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

Forums - Microsoft - how can you guys say MGS4 and HR are movies when....

Barozi on 18 March 2010

I honestly think the cutscenes were the best part of MGS4.



Around the Network
Metallicube on 18 March 2010

Yeah, I sold Mass Effect primarily for that reason. I really tried to like it, but there was just WAAAY too much blabbering for my taste. Plus the battle system just seemed awkward and never really clicked for me. Dragon Age is far superior IMO. It has a lot of chatting too, but it is at least more interesting and it doesn't seem to be the focal point of the game.



AnarchyWest on 18 March 2010
S.T.A.G.E. said:
PlaystaionGamer said:
to be fair its like this

AMAZING PS3 exclusives like HR MGS4 will be trolled by the people who wish they had them

AMAZING multiplat games like mass effect will be trolled by people who dont have them on there system

I have MGS4....and I will be getting HR. They are practically movies. The creator of Heavy Rain cage is a Gaming developer who wishes he was a film director and he masks his film visions with gaming, which is why HR is borderline movie. MGS4 would've been more of a game if Hideo Kojima was given the full amount of Blu Ray space he demanded from Sony. Of course Sony did not let him fulfill his vision, so MGS4 came out half-assed. The reasoning for this? Sony didn't want the world to see the inconvenience of even Blu Ray's limited space for Kojima's expansive mind. Two Blu Ray discs would've been needed to fulfill his vision.

did you really just make this up on your own? MGS4 was in trouble from the start and it has nothing to do with Blu Ray, Sony, or the PS3. Kojima didn't have the same motivation he had when he was making MG (1-2) and MGS (1-3). MGS4 was pure fanfare, Kojima accomplished his vision of MGS long before Blu ray.

And If you are going to reply back I want proof of Sony telling Konami/Kojima what to do with their IP



Dgc1808 on 18 March 2010

MGS4 only has 7 hours in cutscenes, Mirson! Not 10.



4 ≈ One

alephnull on 19 March 2010
Grahamhsu said:
alephnull said:
Grahamhsu said:
Severance said:
Rainbird said:
It's not really 360 fans saying that though

really? i countless times ran into someone "meh if i wanna buy a ps3 to play MGS4/HR i'd go watch a movie"

Perhaps they're implying they'd rather watch a Blu-Ray film on a PS3?

As for HR I'm actually not sure if I can call it a game...not trying to degrade or insult it, I enjoyed my 10+ hours with it, but if I were to dissect it as a game it starts to become weird...This is a game with no game over, no continue, sometimes the point/goal is to literally sit around and wait. It doesn't matter if you fail or succeed in Heavy Rain the story continues and an ending will be given to each character, so essentially you don't have to even have a goal in the game. I still loved the idea of a movie I can influence, it's been an idea I've wanted to see come to life for a while. However, how do you explain gameplay for a game like that?! It's as though the gameplay itself is near nonexistent. 

For MGS4 though I have to agree with some of the haters, I didn't hate the game...but I definitely felt like the cutscenes made the game feel a lot less "actiony". In the middle of MGS4 I remember I stopped at Chapter 4 because I couldn't stand it, I needed guns, explosions, and shit! I popped Infamous into my PS3 instead, finished it, returned to MGS4. Played another chapter or two, went to Killzone 2, and than finally returned back to MGS4 again...

Mass Effect may have a shitload of convo choices, but at least they're all skippable and there's still a bunch of humanoids to blast. I've played through the original game 10x times I know there's plenty of action in Mass Effect. Story and Lore are always important in Bioware games but for the OP to say it is a story driven game is incorrect. Mass Effect 2 can be story, action, or loot based. What I mean by that statement is that you're driven to play it because of either the story, action, or the loot.

All the reasons given for why HR is not a game also apply to Sim City and a number of other applications usually considered to be games.

No you're a PC gamer so you should understand that the idea of "Gameplay" involves how to play the game. Gameplay is when you throw a shock combo in Unreal Tournament 3, Gameplay is when you Micro units in Starcraft, and gameplay is when you macro units in Starcraft, gameplay is exactly what it means. Now if I were to give you a game where you press a button to move, and the rest of the game consisted of button presses that you don't have to press (the game would continue on even if you fail) would you call that a game?

Sims have a goal, sims have a game over or a point where you're like oops I fucked up my town with one too many earthquakes. Sims have gameplay how do I get more people into my town, I can choose to have better roads? More jobs etc.

There's certainly no "game over" point, at least in the original sim city. Was the goal to get more people in your town? You could certainly choose to do that. However, the only consequence if you don't, is that you won't have more people in your town.