Post Reply 
Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
06-25-2014, 09:49 AM
Post: #16
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
I prefer the long adventure.

But the Peace Walker model was kinda fitting too in terms of Big Boss taking charge. That said I'm looking forward to TPP.
QUOTE
06-26-2014, 09:29 PM
Post: #17
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
Hmmm, this is hard for me to put into words. So for example, I'm planning on playing Phantom Pain how I imagine Big Boss would actually likely do things at this point in his life. Pretty much, a stealthy killer. Usually I like to play these games killing as few people as I can even on my first playthrough, like how the first time through Snake Eater I only killed two or three people I think, and here in Peace Walker, I only kill people really in those missions that are a big fight, then I go back and play it and try to knock them out instead. It just feels different having it be a series of missions instead of being rated for my overall playing. I just don't feel so much that I am Big Boss this time.
I almost think of it this way. Think if you took MGS2 and divided it up in a mission format. First mission would be I suppose Snake infiltrating the tanker and ending with him seeing Olga. It ends when she says "But no one gets lucky twice!" and then it says "To be continued", then there's a mission with you fighting her, then the next mission goes to the time when Ocelot steals Ray. Next mission is Raiden up to I guess when he meets Stillman, then the next is the bomb disposal, then the Fortune fight, etc.
I just think you feel more like you actually are Snake or Raiden when you're forced to stay with them and live with the consequences of your choices throughout the game (we don't really deal with consequences so much within those games themselves, but sometimes they do interesting things. GW saying "You sure get a thrill out of slaughtering the enemy." and the fight with The Sorrow for example. Psycho Mantis as well), while with the mission format, I just don't feel like I really am Big Boss so much. It feels more like I'm doing a series of VR Missions.
I like how GZ had a longer mission with Chico and Paz, and with checkpoints, and so I guess TPP will do it like that, but these are just my thoughts on this right now.
QUOTE
06-30-2014, 10:36 PM
Post: #18
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
A lot of Peace Walker can be looked at as one continuous mission, divided into multiple episodes. The way I've always looked at it is that when you're managing Mother Base, you're playing from Kaz' perspective. Like he's running Mother Base while Snake's out on his mission and recruiting soldiers. And playing the extra ops as anybody besides Snake further adds to the immersion for me, as it creates the illusion of MSF being an army engaged in multiple concurrent missions.

If you look at it from the perspective of a TV show, for example, it works similarly to having multiple scenes making up the plot. It's certainly different than any of the other games, but it would only work for A Bog Boss game.

---
Broken bones require different treatment than an infection does
---
PSN ID: DeadByDagger
Gamertag: xDeadByDaggerx
QUOTE
07-03-2014, 12:11 PM
Post: #19
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
Missions fucking stink

Suck my fat one you cheap dime store hood
QUOTE
07-03-2014, 06:36 PM
Post: #20
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
One thing I do like about it is that it reminds me of those fun VR Missions. It's a bit more free with the gameplay, letting you do dumb stuff like shoot Fulton balloons that are taking up soldiers or fighting weird monsters. Like I said before, I just wish that this game was just the beginning of a new series instead of being shoehorned into Metal Gear.
QUOTE
07-03-2014, 07:00 PM
Post: #21
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
It was a game for a portable console so the multiple missions design made sense.
QUOTE
07-03-2014, 07:15 PM
Post: #22
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
But in Ghost Babel, it's separated by levels, yet it's still got a consistent story. You can choose to go into any chapter you want, but the main story mode just goes level by level, and still feels like a consistent story. I kind of get taken out of it when it shows a mission end with a tank showing up, and then I can just go screw around at Mother Base and do other missions and go to the next mission with the tank.
But I also understand that it helps you feel like you're Big Boss in charge of this place, I totally agree, and since it was originally for a portable system, I also understand that. I'm just worried about how The Phantom Pain will feel. I think a game like that would work better if it was a consistent story, with Big Boss returning to Mother Base to screw around after doing a mission, but not being able to just go back to that mission.
QUOTE
07-03-2014, 10:06 PM
Post: #23
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
The thing in PW where missions end right before a boss battle was to facilitate CO-OPs. If MGSV:TPP is single-player then that won't be necessary.

