The Battle Bar, Our Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy

Originally posted by NemeBro
No it wouldn't be.

Are you retarded?

Yes it is.

No it isn't. That you think you can say that as an absolute fact only proves you're a biased assclown.

What do you call:

graphics - best technical graphics for a console game at the time of release, for every single main entry release, and best technical graphics for handheld game, at the time of release of the two spinoffs (fact, not opinion)

music - Harry Gregson Williams as composer (fact, not opinion)

Gameplay - invented stealth genre, innovates with every single release (fact, not opinion)

Story - unique technologies and charactarisation, setting and plot ideas (fact, not opinion, I can expand if needed)

Story-Gameplay integration - Psycho Mantis scene, The Sorrow Battle, The End workaround, Shadow Moses recreation in MGS4 (fact, not opinion)

if not 10/10 calibre. And that is all fact, I did not list anything that is opinion but also clearly the case.

And btw: The most criticised element of MGS4 was its storyline. This is also true of the clownshoe plot of 2.

There is a difference between a story being critisiced for having little to offer (eg... resident evil 6) and a story that is critisiced within the confines of greatness, for example the Matrix sequels (good videogame example would be mas effect 3 ending). You really think because people b1tch about how bad the matrix sequels are that it has a worse story than something like... The Avengers.

Same exact thing with MGS. It is truly great, it has established itself to be great, it has unique ideas, unique characters, veyr detailed storyline, very dramatic storyline with great likable characers, very focused cinematic approach etc... and the people who criticise it for the most aprt is people who didnt like the direction the series went in (for example the use of nanomachine sin mgs4, or raiden beng protagonist in mgs2), people whos first mgs game was mgs4 and they werent able to understand the dtory, or noob gamers who werent interested in its long story approach.

If you really think that just because MGS4's story has a lot of vocal criticists that the story isn;t great, then you is the assclown. It gets that criticism largel because it does great things.

I speak against you because I am a fan of MGS, and you give people who like the series a bad name, and make it look bad.

Skyrim is certainly better, and there are other superior games as well.

Fallout for example.

lol sure thing apricot bingo wings.

Oh, you mean like, looking at Raging Raven's ass? That was probably the best part about that scene.

The B&B corps were a joke, everything about them was so stupid so as to be hilarious.

How so?

All of that is impressive on Kojima's part, but means absolutely nothing to the quality of the game itself.

I am a fan of both, of Kojima and the game, and both are equally impressive.

Mortis. You need to stop riding Snake's d**k dude. Honestly. IT'S NOT THE BEST GAME SERIES OF ALL TIME.

Note: I am only doing this because others brought it up.

But the reason I do is because it is really disrespectful to even think that it isnt the best. Like, it is so far beyond anything else its ridiculous and anybody who isnt a biased fanboy and elarns to judge a game by all its merits will see that it has by far the most to offer out of any game series.

It is absolutely the best game series of all time, if you look at stuff like GTA, Mario, Zelda, Portal, they all have the gameplay, but not the storyline, you look at Bioware's RPGS, they have the storyline (though in story MGS is in a league of its own anyway) but not the gameplay. MGS is arguably the greatest in either catagory, this is not just me who is syaing this, this is a commonly held point of view, and it is a fact that it ha shad the best technical graphics at the time of each release, from the veyr original mgs1 all the way to 4, and the fact that one of the top 10 movie composers compsoes the soundtrack should tell you that the soundtrack is of a very high calibre.

As you is the one proclaiming that MGS is not the best, what is better may I ask UltimateAnomaly? Even if we go by your gaming tastes, I think you mentioned RTS games, well most of those have terrible or non-existent storylines, so can you not admit that something like that at least on paper has less to offer than something like MGS, which is great in all castagories?

And Nemebro you should really shut up about people not liking the storyline and refer to what I said in my last post, things ranging from the unimportant to the great can all be heavily criticised and have love/hate effect or whatever you want to call it so that it is in no way evidence that the story itself is anything less than spectacular, simply that it attracts divisive opinions and idiotic haters. For people who were with the series from the beginning, went into the game knowing and wanting the big cutscenes, and having an openmind about certain choices made about games direction (e.g. fans bitching about raiden being the protagonist in mgs2, when he was a perfectly fine protagonist and there is nothing wrong with changing a protagonist for the second game), the storyline is among the best litereally ever told, for me personally its only rivals would be things like the The Dark Tower, The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, and some manga like 20th Century Boys and Monster.

