Makes sense since MGS4 was the most overrated last gen, keep the streak alive GS. :P
Is MGS5 most overrated game of this generation?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
@JangoWuzHere said:
Hell no, it's the greatest flawed masterpiece for video games. I'm not going to say the game doesn't have issues, but seriously, the people shitting on MGSV need to get some standards.
Pretty much.
And lol @ peeps trying to say Thief is on MGSVs level mechanically. Probably need to quit the memory lane shit and go play the games. I did a replay of them immediately after playing MGSV. They're still great games, still some of the best stealth games, but they're not even in the same league mechanically.
@ConanTheStoner said:
@JangoWuzHere said:
Hell no, it's the greatest flawed masterpiece for video games. I'm not going to say the game doesn't have issues, but seriously, the people shitting on MGSV need to get some standards.
Pretty much.
And lol @ peeps trying to say Thief is on MGSVs level mechanically. Probably need to quit the memory lane shit and go play the games. I did a replay of them immediately after playing MGSV. They're still great games, still some of the best stealth games, but they're not even in the same league mechanically.
Thief is actual stealth game unlike metal gear solid.
I think it's the best worst-game I've ever played.
@ghosts4ever said:
Thief is actual stealth game unlike metal gear solid.
Yeah bro, it's still early and I have no time for cheap bait today. Nice try though.
Had you actually commented about the mechanics rather than quoting me with a nonsense side step, you might have reeled me in. Maybe next time.
Anyways. Stealth is probably my favorite genre, which is depressing really. Not too many games in the genre, and of the few that there are, the actual good ones are few in number.
I appreciate the good ones when I can and MGS has most definitely had some great outings, MGSV being one of them. The fact that the player has choice doesn't take away from the incredible stealth play that is available to me. Go get a No Traces bonus on every mission and tell me it's not an extremely sophisticated stealth game haha.
I really am enjoying MGS5, I think my biggest gripe is the locals are reused too much, there aren't enough areas where you have to penetrate in to a highly populated area, there aren't enough men paroling between missions so side ops become tedious pretty quickly, certain areas are used too often.
Basically I don't feel threatened much at all running around in enemy territory, its too easy to systematically pick of enemies or just crawl into a base. I think the open world is a little too open at times, it might have been nice if they took an approach more like the original hitman games. Granted the moments you do crawl into a base, and people walk past you, or your drying to dump a body out of sight close to someone else can get pretty tense. I just wish there was more variation and difficulty in the areas.
It's overrated by critics in that most of them didn't have the stones to call out the games flaws.
It's underrated by gamers in that so many of them bitch and complain about non-issues while ignoring that it's one of the best games of this generation, in the top 3 for most mechanically tight games of this generation, and is one of the best stealth games ever created.
@NathanDrakeSwag said:
MGSV is pretty much the best stealth game ever made. It didn't deserve a 10 because the story sucked and didn't have a real ending but the gameplay had everything a stealth fan could want.
except for tension and balanced difficulty. You know, the most important thing in a stealth game.
I love stealth games and MGS V bored me to tears
No that nod goes to Destiny TTK.
Its a great game. I'd probably say out the shooters / action games i played last year it was least number 2 behind splatoon. I havent finished it yet though, I acquired Quiet the last i played like 3 missions previous but went playing around in free roam for a whole day doing random stuff. Will get back to it as finished Batman while Evil within can wait
@khoofia_pika: I agree. It's game mechanics, which I usually felt was the area splinter cellout out did mgs, are spectacular. And the OP issues are referring to side ops not main missions. Yes the sides are of limited scope but there are only certain points where I felt I needed to go after the prisoners and high skilled soldiers. Particularly if an infection depleted your forces, I needed to get some replacements. This game isn't my favorite, that is still mgs3. But it is a well made interesting, gameplay wise excellent game Imo.
Not compared to MGS4, MGS5 doesn't even hold a candle to it as far as overrating goes. And funny thing is that MGS5 is worlds better than MGS4 ever was. I thought MGS5 was rather underwhelming as far as critical reception is concerned, it seemed to live in The Witcher 3's shadow this last year. Despite it's initial release praise was quickly forgotten by many, more attention was paid to the Konami-Kojima drama.
@lamprey263: If it was just the playing experience that was concerned, I doubt TW3 would hold a candle to MGS5.
@ghosts4ever said:
@MirkoS77 said:
I loved MGS V mechanically and gameplay-wise, but quickly got bored of the same old environments, locations, and mission types. I couldn't even make it to Africa, I became so bored. But man, did the game look and play beautifully.
