am shocked that people are this thick. Moreso hilarious because first Terra says Yahtzee isn't using his actual opinions anymore, and then in the webcomics review thread says that she has an issue with Yahtzee expressing *gasp* his opinon of CAD and Tim Buckley.

I'll just let that sit as a testament. A testament to epic fail.

Also, has it ever occurred to anybody here that reviewers are not going to immediately go into a game balls-to-the-wall extreme difficulty? Most gamers don't even do that first thing in, and reviewers especially won't because they need to play the majority if not all the game just to generate an opinion on the whole experience. I say in most cases.

Finally, I am a big MGS fanboy but I completely agree with Yahtzee on the points that there are serious problems with the series, made even more clear by the spoilers i accidentally have exposed myself too. I'll just say that I liked my conspiracy theory that as son of the Sorrow, Ocelot had accidentally absorbed part of Liquid's spirit, rather than what actually happened.

Also just because a story is someone's penultimate vision doesn't automatically make it good (see: Uwe Boll, M. Night Shamalyn, and George Lucas)

The fact is that at the end of the day, it's still his opinion and people are still getting bent out of shape about it, and that's just silly.

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,

Hey now, to be fair, it's obvious why Yahtzee had such a breeze playing. As it stands it's obvious he was playing on easy, how do I know? A tranquillizer that has infinate ammo? Anyone who's played the game knows that difficulty levels above easy do not have infinite ammo for anything but the Patriot. That explains the dulled down AI and the fact that it was easier to just run and gun, so don't get too mad at Yahtzee, he's just alittle insecure about his playing skills.

this is still going? wow. and I thought brawl had angry fanboys

I'm surprised that Yahtzee didn't include any details in his review regarding the online play aspects of MGS4 which he should have done to make the review a bit more finalized. I was slightly disappointed because of that.

SoulsGrave:
I'm surprised that Yahtzee didn't include any details in his review regarding the online play aspects of MGS4 which he should have done to make the review a bit more finalized. I was slightly disappointed because of that.

I'm not, he believes online multiplayer on a console is "beneath" him, or something. All I know is he says he doesn't "give a flying shit about multiplayer" but gave a relatively deep analysis of class balance in Team Fortress 2.

Tell me what u know plus you could wach this aws well http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/426712

For once, i disagree with Yahtzee. This game is amazing
Also sounds like you were playing this game on the easyest level and didnt skip any cuts
but whatever that your problem. =P

FIRST COMMENT.

Kshandamionreal:

Gamer: Hey, what'd I miss?
Viewer: It's beautiful. Snake's having this moment with EVA.
Gamer: Ok, for how long?
Viewer: (looks at clock) I guess about 15min. Time sure does fly.
Gamer: O...k. Have you noticed anything else?
Viewer: Huh?
Gamer: YOU PUT THE CONTROLLER DOWN AND KICKED BACK! You've spent almost half an hour staring at the screen WITHOUT PAUSING.
Viewer: Whoa. So I did. And?
Gamer: AND you rented a GAME, not a DVD (movie.) As in, you rented a GAME to PLAY, not a movie that occasionally lets you zoom into cleavage or wet granny panties.
Viewer: But it's so pretty and involving!
Gamer: Pretty, yes, involving HELL NO. Two hours have gone by and we're still plugging grunts. In God of War, the Hydra and a mountain of undead would be long dead and those twins would've been done about 5 times over.

Interesting dialogue. The fact that you're having a conversation with yourself during your playtime with MGS4 makes it painfully obvious that MGS is simply not your kind of game. I'd recommend sticking to things like DMC, Ninja Gaiden, or Dynasty warriors if you want to do nothing but fight things for a half hour. You can't really draw comparisons between God of War and MGS. It's like trying to compare a drama and a comedy movie.

Kshandamionreal:

Once that mental issue died down, I noticed just like Yahtzee pointed out that the game kinda groans about letting you actually play it like it wants to gush its life story for the rest of the week, so I go back to shooting soldiers, killing The Pain, killing The Fear (without getting the infrared goggles,) resetting the PS2 clock to make The End die of old age and watching karma/Kojima scold me for KILLING DURING A WAR as The Sorrow brings back EVERY guy I slaughtered, intentionally or otherwise (because I forgot/didn't care about choking people out instead of throat-slitting.) The game eventually ends with one or two more cutscenes which now feel more satisfying since the game's over and you can restart with the Patriot gun, which has infinite ammo... yet the game/franchise DISCOURAGES killing EVERYONE even the mutant/supernatural bosses.