Persona has storyline and gameplay punk. As well as a far superior cast and a better soundtrack.

As Neme-sama would say: Get on my level. estahuh

PS: I have seen and played MGS's gamplay. Anyone who claims its the best is a screaming poop-flinger.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Persona has storyline and gameplay punk. As well as a far superior cast and a better soundtrack.

lol. Nothing has better cast than MGS. The heroes, the villains, the side villains, the suppoorting characters, virtually every single character in MGS has a detailed and interested backstory (the exceptions being some of the Cobras in MGS3).

As I said I really like the look of Persona, and I think it has a great art style and cool soundtrack from what I've seen that gives it a lot of style. That being said from what I have seen and heard (and I briefly played a bit of both) the gameplay is nothing extraordinary, in that it isn't particularly innovative and I don't think anybody ever said it was literally, 10/10 level fun. Like, there is little in its turn based rog systen to sperate it from oitheer rpgs.

As Neme-sama would say: Get on my level. estahuh

PS: I have seen and played MGS's gamplay. Anyone who claims its the best is a screaming poop-flinger.

Which ones have you played out of curiosity? As I said it invented an entire genre and innovates on it each installment, has very good controls and cameras and level design, and a shit ton of weapons/gadgets, ways around scenarios that range from the violent to the stealthy in a variety of ways, and so many different scenarios and gameplay styles throughout the campagin that keeps it constantly fresh. Like, if you play a Halo campaign for example, you're basically playing the same type of game the entire time, mixing it up with different weapns, vehicles, enemies maybe. But with MGS you will have the choice of taking a stealth route of a "run and gun" approach one moment, and then in a bomb disposal scenario in the next, followed by a trakcing mission in the jungle, mixed in with developing your own base and regulaitng your own mercenary firm, to escrot missions involving sitting at the turret of a scripted driving scenaerio, or protecting someone frpom a distance using a sniper rifle to swipe off any potential enemies... etc (not even mentioning the numerous awesome boss battles). Like, that's probably one of my favorite things about the series, the campaigns are always extremely fresh because of how varied they are and how much stuff there is to do, not to mention the awesome cutscenes that drive you forward, being able to talk to your comrades via codec.

So yes, between how innovative the gameplay is, how varied and grand the campaign is, and the high production values and technical quality of things like the contorls and cameras and gun mechanics, it absoltuely is one of the best series of all time on purely a gameplay basis. In the same league as stuff like Mario, Zelda, Portal, GTA.

Originally posted by TheOneOfMortis
lol. Nothing has better cast than MGS. The heroes, the villains, the side villains, the suppoorting characters, virtually every single character in MGS has a detailed and interested backstory (the exceptions being some of the Cobras in MGS3).

As I said I really like the look of Persona, and I think it has a great art style and cool soundtrack from what I've seen that gives it a lot of style. That being said from what I have seen and heard (and I briefly played a bit of both) the gameplay is nothing extraordinary, in that it isn't particularly innovative and I don't think anybody ever said it was literally, 10/10 level fun. Like, there is little in its turn based rog systen to sperate it from oitheer rpgs.

Nothing except Persona perhaps. Persona is a game where literally 50% is character introspection and development. There are a few asshats like the Moon guy from Persona 3 (what an incredible douche) but they mostly are extremely well-written and intriguing.

The gameplay is the best turn-based system I've personally played and has gotten me addicted to playing like few games have. And there is quite a bit separating it from other turn-based systems imo.

Originally posted by TheOneOfMortis
Which ones have you played out of curiosity? As I said it invented an entire genre and innovates on it each installment, has very good controls and cameras and level design, and a shit ton of weapons/gadgets, ways around scenarios that range from the violent to the stealthy in a variety of ways, and so many different scenarios and gameplay styles throughout the campagin that keeps it constantly fresh. Like, if you play a Halo campaign for example, you're basically playing the same type of game the entire time, mixing it up with different weapns, vehicles, enemies maybe. But with MGS you will have the choice of taking a stealth route of a "run and gun" approach one moment, and then in a bomb disposal scenario in the next, followed by a trakcing mission in the jungle, mixed in with developing your own base and regulaitng your own mercenary firm, to escrot missions involving sitting at the turret of a scripted driving scenaerio, or protecting someone frpom a distance using a sniper rifle to swipe off any potential enemies... etc (not even mentioning the numerous awesome boss battles). Like, that's probably one of my favorite things about the series, the campaigns are always extremely fresh because of how varied they are and how much stuff there is to do, not to mention the awesome cutscenes that drive you forward, being able to talk to your comrades via codec.

