Is MSGV a flawless, 100% perfect 10 out of 10 game?

Is MSGV a flawless, 100% perfect 10 out of 10 game?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=houDtgBNPCA
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Did you forget the opening level?

No, but it's still the best mgs for me

>the whole game was rushed, tons of shit scrapped because of the unnecessary ps360 versions
>no ending
>post-story missions are just the same story missions with gimmicks
>retarded twist that was implemented horribly, without any build-up or explanation
>empty as fuck open world
>stupid story
>can't replay the animal hunting missions, which were among the very few fun side ops in the game
It was so disappointing, it took me 2 weeks to recover from what I've experienced in this trash.

The only people who think so are people who are paid to think so, people who think Kojimas bowel movements are flawless, people who have been in a coma for 10 years and have severe brain damage and Kojima.

>Sparse story
>10/10

As a game, yes, absolutely, there is no other title that rivals the sheer quality and variety available.
As a story, it's a mess, a mess that ends unsatisfyingly in every way possible, but is at least fun while it lasts.

Sure, it's great if you like to hear about WOLBACHIA VOCAL CORD PARASITES COPULATING THROUGH LESBIAN BACTERIA AND IMPREGNATING THE THROAT AND LARYNX

Yes I love shallow games with deviant art fanfic tier story made for niggers

Agreed. Some would say that BotW provides a better open world, and in some ways are correct, but the variety of gameplay and the quality of it is far better in MGSV than BotW.

Gameplay had too many issues to call it perfect.

What do you mean "did I forget"? In case you didn't notice, I was asking a question in the OP, not making a statement.

bad story
open world meme absolutely ruined what could have been otherwise orgasmic

IGN gives MGS5 a 10
>Theyre fucking stupid
IGN gives BotW a 10
>It's great..AND CRITICS AGREE

Kojima should have put in an overly elaborate hunting, skinning and cooking system. Crazy bastard would have done it too.

>mongs still think 10/10 means a game is perfect

>mongs will actually reply to this bait

I'll bet you it was in the works before he got shitcanned and the project was pushed out the door

Along with the hair growth management and laundry systems.

>IT MUST BE BAIT
Here's a question, do you think a five star restaurant is perfect? I mean it's a full score right, if you do, you got brain problems son. Because just like with games, it means it is the highest form of recommendation they can give, which is how it is used and how they've said it is used. MGS5's faults and great aspects aside, you people who herpaderp about "muh no perfect game, no usu 10/10 score" are a fucking braindead plague.

You can instantly tell whether or not someone is a redditor/neogaffer if their criticism of MGSV is "the gameplay is the best in the series but the story was a mess," or "CH 1 was good but everything fell apart in CH 2."

Anyone with even a hint of taste understands that MGSV has maybe the worst gameplay in the series and if you believe otherwise I fucking detest you as a person. Fuck you.

10/10

I loved the story spread over so many levels like a dab of butter spread over too much toast. The 10 hours of audio tapes about Wolbachia hamburgers was all that was needed.

>"Did you hear? Someone spotted a Sasquatch in the woods and it was cooking a fucking eagle."
>"You must be fucking retarded Carl."
>"No I swear i-"
>"ENEMY ATTACK!"

I wish we could have heard the banter

>variety
>quality

>Anyone with even a hint of taste understands that MGSV has maybe the worst gameplay in the series

Oh yeah. MGS3 with the changing outfits in the menu every 30 seconds because you crawled on to slightly different coloured dirt was way better.

Why didn't they give it a 9.9 or 9.8 if they found a flaw in it? How can you give a perfect score to something that isn't perfect? It makes ZERO sense.

Smoothness of controls and situational options/planning/gear is simply the best out of any game I've ever played.

>if you believe otherwise I fucking detest you as a person. Fuck you.

Sup Forums is a very good place

>I am only capable of playing in one way

You probably didn't like BotW either

1. The menu issue is exaggerated if you don't have autism
2. Great, memorable boss fights
3. Level design
4. Variety
5. Compelling gameplay context

Yeah, if you think the gameplay of V is better than 3 fucking kys. The only thing good about V is how Snake controls, that's literally it.

If you think you need 90% camo index to stay hidden then the problem with mgs3 lies with you, user

you shouldn't criticize a game because you're bad at it

When a movie gets 5/5 stars I too sperg out because no movie can be 100% perfect.

