Arriving with very little fanfare from both its core franchise following and Konami itself, Metal Gear Survive is going to be judged unfairly thanks to the baggage of Hideo Kojima’s exit and what the Japanese publisher has become in recent years. This spin-off ditches what made the Metal Gear Solid series so special for the most part, but what it retains and introduces amalgamates into something really quite fascinating. There will be those who write it off completely, but for anyone willing to give Metal Gear Survive a chance, what they’ll find is a compelling, addictive, and ultimately rewarding experience that is unlike nearly anything else we’ve ever played.
Taking place directly after the events of Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes, your player-created character survives the attack on Mother Base, but they are promptly sucked up into a wormhole that opens up above the headquarters. On the other side, you find yourself in Dite, an alternate dimension inhabited by zombie-like creatures known as Wanderers. You quickly discover that you weren’t its first visitors, however, as Charon Corps (the unit that was deployed there to gather information on this new world) has gone missing. It’s now up to you to recover any data they found, as well as rescuing any survivors you come across, and ultimately get yourself out of there.
In true Metal Gear fashion, however, this setup only just scratches the surface of the events that actually unfold. We were unsure how much of a focus the story would actually get, but we were more than satisfied with the amount of twists and turns there are in this wacky tale. It’s certainly not on the level of Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty’s final hours, but the surprises are definitely going to catch you off guard. There’s even some neat tie-ins with Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain, and these help to put a neat bow on a surprisingly good plot. With political groups getting involved, wild supernatural occurrings leaving your mouth agape, and crazy revelations that turn the entire plot on its head, fans won’t be left disappointed when it’s time to put down the controller as the cutscenes begin to roll.
While it stays true to its roots in some ways, Metal Gear Survive’s biggest departure is its introduction of survival mechanics. Prominently displayed at all times within the user interface, your hunger and thirst gauges have a huge impact on the overall experience, and they’re something you need to be aware of at all times. As percentages tick down in front of your eyes, the simple act of playing the game gets tougher and tougher the less you pay attention to them. Your vision becomes blurred, navigation gets harder, and the Wanderers become an even greater threat if one of the meters drops to an alarming level. On top of that, there’s also a weight limit that will put a stop to any sprinting if the soft cap is reached, as well as a stamina gauge that will stop you in your tracks if you happen to run out of breath.
It’s a lot to take in at first, especially so with your resources at their lowest in the first few hours of the game, but as you get a better grasp of the mechanics, the need to obsess over these meters lessens greatly. Side missions will frequently notify you of wildlife in the area, while lakes and ponds are aplenty for sources of water. To help you even further, your home base can be kitted out with turf for farming as well as water tanks to collect rain water.
The survival mechanics and the structuring of your home base work in unison to better your character in a variety of ways, as spending some time back at your encampment allows you to both bolster your defences and craft gear and weapons. A number of stations come pre-built such as an outpost for weapon crafting, another to aid you with your gear, and one more for first aid. These can all be upgraded further, but the real pleasure to be found in this mechanic is situated in management. You begin to recruit people as you progress through the story, and they can be assigned to certain roles within your base camp. Some can tend to the crops to make sure there’s always an onion or a potato to greet you when you return home, others can focus on expanding the base’s operations, while a few more comrades can be sent on missions to collect resources within the world of Dite. Once you have everything set up, it is incredibly satisfying to return home after a tough assignment to find the system working flawlessly without any intervention from yourself.
As well as recruiting survivors, main missions in Metal Gear Survive revolve around the uncovering of Charon Corps’ data, which is done by collecting memory boards spread throughout the open world, and defending wormhole diggers as part of Singularity missions. While the first objective is pretty much a fetch quest, the latter takes the shape of a wave-based horde mode that sees you fend off a series of Wanderers as they try to destroy the excavating contraption. Using your defences, gadgets, and gear, you can put a stop to that.
With these being the only objective types in the game, main missions can become a bit too repetitive. While you’ll always be doing these things in different locations, the motions you’ll go through are generally the same. Some variety in this aspect would have gone a long way to making progression outside of the cutscenes a much more enjoyable affair.
There is an open-world to explore here, but venturing anywhere comes at a risk thanks to the presence of Dust, which is toxic to any human when breathed in. To combat this, an oxygen tank must be on your person at all times, but this too ticks down before your very eyes. When you’re inside the Dust, your map malfunctions and no longer shows your place in the world, your stamina meter depletes a lot quicker, and it’s impossible to clearly see more than fifteen feet in front of you thanks to a thick fog. This means you absolutely need to be prepared when venturing out of your home base, because one wrong move could result in death. Some may see this as being a bit too harsh on the player, but in action it only heightens your survival instincts. It feels like an achievement just making it back home safely, which in turn makes some last gasp dashes for a wormhole transporter to get you back after a tense and gruelling affair.