Yes, you are fighting during the cold war - a war. On one hand, you are a spy trying to infiltrate an operation undetected - if you get out of the God of War midset and into the MGS mindset you would not be tempted by the wide array of weaponry available. Yes, you are discouraged from killing people because unlike in God of War, it is not the point of the game. To get the best scores at the end of the game, you kill as few people as you have to.
On the other hand, people like you and me love nothing more than to fight soldier after soldier until forced to retreat to cover to get ready for another round. If they really didn't want you killing anybody they'd have given you one weapon - the tranq. I hope you can see that you should not be so angry about the fact that this is first and foremost a sneaking game. How did you honestly not laugh after seeing how long your river of ghosts was.

Kshandamionreal:

Then there's the technicals. Minutes of loading and hour-long cutscenes on the PS3 sounds like a bad joke to anyone who didn't buy the big, black behemoth specifically for MGS4. The defenders say "Well you can skip the cutscenes!" which with any other game (ANY Resident Evil game) would be fine, but MGS has ALWAYS been about the story, hence the infamous "more movie than game" title its made for itself. I love a good story in a game as much as the next guy (ok, MORE than the average guy, but a lot less than a JRPG fangirl,) but when you can eat a full meal, go to the bathroom, come back and the cutscene is STILL going, it's too damn long no matter how great its touted to be. Save for the content and load times, the same thing happened in Kingdom Hearts, people fawned over the blissed-out Final Fantasy/Disney crossover, but when FOUR HOURS goes by before you're kicking Heartless/Nobody ass, it has been WAY too long. Again, Yahtzee clearly pointed out how Kojima wants to use gaming as a new medium for storytelling yet at the same time doesn't really want to let gamers... game. So basically Kojima, the guy who did Kingdom Hearts and probably others are frustrated movie directors and before anyone accuses me of fanboyism, I KNOW Dave Jaffe truly wanted to be a movie director and focused that energy into God of War, but he also knew when to let you kill Ares and not just watch him.

you say MGS has ALWAYS been about the story... yet you keep comparing it to God of War... a game not exactly known for it's story.. so again, comparisons are very weak. And yes, you can skip the cutscenes. I just beat the game a few days ago and I'm planning on going through again... not for the story.. but to get bigger and better guns and to go murder countless PMC's. I had 400+ kills my first run through, and I still got to enjoy the story. I really can't see what you're complaining about in those regards.

Wargamer:
When I looked at Metal Gear Solid 3, I was in love again. This was a PREQUAL! We get to PLAY AS SNAKE! There is no Raiden! That sold me on its own!

...the factor that sold you was misinterpreted.. you didn't play as snake(david)... snake wasn't quite alive.

Wargamer:
But then we get Metal Gear Solid 4. At first, I wasn't interested. MGS2 had scarred me, and all the vids I saw only strengthened my conviction that I shouldn't buy this game; it was all "Look how cool Raiden is now!" and "look! Snake's shooting himself in the head!"
That's not how a I want a game promoted. Kojima has this masterful ability to be utterly retarded when showing off a game. His lies with MGS2 and "hiding" Raiden almost ruined the game series for me, and it was not until I actually got to read the synopsis of MGS4's plot and learn what it really involved that I relented and bought it.

Raiden was hidden in MGS2 in the same way the (DARK KNIGHT SPOILER) Harvey dent played such a huge role in the dark knight although his.. other character was not shown in the previews at all. Kojima obviously didn't intend for raiden to be so unpopular. He didn't 'hide' raiden for that purpose.

Wargamer:
If it were not for people handing out spoilers, I'd still be branding Kojima a fucktard. THAT, I feel, is MGS4's greatest failing; the guy doesn't know how to give facts.

What are the spoilers that were handed out to you? Did you honestly think that after such a bad reception than they would center another game around raiden? Again, it is not an issue of 'not being able to give facts,' but an issue of 'not giving people the script before they buy the game.' Who the hell would buy a game like MGS if they knew the whole story beforehand?