MGSV has tons of variety idiot! You can shoot someone with a handgun or you can shoot him with a rifle name literally one other game with that amount of variety.

>MGSV has maybe the worst gameplay in the series

I think it is very important to make the distinction between gameplay and controls when talking about MGSV. MGSV controls very well, but it's it's all outdoor environments, fultoning everything that moves and playing the same formulaic missions over and over again while a glorified phone game is running in the background.

> Boss, shave the mohawk
> No

You're gonna deny it? The sheer amount of shit, both pointless and otherwise available to you is staggering. MGSV's gameplay is absolutely unparalleled, and I don't give a fuck if you write me off as a shill. The game manages to be both the best third person shooter of this generation, and the best third person stealth title. This is what I, and many others will compare future titles too. And it's a high fucking bar to reach.

>the game isn't bad, it's your fault not pretending you're playing a game that encourages you to try different strategies when playing the same level-designless mission over and over again

>the game isn't bad, it's your fault for not intentionally limiting yourself

>Yeah, if you think the gameplay of V is better than 3 fucking kys. The only thing good about V is how Snake controls, that's literally it.

Controls are a very important part of gameplay. A huge part. And V also had mission planning, way more options and play style choices. That is all really important.

Level design affects gameplay but they are not one and the same.

...

Not him but what do you mean by variety? Different guns you can use? Different paths? Both? MGSV isn't unique in either way.

It's not flawless but it's still a fantastic game when it comes to the gameplay, sound, and visuals.

The story is where it falls apart but I don't really give a fuck when the game is so fun to play. If not for the new Hitman I'd say it's the best stealth game this decade.

>controls are very important part of gameplay
Depends on the genre. In the case of stealth games, the most important aspect of gameplay is level design.

I can name many classic stealth games with mediocre controls. You can't name one with mediocre level design.

At least somebody has some sense.

Probably not

But it surpasses every other piece of shit kojima game but such a wide margin I can forgive them for claiming its the best game ever

Compared to other MGS games it truly was

It's a culmination of various aspects. You have your arsenal of weapons yes, and their customization, then your equipment, your buddies and resources.

And then there's the gameplay itself. The sheer amount of things you can accomplish, spend five minutes on youtube looking at people fucking around, ghosting missions in different ways, screwing with the AI, utilizing the tools and equipment in interesting ways.

All of it tied together with the smoothest, most intuitive movement and control system I've ever experience in pretty much any game, let alone a third person shooter.

and options don't matter if the options are superfluous or if the game doesn't encourage the use of these options with a rewarding, unique, fleshed out experience.

As a Vietnam simulator it absolutely fucking is.

I wish FOBs rewarded movement choice as opposed to just crawling and rolling like a retard.

>options don't matter if the options are superfluous
Tell that to all the players that adore the game because of those options.

These are the same people that thought GTA V was good.

Why would I try to appeal to literal redditors

>Rhodesian Bush War simulator
FTFY

Yeah the amount of content on that grocery store checklist of a mission menu, and the sheer number of copy paste outposts. And who could forget the hundreds of completely useless, unvaried weapons you need to play a mobile-tier waiting game to get. Truly unparalleled.

as usual IGN didn't even finish playing the game before putting out the review because if they even reached past 75% of the story they would know it's all fucked from there and that should at least deduct 2/10 points

Variety allows for multiple playstyles and self imposed challenges. If that doesn't appeal to you then fine, but don't act like it doesn't hold value. Also I fucking hate GTAV, it's a game that offers options, then pulls away those options every time you enter a mission, MGSV is the polar opposite.

You sound like a cunt user, need a hug?

I find it funny a game that was laden with shit the creator hoped would hurt the publisher actually helped it to sell.

not an argument
MGS3 has mission variety
Blood Money has level design variety
New Vegas has gameplay variety

Name literally one way that MGSV has any meaningful sort of variety

You're not worth arguing with.

Research grind could have fucked off
The parasite misnomer is fucking hilarious, for a guy trying to sound smart kojima comes off as a fucking up his own ass moron with this shit
The game is severely lacking in good stealth sections
The open world for the most part doesn't add anything to the game
The story and sahelanthropus was a fucking waste of time.

