2007-08-15 13:13:57 PS3: Metal Gear online direct feed

http://www.psu.com/Metal-Gear-Online--First-Direct...

Looks very good..
Could be fun, wonder what gameplay elemens are in it because what we got to see was only shooting.

---
Playstation ID: Martijn_

2007-08-15 13:46:06

Looks like stealth version of GRAW.
I don't know what to think seriously...I guess a proper video would always be good to see how a fight could look like, this one is just to show it in motion but not show how a entire round looks like.

---
Playing: Xbox 360 - BioShock *next week on friday*
PS3: Heavenly Sword - Lair - Killzone 2 - Dark Sector - God of War 3 - MGS4 - Uncharted - Haze
360: Mass Effect - Assassin's Creed - Ninja Gaiden 2 - DMC4 - Too Human - Fable 2 - Resident Evil 5

2007-08-15 16:49:00

I second that assessment about GRAW.

2007-08-15 20:30:49

What a ripoff, hopefully this doesn't become a new--low--standard. What's next Halo 3 MP for another $60 and SP for another $60?

2007-08-15 22:00:15 In reply to LEBATO (2007-08-15 20:30:49)

I'm not to keen on the separate game model myself. Why couldn't think just be packaged as part of MGS4 again?

2007-08-15 22:01:55 In reply to GriftGFX (2007-08-15 22:00:15)

---
COD 4's pre-alpha stage looks better than most game's gone gold stage.

E3 2K7- best. e3. ever.

Saying you cant find animaton in Japan is like saying you cant find food in Italy. Its simply not true.

2007-08-16 04:16:12

hehehe

2007-08-16 10:20:58 In reply to GriftGFX (2007-08-15 22:00:15)

---
all about Crisis Core

2007-08-16 17:08:49

Honestly, I am finding this a very alarming trend from Sony. Their online service is supposed to be for free, but this is the third confirmed game on the system that is getting a pay to purchase online expansion/game sold separately from the main game title.

If this is Sony's idea of "free" online play, then give my Xbox Live over this crap any day of the week.

Look at it from this perspective. If this becomes a regular thing; the norm, the SOP for how online is handled on PS3, even if they only charged $10 per "online expansion", over the course of a year, that will get far more expensive than Xbox Live will ever get. Even if it were limited to only the exclusive titles, at $10 a head, for as many titles as Sony and their 2nd parties can produce in a single year, that is a whole lot of games and potentially hundreds of dollars out of pocket every year just to play your favorite PS3 exclusives online.

I'll use myself as a perfect example. During any average year back on PS2, I'd probably purchase anywhere from 10 to 15 games per year. I'm pretty sure this goes about average for most enthusiast gamers out there. Now imagine if you had to pay an additional $10 per game for each and everyone of those 10 to 15 games just to get the opportunity to play them online with your friends. That is an extra $100 to $150 per year coming out of your pocket just to get to play online!!!

Here is what I say. Don't anyone buy MGO.

No, that is not heresy, and I am not bullshitting. Don't anyone purchase MGO!

Even if this thing is only a $10 expansion, if it is a successful SKU for Sony, by the end of next year, every exclusive title will be doing it. And if those are successful, by the end of 2009, most 3rd parties will be doing it as well; we all know that EA (for example) would not hesitate in the slightest to do this with all their games if they thought they could get away with it. And by a 1st party doing it and being successful at it, that just opens the door wide, for other greedy publishers to follow suit.

It's worse than micro-transactions, it's worse than EA charging for online tips, it's even worse than horse armor. It's paying full price for half a game at retail, and then having to pay an additional fee for each game you want to play online.

At least with Xbox Live, you pay your $50 every year, and you can play every online game (accept MMOs) on the service, for an unlimited amount of play. So if you have 100 online games and want to play them all as often as you want, then you can, and it is still only $50 per year. If what Sony looks like they are doing becomes a regular thing on PS3, then in time, those same 100 online games would cost you $1000 just to play them online. Which would you rather pay?

With this new trend that Sony is doing, even at $10 a game, that can add up to hundreds of $$$ very quickly, and frankly, that is not fair to the consumer. But it is up to us as the consumer to be fair to ourselves first. We send a message to Sony by boycotting any and every game that sells the online mode separately, and in the future, we will never, ever have to worry about walking down that road again.

2007-08-16 17:14:58

Why are you blaming Sony for this? Shouldnt you be mad at Konami?

---
COD 4's pre-alpha stage looks better than most game's gone gold stage.

E3 2K7- best. e3. ever.

Saying you cant find animaton in Japan is like saying you cant find food in Italy. Its simply not true.

2007-08-16 17:57:39

I don't see why it's a big deal tbh, MGS's in the past never started of with MP, and it's highly unlikely to be a full-priced game.

2007-08-16 18:11:31

I'm not read up enough on this yet but what other games are selling their online components separately? Warhawk is the full game, stripped down though it is. Is there a single player SOCOM coming out along side the PSN network one...or something?

Didn't Konami essentially sell the MP separately for MGS3 with Subsistence?

