MTZehvor said:
Any more straw mans and you could file for status as a scarecrow manufacturer. No, I don't enjoy MGSV simply because it's "open world." I enjoy MGSV because the open world adds an element of freedom to gameplay that elevates the general stealth/action mash up that's been Metal Gear's calling card. What I like about Solid V is that it's far more organic and open to surprises. It also puts the planning far more on the player than GTAV does, requiring the player to think through what they're doing less they get shredded by enemy gunfire. I'll reference GTAV's first heist as an example, the Jewlery store heist. Depending on which path you take (loud or smart), you are forced into a very linear set of proceedings. If you go quiet, you have to move around the roofs and throw a gas can in the air vent, and then proceed to actually rob the store. If you go loud, you basically just kick the door down and shoot up the place to a chorus of blaring alarms. You choose either "stealthy" or "actiony" as your plan of attack, and then the game strictly forces you down one of those two paths during the mission, with a game over screen generally following if someone manages to pull an alarm along the way. MGSV, meanwhile, is far more organic. When you see an objective, you can decide to go in with just about any approach that you want. You can shoot the place up, call in a helicopter to shoot the place up for you, pick off enemies one at a time, sneak in without making contact, etc. The decision is left entirely up to the player as opposed to being given a few select routes from which to choose and then being forced to stick with it, with the consequences of poor planning being losing a helicopter or getting a game over. This leads to MGSV's gameplay being far more exciting for me as well. If someone catches me and pulls an alarm in GTAV, it's game over and I just have to redo things. If someone catches me in MGSV, however, it's a moment of surprise and panic. I don't get a game over, I have to suddenly reorchestrate my entire plan and figure out how I'm going to deal with the new circumstances presenting. The ability for situations to change at any moment is a large part of what makes MGSV appealing to me; I find it much more fun to be in a situation where I've got to plan ahead and figure things out on the fly if my plans go wrong as opposed to having the game do most of the planning for me and simply choosing one of a few preselected paths. Perhaps, to narrow it down, why I prefer MGSV to GTAV is the freedom MGSV offers, both inside and outside of missions. GTAV's missions are extremely linear and will give you a game over if you don't follow the instructions to the letter, while MGSV allows for much greater variety and will only fail you if you or a target you're trying to save dies. I prefer that level of freedom in a game, and yes, I do find it more "fun." |
All valid points, but taht's where we differ. In a sense I do prefer GTA V's "linear" missions over what I played of MGS V's "open" missions. On paper it sounds exciting to be able to pick up multiple ways of encountering an enemy, but in practice it becomes a little hectic, unplanned, undirected and hence isn't fun. MGS V may be deeper in this regard, but wasn't fun for me, which is a priority for me when playing a game. That doesn't mean I don't like depth in games, but I like to have fun at the same time. MGS V can be too deep and technical to be fun, and that holds true for the other two MGS games I've played as well. But to a greater extent in MGS V.
GTA V's open-world is far better than MGS V's open-world, and its actually a living, breathing world with a lot of variety and room to create your own fun. MGS V's world is beautiful to look at, but that's where the immersion ends. And GTA V has got a lot more story and humour. MGS V is good but its mission design is not fun and open-world is empty.
