Metal Gear Solid V in Two Pieces "Wasn't The Plan," Says Kojima

Metal Gear Solid V in Two Pieces "Wasn't The Plan," Says Kojima

MGSV Ground Zeroes 1

Hideo Kojima says he split Ground Zeros and The Phantom Pain so that something would be available for the Japanese next-gen launch.

Many have been complaining that Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes, with its reported paltry two-hour length, is just content that has been cut out of the much longer Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain in order to whet our appetites for "the real thing". Lead developer Hideo Kojima agrees, stating that he never intended to split the games, but did so in order to ensure that some form of a Metal Gear Solid game would be ready in time for the PS4's launch in Japan.

"Ideally," Kojima told IGN. "I would have wanted to release the prologue and the main game together, at the same time." However, with the Japanese launch of the PS4 rapidly approaching, Kojima wanted something to present to his Japanese fans.

"It was impossible for us to have [the full game] ready by the time the next-generation platforms launched," he explained "I felt that a lot of people would want a Japanese high-end game. So it wasn't necessarily a strategic move where we thought too much about it."

He added that releasing Ground Zeros in March "is a position we took on to give people a taste of what we're working on ... this wasn't the plan all along."

So there you go. What do you think of games like Ground Zeroes and the Gran Tursimo prologue? Is it justified for developers to expect us to pay for a mere teaser of the full game? I'm going to sound like a crotchety old man here, but back in my day, we would call this kind of content a "demo" and it would be free.

Source: IGN

Permalink

On the one hand, it has too much content for a free demo. On the other hand, they're asking for too much. This'd make a great $15 release, like Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon.

P.S. Thanks

Just because you apologize doesn't mean it's not money-grabbing, Kojima.

I have to say that this paints the entire issue in a new light. I am glad that they are adjusting the price, but I am somewhat disgusted with the original debate where proponents were defending a full purchase-price.

Again, kudos that they are adjusting the price accordingly, and the 2 hour campaign makes sense now. However, it still kind of renders the previous events in a scummy light.

Johnny Novgorod:
Just because you apologize doesn't mean it's not money-grabbing, Kojima.

My point exactly. This is what it seems like now. Whereas it wouldn't have, had they just come out the gate with a $20 or so price-point. To be fair, I think this was probably more Konami than Kojima.

In a time of costume pack DLC, weapon-skins, microtransactions, pay to win and other bullshit, I never doubted there would come a time when we had to pay for a demo.
This is just a continuation of a very sad trend.

I still can't get over the fact that Kojima screwed David Hayter over, and I can't get excited over this game...

Actually, that's not everything. The lack of a health bar (how are they gonna make a decent boss fight without one? Ever since Snake Eater, MGS had TWO health bars working in unison), the apparent dumbed down stealth (if you believe the previews), this early cash grab Ground Zeroes (DLC before the game came out!), and replacing David Hayter (a fan of the series, dedicated to the part since the beggining) with a crappy Hollywood-name... I am surprised that they haven't announced the inclusion of microtransactions...
As a huge fan of the series myself, I feel disappointed.

Disappointed that Kojima let the bad practices of the industry infect Metal Gear.
Disappointed that MGS will stop being something special, that leads the industry ahead, to become "generic AAA crapfest".

That's it. Now to some smartass to call me "entitled", even though I carefully explained my point of view.

EDIT: actually the double health-stamina bar is present in both Sons Of Liberty and Twin Snakes. It is yet another tradition on the series, being thrown out of the window. And I sincerely doubt that these changes are gonna be for the best, since they reek of dumbing down and adapting to the times...

Really, the game wasnt ready for the PS4 launch so you release a $30 demo. I call busllshit, its a money grab. This could have been a $5 dlc game but nope, they wanted more money. Now maybe this wasnt Kojimas idea for this but still, some one wanted to make money. Before they released great demos with other games. MG2 with ZOE - that demo was huge. An selling the Halo Beta with Crackdown 1, people bought that just for the beta code.

Now the game itself could be awesome, i know ive spent hours replaying demos that people complete in half the time. Still doesnt justify charging $30 for a demo of a game they no one knows when it will be released.

well you never know whats going to happen with demos they can actually hurt sales sometimes; case in point left 4 dead 2's demo was still being played more than the full game for a while and i remember hearing on a podcast a while back that a lot of people never ended up playing dead rising 2 because they had already had their fun with it in case zero

I believe him, because that would require Kojima had a plan.

