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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Kojima Productions Responds to MGS4 NDA Complaints

I wonder if there will be any cutscene or something taking place between acts kind of like how the main character in The Darkness monologued between each level.

------

I'm not going to say it's a good thing to have these restrictions for reviewing. However, don't websites and publications want as many people to view their site/magazine as possible? Isn't that what having these exclusive or early reviews is all about? Heck, think of all the games that have had early reviews... 

Congrats to EGM for wanting to wait until after MGS4 launches to publish their review, but I think this is as much wanting to get the most views as it is not wanting to see your game tainted by negative reviews.  



Around the Network

Installs on the PS3 are becoming a joke. Even PC doesnt have installs during the game. 2-3 minute installs between acts. Jesus. Lets hope that there is only two acts



DMeisterJ said:
rocketpig said:
Darc Requiem said:
I don't know whats more disconcerting. The fact that Konami thinks they can spin their way out of this or the fact that so many are will to eat the BS they are serving with a grin. 

I second that. I can't believe so many people are eating up Konami's company line when it's such a blatant PR spin to ward off the outlash from the gaming press.


I'm eating it up, and it tastes good.

Cause Dammit, it's freakin' Hideo freakin Kojima.

If the install time was an hour, and it had three hour cutscenes, I'd take it with a smile on my face.

Konami trying to color reviews is slap in the face to Kojima, but apparently is biggest fans are ignorant to his fact. I don't know Kojima personally but I'm pretty sure he'd rather have people discussing and playing his game and not talking about Konami's restricting reviewers from releasing information that has nothing to do with spoiling his plot.

If you are defending Konami for this you are fanboy plain and simple. A lot the people that have no problem with this are the same people that blew a gasket over Gerstmann getting canned at Gamespot. The type of crap Konami is pulling is what leads to incidents like what occurred at Gamespot. What if someone made and published a review about MGSIV with no spoilers but it contained the length/amount of cut scenes and the installation information about the game. Konami throws a stink about it and the reveiwer gets fired. It would have been Gerstmann gate all over again. Just because you like MGSIV doesn't make it right that Konami tried and mostly succeded in censoring its reviews. 

 



EGM is, by far, my favorite video game magazine. I applaud their journalistic integrity, but it's a song they've sang many times in their long and storied history. Be it losing advertisers due to their convictions, or calling out other magazines for giving high scores to cover story games, when other journalists would bash them. I love EGM. This is different beast all together.

In 2001, I bought MGS2. On the ride home, I had the smile wiped off of my face, as EGM proceded to tell me that I'd be playing a Raiden for the majority of the game. That was within their rights, but it wasn't their place to ruin the game's big twist for me. In 2005, I bought MGS3. I read their review after the fact, and it was full of spoilers, and even tips on how to approach certain bosses. Again, more info than I felt they should've given. Had I read the review first, I'd have been pissed.

2008, I'm buying MGS4. It seems that EGM is pissed that they can't spoil the game for me with their "wink, wink' it's not a spoiler, but really it is" review. No thanks. I don't want to know Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father before the movie starts. I don't want to know Mace Windu gets killed by the Emperor before I get to the theater, and I don't want to know ANYTHING that will ruin my MGS4 experience before I can play it.



If your MGS4 experience can be spoiled by the knowledge that there are, for example, two cutscenes that are about 80 minutes long, then I don't know what to say. Would you consider the following, hypothetical quote as spoiling? (I have never played any Metal Gear games, so just bear with me here ok)

"The storyline in MGS4 is intricate and has enough surprising twists to keep you guessing until the very end. True to his style, Kojima uses a lot of cutscenes to tell the story, but he might have gone a bit overboard this time: a couple of the lengthier cutscenes could almost pass for a feature film, and you can surely use some popcorn and soda for the 80-or-so minutes that it takes to go through them. Of course, you can skip the cutscenes, but then you'll be deprived of the story and what essentially makes MGS4 the masterpiece it is."



Around the Network

DAMMIT, Plaupius! You've said too much! Twist and turns? I didn't want to know that! Oh well........another MGS spoiled.

