Metal Gear Solid V: Phantom Pain
Looks like MGSV: Phantom Pain is a brilliant game:
Metacritic has given 94%(critics score) on average so far and 86% average user so far:
http://www.metacritic.com/game/plays...e-phantom-pain
Gamespot gave 10/10:
http://www.gamespot.com/reviews/meta.../1900-6416224/
Anyone played it yet? I've still got to get my teeth into Ground zeroes, though it's not of the same calibre.
Last edited by The Hand; 10-09-2015 at 06:02 PM.
I've probably got about twenty hours in Phantom Pain right now and it is brilliant, 10/10 brilliant? Maybe not, the perfect ten is a very subjective thing though. For some, that the story follows on from Peacewalker will be a barrier for entry as far as the plot goes, as will be the pacing. The fact that I'm half a dozen main missions in and have a myriad of side quests under my belt and I've not yet been bombarded by twenty different plot lines, conspiracy theories and lengthy segments of exposition via my codec is both a blessing and a slight disappointment. As in your face as MGS4 was about doling out its story, Phantom Pain is sparing and it does leave me wanting more.
The game underneath the metatextual cutscenes is as good as it's ever been however, better even. The open world isn't littered with too much side nonsense, but is large enough to allow you to approach objectives literally any way you see fit. The addition of a Motherbase you can upgrade and use is a nice one and as long as you recon your targets well, the lack of soliton radar on a mini-map isn't an issue either, unlike MGS3, which did suffer slightly without it. It stands up in the "if you can think it you can probably find a trick or a gadget to make it happen" department too. Very well. Especially once you start upgrading the fulton system. If it can be fulton'd, it will be fulton'd
Ground Zeroes got a bad rap I reckon, having played a bit of Phantom Pain I think not every player took from Ground Zeroes quite what was intended. I felt put out that it was a half hour demo and some side missions in the same area as well, but playing Phantom Pain I get the impression Ground Zeroes was an introduction to the new open world approach, the systems in place in Phantom Pain and the different ways you can approach the same situation given all of that. I think Phantom Pain makes up for the lack of play time too, apparently some people have put 70 hours or more into it already!
I'm looking forward to putting some more time into it, but I need to finish Until Dawn first
Is the Boss voiced by Jack Bauer?
Close... Keifer Sutherland!Originally Posted by OilSheikh
I didn't pre-purchase this, but I was very interested and have watched reviews roll in over the past couple of days, everything seemed very positive. High scores on Steam and Metacritic, forums not inundated with complaints about it being a poor port and no mentions of tons of bugs... so I bought it last night.
It's been a few years since I've played a MGS game (played 1 and 2 and that's about it), so I am well out of the story line, but I didn't think that would be a problem. However, I thought this was a "realistic" game, but the first hour of the game really proved me wrong there, and I'm not sure if I like that. Flying people, fire based demons, telekinesis (to be fair, I do remember this from the first, but this game takes it to a whole new level), funny moving dead guys with green eyes, futuristic hardware but the game is set in the 80's??? There's some weird stuff going on in this game and that's not what I saw anywhere on any trailers/reviews.
Plus, the whole hospital bit at the beginning was a complete joke. I won't give anything away, but there's so many glaringly obvious holes to the plot at that stage I found myself laughing out loud and contemplating turning the game off. But I'm glad I didn't.
Once I got in to the "real" game I really enjoyed it. The open world, the ability to go anywhere and do anything. Gathering, crafting, upgrading, collecting staff, animals, building a base... there's a LOT to do. The guys with green eyes did freak me out a bit, I thought it was ridiculous, but if it's part of the game, I guess I have to accept it. However, there are three major problems I have found out, since purchasing the game.
1 - Your game can apparently be infiltrated by others players, and there's absolutely NO option to turn this off. I read this nowhere in any review, comment, forum post, video... nowhere! When you first load the game it goes through loads of things and mentions this and that was when I Google'd it and found out you can't turn it off. This is really, REALLY annoying, and I wish I had found this out before purchasing as it would have changed my mind, until it was fixed. So sad they have to force PvP on us. Still, if it does happen to me in game, I'll just turn it off for a while, I'm not being forced to do it if I don't want to.
2 - All hints show the controller mappings (i.e. press Y, or use the left analogue stick), even if you don't have a controller plugged in, so learning how to play the game is incredibly tedious.
3 - No mouse in menus making dealing with the base a chore - seriously, this shouldn't even be a problem these days on PC games, don't developers now how infuriated us PC gamers get about these things? When will they learn...
Other than that, it's really not a bad game, and I enjoyed playing it for a couple of hours last night.
The mgs games are always epic in terms of production values etc I've sunk over 30 hours since release which shows how amazing the game is.