You know what would be cool in TPP, though? Every MGS since 2 has given you the option to tranq bosses, so what if in TPP any human bosses that you tranq can then be recruited into the Diamond Dogs? That would be pretty cool and a good reason to avoid killing bosses.

Suzaku Wrote:Hah. As if you'd enjoy a new Metal Gear game in the first place, you bitchy, impossible-to-please coprophiliac, you.
Pocket Abortions' Quality Blog for Children
QUOTE
07-03-2014, 10:15 PM (This post was last modified: 07-03-2014 10:20 PM by Smiley.)
Post: #24
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
It depends on the game. Recently, it is refreshing to have games with "chapters" or "missions" that allow me to tackle them at a pace in my day-to-day schedule. But as a kid I had a lot more time devoted to the "long adventure" and I still have time set aside for those longer play throughs, but just not as often as I would like.

MGS games took their narrative into different perspectives. MGS1 felt like the long adventure. MGS2 introduced a short Snake chapter on the tanker and the main Raiden game on Big Shell. MGS3 gave us a virtuous mission before we tackled Operation Snake Eater. MGS4 had its five Act gameplay structure. Even Rising has broken down into segments on its own.

For a game like Peace Walker I enjoyed the mission structure a lot more because it was a portable game. However, I don't believe every Metal Gear iteration needs to follow this formula, and I found it interesting how MGSV looks to do so rather than traditional open world games having all the main and side missions taking place in the large map you explore. I guess the game design will have its reasons for sticking with missions (if Phantom Pain follows Ground Zeroes that way), but I do like that we will get to explore Mother Base unlike Peace Walker and Ground Zeroes.

[Image: iEvhnuZkVdiu5.gif]
QUOTE
07-04-2014, 03:15 AM
Post: #25
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
Metal Gear feels smaller and less significant in terms of scale of the story when it's broken up into segments and cut-off sections. You felt more isolated and helpless in MGS1 because you were just stuck there in that ever-expanding facility. MGS3/4/PW didn't have that because you were constantly progressing and never had to look back. But that said, MGS3 SHOULD have been almost open-world or sandbox, and MGS4 just sucked.

CANUCKLEHEAD
He's just a prick

I just saved 100% on stress by switching to Not Giving A Fuck
QUOTE
07-04-2014, 02:04 PM
Post: #26
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
(07-03-2014 10:06 PM)Venom Animal Wrote:  The thing in PW where missions end right before a boss battle was to facilitate CO-OPs. If MGSV:TPP is single-player then that won't be necessary.

You know what would be cool in TPP, though? Every MGS since 2 has given you the option to tranq bosses, so what if in TPP any human bosses that you tranq can then be recruited into the Diamond Dogs? That would be pretty cool and a good reason to avoid killing bosses.
I don't even think it was just because of Co-Ops, but also because of the inventory system. If you're carrying tranq guns and then had to fight the Cocoon in the same mission, you're fucked. It made every mission a little more strategic since you had to plan out your equipment instead of having everything at your disposal.

Anyway, recruiting bosses? Let's take it a step further. Any bosses you recruit become playable for side-ops/mission re-plays (like Peace Walker) and you can make use of their special stats. Let's use Quiet and Ocelot as examples.

Quiet
+ Camo index 100% while natural octocamo is engaged
+ More accurate with sniper rifle/ aim is more steady
+ Higher agility, allowing more acrobatic CQC (like in e3 trailer)
+ Makes no noise while running due to outfit
- Natural Octocamo will lower psyche quicker, making her slower and more easily hurt
- Other weapon skills are shit-tier
- While not in camo-mode, camo index is very low

Ocelot
+ With revolvers, can use a mark and execute ability to rapidly kill enemies
+ Ability to disarm enemies by shooting hand
+ Any soldiers captured by Ocelot will not be hostile for any period of time
+ Can obtain more information than others while interrogating enemies
- Louder movement because of spurs and whatnot
- All weapons besides revolvers are incredibly inaccurate
- Movement speed is slow

It would be interesting to see special characters in more than just a support-staff role in a way that doesn't take away from the story.

