Reply With QuoteWhile I should've stopped at 2, I've learned to not get hyped about MGS games after Snake Eater. Nice presentation with the occasional nice story, but coupled with mediocre to bad gameplay.
Surprised not to find any comments on the Metal Gear online beta.
Finally got it installed and played a bit tonight. My reaction was a strong "meh?"
Weird controls, dull combat, good but overly monochromatic graphics. It was okay, but certainly didn't hold a candle gameplay-wise to Frontlines. After Frontlines and the Battlefield beta, MGS4's multiplayer seemed simplistic and uninteresting.
Though I do like the ability to disguise yourself as a box.
I'm going to have to read some previews of the single-player, I guess. I can't see getting hooked on the multiplayer.
While I should've stopped at 2, I've learned to not get hyped about MGS games after Snake Eater. Nice presentation with the occasional nice story, but coupled with mediocre to bad gameplay.
It's really just a refinement of the online play of Substinence and MPO, it gets gradually less clunky with each iteration, but it seems to be baby steps each time for MGS online. I really hope this Konami ID stuff is purely for the Beta, as if this comes out with no friends list integration people are going to lose interest very quickly.
It's not as refined or open as Warhawk, and does seem a good deal more lag prone, which the earlier games have been too.
Yeah, I played a fair bit of Subsistence and MPO, so the learning curve was pretty short for me.
It's still a "if you're a fan, cool, but otherwise..." sort of experience.
My favorite little touch/moment was when I used the stun/taser mode of the knife on someone who was hiding in a cardboard box, and it lit him (and then me) on fire.
The big draw is character customization. That's really about it.
Just like MGS3, I am having trouble with CQC. It is extremely poorly explained, pretty much just "hold R1 to grab someone and activate CQC". It is driving me crazy, because it really does seem like this is one thing which sets the game apart but Konami seems to think we all have some sort of innate understanding of it or how to pull it off.
The worst part is if you fuck up, which you will in MGS3, you get like 8 guys on you and you spend 10 minutes hiding. I love MGS3, it can just be very irritating.Originally Posted by jfletch
Also, I remember when the first talked about MGO Konami talked about a chain of command system where one character would be a named character and would act as a commander of sorts, or something. Is this present in the beta.
The better CQC stuff unlocks as you level up skills (both CQC and others). For example, the throat slash is when you equip CQC1 and Knife3.
I haven't seen the named character stuff in the beta, but I think it's supposed to be present in the final release.
So does Metal Gear Online come with MGS4 or is a separate game or what?
I saw video of a match (don't know if it was the beta, thought) and it looked pretty bad. The level looked kind of cool - it was a bombed town, and it was pretty complex, a lot of buildings and alleys. But the shooting looked broken. The player had a sniper rifle and he was firing at an unmoving target in the head, and I kept thinking "Oh, killshot! No, wait, this one is. This one?" He put eight bullets into this guy's head and the guy walked away. This was with a bolt-action sniper rifle, one that makes you watch the reload animation and zooms you out, a weapon that should probably have a one hit kill. Something is really off there.
I was never a big MGS fan, but I really liked Subsistence, and I'm still very much looking forward to MGS4.
The real problem with MGO as far as I can see from my limited playtime with it is that it makes too many compromises with the controls. Ryan Payton has mentioned that Japanese gamers are often unused to using two analog sticks, and prefer using autoaim. This is in sharp contract to Western gamers, many of whom are very good with the two sticks. The MGO control scheme is a compromise which ultimately feels clunky and unintuitive. As a Western gamer, I'd prefer it if they just removed the autoaim completely and used the newfound leeway to remap the controls, especially for CQC.
I really liked the freedom in the game, however; the incredible range of items, weapons and tactics available is overwhelming in a good way. I do think that this game would get better with experience, much of which would likely come from MGS4 when MGO 1.0 comes out.
They just released a new map, new gameplay mode and the Snake character (plus the MKII robot) to the MGO beta. I haven't tried it yet but people really seem to be enjoying the new additions.
I think that the online game would be better suited to the Last Man Standing CS style matches then the infinite respawning types. It would slow down the game a bit which is how the controls seem to be set for.
I love how you can do neat moves like lay down on your back and fire or throw grenades, but they need to give me a complete list of moves that I can do from the get go (maybe it's in the online manual).
Last edited by Jazar; 04-28-2008 at 12:07 PM.
Im in it and I am really enjoying it. Its NOT for those who are expecting a COD4 type experience.
What it is, is alot more like Ghost Recon online, mixed with the RPG style of COD4 and customization of RB6.
Its alot slower paced, the team based objection games are going to be the star of this show. It forces people to hunker down and hold area's and protect people. Forcing more people to use the cover mechanics of the game.
The CQC is somewhat cumbersome to learn at least right now for me. It does need a somewhat tighting of the controls but the game is quite fun.
With some better documentation, I might have more fun.
The single-player version is going to be worth buying the game for, though, right?
Posting Permissions