MGS-ish stuff from RE6 thread

[drauch]

Now that I think about it, I'm actually surprised Bethesda went with the numeral for Fallout 3. Despite it being the "third" game, it still seems like people are completely obvious that it's part of a series. Pretty sad.

[Hagane]

CRPGs hail directly from pen-and-paper role-playing games. Many of the classic ones for PC follow AD&D rule sets. They are not supposed to test your reflexes. You didn`t know that?

A CRPG like BG tests nothing. As a strategy game is pretty much as laughable as a Final Fantasy, and as a role playing experience is much watered down compared to their pen and paper cousins. As a game, BG is not much above an interactive novel, its interactivity being mostly reduced to choosing from lines of text.

CIV or chess don't test your reflexes either, and they are much deeper than any crappy CRPG you care to mention.

[Limbrooke]

AND the controls are poorly implemented, although a lot of that burden I place on the shortcomings of the PS controller.

How anyone can take you honestly after this comment is beyond me. Not to say you haven't slung you fair share of mud at Sons of Liberty but this really makes no sense. I'd like to know how the controls could have been improved in your view.

[drauch]

I'm really curious how much Baldur's Gate you've actually played. The "interactive novel" bit is kinda throwing me off and doesn't make a lick of sense. Do you hold turn-based JRPGS in this fashion?

Jonathan Ingram's avatar. That's an interactive novel. Jonathan Ingram himself. That's an interactive novel character.

I think this thread should be, "I hate this popular game, BECAUSE."

[Ex-Cyber]

AND the controls are poorly implemented, although a lot of that burden I place on the shortcomings of the PS controller.

How anyone can take you honestly after this comment is beyond me. Not to say you haven't slung you fair share of mud at Sons of Liberty but this really makes no sense. I'd like to know how the controls could have been improved in your view.

What you quoted sort of hints that the answer would lead with "by using a better controller", which is entirely plausible to me. The Dual Shock layout isn't awful, but it shouldn't be controversial to say that it's decidedly suboptimal. The placement of the thumbsticks simply does not match the way human hands work, as acknowledged by virtually every pad designed afterward that isn't a DS clone.

Then again, I played the Xbox port of MGS2 and had a nice time.

[Skykid]

AND the controls are poorly implemented, although a lot of that burden I place on the shortcomings of the PS controller.

How anyone can take you honestly after this comment is beyond me. Not to say you haven't slung you fair share of mud at Sons of Liberty but this really makes no sense. I'd like to know how the controls could have been improved in your view.

What you quoted sort of hints that the answer would lead with "by using a better controller", which is entirely plausible to me. The Dual Shock layout isn't awful, but it shouldn't be controversial to say that it's decidedly suboptimal. The placement of the thumbsticks simply does not match the way human hands work, as acknowledged by virtually every pad designed afterward that isn't a DS clone.

Taking me honestly is the easy part, it's the views that naysayers seem to have such a hard time handling.

I already stated that MGS2's telephone directory of a control interface was not helped by the dual shock, which is where I feel a lot of the burden lies.

Hold on, am I repeating myself?

Christ, how strange. Glad people read and digest a comment before posting a retort that requires nothing but a staple re-iteration. Such scintillating conversational techniques continue to make the world a better place.

Ex-Cyber, thank you for kindly clarifying the point on my behalf.

[Jonathan Ingram]

Because the general public can always be relied upon for good taste. The majority is where you belong, for sure. Enjoy it.

I don`t care about the general public`s opinion, just pointing out the flaws in your argumentation. It looks like you have a more severe case of cognitive dissonance than I initially thought:

Code: Select all

So you're basically saying that any criticism of anything at all is completely invalid if there are a select few people who like it in spite of its shitness?

Code: Select all

Because the general public can always be relied upon for good taste. The majority is where you belong, for sure.

Come to think of it, you tried to fall back on the "then why is it more popular?" argument in the Shenmue vs Ryu ga Gotoku discussion a few months ago when you failed to explain what made Shenmue a better game than RgG. Seems like you always try to use that argument, it backfires on you and you start singing a different song.

So which one is it with MGS? Are they:

a)games that are generally considered shitty that only "a select few people" like
b)popular games that still suck because the general public can`t be "relied upon for good taste"

And am I in "a select few" or in "the majority"?

MGS3 offended me during the first three hours because it was 5 minutes of playable game interspersed between 40 minutes of cutscene, and it had a number of excruciating design decisions that were essentially 'patched' in subsistence to make it more playable.

