Metal Gear Solid V

tok9

dreamers75 wrote: »

Reappearing side ops is annoying my side ops OCD.

I have rescued someone in the south 4 times and its still there

I was doing the exact same thing the first day. You just have to let them go

Zero-Cool

I was wondering about that. I have a Side OP about extracting a prisoner. Completed it and now it is bright white as if highlighted but has a check beside it. Does that mean I have completed it but it's available again if I want another prisoner?

Zero-Cool

Zero-Cool wrote: »

I was wondering about that. I have a Side OP about extracting a prisoner. Completed it and now it is bright white as if highlighted but has a check beside it. Does that mean I have completed it but it's available again if I want another prisoner?

Noticed the same thing on mine #14 or 16 i think it was

tok9

Zero-Cool wrote: »

I was wondering about that. I have a Side OP about extracting a prisoner. Completed it and now it is bright white as if highlighted but has a check beside it. Does that mean I have completed it but it's available again if I want another prisoner?

Exactly.

Crucifix

Yeah, the shooting challenges at Mother Base are the same way, I think it just means they can be repeated

rizzla

I did a side op as a combat staff member and it never went grey so I thought that's why that happened, guess not. I wonder if it's because that staff member has maybe left your ranks or been KIA?

It's just the side ops for extracting soldiers/prisoners and the MB time trials?

Jordan 199

On the downside: I suck at stealth :mad:

On the upside: I found an episode where I can get an S rank

Gonzo

finally after picking up the PS4 version of the game in smyths after a 6 day wait! The PS4 version of the game is very difficult to find outside of Gamestop.

Captain Chaos

Gonzo wrote: »

finally after picking up the PS4 version of the game in smyths after a 6 day wait! The PS4 version of the game is very difficult to find outside of Gamestop.

In the UK anyway, sales figures indicate that of the total MGSV sales, 72% were for PS4, 22% for the Xbox 1 and the rest were last gen. If that is any indication of the Irish market that would explain the shortage of PS4 copies. It's rare for a game to sell out these days but both this and The Witcher 3 on PS4 did.

Gonzo

Captain Chaos wrote: »

In the UK anyway, sales figures indicate that of the total MGSV sales 72% were for PS4, 22% for the Xbox 1 and the rest were last gen.

It's probably a similar situation here, I was in 3 smyths stores over the past few days and they had box's of xbox one versions of the game but the PS4 version keeps getting sold out as soon as it's put on the shelves.

Zero-Cool

Anyone else think that the music plays when getting the helicopter back to MB sounds an awful like Tomb Raider music?

dreamers75

Zero-Cool wrote: »

Anyone else think that the music plays when getting the helicopter back to MB sounds an awful like Tomb Raider music?

Dunno but you can edit that music somehow? Anyone know how? Have Fortunate son and Back in Black ready to go

Wossack

being able to change the heli music is all kinds of awesome

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6GV8LH1byU

SouthTippBass

Nah, this is what you want

SouthTippBass

Im also willing to accept....

Zero-Cool

On Motherbase, look for a construction sign saying caution with a pic of a box falling on a man's head. Now stand there for a a few seconds.....

EazyD

I'm not usually one to go out of my way to slate any big title but I have to say this is extremely disappointing considering the budget they had to work with and development time.

The "open world" (which it isn't in the strict sense) feels devoid of life, just outposts with Russian soldiers and little to nothing else). The stealth mechanics are no better or worse than they were on last gen consoles, missions are rinse and repeat of same tasks. While I was impressed with the new fox engine, the whole thing just feels like an overhyped pile of bull crap tbh.

I was initially taken by the visuals in the prologue, despite the fact it dragged on. Maybe rose tinted glasses having played all the previous titles but playing on further I just havnt warmed to it at all.

Det Somerset

EazyD wrote: »

I'm not usually one to go out of my way to slate any big title but I have to say this is extremely disappointing considering the budget they had to work with and development time.

The "open world" (which it isn't in the strict sense) feels devoid of life, just outposts with Russian soldiers and little to nothing else). The stealth mechanics are no better or worse than they were on last gen consoles, missions are rinse and repeat of same tasks. While I was impressed with the new fox engine, the whole thing just feels like an overhyped pile of bull crap tbh.

I was initially taken by the visuals in the prologue, despite the fact it dragged on. Maybe rose tinted glasses having played all the previous titles but playing on further I just havnt warmed to it at all.

I can understand what you are saying somewhat.

