Because of Nintendogs, using your logic, I fully expect that the next MGS game will feature Snake in retirement domesticating a pack of wolves.  You know, considering the massive success of Nintendogs which has sold ridiculously more than MGS.

I give that post a 9.3.

Metal Gear Solid4 is the best game out besides COD4

Not everything needs to be Nintendogs or GTA level success. My point was that the several million people who play and enjoy MGS for what it is is enough justification in itself for movie/game hybrids.

This game was damned if it did, and damned if it didn't.

People were going to find reasons to dislike this game whether it was or wasn't a masterpiece. The fact of the matter is that people will make excuses for, and for not liking any game on any console. It's what people do all the time. It's called "marginalizing". People have to bring other games down on other systems, since they don't want to admit that a game is good (or bad), and it's what's always happened. As long as the people who are happy with the game, are happy, good for them.

Er this is 6+ hours plus another 8 hours of fantastic cut scenes. 15 hours to finish. Can you not see a difference?

Anyway I read here on this review from a 360 site that there are 8 hours of cut scenes

http://xboxoz360.wordpress.com/

When I played the game the first time it took me 23 hours so I got 15 hours of play out of it plus of course the replay value and Metal Gear Online. Anyone who says there isn't much gameplay in MGS4 is either a liar or an idiot.

And incidentally people like you will find any reason to defend it.

Expectations for this game where high so its only natural that the awkward end product would prompt some mixed reactions. People will debate just how high those expectations were, but not everyone with reservations about this game are out to take Sony down a notch or marginalize a PS3 victory. Say what you want about people like myself but stop lumping the rest of this forum into the same category simply for being realistic about a game that is very much a mixed bag.

In truth, none of this is even really about defending MGS4 as a good game is it? It's really more about defending your self-entitled expectation of being able to celebrate this game with others (no matter how it did) unabaided by naysayers. I'm sorry the balloons and streamers weren't waiting for you when you logged online, I'm sorry there wasn't a banner pasted across the VG chartz logo saying, "Congratulations PS3, you've earned it!" to welcome people to the site, but stop attacking people for wanting to discuss the game as something other than Mana from Heaven. For God sake not everyone is out to slight Sony and the PS3!

Once again people are arguing taste. Thats like me saying I hate Smash Brothers because its a simplistic fighter or that Halo is a generic slow paced monochromatic run of the mill shooter.

My only complaint about MGS4; Those damned "Anonymous" who took it upon themselve to send me those spoilers. Like I said in other threads, with MGS games, it's the story that's the main event. Everything else, the good gameplay, the innovative mechanics, the awesome (but not as awesome as some would lead you to believe) graphics -icing on a already delicious cake. Non MGS fans will bash this game at every turn. Those who have been following this game since 1998 (and a few of us who have been following Snake's adventures since the Nes) were in video game paradise. If a study showed that MGS4 caused breast cancer in infants, I'd still give it a 9.5 out of 10. It was a more epic, yet more personal ending to my favorite series ever.

And you were going to criticize it no matter what because for some reason you are against HD games...despite having not played it. Not everyone is out to slight Sony and the PS3, but you are. The game is very well received, being among the best reviewed games this generation. It is not an "awkward end product," despite your wishes.

This persecution complex is getting old.

- No I am not out to slight Sony or the PS3, this persecution complex is getting old.

- Reviews mean nothing, this generation more than ever. Had any of the major reviewers given this game less than 8 they would have most likely been shunned by Sony or Konami and likely denied access to future pre-release titles for review. It happened before with Assassin's Creed and Ubisoft with what reviewers gave it less than an 8/10. Furthermore, it would be a loss of face to admit such a heavily hyped game pushed by none other than themselves was less than perfect. Reviews really can only be allotted to lower profile games and even then that arguably depends on the Publisher/Reviewer's relationship with the reviewer and expectations for that game. Any game that gets an 11/10 calls suspision to itself if not the reviewing process as a whole. Of course this game is well recieved, there isn't anyone in the industry who could afford not to make it look like the best thing ever since GTA4. By no means am I saying the game deserves a low score, but given the underwhelming fan response by people who weren't out to love this game no matter what it was, its exceptionally high scores are dubious at best.

I'm not suggesting a Reviewer conspiracy so much as a well oiled industry machine specially geared to push the biggest selling "Hardcore" products. Do you honestly think Halo 3 deserved the reviews it did? Only if a game is an utter and inarguable piece of trash (LAIR) will people give it less than excellence as doing otherwise would mean a loss of credibility with the reader, and even then most reviewers gave it a higher score than it deserved. A game's true merit needs to be ambiguous or arguable for such review spiking to work, thankfully the industry has become a streamlined assembly line in producing games that are neither excellent nor sub-par. Major publishers and developers can exert pressue over the industry even if only through the assumption of a repremand for not playing ball. If you need anymore evidence simply just look at the aim of their magazines and websites which are just as tailored to push these very games.

Then again if you need to default on the controversial subject of game reviewers to save a game (all the while avoiding constructive points as to why the game was actually "good" or not) I think that speaks more for your argument than any (no doubt to be fiercy attacked) industry flaw I can point out.

- I wish nothing for the game, I merely call it as I see it. And this inability to decide on the games true merit and the mixed reactions from fans in response to questionable story telling and gameplay all suggest an awkward end product. Matter of opinion or not, if there was grounds enough to notice something was up with this game. Sure I've not played it, but I'm willing to trust the opinion of everyone not already notorious for being members of Sony's defenders.

You of course are an avid Sony defender, no offense and none intended, and one of the more outspoken members on this forum of defending everything and anything Sony. So don't you think it looks just a tad dubious for you to be railing against me on such an issue while I at the very least have the greater meat of the thread to base my assertions on whilst you and your ilk remain the outliers?