Korolev:
The problem I've always had with Metal Gear Solid games is not the dialogue - never had a problem with listening to long conversations.

The only problem I have is how stupid the game can be. Sometimes, the game can be great - the game can be extremely atmospheric and can explore unique and meaningful ideas. But sometimes... the game just looks and sounds stupid.

Kojima often breaks the fourth wall with his games, and this is probably what you are referencing.

Korolev:
1) The Name Big Boss. I've always hated this name. He's supposed to be the world's greatest mercenary, the greatest soldier.... and his name is BIG BOSS. Every single time the voice-actors say the words "Big Boss", I wonder how it is that they don't die from embarrassment. It's a really, really, stupid name. If it had just been "The Boss" (I know that was the name he used in MSG3 for that woman), it would have been better. Big Boss just sounds sill.

For some reason this has never struck me as a silly name. maybe it's just because I'm a silly fanboy and hold such reverence for the man. But then again in the MGS universe, everyone else does as well. Either reverence of hatred I'd suppose...

Korolev:

2) Old eye-patch man in a flying octopus suit (with flames), screaming "STUPID MACHINES!!!". That scene just speaks for itself. It felt embarrassing to WATCH.

Solidus isn't really old.. sure he has white-ish hair, but as he demonstrates he could battle with the best of them. Sure, he has help from his suit in terms of extra muscle and snake arms, but all in all someone yelling "STUPID MACHINES" while jumping on top of a 50 foot robot and raping it's face is acceptable to me.

Korolev:
3) Possessed Arms. I know it explains it away in MSG4, but when I was playing MSG2 and that part came up in the tanker mission..... ugh. I didn't know whether or cringe or laugh.

Hmm.. yeah I guess.. my only issue was why he got his arm replaced with Liquids.. but I'd also say ocelot possessed by liquid is better than no liquid at all.

Korolev:

4) SHOW ME YOUR RAGE!!! is stupid, no matter how you try to deliver the line.

Arugal... lol. WoW boss.

Korolev:

5) Johnny Sasaki needing to go to the bathroom every 2 seconds, was stupid. I know it's his character, but honestly, he had stomach pains EVERY SINGLE TIME THE CAMERA was on him. So Kojima creates this incredibly atmospheric game, great music, great voice actors, great graphics - you feel as if you are sneaking around the war-torn middle east, listening to the bullets go by your head, the sound of distant explosions.... and suddenly you find Sasaki having constipation in a metal can. Yeah. Way to go. Really improves the atmosphere.

Ok here's a nice fourth wall example. Yes, the game is mostly very good at being atmospheric, but if there's one thing kojima loves, it's making jokes completely out of context of the game, or a joke relating to past games. Johnny is more of a cameo I'd say, and the fact that he ended up playing a pretty big role is even more amusing.
Other points of great atmosphere - countless talks with otacon and both encounters with psycho mantis. (psycho mantis got some boss reward from IGN or something for being really intuitive).

Korolev:
The Metal Gear Solid games are 80% fantastic, 20% sheer embarrassment. Kojima's "Wacky" humor destroys the atmosphere on any number of occasions. It would be like putting jokes in a serious war drama - like putting constipation jokes in the middle of "Saving Private Ryan". It just doesn't work.

It's a real shame - the Metal Gear Solid games are great, for the most part. They come very close to being classified as "art". Then Kojima makes toilet jokes and gives a character the name "Big Boss". Ugh.

It seems you're taking this nearly opposite as the previous guy I responded too. It seems like you're taking this a bit too seriously. It is a game. It is (kind of) a movie. It really can't be just one. All of the codec calls during the fight with screaming mantis had me on the floor. God knows the first thing I tried was switching the controller settings...

Urgamanix:

- Here's another example, Snake / Ocelot fighting with exactly the same moves. Yeah I guess you can say it makes the fight feel more epic, but more stupid contrived elements. Thought we were trying to keep on the lines of reality.

sorry, this was just a blaring error on my screen. Have you looked at any of the boss fights in any of the MGS games that have come out in the past ten years? Some things that simply cannot be explained: vulvan raven, psycho mantis, fortune (her last hurrah), vamp floating above water and running up walls, the sorrow, the pain controlling bees, the end communicating with the forest, volgin controlling electricity, the boss's scar slithering off of her body, all of the B&B corps. And probably more. Realiity? Nope. Not really.