I'm 5 main missions and 10 side ops in myself. I'm enjoying the game, but overall am a little underwhelmed by it so far based on the stellar reviews it has received. It's early days yet of course and I'm clearly less than 10% of the way into the game (4% officially) so it has the potential to improve dramatically, but I'm almost not expecting it to hit the highs I was hoping for now. I remember being more impressed with MGS4 after being this number of hrs into the game.

I think this may be a case that if MGSV had been panned universally I'd be staunchly defending it because it has a lot of merits and as I said I am enjoying it overall, but because of all the hype I'm a touch disappointed at this early stage.

Credits at the start of missions are really starting to annoy me now, showing what enemies are coming up :mad:

Gamer Bhoy 89

Deleted User wrote: »

Credits at the start of missions are really starting to annoy me now, showing what enemies are coming up :mad:

Voice actors would've sufficed at the very least, if they wanted to throw in opening credits like that.

challengemaster

FOB missions are great for getting staff
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=514060091

And successfully defending gets you about 1.2m credits

Gamer Bhoy 89

Can someone explain the ranking system for me? I did one mission where I managed to go through it without killing anyone, it took an hour to do though and I got a C rank, one of the lowest I've ever gotten.

But then I done another mission where I had to rescue a prisoner and I got him fultoned and I finished the mission without a soul seeing me and got my S rank as well as the FoxHound emblem for my trouble.

Does it depend on the kind of mission? Or is it all if you do it in a set time? I really have no clue....

lawlolawl

EazyD wrote: »

I'm not usually one to go out of my way to slate any big title but I have to say this is extremely disappointing considering the budget they had to work with and development time.

The "open world" (which it isn't in the strict sense) feels devoid of life, just outposts with Russian soldiers and little to nothing else). The stealth mechanics are no better or worse than they were on last gen consoles, missions are rinse and repeat of same tasks. While I was impressed with the new fox engine, the whole thing just feels like an overhyped pile of bull crap tbh.

I was initially taken by the visuals in the prologue, despite the fact it dragged on. Maybe rose tinted glasses having played all the previous titles but playing on further I just havnt warmed to it at all.

While I don't think the game is crap, I sort of feel underwhelmed as well. I've just done it all before in other games and it's been less clunky in most of them.

It's fine, but I'm bewildered by the "10 outta 10! OMG, game of da century!" reception. Have these people not played any recent open world games or something?

It says a lot when the entire time I've been playing MGS 5 I've been thinking "Maybe I should have another play through of Until Dawn. Or I could finish Zombii U since I started it a couple of weeks ago...... A quick round on The Golf Club would be nice."

Mr_Muffin

I am not exactly sure if i am enjoying this game or only playing with the hope it will improve.

Let me start by saying i am not very far into it. The game is 'good' but i read most of the reviews prior to purchase and was expecting a lot more - maybe that's my fault as it can be very hard for a game live up to such hype.

The open world is very linear. Besides outposts i am not sure what exactly the point of it all is. During a mission i always try to use stealth but if i am spotted it is all to easy just to kill every enemy in sight or put them all to sleep - they really don't put up much of a fight and you could literally kill them all day if you wanted to.

lawlolawl

Gamer Bhoy 89 wrote: »

Can someone explain the ranking system for me? I did one mission where I managed to go through it without killing anyone, it took an hour to do though and I got a C rank, one of the lowest I've ever gotten.

But then I done another mission where I had to rescue a prisoner and I got him fultoned and I finished the mission without a soul seeing me and got my S rank as well as the FoxHound emblem for my trouble.

Does it depend on the kind of mission? Or is it all if you do it in a set time? I really have no clue....

Being quick is the best way to get a good ranking in most missions. it'll cancel out any penalties for a massacre but make sure to keep the alert status going because you pay a points penalty for every time it initialises

EazyD

Det Somerset wrote: »

I can understand what you are saying somewhat.

I'm 5 main missions and 10 side ops in myself. I'm enjoying the game, but overall am a little underwhelmed by it so far based on the stellar reviews it has received. It's early days yet of course and I'm clearly less than 10% of the way into the game (4% officially) so it has the potential to improve dramatically, but I'm almost not expecting it to hit the highs I was hoping for now. I remember being more impressed with MGS4 after being this number of hrs into the game.

I think this may be a case that if MGSV had been panned universally I'd be staunchly defending it because it has a lot of merits and as I said I am enjoying it overall, but because of all the hype I'm a touch disappointed at this early stage.

What it really shows though is how little integrity is left in gaming journalism when you have all the big players throwing 9.5 and 10's at it. Pre-release reviews were handled in-house, Konami controlled every aspect of it from the time it could be played to having supervisors assigned to each reviewer for the duration of their playthrough.

