• Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes gets price cut on PS4, Xbox One
    48 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Totenkreuz;44047725]Pretty cool to see some companies still listen to it's fans.[/QUOTE] When release mediums were originally announced there was no next gen physical release and the download was still $40, $20 more than the last gen download. The situation has improved immensely.
[QUOTE=nightlord;44044401]It is a better price, but i still think it's a bit too much. The main game is 2 hours long, side missions and collectables shouldn't be used to justify the cost. The main story is the reason most people are going to buy it, and that is only around 2 hours long. People complain about games like CoD have campaigns that are around 6 hours long, but if you include getting all the achievements and collectables those would be longer than 6 hours. Kojima said the price is justified because you can replay the game and it will be very slightly different. That is a really bad reason to say the game is worth the price. That's a bit like saying a game like Skyrim or any other open world game would be ok if they had cost more than the launch price because you can play through it again and it won't be exactly the same. It's still the same story, nothing new will happen other than things like AI reactions and which way you go. "You can get more than a few hours of play time from it" can be said about any pretty much any game, that doesn't mean its alright if they charge more money for them. Basically, if you have to complete every single thing in the game in order for it to seem worth the price, that is not good. The only reason people think this is alright is because it's Metal Gear Solid. I like the MGS games, but that doesn't mean the game only being 2-5 hours in total at that price is fine. I will get the game, possibly at this price when it releases, but it's still disappointing it's so short. If the main story was around 4-5 hours long i'd be fine with that.[/QUOTE] You can complete starfox 64 in just over an hour, it was similarly priced (maybe even more expensive) at it's time of release and nobody minded because it was designed to be played over and over. If the game is released and you enjoy playing everything as opposed to forcing yourself to justify the cost, doesn't that make it worth it?
[QUOTE=St. Burke;44046244]hmmm, winner for the news, dumb for the comment[/QUOTE] its called a joke charlemagne
I never care about the lenght of a MGS game, personally. My fastest time for MGS3 was a little over 5 hours, and it wasn't even a speedrun or anything of the sort. Heck, I can usually complete the Virtuous Mission in 15 minutes or under, but all MGS games, specially the ones after 2, have insane amounts of replayability due to unlockables, secrets, and different ways you can play, which also helps make every playthrough unique. I'm sure these supposed "2 hours" can easily turn into 1 or 2 whole weeks for anyone like myself.
I'm at least gonna get it on ps3. Might not be the next gen experience but I want to see what it's like and 20 bucks seems an okay price to me. Especially for a fan.
movies are only 2 hours yet we get lots of enjoyment out of them GZ i'm sure will be worth it
[QUOTE] Ground Zeroes will sell for $29.99 on PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 at retail, while those versions will cost $19.99 on the PlayStation Store and Xbox Games Store.[/QUOTE] The price is cheaper for digital on 360 and PS3, but not on Xbox One and PS4?
[QUOTE=Fire Kracker;44050782]movies are only 2 hours yet we get lots of enjoyment out of them[/QUOTE] previous mgs games like 5 movies worth of cutscenes and 2 movies worth of gameplay tho
[QUOTE=PSI Guy;44050942]previous mgs games like 5 movies worth of cutscenes and 2 movies worth of gameplay tho[/QUOTE] they also were full price doe
[QUOTE=LegndNikko;44050936]The price is cheaper for digital on 360 and PS3, but not on Xbox One and PS4?[/QUOTE] yep, that's correct. kinda lame
[QUOTE=Fire Kracker;44050782]movies are only 2 hours yet we get lots of enjoyment out of them GZ i'm sure will be worth it[/QUOTE] It doesn't cost $30 to watch a movie, though. I'm sure GZ will be fun to play, but i don't see how anyone can defend the main story being around 2 hours long. On principle alone a 2 hour long game (excluding optional side-missions) should not cost $30 and no one should be happy that it's only that long. I'm not saying people shouldn't buy it, i'll get it at some point, but the only reason people are defending this is because it's a MGS game.
I love metal gear games enough that even if it was more expensive I'd love to play it. This whole thing is an option to not get anything new metal gear wise for the next year or whatever or get a sample now. I'd rather have this than nothing even if its not the best value. Also wasnt it only the one preview that said 2 hours? We don't even know if the average person will be able to finish it that fast or anything.