I'm not sure I'm seeing a general trend going on here for the PS3 as of yet. Of course if they try it will Killzone then that's a different matter. You could imagine the uproar then but to the best of my knowledge there is no reason to expect Killzone to come with SP and MP together....

2007-08-16 18:20:22 In reply to mkk316 (2007-08-16 17:14:58)

---
all about Crisis Core

2007-08-16 21:02:42 In reply to deftangel (2007-08-16 18:11:31)

2007-08-16 21:21:36

I think with MGS4 supposedly being the last in the series, Online will try to establish a new series in the franchise that can stand very much on its own. There's really no reason to believe that it'll just be a shallow extension at this point, on the contrary I think they'll attempt to flesh it out as much as they can, probably moving far beyond what you can do in MGS4. Metal Gear Online has been talked about for a long, long time, (E3 2005) and it's without doubt a far more robust game than a simple multiplayer portion of another game would be.

2007-08-16 21:24:17 In reply to SimonM7 (2007-08-16 21:21:36)

---
Hironobu Sakaguchi is coming back to reclaim the throne :)

October 20th 2007 (A good day)

Don't ask any questions just shut up and buy Halo : Ghosts of the Onyx one of the greatest books ever.

pssh! more like electronic gay-ming monthly! amirite

2007-08-16 21:34:42 In reply to SimonM7 (2007-08-16 21:21:36)

2007-08-16 21:49:41

Wonder why MGS4 takes up an entire blu ray or potentially a dual layer Blu Ray disc?

Wonder if they have a ton of geometry in there and they've totally fleshed out an entire battlefield and numerous places you can go within an environment?

Maybe the entire world is constantly streamed and connected for any given area?

---
Hironobu Sakaguchi is coming back to reclaim the throne :)

October 20th 2007 (A good day)

Don't ask any questions just shut up and buy Halo : Ghosts of the Onyx one of the greatest books ever.

pssh! more like electronic gay-ming monthly! amirite

2007-08-16 21:57:19 In reply to GriftGFX (2007-08-16 21:34:42)

Socom is essentially exclusively a multiplayer experience. Would you be more comfortable if this game wasn't called Metal Gear at all?

Unreal 2, Unreal Tournament.

Quake 4, Quake Wars.

Final Fantasy X-2, Final Fantasy 11.

These games buy their *existence* back by being unmistakably standalone games. The only reason MGO is getting flak is because of a notion that it's merely an extension of MGS4 which I reckon it just might not be. Especially following demonstration vids of it.

2007-08-16 22:11:09

Unreal 2 and Quake 4 are fine examples--considering they both have multiplayer modes. Here I have one for you: GRAW/GRAW2. MP is essentially a completely different package, done by a different developer, on a different game engine, yet they're still packaged together.

Perhaps this wouldn't be an issue, if there weren't already MGS games with multiplayer modes (in addition to their campaigns) out there. The fact that the subsistance games are separate packages is the only real support of this sort of segmentation. Add to that the fact that it won't even hit PSN as a complete game, and we've got a mess of a community that's not even worth our time, unless we invest in the total package.

I have no problem with MP only games, I have no problem with SP only games--but it seems pretty clear to me that this should have been one package. As is, this seems completely.. pointless.

2007-08-16 22:33:07

Unreal 2 and Quake 4 simply pits the player against other players, based on the exact same gameplay fundamentals as the campaign, and that's simply not the case here.

You could argue that Quake Wars should've been a part of Quake 4, but I don't agree with that sentiment. Likewise I don't think MGS4 needs an attempted multiplayer mode to justify having a separate online franchise as long as it's able to stand on its own. Considering MGO has been touted as a separate game for over two years, I fully expect it to.

But our opinions simply differ. Again.

2007-08-16 22:44:41

Having played both, you could never argue that ETQW should be a component of Q4, as they share very little in common, down to the core gameplay (movement, stance, guns, headshots, vehicles--the list goes on--ETQW is not Quake). That's a total exaggeration of this situation--Just like the Final Fantasy example. Here Konami is taking two existing themes from other existing MGS games, and splitting them into two separate products.. I really don't see how that's the same, at all.

Should GRAW exist as two separate packages too?

It already sorta looks like MGS:PO's online mode--with better graphics.

2007-08-16 22:54:06

With all due respect, you have no idea how different or how similar MGO will be to MGS4 or any of the other Metal Gear Solid games. The notion that it's somehow just a multiplayer component of MGS4 cut loose is pure speculation on your part.

Remember back at E3 2005? Kojima said that a completely separate team was prepping an online game based in the Metal Gear universe. I just don't see why we should expect it to be any more similar to its main series than Quake Wars is.

As for GRAW, that's completely up to Ubi. Personally I was hugely disappointed that they essentially attached Ghost Recon 2 HD to what was supposed to be a brand new experience. I'm not one to say how things *should* be, and value is always value. I'm right there defending the decision to give online MG its own legs though if it proves to be a fully featured, fleshed out package worth paying for. Just like Quake Wars.

2007-08-16 22:57:18

The Quake Wars examples continues to be so wrong. Comparing Quake 4 to Quake Wars is like comparing Halo to Halo Wars.. well no.. but it's almost that ridiculous.