So yes, between how innovative the gameplay is, how varied and grand the campaign is, and the high production values and technical quality of things like the contorls and cameras and gun mechanics, it absoltuely is one of the best series of all time on purely a gameplay basis. In the same league as stuff like Mario, Zelda, Portal, GTA.

4, only for a bit. It was not that great.

Production values do not impress me. Shiny shit is still shit. Shiny gold is still gold. I don't care how shiny something is. The Persona's are PS2 games and they still look great and are my favourite games of all time.

Innovating or creating a genre does not make you the best in that genre. Dues Ex: HR has better stealth than MGS. Hell, so do the Thief games.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Nothing except Persona perhaps. Persona is a game where literally 50% is character introspection and development. There are a few asshats like the Moon guy from Persona 3 (what an incredible douche) but they mostly are extremely well-written and intriguing.

Well I have not played Persona, and you have not played MGS so not much can be said, all I would say is that MGS's chaarcters are so good that I just wouldnt expect anything else to come close, nothing else isve played has, even stuff like mass effect which ius a very charscter driven game, but maybe you feel the same way about persona.

The gameplay is the best turn-based system I've personally played and has gotten me addicted to playing like few games have. And there is quite a bit separating it from other turn-based systems imo.

OK but can you at least admit that the gameplay liekly isnt mindblwoingly awesome? To compare the two, Persona seems to have a fixed gameplay system throughout the game (mixed in with story), a system that you say is different from other turn based systems but have not identified as being particualrly innovative or different. MGS, as I said, makes the campaign so fresh because it mixed up so many different styles and scenarios of gameplay (more so than anything else I can think of), is incredibly innovative (ivented an entire genre bro!) and its high production values do mean that things like the controls and mechanincs are all expertly hones. So can you at least admit on papre that in something like gameplay, MGS has a lot more to offer.

4, only for a bit. It was not that great.

MGS is not a series you can just step halfway through and be able to get the most out of. You should really have started with 1. Anyways, you say you only played a bit, and I'm guessing maybe youd idnt invest that much time or patience into the game? If you had you would have soon been able to recruit a PMC to your cause, and work them against each other to find safe passage throughout the city (or alternatively just ruin and gun the ashit out of everyone), then follow someone through a city at night under serveillance, having to stay close at all times (otherwise you lsoe him) but also whilst evading cameras, petrols, where being spotted just once would alert your rpesence, to later being able to ride your own Metal Gear mech and go up against a RAY, to being stationed in a jungle and have to scan the ground for footprints and study the soil dispersions to track down someone. Point being, you didn;t exprience a 10th of what the game has to offer.

Production values do not impress me. Shiny shit is still shit. Shiny gold is still gold. I don't care how shiny something is.

That's just you then maybe, it does impress a lot of people, it proababyl impresses you and you just don't know it.

The Persona's are PS2 games and they still look great and are my favourite games of all time.

They do have greta art styl.e

Innovating or creating a genre does not make you the best in that genre.

Sure but when talking about the greatness of a series oyu look to things like how influential and innovative it was.

Dues Ex: HR has better stealth than MGS. Hell, so do the Thief games.

Not even close. MGS has a bit of a different approach to stealth anyway, it is not overly realistic and sometimes takes more of a humerous approach than anything. But stuff like using the magazines ot distract soldiers, using the cardboard box to sneak around the place, the camoflage system in MGS3, the following sequenc ein MGS4 I mentioned, are all some of the best and funnest moments I've ever had in gaming, and I;m not alone in feeling that. Not to mention, the level design is so expertly done that if you do take the stealth approach it really i just that prefect balance of fun and challenging. If you look at MGS1 for example, released in 1998, you can still play it today and have a lot of fun even with just the stealth gameplay, and thats because the level and scenario design is just so damn good and engaging. Deus Ex: HR I have not played but it was not acclime dfor its gameplay, I havent heard anything to indicate that its stealth based gamepolay even approaches the master of the genre, and as youve barely even played just a single mgs game i dont think youre qualified to make that opoion.

