By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Metal Gear Survive will be less than $60, is a Spin-off to MGSV

You just can't beat some gamers logic.

If it was called a different name and under a different skin I'd probably like it and buy.

But because it's under a big IPs name and made by a company thats cool to hate I'm not interested.

I'm sorry but I game for my enjoyment not politics.



Around the Network

In a boardroom with people who do not play video games " Co-op Zombie Survival is a popular genre take Metal Gear assets and the name and make a game" FucKonami



Kerotan said:
You just can't beat some gamers logic.

If it was called a different name and under a different skin I'd probably like it and buy.

But because it's under a big IPs name and made by a company thats cool to hate I'm not interested.

I'm sorry but I game for my enjoyment not politics.

Ya I'm gonna have to agree here

 

Now, will this be a good game? Who knows....

But, assuming they simply transfer over most of the gameplay mechanics from V, which seems likely, and then you build a decent co-op experience around that.....what's not to like about that? The gameplay was about the only thing V got right. The story was a barely present skeleton, most of the missions were meaningless copy paste bloating, and the whole thing just left you waiting for a level of satisfaction that never arrived.

 

Now, does a game like this carry the same potential promise as a "real" MGS game? No. If it's good at what it wants to do, then it'll be a fun little co-op game you play with your buddies every now and again, nothing overly ambitious. But even if it turns out mediocre it won't be as disappointing and, frankly, pathetic, as the last game Kojima made, plastering his name about a thousand times on every mission of a game that seemed to desperately lack proper oversight and resource management. Don't tell me Konami didn't invest enough in this series over time to prove that he should have been able to come up with more than like 5 mission types, and 7 or so actual story missions with cutscenes and proper exposition over the course of the years he had to get this game done. 

 

Hell this isn't the MGS game I wanna play either.....but hey....neither was MGSV.....or GZ.......even 4 was a huge step down from 3 imo. Maybe stop hating on Konami just because gaming's most overrated director is gone. Because let's face it, if he was still there, and they made this game, nobody would give a shit. You might be indifferent to it, and choose not to buy it, maybe roll your eyes and say whatever...pass, but you wouldn't be calling for heads to roll either.



Angelus said:
Kerotan said:
You just can't beat some gamers logic.

If it was called a different name and under a different skin I'd probably like it and buy.

But because it's under a big IPs name and made by a company thats cool to hate I'm not interested.

I'm sorry but I game for my enjoyment not politics.

Ya I'm gonna have to agree here

 

Now, will this be a good game? Who knows....

But, assuming they simply transfer over most of the gameplay mechanics from V, which seems likely, and then you build a decent co-op experience around that.....what's not to like about that? The gameplay was about the only thing V got right. The story was a barely present skeleton, most of the missions were meaningless copy paste bloating, and the whole thing just left you waiting for a level of satisfaction that never arrived.

 

Now, does a game like this carry the same potential promise as a "real" MGS game? No. If it's good at what it wants to do, then it'll be a fun little co-op game you play with your buddies every now and again, nothing overly ambitious. But even if it turns out mediocre it won't be as disappointing and, frankly, pathetic, as the last game Kojima made, plastering his name about a thousand times on every mission of a game that seemed to desperately lack proper oversight and resource management. Don't tell me Konami didn't invest enough in this series over time to prove that he should have been able to come up with more than like 5 mission types, and 7 or so actual story missions with cutscenes and proper exposition over the course of the years he had to get this game done. 

 

Hell this isn't the MGS game I wanna play either.....but hey....neither was MGSV.....or GZ.......even 4 was a huge step down from 3 imo. Maybe stop hating on Konami just because gaming's most overrated director is gone. Because let's face it, if he was still there, and they made this game, nobody would give a shit. You might be indifferent to it, and choose not to buy it, maybe roll your eyes and say whatever...pass, but you wouldn't be calling for heads to roll either.

I'm not getting into whether or not I liked mgs5 but yeah I agree.  And on top of that the game won't be full priced.  And as you said maybe it will turn into a mess like umbrella corps but I'll give it a chance to prove itself first. 



Kerotan said:
Angelus said:

Ya I'm gonna have to agree here

 

Now, will this be a good game? Who knows....

But, assuming they simply transfer over most of the gameplay mechanics from V, which seems likely, and then you build a decent co-op experience around that.....what's not to like about that? The gameplay was about the only thing V got right. The story was a barely present skeleton, most of the missions were meaningless copy paste bloating, and the whole thing just left you waiting for a level of satisfaction that never arrived.

 

Now, does a game like this carry the same potential promise as a "real" MGS game? No. If it's good at what it wants to do, then it'll be a fun little co-op game you play with your buddies every now and again, nothing overly ambitious. But even if it turns out mediocre it won't be as disappointing and, frankly, pathetic, as the last game Kojima made, plastering his name about a thousand times on every mission of a game that seemed to desperately lack proper oversight and resource management. Don't tell me Konami didn't invest enough in this series over time to prove that he should have been able to come up with more than like 5 mission types, and 7 or so actual story missions with cutscenes and proper exposition over the course of the years he had to get this game done. 

 

Hell this isn't the MGS game I wanna play either.....but hey....neither was MGSV.....or GZ.......even 4 was a huge step down from 3 imo. Maybe stop hating on Konami just because gaming's most overrated director is gone. Because let's face it, if he was still there, and they made this game, nobody would give a shit. You might be indifferent to it, and choose not to buy it, maybe roll your eyes and say whatever...pass, but you wouldn't be calling for heads to roll either.

I'm not getting into whether or not I liked mgs5 but yeah I agree.  And on top of that the game won't be full priced.  And as you said maybe it will turn into a mess like umbrella corps but I'll give it a chance to prove itself first. 

To be clear, I'm not saying I didn't like MGSV. I did enjoy playing it. But it was nowhere near the game I expected it to be. It was lacking in far too many ways. Thus I found it ultimately disappointing, even if the minute to minute gameplay was enjoyable.



Around the Network

I'm not going anywhere near it.
Fuck konami.