While you’re out in the world of Dite, you’ll want to be scavenging absolutely everything. Crafting is a major part of progression, and so every material you pick up will be valuable in some way. You’ll need to craft the fences that stop Wanderers in their tracks, the weapons you’ll use to beat them to the ground, and the ammunition that takes them out with ease. There’s also a five-tier rarity system attached to the mechanic, meaning that sought after materials will be harder to find while common ingredients are strewn all over the place. This aspect only adds to the survival mechanics, as you’ll need to be looking out for the likes of iron, springs, screws, and paper on your travels.
The Fox Engine that powered both Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes and Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain makes its return, but this version lends itself slightly less to experimentation when compared to what Big Boss could do. The game still feels excellent to play, and stealth remains a viable tactic, but the experience as a whole feels a little held back thanks to some abilities that are just no longer present. With a smooth framerate that generally hovers around the 60 frames-per-second mark, the majority of interactions will feel exquisite, but there will be the occasional moment where muscle memory kicks in but the action isn’t actually performed in-game.
If you had played any of the game’s pre-launch betas, you’d be forgiven if you thought the experience is more of a co-operative one. But it’s actually not, as the co-op based Singularity missions are very much a side project. They play out in exactly the same way as the single player versions, but with more players, there’s added difficulty and further rewards. They’re a neat distraction from the main game, and thanks to the prizes carrying over into your playthrough, there’s definitely an incentive to complete a few, but they’re certainly not the main focus many would have initially assumed.
Metal Gear Survive is not what many envisioned the follow up to Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain to be, but that doesn’t inherently make it a bad game. This is definitely a different experience, thanks to the introduction of survival mechanics and the extensive base building, but these aspects actually benefit what the title is going for. With a punishing but fascinating open world to explore, a crafting system that allows for all manner of items to be fashioned, and a suitably bizarre story that is sure to surprise even series veterans, Metal Gear Survive is likely to please those that give it a solid chance.
That $10 new character charge though 🤣
I'm just going to imagine this is an 8/100!
Interesting review! From what I've seen so far I would think this game would get a 6 max!
Angry Joe's and Videogamedunkey's videos on this made really good points about this game being a disaster, especially after seeing that if you stay on top of an object the zombies or wtv can't hit you! Also the fighting mechanics look god damn awful, besides the spike nothing seems to work really well!
Good to know that the story has some good surprises! But for me this a deep deep sale game or a PS plus game
So its a good kind of disaster?
@AFCC uh AngryJoe didn’t even upload his review only a mere gameplay vid & rant
" Metal Gear Survive’s biggest departure is its introduction of survival mechanics. Prominently displayed at all times within the user interface, your hunger and thirst gauges have a huge impact on the overall experience, and they’re something you need to be aware of at all times. As percentages tick down in front of your eyes, the simple act of playing the game gets tougher and tougher "
pretty sure MGS3 had a similar thing as well
doesn't mention all the Microtransactions this game has
other than that a good review but there are some aspects you didn't mention like the aforementioned MT's and just taking how crap they are i would knock a couple of points of myself, a 6/10 at most
Always online single player game, micro-transaction, $10 for another save slot. Nope.
Pay money for an additional save slot?
Hard pass here.
You guys gave this game the same score as Monster Hunter...
@McGuit I don't want to link to another site but just Google search it.
Good review but don't agree with score tbh. Currently better than The Impatient and I would rather play that, if I had a VR.
@Splat yeah this score cannot be right.
I genuinely think it sounds quite good.
Based on this score I figured this review was written by the same guy who placed Dead Rising 4 in his top 3 of 2017
Well, when a games fun it's fun. Fair play.
@Flaming_Kaiser how dare you not like a specific genre or being online or paying for save slots! 😂
Each to their own. Gotta love the Internet and being told your opinion is wrong lol
I'll probably give this a go later in the year once I've killed my back log. Launch price of £20, will soon be £5.
@CallMeAl how is the open world? Plenty to do between travelling?
@YummyHappyPills but you can't review this game on its own, because it isn't its own thing. It's 85% recycling of MGSVs assets. It's not something new or fresh.
If GTA5 would have released every multiplayer mode as a new game there would be an outcry as well. We shouldn't reward corporations for recycling.
@CallMeAl No need calling names.
well, this is the only review over 70 on meta critic (current average is 62 and falling) which means it is a severe outlier. i cannot take this review seriously at all. i am sorry to see push square has lost its objectivity.
@CallMeAl huh? Hack? Sorry I feel I've missed something lo
All I hate is the $10 save charge.
I'll try it eventually once all kinks are ironed out
@YummyHappyPills I agree. Sounds like they really have trouble adapting to the "digital age". I don't think, like some argue, it's an evil company. I honestly believe they don't have a clue what they're doing half of the time.
wow 8/10 for a cash grab unfair mechanics and $10 for extra save slot. poor review.
@CallMeAl Don't use words like that when talking about other people. That's not something I want to argue about or hear anyone's opinion on it. It's clearly against community rules. Stop trolling.
Enjoy your ban.
@CallMeAl it is not an 8/10. there is a reason why no other review on meta is over a 70. here you go: http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/metal-gear-survive/critic-reviews
@Kidfried I feel he may be a troll. He's account is just under 2hours old
@ZeD yea, he sounds rather pathetic. pay him no mind.
I've seen plenty of gameplay videos, EZA did a two hour stream. It doesn't look like an 8/10 game to me personally. A bit of a 'triple A' asset flip with micro-transactions. I'd be surprised if this game was up there with games like Monster Hunter World.
so a always online game in a mostly SP franshise and a 10 bucks micro transaction game,that screwed over it's fanbase by "trying" to be "new" by adding zombies (the most used and tired thing in any type of survival game btw) get's an 8?
if i didn't know any better i would think this is IGN.
now i know that reviews are to be considered a opinion aswell but to give this an 8 is just a damn lie.
a obvious cash grap should never get such a high score.
I'm going to provide a review with game play at some point to debunk the lies and misinformation spread by the kojidrones hating a really fun game for issues that are prevalent in other games all because kojimahacks name isn't in it. Cannot wait and I should not be banned for speaking the tRuth this is not neogaf or n4g ; I'm allowed an opinion and to express if angry.
I'm glad the reviewer enjoyed this game, and good on them for deviating from the bandwagon, but I just cannot buy this. There are hundreds of decent games out there that I'll likely never play, so buying one less won't be problematic for me.
@CallMeAl You're allowed an opinion. You're not allowed to call people "retards" or "drones" like some sort of irate child, though. Your abusive behavior is what deserves a ban.
I'm angry when there's people saying this opinion piece review is wrong or in any way bad , only idiots would dismiss such a thing and game purely because a certain someone's name isn't slapped throughout the game
@CallMeAl Opinion not truth, and you can't bully people like that, hate speeches are typically not protected by various country's bill of rights, and rightly so. Most sites will follow the laws of the land and hate is never tolerated.
Never said was truth said was a opinion piece review that's right
Using assets from mgs v and do a lttle tweaks, and you give review score for mgsurvive an 8??? but kingdom come deliverance only got 7 ???, what a joke, thats why i never trusted a review
Ahem, don't feed the troll, peeps.
As for the game, might pick it up in a sale, could be fun with some friends.
@Kidfried "but you can't review this game on its own, because it isn't its own thing. It's 85% recycling of MGSVs assets. It's not something new or fresh."
As I recall, Majora's Mask re-used a ton of assets from Ocarina of Time, and that's one of the most original and inventive games that I've ever played, so I don't really see how this logic works.
I've watched quite a bit of gameplay and unfortunately the main gameplay loop doesn't interest me that much and neither do the free to play transactions in a 'full price' game.
@Bad-MuthaAdebisi too many games have this free to play model these days. 😐
So according to you this review is wrong but what you just said contradicts that how smart are you?
I've never played a MGS game and don't plan on making this my first regardless of what score it has on here. $10 for an extra save slot is absolutely ridiculous and I will never support always-online for single player content. Didn't buy GT Sport for that same reason.
I do think games need to be reviewed as their own beast. I hate asset flipping and think this is a massively wasted opportunity from Konami, given the excellent engine they have, but if Liam got some fun from the title and clearly put the time in, then the review is fair as it should be.
The game isn't for me because of how I feel about MGSV and the whole situation (and not a survival game fan) but PushSquare have covered all that in the news and the reviews should cover the game.
We've cleaned up the comments section and handed out appropriate bans. Please can we keep the discussion respectful regardless of whether you agree or disagree with the review.
After seeing that score i knew this comment section was going to be interesting
@CallMeAl It is just a poor man Monster Hunter World. I have 3 save slots optional online, really small nice microtransactions, free crossover content, with probably some nice free updates but the game is just out so we will see soon. I have Kojima in high regards the man is a legend to me. Metal Gear Solid on the PS1 was the game that will always stay with me story, plot and gameplay was epic. I really wanted to give the game a chance but the always online singleplayer killed it for me. And dont give me that crap it has to carry stuff over to multiplayer that must be able with saves. Plus i dont want to check meters all the time. Its not strange that Konami is hated all over. They did so many questionable and unproffesional things. Its a joke off a company like it or not. Who works with the Kojima engine. Nice talking to you anti Kojima drone. 😂 😱 😝
Personally, the game looks more like a 6 or 5. Jimquisition and dunkey brought some good points on the game. The melee combat looks very janky, off-looking character models, boring open world, lazy enemy Ai (just stand over an object and poke away), the fact that you can only eat in the base, and the challenge feels more like a chore than a rewarding experience. Plus, those microtransactions. I just can't. I do gotta admit that this game is atleast nowhere near as bad as Umbrella Corps but I just felt bored playing the game. It just isn't as fun or intriguing as the other MGS games nor its spin offs. And yes, MGR:R is not what I could consider a fantastic spin off but at least it wasn't made just to cash in on the current trend. I think this game would have been fine if it was F2P like Let it Die.
Also, the fact that this game gets a higher score than games like Gravity Rush 2, Fatal Bullet, and such, and having the same scores as MH World is crazy. Then again, Drawn to Death and Dead Rising 4 also got pretty high scores, and both games were still underwhelming.
Still, I do have to respect the reviewer's different point of view on reviewing the game for what it is. Is clear this game isn't for me. I always liked the MGS games and survival games are somewhat of a guilty pleasure for me (this is why MGS3 is one of my favorite games of all time). But MGSurvive just doesn't click on me. And with games like MH World, DB FighterZ and even Fatal Bullet, is hard for me to even enjoy the game when I could have saved my money for a better game.
I do think you've got to take the game on its own merits. While I do understand (and agree with) some of the complaints in the comments, we can't knock points off the review score because we don't like Konami. And microtransactions need to be considered in context: are they affecting the flow of the game? Clearly, in this instance, Liam didn't think they were obtrusive enough to impact his enjoyment of the game.
I haven't played it so I can't say any more, but I am curious how many of this title's staunchest critics dislike the game or simply dislike the fact that it exists?
@SoulsBourne128 agreed. good points.
@get2sammyb probably the latter. But for me it's just the cheek of the save slot that makes me not super interested.
@get2sammyb To be fair Sammy the game seems to be solid and that is great. I never want a game to fail because if that happens nobody wins. But microtransactions should never ever change the flow of a game.
@CallMeAl i'm sorry what about what i said makes me a Kojidrone? (whatever the hell that is)
all i said was MGS3 had survival aspects and that they didn't mention the Microtransactions in the review which are pretty bad $10 just to be able to save a new character is terrible
so if you had been bothered to read my comment you would see i said it was a good review but I would have rated it a bit lower because of those terrible MT's
so please tell me how that makes me a Kojidrone?
It may be interesting to some people i respect the review but despite really wanting to like this game i couldn't get over the boring cheap zombie survival mechanics. It just doen't look fun
Zombies seem to be back in fashion with the upcoming Rainbow Six update too. Yawn.
I wonder who much Konami paid pushsquare for the good review and recent strings of 6s i dont think i'll bother with pushsquare reviews again
Respect for not jumping on the hate bandwagon and for judging the game for what it is.
And you and other whats wrong with today gaming community. Hope u enjoy taking lootboxs and MTs
Removed part of comment as it was simply unnecessarily hostile. - get2sammyb
@DashingGold1 Man, we wouldn't be living off Super Noodles if we actually got paid for reviews.
Also, please don't insult other members. Feel free to discuss, but you don't have to be so hostile about.
The following review is paid for by Konami
@DashingGold1 Feel free to discuss the review and criticise the site, but consider adding value to your comments or you'll be banned. Consider this your first warning.
Uh oh, someone had fun with a game and reviewed it accordingly to their own opinions. That's not allowed here
@Porco pushsquare has lost its "objectivity" because a reviewer enjoyed a game more than other reviewers? If you say so.
@naruball yes, because this review is a clear outlier. out of the 20 opinions on this game i have read/watched, none of them were so forgiving of its problems. why on earth would i take this review seriously if it goes against the grain of nearly every other media outlet in the world? also, i have seen enough of this game to know it is a steamy pile if i have ever seen one. this review is not going to sway my opinion on the matter. thanks for your reply, though
@RedMageLanakyn no it is allowed. but that doesn't mean i need to take the review seriously or consider it an objective opinion. i think this website has lost some of its credibility over this review... just saying
@Porco "Objective, adjective: (of a person or their judgement) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts."
This is the definition of objective: we reviewed the game as we saw it. You're, of course, free to disagree — and we welcome a (respectful) discussion on that note. But we wouldn't be being objective if we just mirrored what everyone else is saying when that doesn't reflect our true opinion.
You're more than welcome to read the alternate reviews and come to your own conclusion, but we're just offering our own perspective here.
So if you are going to review a whole game inc multiplayer etc. Then if microtransactions $10 extra save slot should be in review and how it affects the game. Especially now this is such expensive hobby that these things should be in the review. Like EA logo its in the game then it should be in the review.
Ok serious question whats the most comments on one review or news post at pushsquare because at the rate this is going it will be this review.
@Porco there is no such thing as an objective opinion.
Your argument doesn't hold any water.
Have you never disliked something that all reviewers seemed to love? Same with movies, music, etc. It's how opinions work.
@Porco well, to be honest I don’t think that the fact Liam’s opinion goes against the vast majority automatically discards it as “biased” or “incorrect”. It just doesn’t work like that.
First of all it’s his opinion about the game, and that’s hardly “wrong” as he views the game that way; it may differ from yours or Kotaku’s or IGN’s or the whole world’s, still it can’t be discredited for that reason. Secondly, it’s so simplistic and narrow-minded to say that because he goes against everyone he must be wrong. Seriously? So the opinion of the mass always is right?
Galileo was wrong in saying the Earth revolves around the Sun just because at the time the Church said otherwise?
P.S.: I’ll point out that no, I’m not a stern defender of this site and actually I criticize it more than I praise it, just in case you were going to accuse me of being overly defensive about PS. I hope you were not, though.
@get2sammyb nothing wrong with Super Noodles
Well, this comment section sure is a lot different compared to the norm.
That aside, good review. I like the sound of some of the gameplay elements, but other elements I really don't care for.
Can't believe a good game came out of this mess. I won't buy it, I've got far too many games ahead of this on my wishlist, but I'm glad those that do have got a decent game to play.
I'll probably just replay MGS V like the daft little Kojidrone that I am.
If you don't like it don't buy it simple. I won't buy it cuz it ain't for me.
@Derpie1 I know, and? In his rant I think other Joe is on top of some rocks just poking the zombies and AJ asks 'does this look fun to you?' That's a pretty good point imo
if you think some of the comments on here are bad you should see the ones people are posting on Facebook
@CallMeAl if it wasn't Kojima there wouldn't be any Metal Gear...so why the attitude?
Besides, this 'game' seems and will always seem an expansion to MGS5, not a full game...
Doesn't matter if it's decent or even good, it's a cash grab alright!
I must say I'm very surprised by this review as it seems to disagree with every other review with some being very cutting.
I guess given the good reviews being outweighed massively by bad this is player preference by this reviewer. I'd be keen to see what other push squares staff think after they've played the game.
Every video review of it I've seen makes it look atrocious. The clunky zombie ai. The asset flips from mgsv. The genre its went. The fact its nothing to do with mgs universe.
Yea I'll ignore this review and future reviews from the reviewer. We clearly have much different tastes in quality.
@AFCC have you seen the english guy review he just puts up one fence panel and just stands behind it stabbing them.
@TricksterTyler if you never played one before i suggest starting with the PS1 MGS, yeah it's aged a bit but it is still the best place to start i think
@DashingGold1 Youve got ages to go yet. If you think @callmeAl and his rants have plumped up the comments and made it exciting, they aint nothing compared to Wheelgate.
best game ive played for ages good review
Can't wait to grab this in a sale. All this hates got me intrigued!
@themcnoisy sorry to butt in but what's wheelgate?
playing the game you dont need another save slot
@FullbringIchigo Oh don't ask.
I'd.....8 to be the reviewer right now heh heh. I'll show myself out
@Anguspuss fences dont last long
This is honestly the best comments section ever once it gets going. @kyleforrester87 even gets called a troll. Man its absolutely brilliant.
@get2sammyb @themcnoisy surly it can't be that bad.....reads the comments
@Porco There's a lot of reviews and opinions I heavily disagree with here, and obviously you don't want to take someone's opinion as gospel, but saying the site's credibility is going down just because one reviewer liked a game and was able to overlook it's faults more so than what, 20 other people? I'd call that a bit too extreme. I could site a few reviews at some sister sites affiliated with this one that have done way, way worse things than hand out an 8 on a well written review, but it's not worth getting into really.
My Opinion is not same as yours so It must be a bad review lmao ahh gaming community.
If everyone thought the same way, the world would be a really boring place....
While I wouldn't give it an 8 myself, I'm glad there is an audience that is enjoying this game. I for one, thought the title would 'bomb'.
I'm really tired of zombie games, personally. I don't know if I could stand playing another zombie survival game.
Either way, good for the reviewer that he stuck to his guns and reviewed the game based on how he truly felt about it, rather than how the masses felt about it. I personally don't feel like this game is an 8/10 at all, but the world would be pretty boring if we all felt the same way about everything.
@FullbringIchigo @themcnoisy Haha! I fell down the rabbit hole too with that link to “wheelgate” There goes 30 minutes of my Sunday ... but at least I got a good laugh. I wasn’t around here back then.
The only other comment section for a review that got this heated recently was Yakuza Kiwami. People were freaking out about a 6/10 on that, as I recall, and stating Push Square was single-handedly killing any chance of future Yakuza games coming to the West because the review score was too low 😂
On topic — I respect the review. The positive experience Liam had with it has not convinced me to buy it, but props to him for first of all agreeing to play it, and secondly for putting himself out there and writing an unpopular opinion.
Fair play to the reviewer for calling it like they saw it. Doesn't look like it's for me but there you go. I do think if a single player game has microtransactions, as others have mentioned, mention of this should be included in the review (apologies if I missed this in review).
I can't believe you gave this cash grab an 8/10 while Kingdom Come Deliverance got only 7! Reviewer should see videogamedunkey review and requestion their score. And you are the only one that stands out with score on metacritic so there must be something wrong with your score and objectivity. I am sad I can't even trust your scores anymore...
Played it briefly. It's awful.
Something tells me there are a few shills in this comment section.
As for the game itself, I'm neutral. Maybe I'll try it in the future when I can get it used for cheap.
Shocked by how high it was rated I will still not be getting this more for the simple fact how konami treat there employees. But we all like different things and the reviewer seems to really like it and would be a boring old world if we all liked the same things. But for me for better games that intrest me on the horizon.
Reading this other posts that callrmeal just seems some sad troll desperately seeking attention, they seem to have just joined today to make those childish and insulting posts, doubt they even played the game and are just seeking attention, when I see people like them I can't help but think what happened to them to make them like that, normal people don't behave in this matter.
Hmm, I respect your opinion, but i'm really not interested on this game. They are taking away everything that made Metal Gear special, The Phantom Pain and the glorified paid demo Ground Zero are also a disappointment too.
Don't let me start with the terrible consumer practices. Also interesting how some people here think that Konami nowadays is a great studio. Where are games like Castlevania and Suikoden?
Anyway, Konami is a lost cause.
Nothing wrong with super noodles, pot noodle is evil though.
@Porco bro because someone likes the game more than other people it means he's wrong and you can't take him seriously grow up dude. I'm playing elex right now and freaking love it easily a 9 imo but it has like a 60 something metacritic so am I wrong? I recently just bought knack 2 and couldn't believe I slept on it because that game is amazing and I would easily give it at least an 8.5 yet it has a 69 on metacritic so again I must be wrong to feel that way right? Metacritic is a joke with their super secret weighting system besides if you can't make your own decision on games and need someone else to tell you what to like or not like you're in trouble when it comes to life my dude.
well i wanna check it out now after reading this review
@Porco let's see because people have different opinions and likes not everyone follows the hive mind like you seem to do. Does that answer your question?
@DashingGold1 the goty vote article had more than this I think
@AFCC what does that prove though? Every game ever made has had goofy things you could do or ways to cheese hell dark souls has a whole culture around exploiting bosses with cheese strategies
@YeYa grow up dude
Happy that this game gets added to the PlayStation 4's library of games. That's a positive outlook to this. Hooray for more games! Woo-hoo that somebody else will buy this, because I'm sadly not interested in it. Hope it does well regardless.
Dang, this is the worst I've ever seen the comments section here on Push Square!
Oh Lord almighty, this really did not go down well at all. I expected this to a point. This makes good midnight reading.
Apparently Konami charged for character slots in MGS4, so they haven't changed so much but their flaws are looked at much more vigorously now than before.
@YummyHappyPills I so agree with you, Super Bomberman R was a pleasant surprise for me, i thoroughly enjoyed it, there are rumours that Konami are planning on releasing their three 'ReBirth' Wiiware games on Switch too which i would love, there's definitely two very different sides to the company.
Just my two cents worth on this review, to me, if a reviewer goes against the grain with a review and isn't afraid to give a true opinion even if it doesn't match every other review, that gives me more confidence that they are being honest, not less, i respect that so much more, i feel sorry for Liam for receiving so much flak, hope it doesn't put him off on giving his true opinions on future reviews.
Personally i've never actually played an MGS game, one of the few major, long-time gaming franchises i've never tried, though i do have the original on my Vita, just haven't gotten around to playing it yet, i will try and get to it this year sometime lol
This game was always going to be very controversial - interesting to see that it has 'upped the ante' by having some fun/ varied/ new mechanics.
Thank you for the review.
@FullbringIchigo or the gamecube port of mgs1... from there, the hd collection + mgs 4 on ps3 is all you need.
@dark_knightmare2 one of the best comments ever.you dont listen to metra.about a game you love.play it you will have fun.word up son
@get2sammyb i never seen so many hate for a game like this wow.is this jerry springer talk show or a video games site😊.word up son
@get2sammyb my biggest complaints towards the review:
no mention of always-online (there are cases where the game will log you out and you can lose all your progress since the last save point. there are many reports of this happening...)
no mention of $10 fee for a second save slot
no mention of all the fabulous microtransactions the game has to offer
no mention of how atrociously bad the AI of the monsters is and how they often glitch out and get stuck against fences or other locations. the AI is so bad, the idea of stealth is essentially thrown out the window.
i would think that these are issues worth mentioning in an "objective" review.
First of all i respect others opinion, but from what i understand metal gear franchise behind kojima is always brings ideas, creativity and feels never get enough and have a “must be better than before” mentality behind each game.. i dunno what aspects from mgsurvive that makes the reviewers thinks its deserve a score of 8??, what about the creativity, taste and quality? An 8??? also Its just a trace from kojima design all around.. and just tweaks and add ideas from other games, nothing new. from my opinion this game doesnt receive a score better than 6,5.. sorry
So what you're saying is; play Monster Hunter World.
This stinks of a shill review, although, I'm hesitant to say it is outright. I don't think it is. Having said that.
A review is meant to inform consumers, adequately of what they're getting into and it makes no mention of any of the egregious forms of microtransactions or the fact that you need an online connection! Sure you can like the core gameplay. I think it looks pretty alright bar a few issues that annoy me, but to completely neglect to inform any potential consumers who frequent the site for trusted reviews, and who may not have seen other articles about these malicious forms of monetization, is just just completely irresponsible for a game reviewer to do.
Objectively speaking, this is a god awful review, and for once I'm glad this site exists in small bubble.
@MadAussieBloke I absolutely agree! Why subscribe to a stupid YouTube channel when you can see fake opinions on sites that have ads to get rid of that pesky toe fungus. Man those ads are a godsend; without them I wouldn't have been able to get my job at Burger King making foot lettuce!
@Constable_What I think the amount of articles already on the site is enough to inform readers of the amount of micro-transactions in the game. During my time with Metal Gear Survive, not once did I feel the micro-transactions were putting a limit on my experience. They're definitely there, but not as in your face as you think. But thanks for thinking my review is god awful!
Good review, glad you were honest and didn't give in to the mob mentality. Even though I didn't like the reveal trailer, the survival gameplay videos made me jump on it and I'm loving this game. Its challenging, gameplay is great and it progresses nicely. A lot of people are calling it "fun", "satisfying" and it is definitely pulling me back in like a game hasn't in a while. Can't wait til I'm back home to play it. The story and characters are logical enough for a SciFi game to not detract from the gameplay. The micro transactions just lower the difficulty of the game and are not in your face and although I laughed at the character slots, I have no need to have another character if I can change my current one any time. Great price for what it offers too. Its too bad many reviewers are going to be taking points down just to fit in with the mob mentality because they are afraid of getting scolded.
@Porco Fair criticisms. The only thing I’d counter is that we try to put the most pertinent details in a review. We covered some of the things you mentioned elsewhere on the site.
@Anguspuss There are no save slots. You can pay to make a new character. Or delete your first or sign in as a different account. A lot of games today do the same where you only get one character and one save slot, I can't think of anybody who gave you the option of another for money but the game is not at AAA price. Also they are giving 50 coins per day for almost 20 days which will let people purchase one or something else. I'm guessing they will have other events to get the coins in game.
@LiamCroft You're welcome. You're free to put whatever you want in your article, but even if there are other articles on these issues, would it really be overkill if you at least referenced these articles in your article? I view the site on mobile, and most of the time relevant articles don't show up correctly.
