Topic: MGS 5

[A-Yty]

Where is he gonna go with this? Continuing the story would be pointless. Doing a whole new prequel game would be pointless. Rebooting would be the equal of another "Ac!d" continuity.

Kojima's strenghts isn't in scripts, anyway. He can do nice melodrama and cook up memorable characters. But as a writer he constantly paint himself into a corner while making plot holes and tries to fix the situation with twist after another twist. I'd be interested in remakes of the first two games, but nothing else.

[KaZudra]

True that, but MGS3 was unarguably a Frikken Masterpiece!
Mixing a well written story with a game and not to mention great Cutscenes that are only 1/5th of the gameplay.

[X]

I don't mean to jump of topic here... The MGS HD PS3 collection has been quite the surprise for me. MGS2 & 3 are actually the substance editions. Also MGS3 comes with the first two MSX Metal Gear games in the menu selection, fully localized too. This is one sweet deal! Made my day since I've been try 'n to get my hands on MG3 substance for a while now. If you don't have this PS3 HD game I suggest you get it. It's well worth it IMO

[JooohnShaft]

it's not off topic... IT'S AWESOME!

[KaZudra]

I don't mean to jump of topic here... The MGS HD PS3 collection has been quite the surprise for me. MGS2 & 3 are actually the substance editions. Also MGS3 comes with the first two MSX Metal Gear games in the menu selection, fully localized too. This is one sweet deal! Made my day since I've been try 'n to get my hands on MG3 substance for a while now. If you don't have this PS3 HD game I suggest you get it. It's well worth it IMO

I actually dislike the subisistance version of MG2, replacing all the Celebrity mockups (their original design, Sean Connery Big Boss) into the modern art.
I do love the Spoof vids on Subsistance though, it was awesome.

[Sumac]

...And in the end the game will have quality gameplay and few memorable scenes.
My main concern - what it will do with the overall MGS mythos.

[A-Yty]

I don't mean to be a dick, but gameplay has never been MGS' strong point.

..

..wait, why am I apologizing for saying that? It has never been Silent Hill's strong point either and it's an excellent series.

[Sumac]

I don't mean to be a dick, but gameplay has never been MGS' strong point.

Wait, what? 
I mean it maybe not something super unique, but is as much part of the game as story. It is responsible for why MGS is cult it is now.

[thernz]

The bosses are at least a strong point, even if they are generally a dissonance to the general gameplay. The games are more like strings of mini-games anyway, but they're good mini-games.

[A-Yty]

Sorry, I meant that the controls have never been particularly fluid or practical (IMHO, obviosly). I didn't mean that hide and seek isn't MGS's enjoyable thing.

[X]

I think what I'd like to see is Hideo kojima make a MGS game that takes place between MGS1 and MGS2. The MGS2 story says that Snake and Otacon were doing missions all over the earth for Philanthropy, taking out each and every single Metal Gear variant that was being produced by rival nations. It would give us a chance to play as young Snake again and go up against the many different versions of Metal Gear. If there's one thing I like about the MGS series is that it's going up against a Metal Gear.

[KaZudra]

Ahem, Gameplay is a VERY strong point in MGS, it's what separated it from other games, and MGS4 perfected it.... unfortunatly to fully play it, you gotta play MGS Online.

[A-Yty]

Now I'm curious. What kind of improvements did 4 offer exactly?

Without the radar, you've been pretty much blind in the past games. Mess around with the camera to get a view around and you'll simply find yourself getting spotted. It's absolutely hilarious that a fully controllable camera was saved for Subsistence instead of the original release.

From what I've heard, shooting an enemy soldier in MGS4 in the leg is no different from shooting him in the head. Correct? If so, that's pretty primitive.

Didn't they also change the fire button into R1? Did that really improve anything? How about taking away the "back-against-the-wall" ability?

[KaZudra]

Now I'm curious. What kind of improvements did 4 offer exactly?

Without the radar, you've been pretty much blind in the past games. Mess around with the camera to get a view around and you'll simply find yourself getting spotted. It's absolutely hilarious that a fully controllable camera was saved for Subsistence instead of the original release.

From what I've heard, shooting an enemy soldier in MGS4 in the leg is no different from shooting him in the head. Correct? If so, that's pretty primitive.

Didn't they also change the fire button into R1? Did that really improve anything? How about taking away the "back-against-the-wall" ability?

1. Radar is for bitches, you pay more attention to that than the game in the older games, MGS3 removed it and it only made it better and more challenging, this is the same case.

Although, the Fixed, adjustable Camera in MGS3 (regular) was superior to the free-form because you could see enemies 1 screen over.

2. Yep, you shoot an enemy in the leg, they limp, that's is just as primitive as kill dudes on Cod by foot shots.

Shooting them in the Balls = Headshot though, but that's deliberate.

3. Do you have any idea how shitty the ps3's triggers are? trust me, it's better on the bumpers (like resistance)


MGS4 failed with a over the top, excessive story with so much Padding and useless cutscenes that make Xenosaga's cutscenes look short.
Gameplay, however is in it's prime....but due to practically never being able to actually play the game, I can see your point of gameplay not being  srong.

[A-Yty]

I have played the previous games, just not 4 and Portable Ops. I just almost always felt the controls were cumbersome. However, sneaking around was mostly fun (especially in MGS3), the boss battles were funny, memorable characters were around and until part 4, the story kept me interested.