*walks away, defeatedly*



d21lewis said:
EGM is, by far, my favorite video game magazine. I applaud their journalistic integrity, but it's a song they've sang many times in their long and storied history. Be it losing advertisers due to their convictions, or calling out other magazines for giving high scores to cover story games, when other journalists would bash them. I love EGM. This is different beast all together.

In 2001, I bought MGS2. On the ride home, I had the smile wiped off of my face, as EGM proceded to tell me that I'd be playing a Raiden for the majority of the game. That was within their rights, but it wasn't their place to ruin the game's big twist for me. In 2005, I bought MGS3. I read their review after the fact, and it was full of spoilers, and even tips on how to approach certain bosses. Again, more info than I felt they should've given. Had I read the review first, I'd have been pissed.

2008, I'm buying MGS4. It seems that EGM is pissed that they can't spoil the game for me with their "wink, wink' it's not a spoiler, but really it is" review. No thanks. I don't want to know Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father before the movie starts. I don't want to know Mace Windu gets killed by the Emperor before I get to the theater, and I don't want to know ANYTHING that will ruin my MGS4 experience before I can play it.

Again, you're muddling plot details with a reviewer's ability to properly convey his experience with the game. Installs and cutscene length do not give away the storyline. These are separate issues. MGS2 and EGM's revealing that Raiden was playable are not relevent to this discussion (though I understand your frustration at learning this before you had a chance to play the game yourself).




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

d21lewis said:
EGM is, by far, my favorite video game magazine. I applaud their journalistic integrity, but it's a song they've sang many times in their long and storied history. Be it losing advertisers due to their convictions, or calling out other magazines for giving high scores to cover story games, when other journalists would bash them. I love EGM. This is different beast all together.

In 2001, I bought MGS2. On the ride home, I had the smile wiped off of my face, as EGM proceded to tell me that I'd be playing a Raiden for the majority of the game. That was within their rights, but it wasn't their place to ruin the game's big twist for me. In 2005, I bought MGS3. I read their review after the fact, and it was full of spoilers, and even tips on how to approach certain bosses. Again, more info than I felt they should've given. Had I read the review first, I'd have been pissed.

2008, I'm buying MGS4. It seems that EGM is pissed that they can't spoil the game for me with their "wink, wink' it's not a spoiler, but really it is" review. No thanks. I don't want to know Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father before the movie starts. I don't want to know Mace Windu gets killed by the Emperor before I get to the theater, and I don't want to know ANYTHING that will ruin my MGS4 experience before I can play it.

 I see where you are coming from but the problem is install times and cut scene lengths are not plot spoilers. If this was just about Konami wanting the plot to stay unspoiled I'd agree with them. However their list of things not to mention includes things that having nothing to do with plot spoilers that may effect the decision to purchase the game. It would be like an upcoming Guilty Gear 2 review not being able to mention that it isn't a fighting game.



My EGM remark was more of a response to IllegalPaladin's praise, than anything else. Anyhoo, in keeping with my many Star Wars references, remember at the end of Empire Strikes Back? Remember when the good guys were beaten, and the movie ended ubruptly? I totally thought the good guys were going to rebound, and kick some bad guy ass! If somebody had said, "There's only 60 secondsleft in the movie. You gotta wait until part 3", that portion of the film would've had no impact on me.

In MGS3, I thought the game was over when Boss died. Then, I thought the game was over when the airstrike was called off. Then, I thought the game was over when Eva revealed Boss's history. Everytime I thought the game was over, it would give me a little more. Every time the game gave me a little more, I was grateful. Now, during the ending movie, I'm going to keep thinking "yeah. This is good, but there's going to be another twist, soon".

It's not a dealbreaker. In this day and age, spoilers are impossible to avoid. Still, MGS is one of those rare instances where you want to know everything about the plot and technical achievements, but you don't want the experience tainted in any way. I don't know. Maybe I'm just rambling, at this point.



the file structure of this game is bullshit. i seriously think they could have done a better job with the file structure, but they probably rushed it out.