Hideo Kojima Needs More Money -- A Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes Review

Written By: Tyler
Platform Played On: PS4

Rating: 9/10
Verdict: The price tag is sure to, understandably, turn people off, but the game that is there is wonderful and is a good teaser for what's going to come in Phantom Pain. I can't imagine fans of Metal Gear hating the gameplay, because it's what Metal Gear is supposed to be.


To put it lightly, I'm a Metal Gear fan. It's been my favourite series for quite some time now, and it got to the point where I stopped job searching until I beat Metal Gear Solid 4. My first ever email was a Metal Gear reference, and one of my first online usernames was "Solid Cobra." I like the series. It's with this information out in the open that I proceed with my review -- a review where I will level the game with some criticisms but still somehow manage a 9 out of 10. Hey, at least it isn't a 10 which I'm sure Phantom Pain will end up getting.

The problem with Ground Zeroes is that it's a glorified demo. For thirty bucks. Knock it down to about ten or even fifteen, and I'm not complaining nearly as much, even if it still ends up seeming more like a money grab than anything. It's been said that the main story in Ground Zeroes can be completed in ten minutes, but it took me about an hour and a half because I took my time. Still, I spent almost half the amount of a full game for an hour and a half of story, with a few side missions (set in the same area) that end up taking maybe half an hour each. I can understand the pain of paying this much money for this little content, but Metal Gear 5: Ground Zeroes is a pain that hurts so damn good.

Before I gush over how good the gameplay actually is, let's just keep talking about the bad... just to get it out of the way. The side-missions are nothing to write home about, but it does add content to the game that extends the playtime to maybe five hours if you include the story, getting every single thing, and playing these missions on hard. Five hours is a lot better than an hour and a half (or less if you want), but seeing as how these are just side-missions set in the exact same spot you play the story, they lose their appeal a little bit. It's just very difficult to separate oneself from the price tag, and I get that. I can totally understand the reluctance to buy this for that reason.

I'm not really a fan of Sutherland as Naked Snake/Boss, because I -- like many others -- am used to the gravelly David Hayter voice. I think Hayter's voice just fits him, and I hear Sutherland when Boss talks now. It's not that Sutherland doesn't do a good job in the little bit that we hear him, it's just that for a long time Hayter's claim to fame has been Snake, whereas Sutherland is an incredibly famous actor and being Snake is just a little blip on his career. I am still willing to give him a go when Phantom Pain comes out... I want to let the voice grow on me and I want to hear him become Boss instead of just being Sutherland playing Boss.

So... I am iffy on the voice so far, and the price tag is ridiculous. Why does this game get a 9? Because it's legit awesome... all things considered.

Some critics harped on about the story not being much of anything. Well, yeah, Ground Zeroes is short and the actual game is supposed to be a hundred times bigger. The crazy, confusing, epic story will come, but I actually disagree with some critics because I think this little glimpse of the overall story is fascinating and well done. The cutscenes are memorable and well staged, and it ends on a great note. It's a teaser more than anything, but it's a successful one that makes me want Phantom Pain right now. That was always the point of Ground Zeroes.

But above all else, what we can gather from this demo is that the game plays well. It took me a little while to get used to what I can do, but they have evolved the Metal Gear experience in little ways, so sneaking around (or blasting everyone in sight) is still a joy. The Marine base that you're in is open but not open enough that you're confused where to go. You have a bunch of different ways to get to where you want to go. The game is familiar in a lot of ways, and is distinctly Metal Gear, but I didn't want them to drastically change how it looks, feels and plays.

The changes that they've made, such as managing your inventory, or CQC, are all well done. The guns feel good to shoot, the action is fluid and smooth, and the fact that you can call in a helicopter is going to add a lot to the full game (if that's the route you want to go, though sneaking is always priority one for me while playing Metal Gear).

Metal Gear has not lost its charm. In the beginning cutscene we are introduced to a villain with a disfigured head, and the music selection within that same cutscene is great and sets a good atmosphere. It's a blast interrogating the Marines and getting information from them about where things are, and then stabbing them in the neck. When you get seen, the game slows down and allows you to find the enemy and shoot him before he has time to alert the rest of the Marines.

One controversial aspect is regenerative health. Metal Gear fans are used to rations, with very minimal regeneration abilities, so this is sure to turn off some. But health that regenerates has been the trend for years, and maybe it was only a matter of time. At this point I'm just used to it so I feel nothing.

