Like most fans of MGS*, I was excited for Ground Zeroes, regardless of any length issues, to see the next bit of story. While enough can be gathered on that front from the main mission, audio logs/journals, etc., something about the gameplay did not grab me. After consuming said audio logs and main mission I put the game aside and didn't return to it until now. I played half of the next mission and put it down again. It just didn't feel right and I finally put my finger on it...wanted to see if others feel the same:
All previous MGS games have been a series of interconnected rooms/levels that you are free to walk through (sort of metroidvania style), whether it's the Tanker in MGS2, the Russian jungle in MGS3, Shadow Moses, Batman's Arkham Asylum, etc. Meanwhile this game takes place in one large, flat, base. While this can be seen as just an evolution of the previous ideas, i.e., the technology allows them not to segment the level, I think it actually detracts from the gameplay. Managing so many guards, having to deal with the entire base if you trigger an alarm, etc made the game feel more like a chore than fun stealth. I think it is clear that the devs understood this and therefore had to give you additional tools to deal with it (e.g., permanent enemy tracking/tagging, the slowdown everytime you are spotted), but this changed the gameplay a bit too much for me. Am I alone in thinking this, or do you like the large levels? I think it is clear that we can expect different locales in Phantom Pain, but are you expecting them to be more traditionally segmented, or large areas like in GZ?
* - full disclosure - I have never played MGS4, having never had a PS3. I've also avoided coverage of it, expecting one day to play it. Feel free to tell me that the MGS4 level design is closer to MGSV:GZ then previous MGSs. But, my impression of it is that it follows MGS1/2/3 conventions but with cooler and longer cut-scenes :P.
Log in to comment