It's a severely flawed game that you couldn't just fix by a few small improvements to the open world here and there.

MGS3 in Fox engine probably would have completely fixed every issue with the game, instead forcing the player to play as a guerilla insurgent ambushing patrols and stealing supplies, carefully planning sub mission entry and extraction on your own with minimal external support.

are you retarded? all of the "variety" in TPP is superficial at best, none of it is encouraged and none of it actually means anything when it comes to the mission. The missions are not good in their core (unlike ground zeroes) and the adding of whatever gear you want to use only breaks them further into GTA tier laughable sandboxes that a stealth game should literally never be. Youre an easily entertained retard if you still defend the game at this point because muh loadouts

not an argument

this

This nigger puts it best
youtube.com/watch?v=houDtgBNPCA

Yes. They really nailed the not-big boss sitting in a helicopter

Neither is repeating yourself like an autist.

You can defeat Quiet with a fucking supply drop to the head. It doesn't matter whether or not creative play is incentivised through rewards, what matters is that it's present, and it's fun as hell.

It's a Love/Hate type of game and even if you really dig it you will scratch your head multiple times.

For example Motherbase should have been nothing but a menu screen, instead he build like a personal money sink to bankrupt Konami single-handily. Also since you'll spend about 60% of game time inside the MB menu...why does it have to be so cumbersome to navigate?

And that's just one of a million nitpicks that will rustle your jimmies while playing. Still a masterpiece tho.

>caring about scores
They’re arbritrary as fuck, user.

No.
But it's a very good game.

>sparse story

>Extract the Highly Skilled Soldier 16
>Prison Extraction 18
>Extract the Wandering Mother Base Soldiers 10
>Unlucky Dog 05
>Eliminate the Heavy Infantry 16
>Mine Clearing 10
>Eliminate the Armored Vehicle Unit 14
>Eliminate the Tank Unit 14
>Eliminate the Wandering Puppets 15
>Search for the Escaped Children 05
>Target Practice x 7
>Extract Interpreter x 4

V A R I E T Y

>MGS3 has mission variety
>Blood Money has level design variety
>New Vegas has gameplay variety

>MGSV has killing it's one half decent boss fight (which is a far inferior version of the same fight from over a decade ago) by dropping a crate on her head

Consider my almonds activated

>bringing up the boss fights in a conversation about MGSVs variety

Motherfucker was I talking about the garbage mission variety? Missions are merely playgrounds for the gameplay variety to occur.

I wonder if Konami would've allowed them to add back in all the cut content, if the game hadn't received such praise at launch.

Other than optional objectives in the main missions, there is no reason to change how you play.
Because all the missions are the same, which means you find the best way to do it and keep doing that.

Sure, you CAN do X, Y or Z. But there is no reason to.
S rank? All that matters is that you're fast. It's not even about stealth at that point.

You may have options, but nothing about the game's design incentivizes or rewards utilization or experimentation with these options.

And there is absolutely no reason why an $80M AAA title can't beat the mission variety of a half-baked PSP game.

>missions are merely playgrounds for the gameplay variety to occur

What variety exactly? The level design? The hundreds of pointless weapons of which you can carry 3? The buddies that make the game completely trivial?

>muh playground
>muh open world
>why would I ever want a quality focused experience

you are fucking cancer

The controls are nearly perfect and very much identical to all other mgs games, except the vehicles and the ego perspective.

Gameplay improved on all levels, except fulton extraction is overpowered. Story is interesting and doesnt came pulled out of the ass.
Its the best Metal Gear Solid so far.

The only real critic point is that the ending is unsatisfying.

in the case of metal gear, that's good

>Sure, you CAN do X, Y or Z. But there is no reason to.

The incentive is to have fun, if you're looking at a game as if it's work, then maybe you're the problem. I like sliding down hills in a cardboard box because it's fun, not because it's the most effective way to approach the mission.

The variety of how you can play the game and what you do on the mission, what ways you use to achieve your goals. Also buddies only are used by players who run around in battle armor all the time, except for the horse.

It's a 1/10 for me

With the hospital part being the best of the whole game actually feeling like your playing a MGS game.

I'd love to hear your well constructed reason behind this score, but I have a feeling it's gonna be laughable.

Is MGS literally the only "stealth" game series you've ever played?