It's also worth pointing out that there is more to Persona's gameplay than merely the battle system. Persona is particularly ingenius in the way that it utilizes the Social Link system. It's bizarrely effective how they connect the dating sim aspect of Social Links to the regular battles. The stronger your social links the more powerful Persona's you can create, which means that you need to forge friendships with others and pursue the character introspection that I alluded to. Persona 4 is particularly good at this as it makes the player balance training your social links with your progress through the dungeons, increasing the tactical and strategic element of the game to outside of battles. The system is a stunningly effective merge of the story and the gameplay, which is something that few games ever have gotten right, and adds so much to both aspects, as well as highly strengthening the key themes of the series and creating some of the best characters in gaming.

There are also other aspects to gameplay, such as training your protagonist etc.

That does sound like a pretty cool system. As I said I am actually looking forward to playing the games myself so I don't really want to be looking to criticise them, but you can at least admit that, on paper, the gameplay of both is not really comparable yes?

Also, question for Nephthys: Would you ever consider having an open mind, being aware that you're not just playing a game but entering a story, and playing the entire series from mgs1 - 4? Anybody who doesn't is really missing out imo, it honestly has the visuals and production of a great epic/action movie, the detail and ideas and sotrytelling of a novel, and the flair and style and quirkiness of an anime.

No. MGS doesn't interest me in the slightest.

Well you are missing out on the greatest game series of all time and being a bit narrow minded in that case.

I've already seen the storyline through hiimdaisy and it doesn't sound like anything I'd be interested in. Government conspiracies, stupid sci-fi cliches and something about a country for soldiers? Lol, pass.

Also a guy possessing someone through their transplanted arm? What the christ was Kojima smoking?

Games are meant to be played, not watched bro. Even something cutscene heavy like MGS, relies on the precise balance of the scenarios established through gameplay and storyline. It would be similar to watching ten minutes of a movie every day for a week. You're still watching it all, and in order, but it was meant to be seen all at once and so the timing will be completely wrong. Same thing here, those cutscenes are much more powerful when they take place after the gameplay segments. Not to mention you'll be missing out on all the itneractivity, like the Psycho mantis scene, the Codec calls etc.. plus as I said it's a great story but also a great gameplay.

Sci Fi cliches? MGS is one of the most original works of Sci Fi ever. The concept for Metal Gear as a weapon and how it nullifies nuclear deterrence theory is one of the most original sci fi ideas ive ever come across. Also if you properly experienced the story of MGS3 and witnessed the Boss's story, you'd probably take Big Boss' ideal for Outer Heaven a lot more seriously.

But ok, maybe you're not a fan of the genre thta the story take splace in (though it sounds to me like you actually want to dislike it, personally). I sitll maintain however that you would find the gameplay a lot of fun anyway.

But really, I haven't even touched upon a lot of the really ntoable aspects of the game. For one, its actually a very educational experience. Look at this for example, tis a briefing file from Peace Walker abou t peace constitutions, and it is entirely real, accurate and everything, but you learn about it in history class, i have one word for you; boooooring. You learn about it playing MGS, from one of the coolest guys ever? AWESOME! MGS actually makes a lot of the background history extremely interesting to learn about, through the characters who are talking about it, and how it relates to evenets taking place int he story. here is a video for example (watch it even if you have no itnerest in MGS, you'll learn something lol):

YouTube video

Hideo Kojima has stated that he wants to use his games partially as a vheicle to educate people about certain things and he does it expertly by making it an interesting topic... and he covers it veyre xtensivlely, covering the facts, and some of the debate around the topic.

I'm just saying that I'm aware of the story, and it doesn't appeal to me.

Metal Gears are giant robots. Excuse me if I don't agree that the most overused element in japanese media is too original.

And let me guess, it's something retarded about how soldiers need to fight or how awesome war is so they create a country to perpetuate war or something. Because thats exactly the stupid romanticisation of war that most stupid people buy into or think is deep when they've never been in a fight before.

Yeah, this Big Boss guy sounds like a total lunatic. I read some of his stuff.

NOW SWIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITCH

TO KRYPONIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITE

Originally posted by Nephthys
I'm just saying that I'm aware of the story, and it doesn't appeal to me.

And how was the story presented to you? Did you even see cutscenes?

Metal Gears are giant robots. Excuse me if I don't agree that the most overused element in japanese media is too original.