I'd love to see the original MGS and Snake Eater redone in this Fox engine with these mechanics and AI. God that'd be amazing.
thats probably what i think of a game. Ever mission and Every location is almost almost same. dont know what was kojima thinking after all.
I might be wrong in saying this. But perhaps you expected something different when you saw the open nature of the game's world.
To me it was designed around being a sandbox and not a open-world even in it's presentation alone.
@ghosts4ever said:
@jg4xchamp said:
@ghosts4ever said:
@jg4xchamp said:
**** no, the game plays fantastic. The Witcher 3's status as a "great" game to me warrants the argument for "overrated" for the amount of apologies made for that combat engine, that camera, the encounter designs. There are points of that game that are straight up amateur hour. And the repetition knock is always from people that want to play their games in the single most boring way imaginable, that and ignoring all the different set ups to begin with. The frame work of the missions can be the same brand of scout, infiltrate, gank, exfiltrate, but the missions themselves are plenty varied. Get real.
Beyond Witcher 3's butthole combat, I actually don't have an honest answer for a game I feel gets praise while being an sub-good game at least, because The Witcher 3 does plenty right to be a good game, I don't think it was the best game of last year, **** it wasn't even the best rpg, and what I've played of Shadowrun Hong Kong, it wasn't even the best western rpg, but it was a good game.
witcher 3 is overrated too. sure it has terrible combat and become extremely boring but i atleast end up complete witcher 3. cant say same about MGS5.
there are only same type of missions over and over and over again to the point i become chore to play.
Mission 1: First get intel on kaz's location, then sneak into outpost to actually extract (and it ends with the skulls)
Mission 4: destroy the comm system
Mission 6: Sneak into that one shit, get the rocket launchers, now deal with the skulls
Mission: 7: Take out 3 dudes, can be done multiple ways, including going to 3 separate outposts, or take them all out at once
Mission 8: Take down a colonel, where if you take too long there is also a tank convey you have to deal with, and that can be hit while on the move, or taken down easier at that one compound you steal the killer bee from
Mission 9: Destroy convoys
Mission 10: Extract prisoner from that broken down palace
Mission 11: Fight a sniper
Mission 12: Sneak back out of a compound you already went into, grab Heuy from one of the more elaborate outposts, and oh yeah Gundam at the end
Mission 13: blow up oil factory
Mission 14: Tail an interpreter first, then you get to the extracting, and you never come back to this area ever again
Mission 15: blow up walker gears
Mission 16: extract that truck. Which you either can take out at an airport and deal with skulls, or get on the move, in between 2 tanks before they reach the finish line
Mission 18: get a bunch of kids out of a mine, and now escort their asses, and they are fucking kids so they barely listen
Mission 20: Devil's House stuff
Mission 22: It's a PVP thing
Mission 25: deal with child soldiers, all your guns are taken away
Mission 28: Codetalker, first there is that swamp, then there is getting in that bitch, and then its getting out of that bitch
Mission 29: **** this, you fight skulls at an airport
Mission 31: Fight a gundam
Hit the bench please.
You didn't care for it because the game clearly needed a difficulty setting, less konami bullshit, less padding in side ops, and actual plot written by someone who can actually write a good plot? Sure, I have no problem accepting a complaint from those people, but "herpa derp the game was repetitive" nah, you weren't paying attention, that's on you, and that goes without bringing up how much mechanical freedom you have and how many solutions you have to actually beating a good chunk of those missions.
TL:DR
so theres different mission objectives?? but all you have to do is same thing and also capturing same checkpost again. game is very repetetive.
So there's different mission objectives ? But all you have to do is the same thing and also capturing same outpost again??? Game is very repetitive.....?
This has to be one of the most contradictory posts I've seen on here.
You just proved to everyone in here that you don't know how to play MGS V TPP.
@ConanTheStoner said:
@JangoWuzHere said:
Hell no, it's the greatest flawed masterpiece for video games. I'm not going to say the game doesn't have issues, but seriously, the people shitting on MGSV need to get some standards.
Pretty much.
And lol @ peeps trying to say Thief is on MGSVs level mechanically. Probably need to quit the memory lane shit and go play the games. I did a replay of them immediately after playing MGSV. They're still great games, still some of the best stealth games, but they're not even in the same league mechanically.
I haven't played them through....but I remember that they have their mechanics well "merged" ( Don't know if this is the right word) with the level design.