The 'start' button is to the right of 'select'. Use it if cutscenes annoy you that much. Or better yet, develop an attention span that exceedes that of a 5-year-old and learn to play games to the end if you want to express your opinion about them. As it stands, your whole "it derailed much earlier" in relation to MGS series amounts to nothing more than talking out of your ass.

Subsistence didn`t "patch" anything. It only added controllable camera mapped to the right analog stick.

When did I attempt to say it was better than MGS3?

When you said the series went downhill as it progressed. MGS1 is a apparently the highlight of the series compared the nigh unplayable mess of MGS2 and MGS3 that "offended" you so much you quit playing it after the first few hours.

A CRPG like BG tests nothing. As a strategy game is pretty much as laughable as a Final Fantasy, and as a role playing experience is much watered down compared to their pen and paper cousins. As a game, BG is not much above an interactive novel, its interactivity being mostly reduced to choosing from lines of text.

You wouldn`t know if they are watered down since you haven`t played a single one of them. And why would you care if they are given your perception of role-playing games as non-games anyway? I doubt you ever played a table top RPG either.

CIV or chess don't test your reflexes either, and they are much deeper than any crappy CRPG you care to mention.

You know, I think I got a life`s worth fill of idiocy out of your posts in this thread alone. For future reference, when you don`t like a certain genre of videogames, just say that you don`t like it and stop at that. Don`t try and make a case against that entire genre and make a complete fool out of yourself in turn.

[Hagane]

So, what does BG "test", then? Reflexes or dexterity of course not. Strategy, it has as much as a Final Fantasy. Very little. What is there left, besides choosing lines of text and mashing the left mouse button? Surprise me and post a coherent defense of BG.

[Skykid]

cognitive dissonance

This 'cognitive dissonance' baloney is the most pathetic get out of a direct conversation dealing in specific points, shortcomings and positives I've witnessed in all my years on this forum. I actually let that slide the first time because I thought you misunderstood what cognitive dissonance actually was, and were using it as a fill in for 'hypocrisy' in an attempt to sound more assertive (which makes sense considering the sections of my posts that you quoted) - even though hypocrisy is a trait that hasn't been expressed exceptionally by anyone in this thread, since all stances are consistent, and has nothing to do with cognitive dissonance at all.

To quote:

An example of [cognitive dissonance] would be the conflict between wanting to smoke and knowing that smoking is unhealthy

Try following the actual argument please, rather than glossing over every criticism raised against Sons of Liberty by me or any of the other individuals who raised points regarding its content.

To get back on track and address a specific point you made - one that actually correlates with the argument and doesn't involve using big words to try and sound clever - people who can't stomach MGS's lengthy cutscenes don't have ADHD: it's because they're often badly scripted, edited, verbose, boring, confusing and pointless.

Suggesting skipping them because of their insufficiency in storytelling is not something the player should be burdened with.

Additionally, while I enjoy people putting words in my mouth over and over, just so I have to continually repeat the same point: I didn't say MGS2 was an 'unplayable mess' - you said that. It has plenty of good aspects, but also its fair share of problems.

And (like this needs spelling out) if MGS > MGS2, then it has gotten worse in its progression between those two. That's usually how that works.

[Jonathan Ingram]

This 'cognitive dissonance' baloney is the most pathetic get out of a direct conversation dealing in specific points, shortcomings and positives I've witnessed in all my years on this forum. I actually let that slide the first time because I thought you misunderstood what cognitive dissonance actually was, and were using it as a fill in for 'hypocrisy' in an attempt to sound more assertive (which makes sense considering the sections of my posts that you quoted) - even though hypocrisy is a trait that hasn't been expressed exceptionally by anyone in this thread, since all stances are consistent, and has nothing to do with cognitive dissonance at all.

No, I believe cognitive dissonance characterizes your entire behavior in this thread and many others very well. It`s not just about the bits with hypocrisy that I highlighted, it`s your general trait. It`s like in that discussion about N64, a generally unspectacular console that you wanted to like so much that you tried to minimize the dissonance by emphasizing the flaws of the PSX.

I`m not going to comment on the rest of your post as I`m getting tired of all this and see no point in taking this any further.

So, what does BG "test", then? Reflexes or dexterity of course not. Strategy, it has as much as a Final Fantasy. Very little. What is there left, besides choosing lines of text and mashing the left mouse button? Surprise me and post a coherent defense of BG.

Ignorant and unrepentant.