---
Broken bones require different treatment than an infection does
---
PSN ID: DeadByDagger
Gamertag: xDeadByDaggerx
QUOTE
07-04-2014, 03:32 PM
Post: #27
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
(07-04-2014 02:04 PM)Daggamuffin Wrote:  Quiet
natural octocamo

Hahahaha what the fuck. Is this an actual theory or what

Benny Harvey, RIP
QUOTE
07-04-2014, 09:01 PM
Post: #28
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
(07-04-2014 02:04 PM)Daggamuffin Wrote:  
(07-03-2014 10:06 PM)Venom Animal Wrote:  The thing in PW where missions end right before a boss battle was to facilitate CO-OPs. If MGSV:TPP is single-player then that won't be necessary.

You know what would be cool in TPP, though? Every MGS since 2 has given you the option to tranq bosses, so what if in TPP any human bosses that you tranq can then be recruited into the Diamond Dogs? That would be pretty cool and a good reason to avoid killing bosses.
I don't even think it was just because of Co-Ops, but also because of the inventory system. If you're carrying tranq guns and then had to fight the Cocoon in the same mission, you're fucked. It made every mission a little more strategic since you had to plan out your equipment instead of having everything at your disposal.

Anyway, recruiting bosses? Let's take it a step further. Any bosses you recruit become playable for side-ops/mission re-plays (like Peace Walker) and you can make use of their special stats. Let's use Quiet and Ocelot as examples.

Quiet
+ Camo index 100% while natural octocamo is engaged
+ More accurate with sniper rifle/ aim is more steady
+ Higher agility, allowing more acrobatic CQC (like in e3 trailer)
+ Makes no noise while running due to outfit
- Natural Octocamo will lower psyche quicker, making her slower and more easily hurt
- Other weapon skills are shit-tier
- While not in camo-mode, camo index is very low

Ocelot
+ With revolvers, can use a mark and execute ability to rapidly kill enemies
+ Ability to disarm enemies by shooting hand
+ Any soldiers captured by Ocelot will not be hostile for any period of time
+ Can obtain more information than others while interrogating enemies
- Louder movement because of spurs and whatnot
- All weapons besides revolvers are incredibly inaccurate
- Movement speed is slow

It would be interesting to see special characters in more than just a support-staff role in a way that doesn't take away from the story.

I was thinking this sort of thing also actually. And I would argue that Ocelot should be good with all handguns, not just revolvers.
QUOTE
07-04-2014, 09:38 PM
Post: #29
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
(07-04-2014 03:32 PM)sput Wrote:  
(07-04-2014 02:04 PM)Daggamuffin Wrote:  Quiet
natural octocamo

Hahahaha what the fuck. Is this an actual theory or what
[Image: mgs-v-part-2-9.gif]
That's not a shadow on her face. The best explanation so far is that she might have some sort of natural camouflage capability, but who knows? I just went with that as a possibility.

'Venom Animal Wrote:And I would argue that Ocelot should be good with all handguns, not just revolvers.
Yeah, I originally had that typed out but decided against it when I thought of the disarming as a way of subduing enemies without tranquilizing them, since that seems against Ocelot's nature. Either way would be fine with me though.

---
Broken bones require different treatment than an infection does
---
PSN ID: DeadByDagger
Gamertag: xDeadByDaggerx
QUOTE
07-05-2014, 12:35 AM (This post was last modified: 07-05-2014 12:41 AM by jdnation.)
Post: #30
RE: Mission based gameplay vs. the long adventure
(07-04-2014 09:38 PM)Daggamuffin Wrote:  [Image: mgs-v-part-2-9.gif]
That's not a shadow on her face. The best explanation so far is that she might have some sort of natural camouflage capability, but who knows? I just went with that as a possibility.

I have a theory here as to what might be up with quiet...
http://thesnakesoup.org/forums/Thread-Qu...-chamelion

Quiet's appearing/disappearing trick also fits in with my theory here.
http://thesnakesoup.org/forums/Thread-The-Phantom-Logo
QUOTE
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)