Mechanically, MGS V is quite on another level. Or rather I can't see how you can compare the two as I feel like the way the mechanics were handled in MGS V and Thief 2 is just too different.
I'd rather compare MGS V to it's predecessors or the Splinter Cell's
@faizanhd said:
@jg4xchamp said:
@ghosts4ever said:
TL:DR
so theres different mission objectives?? but all you have to do is same thing
That's a reductionist understanding of how video games work, on a very basic level most if not all come down to do the same thing. Mario Galaxy is get that star. Only a certified moron would call it repetitive. If you want to argue the side ops make the game more repetitive? eh sure, but those are also optional, the mandatory missions are more than varied sunshine.
@faizanhd said:
@acp_45 said:
@khoofia_pika said:
No, MGS5 is excellent. Its story doesn't take the direction that MGS veterans may have been hoping for, but gameplay-wise it's close to perfection.
Mechanically, it's probably the best game in the genre/year/series
fixed
Never played the original Thief games I'm guessing.
Thief's overall gameplay loop is stronger, because the level design, basic presentation, and even the narrative all make a more cohesive stealth experience. It's a more tense and cerebral experience overall, but he's not wrong necessarily for arguing purely in a vacuum that MGSV's individual mechanics are some of the best the genre has seen. From basic movement, to the way the fulton/soldier stuff provides incentive for no kill runs, to the scoring system, to how the shooting works, to how the enemy line of sight, shift patterns, to basic environmental stuff like sandstorms or rain, etc.
Individual mechanics? MGSV has an exceptional argument, hell I think Chaos Theory might have an excellent one as well.
The beautify of Thief, especially 2 isn't that the mechanics are ace (which they are top notch for the record), it's the way the entire gameplay composition comes together. There's a the game is firing on all cylinders vibe to that game, where MGSV is more its mechanics.
Mechanics aren't much when most of the game world is a flat plane with somewhat intelligent AI wandering around.
MGS V:GZ had one of the best levels in the entire genre and was highly unrepresentative of how MGS V:TPP actually turned out to be.
Having played Thief 2 ( although I didn't finish it) I can see why most people would call it a great stealth game...
I actually meant it when I said that MGSV is probably the best game in the genre, mechanically. After playing it, it gave me enough reason.
I don't know how you interpret the word "mechanics" but from the looks of it......you're screwing it's context.
"Mechanics aren't much when most of the game world is a flat plane with somewhat intelligent AI wandering around"
Just because there is little vertical change in the game world doesn't make the mechanics inferior to game that uses vertical change a lot.
You're just projecting a certain game's focus onto another one.. and because MGSV doesn't live up to it....it's mechanic's are now considered redundant ?
Fine.
@acp_45 said:
@faizanhd said:
@jg4xchamp said:
@ghosts4ever said:
TL:DR
so theres different mission objectives?? but all you have to do is same thing
That's a reductionist understanding of how video games work, on a very basic level most if not all come down to do the same thing. Mario Galaxy is get that star. Only a certified moron would call it repetitive. If you want to argue the side ops make the game more repetitive? eh sure, but those are also optional, the mandatory missions are more than varied sunshine.
@faizanhd said:
Never played the original Thief games I'm guessing.
Thief's overall gameplay loop is stronger, because the level design, basic presentation, and even the narrative all make a more cohesive stealth experience. It's a more tense and cerebral experience overall, but he's not wrong necessarily for arguing purely in a vacuum that MGSV's individual mechanics are some of the best the genre has seen. From basic movement, to the way the fulton/soldier stuff provides incentive for no kill runs, to the scoring system, to how the shooting works, to how the enemy line of sight, shift patterns, to basic environmental stuff like sandstorms or rain, etc.
Individual mechanics? MGSV has an exceptional argument, hell I think Chaos Theory might have an excellent one as well.
The beautify of Thief, especially 2 isn't that the mechanics are ace (which they are top notch for the record), it's the way the entire gameplay composition comes together. There's a the game is firing on all cylinders vibe to that game, where MGSV is more its mechanics.
Mechanics aren't much when most of the game world is a flat plane with somewhat intelligent AI wandering around.
MGS V:GZ had one of the best levels in the entire genre and was highly unrepresentative of how MGS V:TPP actually turned out to be.
Having played Thief 2 ( although I didn't finish it) I can see why most people would call it a great stealth game...
I actually meant it when I said that MGSV is probably the best game in the genre, mechanically. After playing it, it gave me enough reason.
I don't know how you interpret the word "mechanics" but from the looks of it......you're screwing it's context.