[trap15]

So, what does BG "test", then? Reflexes or dexterity of course not. Strategy, it has as much as a Final Fantasy. Very little. What is there left, besides choosing lines of text and mashing the left mouse button? Surprise me and post a coherent defense of BG.

Games don't need to "test" anything. They're a form of entertainment. Not all games have to be skill-driven. Story-driven games are just as important.

[Despatche]

Playing MGS over MGS2 is more like playing ST over SFIV.

This comparison is kinda dumb. MGS2 is Alpha, if anything.

It`s like in that discussion about N64, a generally unspectacular console that you wanted to like so much that you tried to minimize the dissonance by emphasizing the flaws of the PSX.

This bullshit about "mediocre" needs to stop. It only means "I don't like it" now, not what it's supposed to. There is absolutely nothing mediocre about the N64, from any possible angle.

[Hagane]

trap15:

The problem is that people misunderstand the meaning of the word game. Most believe that everything included in the disc (or whatever storage system is used) is a game, when in fact the game is only the parts you can interact with, the rules. So we come to misunderstandings like believing that a game can be good based only on story. But no, a game should primarily be judged based on the depth and complexity of its rules. And a title with good story characters will always be a bad game if the rules / interaction are bad.

Which is why something like BG, regardless if you love its story, will always be inferior compared to pretty much any game that demands skill (be it strategy or dexterity).

[Skykid]

No, I believe cognitive dissonance characterizes your entire behavior in this thread and many others very well. It`s not just about the bits with hypocrisy that I highlighted, it`s your general trait. It`s like in that discussion about N64, a generally unspectacular console that you wanted to like so much that you tried to minimize the dissonance by emphasizing the flaws of the PSX.

^ Although again, that's actually not an example of cognitive dissonance at all -- and it seems you completely misunderstand what it means -- I apologise on behalf of all people with opposing or alternative views who are chronically suffering from it.

I'll tell you what I'm getting tired of: constantly having my words, written in plain english, twisted, mis-interpreted and fed back to me as the basis for a phantom argument.

I find it irritating that I could return all of your comments with existing quotes that dictate the opposite of what I said. In the N64 conversation you handpicked, I reiterated several times the console suffered from a neutered library and had plenty of dross. I only wanted to highlight the fact that it produced some exceptional titles in-spite of its shortcomings, some of which were more exceptional than anything produced on competing consoles.
That's my belief and I stand by it, and it doesn't change even if you put your Sigmund hat on and decide to engage in a course of amateur psychoanalysis.

This bullshit about "mediocre" needs to stop. It only means "I don't like it" now, not what it's supposed to. There is absolutely nothing mediocre about the N64, from any possible angle.

The only thing mediocre, Jonathan Ingram, as you seem to have proven on countless occasions (and with assertive vigour whenever it happens to be my opinion) is your general critical taste and ability to listen, digest and return with an acceptable argument without regurgitating misnomers and non-existent points that were never made in the first place.

If attention were paid, I never ever said MGS2 was a 'bad' game, just one that's lacking finesse in several critical departments. The original may not have its level of complexity, but it's a more enjoyable and better crafted experience imo.

Discussion, debate and argument doesn't need to be this frustrating, even if it is centered around a disagreement.

[Strider77]

pointless... and I got sucked into it.

[Skykid]

pointless... and I got sucked into it.

You started it:

RE is now taking the place of Metal Gear... it's just the trending thing to hate on.

[Strider77]

I couldn't have done this on my own. Interweb Warz!!

I can't take all the credit and glory though.... my were efforts are small. Still I can't be to modest, I did open a can or worms.

I think we should all take this shit to Facebook and let it REALLY get nuts. Facebook Warz!!!

But in the end I like RE and MG, so my opinions are foolish from the get go. On the bright side... I can play a mean game of Ninja Gaiden 1 and 2. I've managed to beat all but the Master Ninja difficulty on those. I also pulled this off on the xbox, 360, and PS3. I managed it on all those controllers and even managed on the dual shock 3.....

[Jonathan Ingram]

@Skykid

Debates don`t have to be frustrating, but it doesn`t seem like they can be any other way with you. You threw a fit when somebody thought MGS2 was a good game as if it`s some uncommon notion(the person who likes RE5 and is looking forward to playing RE6 is baffled someone thinks MGS2 is a good game; come the fuck on). Now you`re playing the victim card.

[Skykid]

Debates don`t have to be frustrating

Well then read people's responses and direct criticisms, respond reasonably and stop using phrases like 'you threw a fit', which are inflammatory because they have no truth.