[QUOTE=nightlord;44044401][B]It is a better price, but i still think it's a bit too much. The main game is 2 hours long, side missions and collectables shouldn't be used to justify the cost. The main story is the reason most people are going to buy it, and that is only around 2 hours long. [/B] People complain about games like CoD have campaigns that are around 6 hours long, but if you include getting all the achievements and collectables those would be longer than 6 hours. Kojima said the price is justified because you can replay the game and it will be very slightly different. That is a really bad reason to say the game is worth the price. That's a bit like saying a game like Skyrim or any other open world game would be ok if they had cost more than the launch price because you can play through it again and it won't be exactly the same. It's still the same story, nothing new will happen other than things like AI reactions and which way you go. "You can get more than a few hours of play time from it" can be said about any pretty much any game, that doesn't mean its alright if they charge more money for them. Basically, if you have to complete every single thing in the game in order for it to seem worth the price, that is not good. The only reason people think this is alright is because it's Metal Gear Solid. I like the MGS games, but that doesn't mean the game only being 2-5 hours in total at that price is fine. I will get the game, possibly at this price when it releases, but it's still disappointing it's so short. If the main story was around 4-5 hours long i'd be fine with that.[/QUOTE] Is this for real. Are you actually, legitimately serious? I suppose we should disown all RPG's ever because they only sport a 4-5 play time because sidequests don't factor in.
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;44047059]Does anyone have good pictures and videos showing what the PS3 one will be like.?[/QUOTE] Yup. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60FqLOMOPgU[/media]
[QUOTE=G-Strogg;44053460]Is this for real. Are you actually, legitimately serious? I suppose we should disown all RPG's ever because they only sport a 4-5 play time because sidequests don't factor in.[/QUOTE] That is not what i said. I said they shouldn't be used to justify the cost with this particular game. The main story is what most people are going to get this game for. With games like Skyrim, people don't get them for the main story - they expect a large world to explore with plenty of things to do. In a story-driven game like MGS however, it's the opposite. It's completely different with RPG games, if GZ was a fully open world game with many more places to go and things to do (which is what Phantom Pain will be more like), it would be fine. Normally MGS games focus on the main story and don't usually have side quests. Side quests are great, i like it when more content gets added to games. What i don't like is how GZ seems to focus on side-missions and collectables more than it does the main story. If the main story had been 4-5 hours long i'd be happy with it. The side-missions are unlikely to advance the story or include anything meaning, judging from what we've seen of them so far.
[QUOTE=nightlord;44058878]That is not what i said. I said they shouldn't be used to justify the cost with this particular game. The main story is what most people are going to get this game for. With games like Skyrim, people don't get them for the main story - they expect a large world to explore with plenty of things to do. In a story-driven game like MGS however, it's the opposite. It's completely different with RPG games, if GZ was a fully open world game with many more places to go and things to do (which is what Phantom Pain will be more like), it would be fine. Normally MGS games focus on the main story and don't usually have side quests. Side quests are great, i like it when more content gets added to games. What i don't like is how GZ seems to focus on side-missions and collectables more than it does the main story. If the main story had been 4-5 hours long i'd be happy with it. The side-missions are unlikely to advance the story or include anything meaning, judging from what we've seen of them so far.[/QUOTE] peacewalker also was all sidemissions pretty much
[QUOTE=Fire Kracker;44061203]peacewalker also was all sidemissions pretty much[/QUOTE] And grinding. Holy fuck. So much grinding for weapons that are worth a shit in boss fights. [sp]Especially the custom/ type 2 AI fights, fuck it.[/sp]
funny how plenty of people complained about PW's side missions but when it comes to GZ none of those same complaints have come up i hope you like fighting a billion different variations of tank, armored vehicle, helicopter and giant singing mechs a billion times
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;44045127]imo the idea that length of a game should affect its price is incredibly poorly thought out. that kind of thinking is really a lack of thought, one that ignores the innate worth of something. an amazing 2 hour game should have more worth to you than a terrible 200 hour game, or whatever. i mean that's obv an elaboration but u get what im saying. why would you care how long you enjoy something for if you thought every moment was great? its a fine price if the end result is something well crafted and thoroughly enjoyable, padding out an experience is a wasted effort when something more punctual is all that's needed to convey everything they wanted to. looking at it from that perspective it seems kind of greedy.[/QUOTE] Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons is only like 3 hours long and only good for one playthrough and I would totally spend $30 on that game, even though I only got it for $5. A good movie for a couple of people or tickets to a concert would be about $30 dollars and I would spend money for that. I don't see why a good game can't be worth that much.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.