"Mechanics aren't much when most of the game world is a flat plane with somewhat intelligent AI wandering around"
Just because there is little vertical change in the game world doesn't make the mechanics inferior to game that uses vertical change a lot.
You're just projecting a certain game's focus onto another one.. and because MGSV doesn't live up to it....it's mechanic's are now considered redundant ?
Fine.
Mechanics aren't useful when you don't have places to use them. You need exactly 3 things to ace pretty much any challenge in MGS V, a tranq sniper, the tranq gun and CQC for heavy enemies. Nothing that hasn't been done in other games like Splinter Cell. So those mechanics don't come in very handy when you never use them. I don't think I've ever needed to use any placeable items like the decoys and mines, vehicles or most CQC moves to get pass any challenge.
"Just because there is little vertical change in the game world doesn't make the mechanics inferior to game that uses vertical change a lot."
WOW. Do you have some sort of social disorder that makes you read everything literally ? I was talking about level design (of which there is none in MGS V TPP). Thief's level design was always centered around it's mechanics. You had to use everything you know to get by challenges.
In MGS V, you need to know 3 things. Aim, shoot and sometimes choke. Pretty much every MGS V speed run consists of the player tranqing enemies from a mile away and then running in to do the objective. Nothing exceptional whatsoever.
@faizanhd said:
@acp_45 said:
@faizanhd said:
@jg4xchamp said:
@ghosts4ever said:
TL:DR
so theres different mission objectives?? but all you have to do is same thing
That's a reductionist understanding of how video games work, on a very basic level most if not all come down to do the same thing. Mario Galaxy is get that star. Only a certified moron would call it repetitive. If you want to argue the side ops make the game more repetitive? eh sure, but those are also optional, the mandatory missions are more than varied sunshine.
@faizanhd said:
Never played the original Thief games I'm guessing.
Thief's overall gameplay loop is stronger, because the level design, basic presentation, and even the narrative all make a more cohesive stealth experience. It's a more tense and cerebral experience overall, but he's not wrong necessarily for arguing purely in a vacuum that MGSV's individual mechanics are some of the best the genre has seen. From basic movement, to the way the fulton/soldier stuff provides incentive for no kill runs, to the scoring system, to how the shooting works, to how the enemy line of sight, shift patterns, to basic environmental stuff like sandstorms or rain, etc.
Individual mechanics? MGSV has an exceptional argument, hell I think Chaos Theory might have an excellent one as well.
The beautify of Thief, especially 2 isn't that the mechanics are ace (which they are top notch for the record), it's the way the entire gameplay composition comes together. There's a the game is firing on all cylinders vibe to that game, where MGSV is more its mechanics.
Mechanics aren't much when most of the game world is a flat plane with somewhat intelligent AI wandering around.
MGS V:GZ had one of the best levels in the entire genre and was highly unrepresentative of how MGS V:TPP actually turned out to be.
Having played Thief 2 ( although I didn't finish it) I can see why most people would call it a great stealth game...
I actually meant it when I said that MGSV is probably the best game in the genre, mechanically. After playing it, it gave me enough reason.
I don't know how you interpret the word "mechanics" but from the looks of it......you're screwing it's context.
"Mechanics aren't much when most of the game world is a flat plane with somewhat intelligent AI wandering around"
Just because there is little vertical change in the game world doesn't make the mechanics inferior to game that uses vertical change a lot.
You're just projecting a certain game's focus onto another one.. and because MGSV doesn't live up to it....it's mechanic's are now considered redundant ?
Fine.
Mechanics aren't useful when you don't have places to use them. You need exactly 3 things to ace pretty much any challenge in MGS V, a tranq sniper, the tranq gun and CQC for heavy enemies. Nothing that hasn't been done in other games like Splinter Cell. So those mechanics don't come in very handy when you never use them. I don't think I've ever needed to use any placeable items like the decoys and mines, vehicles or most CQC moves to get pass any challenge.
"Just because there is little vertical change in the game world doesn't make the mechanics inferior to game that uses vertical change a lot."
WOW. Do you have some sort of social disorder that makes you read everything literally ? I was talking about level design (of which there is none in MGS V TPP). Thief's level design was always centered around it's mechanics. You had to use everything you know to get by challenges.