You threw a fit when somebody thought MGS2 was a good game as if it`s some uncommon notion

So I just reviewed all posts in relation to this topic, in this thread and the thread it stemmed from. Can't find any instances of 'fit throwing', but you're welcome to quote the occurrences you're referring to.

Also, in scanning our conversation, I've noticed an awful lot of overarching statements coming from you along the lines of 'the general consensus is', 'you're in a minority' and 'most people think RE has had more low points than MGS as a series'. Not dissimilar to most people thinking Shenmue is inferior to Yakuza, iirc.
I don't mind looking at facts, nor being in a minority, but I'm curious where all this statistical evidence is being collated from?

(the person who likes RE5 and is looking forward to playing RE6 is baffled someone thinks MGS2 is a good game; come the fuck on). Now you`re playing the victim card.

Victim card?...

I don't think RE5 is the best example of the series, but I enjoyed it more than MGS2, sure. Why is that weird?

The only thing I said about RE6 was that I was being optimistic - that's it. Look, if it's easier, rather than telling me what I did and didn't say, just go back and actually read the posts you didn't read, or the sentences you imagined I said, and then use those directly.

All this 'you said this', 'think this', 'threw a fit like this' is not a conversation. No-one's doing that to you.

[Drum]

The problem is that people misunderstand the meaning of the word game. Most believe that everything included in the disc (or whatever storage system is used) is a game, when in fact the game is only the parts you can interact with, the rules. So we come to misunderstandings like believing that a game can be good based only on story. But no, a game should primarily be judged based on the depth and complexity of its rules. And a title with good story characters will always be a bad game if the rules / interaction are bad.

This is such an astonishing post. Forceful in it's total lack of reason or insight, like a choo-choo train going through a tunnel at night. At full speed with no driver or passengers.

[Jonathan Ingram]

I don't think RE5 is the best example of the series, but I enjoyed it more than MGS2, sure. Why is that weird?

You in response to my post about MGS2 improving upon the first game:

Self-inflicted fatality. MGS2 was about 70% gaffe, 20% potential and 10% superb. The mind boggles that this isn't trolling.

So, in your opinion it isn`t weird to enjoy RE5(I don`t think it`s weird, liked the game quite a bit myself), but someone liking MGS2 and preferring it over MGS totally amounts to trolling(even though it`s far more popular a sentiment than liking RE5 is). My mind boggles this isn`t trolling.

And again these two pieces:

So you're basically saying that any criticism of anything at all is completely invalid if there are a select few people who like it in spite of its shitness?

Because the general public can always be relied upon for good taste. The majority is where you belong, for sure.

Look, walk up to the nearest wall and call on a firing squad. I`m out to drink some bleach and unwind.

[njiska]

The problem is that people misunderstand the meaning of the word game. Most believe that everything included in the disc (or whatever storage system is used) is a game, when in fact the game is only the parts you can interact with, the rules. So we come to misunderstandings like believing that a game can be good based only on story. But no, a game should primarily be judged based on the depth and complexity of its rules. And a title with good story characters will always be a bad game if the rules / interaction are bad.

This is such an astonishing post. Forceful in it's total lack of reason or insight, like a choo-choo train going through a tunnel at night. At full speed with no driver or passengers.

Don't try to engage Hagane on that subject. It's a completely lost cause.

[Strider77]

but someone liking MGS2 and preferring it over MGS totally amounts to trolling(even though it's far more popular a sentiment than liking RE5 is). My mind boggles this isn't trolling.

He kind of has you there.... the gist of your posts come across as anyone who liked MGS2 is eithier an idiot or delusional. You also explain yourself, but absolutely refuse to accept anothers reasons for liking it. You come across as thinking you are superior to anyone that likes a game you don't enjoy... and also not good at due to complex controls and the dual shock mind you.

We are allowed to enjoy the game and not be labeled morons. No one has labeled you a moron for not being able to use a dual shock and handle MGS2's "complex" controls. I didn't label you as foolish for "not being able to be bothered with every nuance in some fighting engine". Or for writing pages on a movie or game you have hardly touched or even seen.

Your opinions are not the gospel.. they're like ass holes, we all have them. Just some of us don't act like one when it comes to opinions.

--------

I know alot of folks must be loving this.... I can see many a PC desk with a bowl of pop corn on top.