As for my response to Yahtzee's review, I thought it was unfair (ooh, who saw that coming). He assumes you have never heard of the previous three installments, so to get a good review it has to be either 1. the only game or the first game in a series, or 2. a game that is constantly changing like FF.
Being someone that has played 1,2 and 3, I can't say I was surprised when it took a while for the game to actually start. It was a little ridiculous when I got control of snake, crawled under the jeep, then another cutscene started.
It was a frustrating first hour, the controls took a while to get used to. But, being the war machine that I am, I got a lot of practice pretty fast to by the time I got to act 2 I was fighting pretty smoothly.
I can see what he means when he says it could have used some editing, but this isn't a movie. It doesn't have to be constrained into a 3 hour time slot. Maybe people just need to be hardcore about it (like me..?) and play through the game in a day and a half (pretty solidly..)(SOLID. HAHA.) instead of playing mgs4 during your daily half an hour video game time before lights out every night, so you can actually get some playing in around the immense story.

But then again, I don't take Yahtzee's reviews seriously. I don't know who does. I watch them because they're hilarious. Especially when he rips on a game that I like to rip on. They're great to show to your friends. Anyway. [insert link to Famistu's 40/40 review of MGS4]

G'night.

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.

Tempdude0:
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.

Tempdude0:

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.

Tempdude0:

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.

Tempdude0:

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.

Tempdude0:
"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.

Tempdude0:

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?

Tempdude0:

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.

GETS BETTER EVERYTIME I WATCH IT....

Sandoggg:

Tempdude0:
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.

Tempdude0:

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.

Sandoggg:

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."

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.

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

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

Aries_Split:
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.

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

tldr

Sylocat:

Aries_Split:
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.

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!

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

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?

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.

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

I was talking to Yahtzee, not you.

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.

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

john.smith.100@hotmail.com
john.smith_100@yahoo.ca

Indigo_Dingo:

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

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?

raunchy:
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.

m_jim:

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.

m_jim:

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.

Tempdude0:

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.

Tempdude0:
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.

Tempdude0:
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.

Tempdude0:
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.

Tempdude0:
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.

Tempdude0:
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.

Tempdude0:

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.

Tempdude0:
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.

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

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

Ryuuken:
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.

Ryuuken:
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.

It would be impossible for a game to have universal appeal. Some of the best games ever - Ocarina of Time, GTA III, Super Mario 64 - I've met fans of the series who were put off it by the transitions these games made. There are even some users here who don't like Portal (I couldn't tell if Shatnershaman was being sarcastic). A game is never going to be universally recognised as great, the best it can do is satisy its target audience - in this case, fans of the original. In that sense, was I, as a fan of the series, satisfied with the game? You bet your ass. I always thought that Yahtzee wouldn't like this game, due to his lack of understanding of the series (The whole point of those Codec conversations where Rose was trying to make Raiden squirm was because that wasn't Rose, that was the system trying to destroy him before he destroyed it - a brilliant twist in my opinion), and while he did say that, I feel that he could have phrased it better (i.e. something along the lines of "If you've loved and stuck with the Metal Gear Solid series up til now, and have enjoyed it all, you owe it to yourself to get this game. Price be damned, you will love it".

I recognise that he didn't enjoy his time at it. Its not his fault.

Sandoggg:

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.

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.

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.

Wow, all the long-ass monologues are rubbing off on its fans.

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.

Do you want your money back because you wanted a stealth game? A stealth game in which there are only non lethal weapons and all roads, as open as they may look, are closed off, and the only paths you can take are those of air ducts and tunnels that you yourself dig? I'm sure there are plenty of people that can show you how to play if you want to learn. Not to mention that none of the previous MGS games have required you to play stealth. Why would they suddenly start now?
Also, in my opinion if a game locks you into one mode of play, that makes it less of a game. I'd presume that you hate games such as elder scrolls and GTA that let you do generally anything you want. What a travesty, freedom.

Tempdude0:
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.

Sorry, but I can't accept this as a flaw. When so many people watch the cutscenes and enjoy them, there seems to be at least as many that dislike them. We know which categories you and I fall into, and this is where the fact that this is an opinion board becomes a bit more obvious.