In MGS V, you need to know 3 things. Aim, shoot and sometimes choke. Pretty much every MGS V speed run consists of the player tranqing enemies from a mile away and then running in to do the objective. Nothing exceptional whatsoever.
verticality was just an example of something not flat. Unless that part of your post wasn't supposed to be read at all.
level design is what I meant as well. Once again you're projecting the "level design around mechanics" of Thief onto MGSV and comparing them in this fashion. Not very considerate of the fact that each game has it's own focus. Just because MGS V's mechanics don't merge with it's level design doesn't mean it's mechanics are redundant. MGSV went for a open sandbox type approach...making the level design less significant in a sense. The mechanics aren't all compulsory to get through the game....like you said...you can get through a big chunk of the game with just 3 things..... but ultimately that's up to the player's choice. If you want to complete every mission in that way....fine... but that also means that you didn't experience everything that was offered. The fact that it's a sandbox type game gives you a bunch of options.....You're just choosing the same way over and over again.....
You're basically moaning about this because the game doesn't force you to use all the toys and you don't necessarily need to use them to complete the game..... This is true...but I can't really see how its a problem.
@khoofia_pika said:
@lamprey263: If it was just the playing experience that was concerned, I doubt TW3 would hold a candle to MGS5.
But TW3 won because simply put, it was a more complete experience.
MGSV had too many flaws in key areas.
Imho when games getting that kind of praise from industry or media or their userbase or even better all 3 , they doing something right but at the same time , aside our tastes which is the leading factor what each one of us think as good , great or amazing , games having flaws. Having core elements or mechanics or whatever that are not great enough or they could have been better in order for games to jump from AAA to AAAA.
MGS5 is easily a 9 for all the reasons other posters mentioned already. So is MGS5 overated ? Since i go with Metacritic , no its not. Game stands at 93 and its totally worth it. Now , if you ask me if game is AAAA , not its not 10/10. Game feels repetitive after a while , world a bit "flat" if you get what i mean and story ..ehmm . Game is a great AAA but has some holes and gaps to call it AAAA.
Now if you compare it to Witcher 3 i really think both games are great AAAs but none is AAAA since both having pros and cons. Now personally ill go with Witcher 3 but i would understand if someone would choose MGS5 for GOTY over Witcher 3 as well. Though i personally think that Witcher 3 design flaws for example on camera are way more forgiving than MGS5s repetition and the list goes on and on. But thats my opinion , many will beg to differ i guess.
So , in short , both great games but they had to be a bit better in certain vital areas to meet AAAA criteria imho. Therefore , Metacritic wise MGS5 is not overated at all . As of Gamespot AAAA score i think its a bit overated yeah.
@ghosts4ever said:
@ConanTheStoner said:
@JangoWuzHere said:
Hell no, it's the greatest flawed masterpiece for video games. I'm not going to say the game doesn't have issues, but seriously, the people shitting on MGSV need to get some standards.
Pretty much.
And lol @ peeps trying to say Thief is on MGSVs level mechanically. Probably need to quit the memory lane shit and go play the games. I did a replay of them immediately after playing MGSV. They're still great games, still some of the best stealth games, but they're not even in the same league mechanically.
Thief is actual stealth game unlike metal gear solid.
Metal Gear Solid games are as stealth as stealth can get.
I think it's overrated. But it has a lot of elements that gamers seem to love these days: hours upon hours in an inventory management screen, open world of vast empty space so you can feel a sense of "freedom" as you slog from one map marker to the next. You know, "depth".
@ghosts4ever: I completely agree with you. I found the same. And buying a Ground Zero was already a very deceptive game played by Hideo Kojima and Konami. Credits after every mission showing Hideo Kojima as director is painfully frustrating. If Kojima calls this his best game, his levels are certainly low. Stealth-wise, Splinter Cell was a better game than this and Kojima might have learnt something from them.
The side missions do get repetitive after a while and there are way too many, but the core gameplay is brilliant. If you find it boring, you're obviously not utilising the incredible amount of tools at your disposal to keep it varied. Also, the bases you have to infiltrate are some of the best designed I've ever experienced in a stealth game, particularly the larger ones.
@ConanTheStoner said:
@JangoWuzHere said:
Hell no, it's the greatest flawed masterpiece for video games. I'm not going to say the game doesn't have issues, but seriously, the people shitting on MGSV need to get some standards.
Pretty much.
And lol @ peeps trying to say Thief is on MGSVs level mechanically. Probably need to quit the memory lane shit and go play the games. I did a replay of them immediately after playing MGSV. They're still great games, still some of the best stealth games, but they're not even in the same league mechanically.
You only showed up on the 2nd page? Am disappointed :V
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment