Top
420°

GameCritics: Metal Gear Solid 5 Review

GC writes "It's been nine years since the end of Ground Zeroes, and Big Boss has been taking it easy ever since—not that he's really had much choice in the matter given that he's been comatose the entire time after getting blown out of the sky. Alas, all good things must come to an end, so after waking up at a particularly fortuitous moment he decides that it's probably a good idea to rebuild his private military and seek revenge on the people who wiped it off the face of the earth in the first place."

Read Full Story >>
gamecritics.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Rimeskeem1002d ago

In no way shape or form is this game a 6/10.

DarkOcelet1002d ago (Edited 1002d ago )

And if he did then that would be complete BS! The gameplay alone warrant this game at least a 9/10.

Edit
@Kenpachi

I didnt see it on Metacritic. I cant believe he gave it a 6/10.

kenpachi1002d ago (Edited 1002d ago )

its on metacritc as 6 out of 10

its on the ps4 version

Emilio_Estevez1002d ago

It can be found before the 'disclosures' paragraph and needs to be highlighted to be revealed. He gave it a 6/10.

Everyone has different tastes and I get the feeling MGS was a bit too much for some people. Lots going on there...coulda made it feel a bit....convoluted I guess. The story wouldn't have helped that.

suckingeggs1001d ago

How can We stand out in a sea of metal gear reviews?

Hmmmmmm... ...

WellyUK1001d ago

"How can We stand out in a sea of metal gear reviews?"

Giving it a score that more resembles the product rather than over rating it... 6/10 is low but it is not a game that deserves anything more than an 8/10. Alot of people have said how boring this game is and this guy obviously has felt the same and has warranted his low score.

Stallion1001d ago

Running around an empty, excessively large open world with copy paste outposts which serve as an MMO-like grinding field to extract soldiers to your empty, lifeless motherbase.

Worst bosses in the series.

Weak, unimaginative level design compared to the previous games.

Over 3/4s of the main ops are filler (even in chapter 1) and the side ops are extremely unimaginative. You are literally checking boxes off a list.

>the gameplay alone warrants a 9/10

Ok bruh.

Septic1001d ago

If he can qualify his score then there's no problem. Many opinions differ

CrazedFiend1001d ago

Do we REALLY need a review this long after the games released?

Unless they've been able to completely avoid any media about this game, reviews made this later going to be biased because they can't go in with fresh eyes.

xHeavYx1001d ago

"Hey, how do we get clicks"
"Let's give a low review to a popular game"
"But, how is that going to give us clicks"
"Let's launch the review almost a month after the game is out"

GENIUS.

HammadTheBeast1001d ago

@WellyUK

Not many people have said it was boring, in fact, the gameplay is it's best aspect. The story, understandably, isn't loved by older MGS fans since they prefer the more direct story rather than what MGS has become since Peace Walker.

MysticStrummer1001d ago (Edited 1001d ago )

@WellyUK - For me this game deserves nothing less than a 9, though my personal score is higher, and no one I know feels the way you do. You say a lot of people agree with you, but the scores (user and critic) don't really bear that out, now do they?

Either way… it's another opinion for the pile.

DarXyde1001d ago

Stallion,

"Empty"? "Excessively large"? So you're saying there's nothing to do in the game and the world is too big. Yet somehow, people complained Ground Zeroes was too short and small. The game is $60. You're getting a lot of mileage.

Copy and paste outposts? You likely have not been to the outposts. They're pretty different in resources, staff, terrain, and positioning which is further altered by time of day.

Unimaginative level design compared to past games? No. The other games were a lot of urban sneaking and, while great, was a lot of wall knocking and running around corners. Snake Eater changed the formula as did The Phantom Pain. If anything, as Guns of the Patriots had the weakest design, though still a great game.

Worst bosses? Three words: [SPOILERS FOLLOWING:] Metal Gear Sahelanthropus. That alone I would argue is only rivaled by Snake Eater's final boss.

You seem to have an issue with the "repetitious" nature of the game. It's also the only game in the series to be like this. So, assuming this is a problem, what's everyone's reasoning behind every Grand Theft Auto game being so highly praised?

I'll never understand the complaints of critics when the game offers very many hours of gameplay (which are broken up in an episodic manner, which should help to assuage any feelings of burning out) when GTA is essentially "plagued" with very similar issues, if you'd call them that.

Different strokes I guess. I'm having a blast with this game. Then again, I like to switch up my approaches.

Stallion1000d ago

@DarXyde
I'm saying the world is too big for the amount of content or creative environments in the game. That coupled with the fact that there is no *good* fast travel system makes it poorly designed. I love Red Dead Redemption and the world was pretty empty, but it came with 1, a decent fast travel system, and 2, beautiful and varied environments. I still remember the cliff overlooking Armadillo. I still remember riding into Mexico for the first time into the sunset. I still remember Marston's little farm. I still remember the big city, and the snowy landscapes. MGSV's open world has no real variety like that. Went off on a bit of a tangent there, but basically, bigger =/= better. I'd rather have 10 creative, distinct, memorable missions than 50 repetitive ones.

Yeah. The typical outpost is very copy paste. Every one knows that.

>it had a lot of stealth
>implying this as a negative
>MGS4 had the weakest level design
Really? Crawling through the middle of an active, beautifully designed warzone with bullets and dust flying inches away from you versus literally Far Cry. The best stealth games treat stealth like a puzzle. See Blood Money, see Thief, see Chaos Theory. Nothing in MGSVs world feels designed with the puzzle concept in mind. There is no sneaking up in the rafters above dangerous enemies like there was in MGS4 Act 5.

How you can even say Sahalanthropus is better/more memorable than Psycho Mantis, Vulcan Raven, Revolver Ocelot, Fatman, 20 Metal Gear Rays, Solidus Snake, The End, The Fury, The Boss, Laughing Octopus, and Liquid Ocelot is absolutely beyond me. Sally doesn't compare in the slightest.

I think GTAV was pretty overrated, but even that had way more creative missions, and the world is much more lively.

More shit =/= good shit m8.

Dee_911000d ago

something tells me this "game critic" wears glasses without prescription in them.

DarXyde1000d ago

Stallion,

Many of those missions are optional, particularly side ops. If you approach it monotonously, you're likely to get burned out. Again, the game is made in an episodic manner to help alleviate any issues there.

I don't find the outposts too copy-paste. You return to some to take up different missions, but the outposts themselves are not that similar. Like I said (and to expand), the size of the outpost, the route taken, the time of day, weather, equipment, buddy you have, whether you're coming from above or below, what have you, all factor in to how the scenarios play out. While I would say that there is no wrong way to play Metal Gear Solid V, I have to you say that I believe you're missing it. An incredible amount of thought went into the game. People still discover new things and discuss how they approach particular missions because there's no one way to do it. More is not necessarily better, but considering the mechanics are top-notch and create an entirely different game with regard to how much you can do at the micro and macro level, I would say that, yes, more is better with The Phantom Pain. If you don't see what it offers, that's on you.

There are outposts where you crawl through the ducts in the ground. I would definitely say that constitutes "like" Act 5. You conveniently left out enemy competence relates to combat deployment teams destroying supply sheds that provide enemy shields, weaponry, night vision goggles, etc. There's so much strategy to this game that provides longevity.

You bring up The Boss and I said the last battle in Snake Eater is comparable to Sahelanthropus when they're synonymous. Psycho Mantis was incredibly memorable and I'll give you that, but are you seriously placing the duck duck goose Ocelot Battle, MG RAY, Fatman, The Fury, and any of the MGS4 boss battles in this high of a regard? Sahelanthropus gives you options. Every other boss, The Boss and perhaps The End withstanding, have incredibly scripted ways to beat them. Not saying it's bad, but Sahelanthropus basically puts you up against a bloody gundam without the use of quick time events or gimmicks. It's an all out battle where you assemble Diamond Dogs to aid you, you can summon tanks, go straight at it with a missile launcher, whatever. It was the first time in Metal Gear Solid that you actually felt real creative freedom with fighting a boss. From a story perspective, the stakes were higher here too. I like Solidus a lot, but I definitely don't see that as a memorable battle at all. In fact, overall, Sons of Liberty did a lot to damage the story and it feels like a standalone side game in the same vein as Rising. The characters you mentioned are great, but memorable boss fights I would only ever give The Boss, The End, and Psycho Mantis. The games as a whole have been incredibly memorable; storywise, Snake Eater is still my favorite. Individual boss fights? I don't really agree outside of who I've agreed with.

All things considered, it's still a great game. Imperfect in some of the ways you've mentioned, but still very much exceptional as a quality title which we have no abundance of yet.

DarXyde1000d ago

[continued]

As for GTA V having more diverse missions, I disagree purely for the simple fact that I wasn't talking about GTA V. I was talking about GTA, period. Sometimes the games are a step backwards in terms of freedom and mission variety (San Andreas versus GTA IV) yet the premise remains the same: you kill people, you pick people up, you fight people, that kind of thing. Where The Phantom Pain is a lot of sneaking, it doesn't have to be played that way and your approach is completely affected by very diverse elements. My point being it does not at all have to be repetitive.

As for ineffective traveling, you could use delivery points, return to ACC for specific LZs, or vehicle. For a first effort at an open world Metal Gear Solid title, The Phantom Pain turned out great. I can agree that traveling could have been handled better, but still an awesome game.

In the end, I will simply disagree with you. Tossing opinions back and forth doesn't make them any more factual.

Septic1000d ago

Stallion I've just started playing and whilst my mate gave this a 10 I do kind of see where you're coming from with a lot of your points. Mind you, I wouldn't go so far as to agree with them.

I'm thoroughly enjoying it so far. Glad you can substantiate your points so well though.

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 1000d ago
1001d ago
1001d ago
Ezz20131001d ago

It's an 8/10 for me....but in no way it's a 6/10 game

quaneylfc1001d ago

It's subjective, no way can you disagree.

1001d ago
quaneylfc1000d ago

No, you can't shoot down opinions youn just have to have different opinions. Clearly people are mistaking opinions for allegations.

You cannot judge, disagree with or compliment on opinions, they're all in the brains of those who think it and there is no way of making them invalid.

Stokedup1001d ago

You're right it's not a 6 but its also not a 10 which it got a lot of. This game is 8.5 or 85% which ever way people like it.

hay1001d ago

It's a 5, Metal Gear Solid 5. Not a 6, 9, 10 or even 11 ; p
Just play the effin game and stop playing reviewers. Even reviewers are playing reviewers 'cause they know jack shit about gaming.

CuddlyREDRUM1001d ago

In no way shape or form is this game a 10/10.

3-4-51001d ago

It's not a 6/10, but it's also definitely not a 9.5/10 or 10/10 like some sites are reporting either.

Once the hype died down, people started calling out some of the BS in the game for what it is.

You know .....the TRUTH.

The thing (truth) that so many forget to mention in their blind praise reviews that they gave.

MGS is a great gaming series, but the circle jerk around Kojima is sickening.

It's ok to make mistakes.

ALL of the best and greatest people at whatever they did, were NEVER perfect, so why would people unrealistically think Kojima would be as well.

ZombieKiller1001d ago

10/10
5/5
9.5/10

Yeah thanks for the heads up, not clicking this article. I don't get HOW it attracts clicks in the first place. If someones opinion sucks, why does anyone care what they say? Lol...sorry I kinda hear what I wanna hear...which is all the crazy ass positive reviews. It's like the kid in high school that used to shave his eyebrows for attention....no, just stop trying.

GTR1000d ago

someone see that ?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=hv9lh a91IMI

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 1000d ago
AizenSosuke1002d ago

Umm no a 6/10 unless it's a very warped opinion.

Muadiib1001d ago

A 6 is above average, I'd say that's fair honestly.

Taero1001d ago (Edited 1001d ago )

Well, technically only if a 5 is actually the average score of all video games reviewed. If the scores are skewed towards a higher number e.g. 7 average then we have 8, 9, 10 to show exceeding it, and simply more categories of bad to terrible below it.

tldr; 5 is the median and average number in the literal scale 0-10, but not necessarily the applied scale in videogames.

1001d ago
Muadiib1001d ago

Doesn't let me ever reply to people that have replied to me for some reason, so I'll reply to myself!

I know that 7 is more akin to an average in videogames, I was just making a point that the rating scale is ridiculous and broken, in fact reviewing games in general is completely broken, I see why Eurogamer got rid of them I really do.

Palitera1001d ago

The number we will use for average depends a lot on our culture and backstory. If you have grown up on a scholar system that demands 7 or 8 to pass, you'll be more in line with the game reviews standard, as Muadib pointed, since below 7 is already bad.

About not being able to reply, there can be only three levels of messaging: the original, a reply and a reply to this.

KiwiViper851000d ago

There is only 3 levels of comments.

Have a look, any comment in the third tier doesn't have the option to reply.

I see alot of people not understanding this basic logic...

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1000d ago
MASTER_RAIDEN1001d ago

There's always that one freakin guy...

higgins781001d ago

Yes, EVERYBODY should share the same opinion/tastes...

I feel the same when those trolling Nintendo/WiiU share their uninformed opinion - the majority of which don't even own a WiiU.

SnotyTheRocket1001d ago

There are things, objective and not opinion based that make a good game (controls, responsiveness, and so on). Even if I hated Metal Gear, I know it isn't a 6.

MASTER_RAIDEN1001d ago

Don't try to reduce my point. You know when these considerably-lower-than-averag e-reviews come along, it's more about the site hits than anything. That's obviously not to say there can't be fluctuation in opinion, but a 6? Come on.

I do agree about the wii u thing though. In my opinion it's the most misjudged and under appreciated console of all time along with the dream cast.

RustCohle1001d ago

I understand the story's been...lackluster in comparison to other games in the series. But in my opinion, the gameplay alone saves this game. Been putting in so many hours and still haven't got bored of it.

But that's just my opinion and this is his.

chrisx1001d ago

MGS V TPP a solid 9/10 hands down