No, reviews are subjective so a game doesn't need to be perfect or flawless to legitimately get a 10.

New Vegas allows you to approach missions in different ways. Deus Ex allows you approach missions in different ways. MGSV gives you a bunch of pointless tools that ultimately affect how you approach the mission in no meaningful, focused, developed way.

It has just as much (actual) gadget variety as MGS3, but with none of the level design, interesting mission context, boss fights, mission variety, etc. Not to even mention how the fulton system HEAVILY incentives you to play the one most effective way.

Love to hear you defend Kojima and his hackery

Even Konami couldn't defend Kojima

Hell no. Maybe a 7 on a good day

>The incentive is to have fun
Doing the same thing over and over and over is not fun.

No amount of changing tactics will make it fun, because you are still extracting yet another soldier, taking down yet another tank, etc.

>if you're looking at a game as if it's work
If the game wasn't designed like a list of fucking chores, then I wouldn't look at it like a list of fucking chores.

Yeah, I can dance while I take out the trash, but I'm still just taking out the trash again.

nigga credit it for what it did best. Spawn MGO, then the superior mgs4 MGO

They grew up on MGS user, they don't play anything other than AAA third person console games.

I enjoyed it a lot, but I'd give it an 8.

So what? The scoring system incentivises you to not kill anybody, but that didn't stop me from taking people out whenever I got the chance. Idk man, I wouldn't have enjoyed the game if they approached it like the previous MGS games, the sandbox gameplay is what stood out to me, and I think they nailed it. I liked seeing how absurd my approach could be, purposefully utilizing mechanics that ARE essentially pointless, because self imposed challenges in a sandbox environment are what makes games like MGSV such a blast. I'm sorry you felt like you needed to approach every mission the same way, but those who didn't enjoyed the game a hell of a lot more than people that approached it with your mentality.

lol you can literally wait a week(change time and date) for The End to die

You know, the way they tricked reviewers would have justified an outrage to out rage GamerGate. They had a "Reviewer boot camp" where they let them play for a set amount of hours that was just too little for them to get to the blatantly unfinished Chapter 2.

>Start of the game: Great, 10/10
>Afghanistan: Boring desert, 5/10
>Africa: what the fuck there is absolutely nothing here, 1/10
>postgame: lmao

Comrade, there is such variety in digging industry! You can dig with shovel, dig with rake, dig with bucket, dig at night, dig with friends, dig during winter, dig with bleeding hands, and even dig near old log that smells like food.

But you must dig.

So is Mario 64 bad because every level is just jumping and grabbing a star? Just because the end goal is a common thread throughout the game doesn't mean that you can't take drastically different approaches to every mission if you choose to do so.

It's not about people liking a bad game. It's about people liking a game that was such a casualization, bastardization of a genuinely great series.

Even MGS4, as many faults as it had amazing moments, boss fights, mission variety, and at times some really amazing stealth gameplay. MGSV is basically a third person ubisoft game with a wacky story and Kojima's name printed on it.

>New Vegas allows you to approach missions in different ways. Deus Ex allows you approach missions in different ways.
Doesnt affect in anyway the fun in the gameplay of mgs5.
Also you cant ride a horse in deus ex or new vegas, nobody cares.

The courses in Mario 64 actually present you with different situations.

Here are the scenarios Bob-Omb Battlefield offers you
>fight a boss
>race through the level
>reach a specific area
>explore the level for 8 coins
>use the wing cap to collect coins in the sky
>unleash a dangerous enemy while avoiding its attacks

These are all completely different scenarios which demand different approaches despite Mario's fairly limited arsenal of abilities.

At the end of the day you're always collecting a star, but the methods by which you achieve that goal are completely different, and MUST be due to the design of the game.

Meanwhile, in MGSV...
>defeat a tank for the sixteenth time
You have the option to do it one of several different ways, however there is no reason, no gain, no purpose to any other method than the one that is fastest or easiest (often both).

It's a fucking sham, user. You're deluding yourself into believing that this is good. It's not.
It is a chore. It is busywork.
Even in the game's story, they try to justify it with Kaz telling you "well, someone's gotta do it, and we need the money."

It's a bullshit excuse for bullshit padding.
I don't even know who you are but I'm still disappointed that you would eat this shit and call it gourmet.