I think a lot of reviews were so focused on not spoiling anything that yes, there's an illusion of "realism" from early previews that quickly disappears. I don't think it goes much deeper down the impossible tech rabbit hole than its predecessors though. The key difference is that it's set in the mid to late eighties and other than MGS3 all the other games have had a more "present day" setting. So seeing a enemy base with a twelve foot bipedal mech on patrol but hearing Take On Me by A-Ha in the background is what pushes it out of its own timeline a little. There are similar issues if you go back and play the early games mind you. MGS1 rattles on about every dot com having its own metal gear and being a nuclear power, MGS2 went overboard on AI and Nanotech and MGS4 just goes overbaord everywhere. Kojima seems to love latching onto whatever's hot technology wise at the time of production, evolving the idea ten years beyond what's happening at the time and throwing it into his games.
I'd say the same thing about the crazy boss enemies as well. Pyscho Mantis from MGS1, Vamp and Fortune in MGS2, Sorrow in MGS3 and flat out almost every boss character in MGS4 had some kind of supernatural, otherworldly powers. They explain them all within their own universe to an extent, usually with nano tech or some other such nonsense, the difference for me is that so far Phantom Pain hasn't even tried to explain these enemies to me within its own universe, or posit a thoery on why they can do what they can yet; which makes disbelief all that much more difficult to suspend.
I am glad to hear it runs well on PC though. After the Arkham Knight debacle I was concerned that PC players would be in for more of the same from Phantom Pain. Particularly given that it seems to have been developed with the Playstation 4 in mind.
Thanks Knox, I haven't played a MGS game since 1 and 2, and that was when they were released, certainly not recently. I had no idea that the "supernatural" had such an impact on the game. I have also since read what you suggested about Kojima using modern day (or advanced) technology and putting it in to games based on an older timeline. Kind of hard to accept it along with the supernatural stuff going on.
But odd plot aside, the game plays well, looks good and is dragging me away from Mad Max, although the urge to play MM is also very strong, it's a fantastic game.
Metal gear online is coming out for free on October 6th.
As I said in an earlier post, I had no intention of playing MGS against other players, however after reading more about FOB's it looks like even if you don't participate in attacks or defences, you should be able to earn more from them than you lose. Plus, it looks like defending is easier than attacking, so I may just try it out and see what it's like. I would like to know though if your base can be attacked whilst you're offline, because that would be a huge advantage to the attacker and a pain if you don't play for a few days/weeks.
However, that video of MGO looks absolutely amazing... IF players don't treat it as a typical run and gun CoD clone. However, I don't have much faith in the average gamer to use tactics and team-play to win. That said, I'm sure a few of us can group up and play, if that's possible (and people are willing), like we used to in good old days of BF3.
By the way, I tried searching to see if anyone else had this, but found nothing (honestly, Googling MGS and Quiet just brings up copious amounts of distasteful pictures/videos). I dismissed Quiet whilst on a mission and she shot me. The shot didn't kill me, but it knocked me down and made my screen go red. Was quite funny to be honest, but I'd like to know if she always does it, as dismissing her at the wrong time could probably kill you! Anyone else experienced this?
35 hours in, 25% complete. Absolutely loving this game at the moment!
My base is pretty solid so I've had quite a few rewards from successful defences. I always play online and like that the fob bases can be further upgraded to potentially double to man size of r and d etc.
As someone whos played the original mgo cod players will suffer for running and gunning and you have to pay attention to your surrounding ALOT. Traps can disable you very easily and leave you vulnerable. It would be great to group together and maybe create a hexus clan for it. Also we could use biscuits ts.
Lol you must have really pissed her off. I've used her as a scout mainly to mark as many enemies as possible. I'm currently 50+ hours and 54%. There actually have been a fair amount of emotional moments in the game that I won't spoil for you. What mission are you on?
I did mission 16 last night, extracting the cargo lorry. Hate those damn shifting units, impossible to kill (I'm hoping just for now).
I have seen a couple of moments so far, mainly to do with Quiet. Don't know why, there's just something about her. And no, it's not her lack of clothing!
i've only put about 4 hours into this so far (fighting between TW3, Batman, Gears and this at the moment - too many games!) but really enjoying it. I'm pleased that they have not gone too far with the "open world" thing, as thats a worrying trend that far too many other games are following at the moment and tends to leave things unstructured..but with MGSV it feels more that you know the open world is there, but that you can choose to ignore that if you wish and play through the missions logically in a more fixed order (and the main missions at least are helpfully numbered).
looking forward to putting some hours into this later tonight
9.5\10 from me
I was super excited for it before release. Poured 100 hours into the single player mode in the first few weeks. Spent a few hours dying a lot in the online mode and now haven't touched the game for about a month.
I loved the last online mode (with MGS4) and spent a good couple of years obsessed with it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