The game goes into much darker territory this time around, and while some have felt that it is awkwardly handled, I like the gritty nature of it because this is supposed to be the final game chronologically before the events of Metal Gear for the NES. I think Kojima is perfectly capable of handling the subject matter, and I thought the ending was proof of that.

Ground Zeroes is polished, runs well, looks great, and is a wonderful primer for the absolute monster that is going to be released next year. I always follow Roger Ebert's philosophy on reviewing to some degree where he said that you have to rate something based on what it's trying to accomplish. That's why I can give this a 9 out of 10, because the game that is there is excellent. However, I do reflect the price tag issue by knocking it down a point because it's the elephant in the room and it's hard to ignore. Some will be harsher on that, but I stand by a 9.

On The Podcast Episode 4 -- Black Ops Zombies, Thief, Too Much Sonic, Flappy Bird... And Jacob Tries To End The Podcast Before It Begins

 Welcome to Episode 4 of On The Podcast, YOUR (okay our) weekly Podcast... starring Jacob and Tyler, two random dudes who talk about things and may or may not be related.

Anyway, this week we have a video game focused episode. Most of the time we try to throw in some real world events, movies, books, whatever... but this time we found ourselves mostly talking games. We did touch a bit on things like Pinky Pony and whatnot, however.


Youtube: http://youtu.be/rL7kKIpkYEs
Listen To Mp3:
Download Mp3:https://archive.org/details/onthepodcastepisode4

Is It Okay To Be The Same Or Should They All Be Unique Snowflakes? The Answer Is Batman.

Written By: Tyler Selig

That's me throwin' molotovs at people who feel different than I do, and who didn't ask for my opinion anyway. I don't know who the other two are because I have no friends.

                Hey there everybody, I know it’s been a while since there’s been a blog post. My next post was originally supposed to be a review of Batman: Arkham Origins, but I got it for Xbox 360 and my save got corrupted about ten hours in. This means that I’m too annoyed to restart the game right away, and since I saw other people having this problem I’m hoping it’s not just my piece of shit 360 and it’s something they can patch. Either way, I’ll have to finish my experience with Batman later on.

                But never fear because I’ve found a way to make an article not about Batman, but actually kind of about Batman. An article with a Batman “review” (in quotation marks because it isn’t a review to me unless I’ve at least finished the story and done a bunch of side quests) jammed in there. The genesis of the article came from me reading reviews of the new game (specifically IGN and Gamespot) and taking issue with one main complaint: how similar it is to the other games in the series.

                I’ll go on record and say that Arkham City is one of those games I’d rate a 10 and I firmly believe it’s close to perfect. I don’t think any game is perfect and I never will. Even my most loved games have minor flaws but that’s the thing… they’re so minor it hardly matters. I would say Arkham Asylum isn’t perfect but damn it is an awesome game. So I had high hopes for Origins and even though the series switched developers, I felt their heads were in the right place. I thought reviews would reflect this. I single out sites like Gamespot and IGN because they’re so big within the industry. The fact that IGN gave it a 7.8 (which is pretty good) and Gamespot gave it a 6 (which is a terrible rating) rang some alarms in my head. And it hurt.

                So I investigated. The general consensus is that it’s more of the same. That’s when my brain started to do think. And that also hurt.

                Why is that a bad thing? Some of the best series of all-time have been doing it for years. And why was Batman singled out when series like Call of Duty are notorious for getting high ratings despite offering very similar experiences. In the case of CoD, there is literally one – Modern Warfare or Black Ops, which offer slightly different experiences from one another but are still ultimately CoD – every year.

                I’m not picking on Call of Duty. It can have its fans. I’m sure they do this with Battlefield but I’m not into the series. They do it with Assassin’s Creed as far as I can tell (again, not a series I’m real into). Metal Gear, which is my favourite series of all time, doesn’t really differ that much from one another. Some differ more than others but I’d say Solid 1 to 4 aren’t a hell of a lot different outside of where they take place and some evolutions of gameplay mechanics. But it’s still Metal Gear. Killzone hasn’t changed a whole lot since the first one. Another series I love. Borderlands 2 is not a hell of a lot different than the first. I doubt the third will reinvent the series.

                I didn’t want Origins to break new ground… I just wanted it to feed me more of what I loved about the other two in the series.