JenSeven:
In a time of costume pack DLC, weapon-skins, microtransactions, pay to win and other bullshit, I never doubted there would come a time when we had to pay for a demo.
This is just a continuation of a very sad trend.

People have been paying into betas for years, so it's not even remotely surprising.

Yup, basically confirmed everything I'd been raging about.

I can understand wanting something for the Japanese release of the PS4, I do. But then why make it so goddamn expensive, Kojima? This is reaching into the depths and challenging EA's scummy business practices for supremacy. Its that bad for the industry.
I'm sorry, but I'm afraid I can't support you anymore, Kojima. I refuse to contribute to the slippery slope this industry is headed towards anymore.

Who cares if it wasn't the plan? It is what happened! You shouldn't be able to get away with doing something shitty just because you didn't intend to.

If I fired a gun off into the sky and the bullet came flying back down to earth on some unlucky bastard's head, I shouldn't get off just because I didn't intend to kill the guy.

Note: if they were charging 10 bucks for this I'd totally be okay with it but it's 30 fucking dollars!

Steven Bogos:
I'm going to sound like a crotchety old man here, but back in my day, we would call this kind of content a "demo" and it would be free.

Anyone remember the MGS2 demo? I'd say it was pretty well equivalent to this one in terms of content, since it was either the entire Tanker chapter, or the whole thing up to the Olga boss fight (can't remember whether it ends there or if you get the parts that come after the fight too, but it's not a significant amount of game time either way). It wasn't free either, but you did get a full game with it: Zone of the Enders. I guess it's too much to expect in this day and age for it to be a pack in with a game, or just a straight up free demo. Gamers have proven they'll pay much more for much less content than would have flown during the PS2 launch.

Developers are welcome to charge whatever they wish for a game. I am also welcome to not pay that price if I believe it is excessive. People need to stop whining on the internet. The publisher doesn't care about that in the slightest. Hit them in the wallet, though, and you'll see things changing. If the game ends up selling great, then clearly no one else agreed with you anyway. I'm not a fan of MGS, so this won't affect me personally, but it holds true for any game, really.

"I would have wanted to release the prologue and the main game together, at the same time."

That...doesn't exactly make it better. In fact, it makes him look even worse.

"Hey guys, how about you pay extra for the first two hours of the game for no particular rreason?"

Steven Bogos:
What do you think of games like Ground Zeroes and the Gran Tursimo prologue? Is it justified for developers to expect us to pay for a mere teaser of the full game? I'm going to sound like a crotchety old man here, but back in my day, we would call this kind of content a "demo" and it would be free.

We'll have to wait and see with Ground Zeroes, but considering when GT5: Prologue came out it had as much content as full fledged racing games and was cheaper than full price, I'd have to disagree with the assertion that it should have been a free demo.

Steven Bogos:

So there you go. What do you think of games like Ground Zeroes and the Gran Tursimo prologue?

You might want to change Tursimo to Turismo.

So what's up with the subtitle for this game?

Did the PMCs draw nefarious ovals on the ground (the Ground Zeroes!) or is it supposed to be Grounds Zero (the sites of very localized catastrophic events)? Given my limited understanding of the Metal Gear lore I honestly believe it could go either way.

Eldritch Warlord:
So what's up with the subtitle for this game?

Did the PMCs draw nefarious ovals on the ground (the Ground Zeroes!) or is it supposed to be Grounds Zero (the sites of very localized catastrophic events)? Given my limited understanding of the Metal Gear lore I honestly believe it could go either way.

There's a (largely outdated) convention related to the plural form of person. It occasionally crops up in older legal texts. There's three plural forms of person (i.e. individual): persons (several distinct individuals), people (a group of related individuals, e.g. members of an organization or nation), and peoples (groups of related individuals, e.g. several nations). That's where such language as "peoples of the earth" comes from.

So if I were to be generous, in this case I would grant that the distinction could be Ground Zero (site of a catastrophic event), Grounds Zero (sites of localized, related events), and Ground Zeroes (sites of several unrelated events).

But with Kojima, I don't think it'd be reasonable to think he's coining new English phrases based off of outdated English grammar rules. More likely, he didn't know how pluralizing Ground Zero works.

Besides, Grounds Zero doesn't roll off the tongue nearly as well as Ground Zeroes.

 

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