Sctually wahat was original about Metal Gear was its impilcations on the nuclear power struggle. For one, as a bipedal tank, it could access terrain (such as mountains, marshlands etc) not available to regular tanks, compeltely rewriting the tactical nuclear map. More importantly, as it used rail gun technology, it could launch a nuke without the need or a rocket propulsion system, making it udnetecable on radar, which compeltely nullifies NDT, as NDT relies on being able to detect where the nuke is coming from, and being able to respond to it before it lands. But because Metal Gear used rail gun technology, it could launch a nuke on the enemy without them being able to detect where the nuke was coming from, and so not even knowing who their enemy is (and thus not being able to retaliate), and they wouldnt even know that a nuke had been launched until they were already hit byt it, and because of the bipedal locomotion Metal Gear could launch the attack form anywhere. It was also equipped with an arsenal that made it effective in close range combat, making it very difficult to overcome in close quartyers.

This was further explored with one of tis prototypes in Peace Walker. Instead what was being epxlroed here was whether a sane, rational, and human individual would have the heart to launch a retaliatory strike, if they knew it could effectively mean the end of the human race. Even if it meant they were being wiped out, would they have it in them to wipe out the enemy in retaliation, effectively causing genocide? Not to mention in cases with peace treaties where other countries were being protected by a country with a nuclear deterrence, would that country always follow through with the retalitaion, when its not even to avenge themseolevs but another nation entirely, if it could mean further retaliation on themselves? Well Peace Walker's answer to this was by equipping the weapon with an A.I. that was programmed to, and given full authority, to always retaliate in the case of an attack, no exceptions, even if it meant th eend of the human race. As a cold, inhuman A.I., it would not eb held back by human emotion but would simply operate off of cold, hard logic. Thus, entrusting such a decision to an A.I. with no way of overriding it, was a way to strengthen the diea behind nuclear deterrence, and remove some of the hypothetical nature away from it. And the government themselves were actually planning on launching a nuke on themselves secretly, passing it off as an enemy attack, to prove to the world that retaliation was assured with Peace Walker. Another dimension of Peace Walker was that as a bipedal tank, it was also equipped with anhydrogen bomb, a bomb far too powerful to be released by any kind of rocket or tank, and a self destruction system, making it by far the mostr powerful mobile weapon of mass destruction on earthg.

There was also another weapon known as the Shagohod that was unrelated to Metal Gear but actually a weapon being created by another department, and it was unique in that it answered the problem of what was capable of housing ICBMs, by being equipped with theatre- to intermediate-range nuclear weapon, but by using rocket propulsiona nd accelerating the nuclear paltform itself, it as able to enhance the range of the missiles to ICBM levels, essentially achiving the range but without having to face the difficulties in storage and assembly not to mention immobility of ICBMs.

So as you can see the Metal Gear franchise has cinceived of numerous weapons/weapons tehcnologies that are unique in nature, not just Metal Gear, and it is far more than just a giant robot. So in many ways it stands as an inventive peice of science fiction and war fiction.

And let me guess, it's something retarded about how soldiers need to fight or how awesome war is so they create a country to perpetuate war or something. Because thats exactly the stupid romanticisation of war that most stupid people buy into or think is deep when they've never been in a fight before.

You can make it sound stupid all you want but if you properly experienced the story you would see that it was all rpesented in a pretty meaningful way.

Plus you're not entirely correct either for the record.

It's not about perpetuating war. War would always exist in one form or another. And as long as war existed, they would be needed. And what they understaod is that enemies only ever existed in relative terms, today's friends can become tomorrows enemies only to become friends again, and that roles change with the political climate. And so they only had one constant enemy, and that was "the times". And so, after having been betrayed by their nations, they became soldiers without borders, an army without a nation, determined to fight the times by remaining relevant and never being relegated to obscurity by it. And with Metal Gear Zeke (the first emtal gear) as their own nuclear deterrence, they ebcame a valuable commodity in the enw landscape of war. So they became their very own nation, a nation without politics or governments, without any ideals but one: to never be swollowed by the times. And as war was the only thing they were good at, and as people like them would be eneded by nations or groups without their own strong militaries or nuclear arsenals, they found their new place in this world as Outer heaven.

Seriously, wtfvckton of text.

I've never known anyone to have such an overzealous boner for a f*cking video-game.