               In my play through that was tragically cut short, I enjoyed the shit out of Origins. It had more of the free-flowing combat that is one of the best things to ever happen to fighting games. It gave me an intriguing story that did a wonderful job of giving Batman a reason to fight so many villains in one night (saw that in a review, thought it was a good point). The predator mode is still amazing, with clever level design and so many ways to take out opponents. The crime scene investigation element isn’t as deep as it could be but the game is better for having it, though I think this is a point of contention for people. The few boss battles I’ve partaken in have been exciting and Deathstroke was challenging to me. I also got to see people like Anarky. It also has a fast travel which is always good in an open world game. I don’t care what IGN says: it doesn’t disservice the world at all to be able to move quickly around it. I fast travelled in Skyrim like a boss.   

                So to me, Origins captures the essence of both Batman and these recent Arkham games and though it’s probably not as polished as Arkham City and it’s not a step-forward like that game was, it was an extremely satisfying game, not taking into consideration things like corrupted save files (like I said, I don’t know if that’s my systems fault or the games) or other glitches that are patchable, if the developers are paying attention.

                Okay, so this has become more of a Batman review than I wanted. So let’s get down to the points I wanted to make.

                My point is: Origins is more of the same but that’s okay. You have to have your series that don’t innovate every time. There are times that I just want to take part in something familiar, something that I know I will love.                There is a reason you gravitate towards a certain series of games, or even movies, books, etc. It’s because the original gives you something that you can sink your teeth in and like drugs, you want more more more. Not everyone is like this, but judging from the sales of certain series that are mammoths within the industry, it’s obvious that there are a lot of people picking up what I’m putting down.

                It’s hypocritical of me to say this, but yes I’ve criticized games for being predictable and for playing it safe. On the surface my comment doesn’t make any sense because I play games that are predictable and play it safe. Underneath though, that statement is more of a personal preference than anything. It’s less “this game sucks for being the same” and more “I just got tired of playing it.”

                There are just so many games that have the same gameplay mechanics, but they’ll throw in a few different guns, change up the maps, tweak something a little bit here and there, polish the game, make it a little bit bigger and badder, then release it. I know it feels like I’m picking on shooters but they have been the genre of choice for a lot of people so that’s what I’ve used as a point of reference.

Not every game is going to revolutionize the industry. I don’t even want them to, nor do I want every game to be completely original. I don’t want every game to be like Journey but I’ll enjoy the fuck out of Journey when it’s given to me.

                Maybe Origins falls apart as the game goes along, though I doubt it. I’ve seen it called glorified DLC and that’s unfair because then you have to start shit-talking a lot of classic games. The fact of the matter is, the game industry, much like the movie industry, will find things that work and exploit that. Developers will find something that sticks, and they will release that over and over because it’s a business and because they know there’s a market for it. So while it can be annoying that new and fresh games get overlooked, and believe me it happens all the time, there is still place for these sequels that provide consumers with a product that they know and love. It feels weird to treat massive series like the underdogs, but I’m just calling it like I see it. I’m the first one to pimp a title that I feel brings something new to the table, but the truth of the matter is, I just love games as an art form so I embrace both familiar games and games that have their own little niche.

I didn’t mean for this to be a long article but it seems to be. I’ll make one final point and allow me to generalize for the next little bit: You can’t actually satisfy gamers. This is true for fans of everything, but since this is a game blog I’m targeting you. Yes, you. And me. And the person next door. We all suck.

If WB Games Montreal had changed the series too much people would have bitched. They keep it the same (but add a few things) and people bitch. So what’s someone to do? Origins isn’t a bad game but people keep rating it way lower (seriously, a 6?) than is necessary. I don’t expect people to gush over it, though I am, but what were they to do? Origins suffers mainly from the fact that it’s from a great series and is arguably the weakest link of the three. But that doesn’t make it a bad game, and people can’t seem to realize that. It’s like, if a game doesn’t live up to peoples ridiculous standards, it becomes a shitty game. Although I don’t think people are going that far with Origins, my point remains.

I was playing Warface a while ago and in my first-impressions I said that it’s a generic shooter but all I saw in-game were people saying it’s the worst game ever. The nerve of me to say this because it’s all personal opinion but no, it just wasn’t a good game. It wasn’t the worst ever. People who say that make me wonder if they’ve ever played a truly bad game.

So what do you think about me white knighting for a big-budget title? Think I have no soul? You’re right, but let me know what you think in the comments below and see ya next time.