Taken as a whole I like the series, 15 to 20 years ago it really was revolutionary and pushed the boundaries of what was possible with the hardware at that time. But in all honesty has it changed much over these two decades? Are people playing it for its brilliance in its own right or for the name. I among many others would think its the latter, and applies across the board with other big titles.

And developers know this, hence the staggering drop in quality we have come to expect from triple A titles over the last number of years.

Gamer Bhoy 89

lawlolawl wrote: »

While I don't think the game is crap, I sort of feel underwhelmed as well. I've just done it all before in other games and it's been less clunky in most of them.

It's fine, but I'm bewildered by the "10 outta 10! OMG, game of da century!" reception. Have these people not played any recent open world games or something?

It says a lot when the entire time I've been playing MGS 5 I've been thinking "Maybe I should have another play through of Until Dawn. Or I could finish Zombii U since I started it a couple of weeks ago...... A quick round on The Golf Club would be nice."

I believe that perhaps it's mainly because of the direction in which Metal Gear Solid V went in comparison to every instalment before it. It made a bold change in terms in linearity, something a game series rarely does well.

Metal Gear Solid has been infamous for it's very long cinematic cutscenes and short bursts of gameplay in some instalments. This is the first Metal Gear Solid game to have shorter bursts of cutscenes and harder focus on the gameplay. And on top of said gameplay, it boasts a ton of features that any previous game in the series couldn't attain. While there are plenty of open world games out there, it's the missions you do in those open world games that are the linear part. In GTA, you can go about your own business in between missions, but when doing a mission, you obviously have to do it in the way it asks you. Whereas in MGSV, even during missions you are free to approach it in literally any way that you like, and the game will not punish you.

The game released with little-to-no bugs, something a lot of AAA games have not been able to do nowadays, so this is a breath of fresh air. The PC version is apparently very well optimized and the graphics are the best in the series to date. The only issue with the game is that of the servers, but even those can be fixed and stabilized as the weeks go on

It's the first game in the Metal Gear franchise to allow this kind of gameplay and it done it very well, compared to what it used to play like.

That, I believe, is why the game was received as well as it was, because it was an entirely different way the game was being presented and it was done well in my opinion.

I hope I made sense in all of this but I've been a fan of the series for a long time, and I won't be biased either as I know how frustrating all the long cutscenes in the older games can be, it's just something I chose to bite my tongue at.

lawlolawl

Gamer Bhoy 89 wrote: »

I believe that perhaps it's mainly because of the direction in which Metal Gear Solid V went in comparison to every instalment before it. It made a bold change in terms in linearity, something a game series rarely does well.

Metal Gear Solid has been infamous for it's very long cinematic cutscenes and short bursts of gameplay in some instalments. This is the first Metal Gear Solid game to have shorter bursts of cutscenes and harder focus on the gameplay. And on top of said gameplay, it boasts a ton of features that any previous game in the series couldn't attain. While there are plenty of open world games out there, it's the missions you do in those open world games that are the linear part. In GTA, you can go about your own business in between missions, but when doing a mission, you obviously have to do it in the way it asks you. Whereas in MGSV, even during missions you are free to approach it in literally any way that you like, and the game will not punish you.

The game released with little-to-no bugs, something a lot of AAA games have not been able to do nowadays, so this is a breath of fresh air. The PC version is apparently very well optimized and the graphics are the best in the series to date. The only issue with the game is that of the servers, but even those can be fixed and stabilized as the weeks go on

It's the first game in the Metal Gear franchise to allow this kind of gameplay and it done it very well, compared to what it used to play like.

That, I believe, is why the game was received as well as it was, because it was an entirely different way the game was being presented and it was done well in my opinion.

I hope I made sense in all of this but I've been a fan of the series for a long time, and I won't be biased either as I know how frustrating all the long cutscenes in the older games can be, it's just something I chose to bite my tongue at.

Pretty much every recent Ubisoft open world game let's you approach missions in whatever way you want.

And people are pretty much sick and tired of them.

Gamer Bhoy 89

lawlolawl wrote: »

Pretty much every recent Ubisoft open world game let's you approach missions in whatever way you want.

And people are pretty much sick and tired of them.

This isn't Ubisoft though :P

Those games started off being that type of game, though. Whereas Metal Gear Solid was never that kind of game. It changed it's genre, essentially, and done it well

SouthTippBass

lawlolawl wrote: »

Pretty much every recent Ubisoft open world game let's you approach missions in whatever way you want.

And people are pretty much sick and tired of them.

Can you give some examples?