Tempdude0:
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.

I can't think of anything that's unrelated.. Generally everything is relevant in the MGS universe. The only thing that I'm pretty sure I'll never listen to again are Drebin's codec stories of the BB Corps. Yeah, your example of the TTG fits better than mine, although you forgot the part about being able to skip it, after loading of course. But back to the cutscenes, I think the biggest room for complaint isn't the relevance but the complexity. Call it what you will, complexity, mumbo jumbo, bullshit, it's generally hard to understand until there's a bit more clarification later, or perhaps even another playthrough.

Tempdude0:
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.

I'll pull out the opinion card once more, as the only thing we can really conclude from these boards is again, some people appreciate it, some don't. It's too bad that aspects such as these simply stop your ability to play the game seriously. Maybe play through it again, and now that you know when they're coming, skip them. Maybe then you'd enjoy it more?

Tempdude0:
Derp derp derp not bad guy hurr hurr hurr...He's set up as one until the inevitable quintuple agent angle is played.

It really sounds like you simply have no patience for a complex plot. Anything that you didn't see coming from the start of the game is frustrating and unorthodox.

Tempdude0:
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.

I really feel like we're running into dead ends. You can't make me agree that Solidus looks stupid, and I can't convince you that he is badass (not near as badass as solid or liquid of course..) My initial reaction of having this 'third' clone being introduced was pretty upset, but despite my bias against him I think he developed his relationship with Jack very well and played his role accordingly.

Tempdude0:
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?

I'll assume you meant 'shouldn't'. And I'll agree with your statements and mention that I watched each cutscene through it's entirety the first time through. I won't deny that sometimes I just wanted to get back to the action, but it was never a feeling of boredom, it was an issue of what I wanted more. Alright, I can't make a good analogy, but comparing a video game to a movie on these terms doesn't quite fit. MGS4 is much more cinematic than the average game, although it doesn't always have to be like that. As I said, at the moment I'm playing it just for the game. I'm getting emblems and costumes and having a good time playing the game and just the game. You can't skip parts of a movie and.. do something other than watch the movie.

Tempdude0:
Key word being ignorant...That's, not a good thing.

But then how would I know? =P

Tempdude0:
Why are you bringing up GTA 3? At what point did I bring that up, and not everyone has to like it, you lackwit.

If you had read my entire post, you'd have noticed that before I replied to you, I replied to someone else about GTA3, sorry, it was on my mind. I had been off the boards for a couple days and replied to multiple people in my post. Take a deep break and stop letting the internet get to you.

Tempdude0:
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?

I don't think I even responded to that part of your post, as I said, I'm not analyzing every word you say in your posts, this thread has more posters than just you and I. Anyway, it didn't even seem that post was directed at me. I've never read a Tolkien book, but I respect and admire him for obvious reasons. I actually started with the animated movies, and of course Jackson's films were great. I think that MGS and GTA3 were a couple groundbreaking games. I also believe that if not for GTA3, Rockstar's other releases (I don't even remember their names) would have done better, but they were essentially the same game as GTA3 and no one cared.

Tempdude0:
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.

If the game is good enough that you want to keep playing and stop for nothing, you can generally do that. You don't feel locked into playing the game how it was 'meant' to be played, yet you do when it comes to cutscenes. Why do you torture yourself so? Switch them around, get locked into the game for the gameplay, and lose it for the cutscenes. Both situations give you choices, and you pick the choice that you dislike. I understand that you're trying to prove a point but I how can I agree when there are such simple solutions?

Tempdude0:
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."

Not many families let you skip your vegetables. MGS4 tried to interrupt me from playing and I punched it in the stomach, and ran into the next room. MGS4 used to stop me with new and interesting dialogues but now they're something I don't quite mind missing.

Tempdude0:
...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.

Nice of you to defend for this guy, he probably won't be back anyways.
Service is service nonetheless, I'd rather have MGS4 than not, and if another Legacy of Kain comes out I'd be very grateful, the long story needs a conclusion. Would I accept a half-assed job? Probably. I used to be very into LoK..

Tempdude0:
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.

Sorry.. I'm going to have to ask for a bit of clarification here lol, what feelings are we referring to? The feelings I have aren't in you, and vice versa, there's really not much we can do.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here