[trap15]

The problem is that people misunderstand the meaning of the word game. Most believe that everything included in the disc (or whatever storage system is used) is a game, when in fact the game is only the parts you can interact with, the rules. So we come to misunderstandings like believing that a game can be good based only on story. But no, a game should primarily be judged based on the depth and complexity of its rules. And a title with good story characters will always be a bad game if the rules / interaction are bad.

This is such an astonishing post. Forceful in it's total lack of reason or insight, like a choo-choo train going through a tunnel at night. At full speed with no driver or passengers.

Quite a rude way to put it, but the underlying idea in your post is pretty much spot on.

[Skykid]

Look, walk up to the nearest wall and call on a firing squad. I`m out to drink some bleach and unwind.

Be sure to fill the jug. I've heard it stops people excising two completely separate parts of a discussion and childishly using them as a comparison that's meant to be an end all answer to the questions of the universe, rather than the topic at hand.

Self-inflicted fatality. MGS2 was about 70% gaffe, 20% potential and 10% superb. The mind boggles that this isn't trolling.

He kind of has you there.... the gist of your posts come across as anyone who liked MGS2 is eithier an idiot or delusional.

I don't think you're idiots or delusional, or even delusional idiots - it just amazes me that anyone would hold the second above the first.
I'm also none the wiser as to how using RE5 as some kind of throwback ammunition is even viable in the discussion, it's an entirely separate entity that has nothing to do with the points raised about MGS2. It's presence is like a failed desperation attack.

And this:

someone liking MGS2 and preferring it over MGS totally amounts to trolling(even though it`s far more popular a sentiment than liking RE5 is)

Where do these facts come from? I think we should open a poll to find out which of the two games is more popular, at least for some hard statistics rather than all this chancing conjecture.

Thankfully we've managed to get somewhere: right back to square one. This is the point where you all say MGS2 innovates and improves on its predecessor in almost every conceivable way, and then I go on to list a number of reasons why I think it failed to capitalise on the groundwork of the first and has a multitude of problems. You then ignore all those points and skirt discussing them directly for several posts, then we get a thread split, fanciful recollections, random usage of the term cognitive dissonance, and after a while, get back here again.

I gotta get off this roundabout.

[Hagane]

This is such an astonishing post. Forceful in it's total lack of reason or insight, like a choo-choo train going through a tunnel at night. At full speed with no driver or passengers.

Yeah calling things by their name seems to be astonishing nowadays. Not surprising that most people who are against this view are shit at games.

[Drum]

What the fuck is wrong with you?

[BulletMagnet]

This is already getting too personal; if the tone doesn't change I'll have to lock this.

[drauch]

I'm really curious how much Baldur's Gate you've actually played. The "interactive novel" bit is kinda throwing me off and doesn't make a lick of sense. Do you hold turn-based JRPGS in this fashion?

Jonathan Ingram's avatar. That's an interactive novel. Jonathan Ingram himself. That's an interactive novel character.

I think this thread should be, "I hate this popular game, BECAUSE."

Quoting myself because you didn't answer me, and I still don't believe you've played more than 15 minutes of the original Baldur's Gate. Or did you just watch videos and assume?

[Skykid]

^Sorry drauch, not meaning to cut in. Hopefully you'll get the answer you're after.

After assertively being instructed that my opinion of MGS > MGS2 is the minority, and that MGS2 > MGS is a far more popular sentiment than liking RE5, and that sentiment is also the general consensus amongst fans, I admit to feeling a little perplexed.

So I went looking for some evidence of the general consensus, and found the following:

http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/best- ... 250123817/

Result:

1: MGS3
2: MGS
3: MGS4
4: MGS2

http://www.gamesradar.com/best-metal-gear-solid-games/

1: MGS3
2: MGS
3: MGS4
4: MGS Peace Walker
5: MGS2

http://forums.gametrailers.com/viewtopi ... &t=1009295

1: MGS3
2: MGS4
3: MGS
4: MGS2

http://uk.gamespot.com/forums/topic/27524279

1: MGS3
2: MGS4
3: MGS
4: MGS2

http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/681794-m ... s/63933346

1: MGS3
2: MGS
3: MGS4
4: MGS2

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/ ... Solid-game

1: MGS3
2: MGS
3: MGS2
4: MGS4

http://ry-spirit.deviantart.com/journal/poll/604608/

1: MGS3
2: MGS
3: MGS4
4: MGS2

And then interestingly, I found a poll for 'Least Favourite MGS game':

http://www.muselive.com/forums.php?m=posts&q=53014

No prizes for guessing.

There are quite a lot of these, but I think that's enough to offer me a little vindication in this 2 page, multi-thread debacle.