Especially the always online bit. I was surprised that wasn't mentioned at all.
I understand you want to review the game as it's own thing seperated from the rest of the franchise, and I think that's fair, but shouldn't you apply that same thinking to constructing your own article? As in operating under the assumption that people may not have read those other articles?
@Constable_What no, its absolutely not necessary. This is not a product details page, its a review. He doesn't have to mention everything about the game on here that people don't like. He felt the game is great so talked about the points that make it that. You can find other negative reviews if that's what you're after.
@Porco yeah the reason is because other reviewers are afraid of getting scolded by people like you if they give it a higher score so they will lower their score just to please your mob mentality so they don't get a backlash.
@brutalpanda Wanting an informative review is different from wanting a negative review. I don't care about the score at all. So don't make assumptions about me.
Frankly, a product details page isn't going to tell you everything, and it's a reviewer's job to go over not just the gameplay, artistic, story, and graphical aspects of the game, but also the technical (That's was covered), and foundational aspects (things like it requiring an online connection, and if microtranactions didn't impede his gameplay, then why wasn't it stated in the review?).
A game is still a piece of tech, and tech is more than just enjoyment of lack thereof.
To not even mention it is surprising to me, because usually reviews on this site are very thorough.
@Constable_What Tend to disagree. It’s great that you hold the site to high standards, but my view is that the review covers the interesting stuff (positive or negative). Liam clearly didn’t think those factors were pertinent; you obviously do, and it’s your right to come to that conclusion.
But if we cover every aspect of every game you’re going to get 3,000 word articles everytime, and I don’t believe that’s what readers want.
@get2sammyb I completely understand that! But surely mentioning some of the more glaring issues that other articles on the site cover, by stating something along the lines of: "If you'd like more information about Metal Gear Survive be sure to check out our other articles!" somewhere in the article wouldn't contribute that much to the length of the article?
I get that opinions are different (I did not enjoy the game all that much after renting it, but I don't regret the $3), but making no reference at all to the other articles on the site seemed incredibly odd.
I appreciate you guys a lot though. The way you guys interact with the community and react to criticism is anything but god awful.
It's absolutely amazing, and the main reason why I'm so critical. Because I care.
Reading a reviewer and people comment is also fun because of how vary and colorful the result are, in terms mgsurvive some like it some are not, as my personal opinion as a player that have to spend around 60$ for a game to play it, i have to read references or view a complete review from others that plays it.. as for mgsurvive on this article and see the end result score, theres clearly a difference between me and the reviewers in terms taste and quality of a game
Looks to me like somebody got paid.
@MadAussieBloke Oh no! I got exposed! Quick eject! Eject eject eject eject eject! Damn you google!
Hey, now that I've got you, do you mind telling me what device you use for PSVR to have HDR function on your TV while your VR is connected?
I've been looking for one. When I'm not looking at feet.
@dark_knightmare2 I am no dude and please go spam elsewhere.
Patch out the always online single player and I'll give it a chance at $20
@sonicmeerkat I would have bought this game if not for that.
@YeYa im sorry how am I spamming please enlighten me.
Well I'm late to the party.
I do agree with @Constable_What that the glaring issues within the game should've been covered. In my opinion the excuse that 'well we covered it throughout the week' doesn't hold merit here, because:
1) People will actively search out this review (outside traffic)
2) The previous articles will get quickly buried (if not already)
3) This review is evergreen (or as long as MGS Survive is alive)
I was never going to buy this game. I don't think it looks very good at all, but if someone can find some enjoyment out of it then more power to them.
I think it's sets a dangerous precedent when the inclusion of Microtransactions in most of a game's mechanics are ignored (save slots, character slots, loadouts,...).
Microtransactions are here to stay. Some publications have accepted that & others have included them in their review scoring (open critic tracks them). I think it would be good to know Push Square's official stance on them @get2sammyb & @ShogunRok. This is a problem I had with the Shadow of War review as well. If I wasn't 'smart' to the late game microtransaction encouraging grind I would've picked the game up, as I don't really read other reviews.
Man, the comments on this review are incredible. Guy likes a game you don't - gotta be bribed!
What's going on in here then? Is it safe to come in?
Great review. I am glad you looked beyond the current trend of hating on Konami.
@Fight_Teza_Fight I kind of half agree but I think the issue of addressing micro-transactions is a difficult one and something that is hard for the site to have a policy on. I don't like micro-transactions at all, yet I have played and enjoyed many games that had some form of them in. I think that the emphasis should be whether the reviewer found they affected the gameplay and user experience. I would guess that this review didn't find them a bother. That said, I don't like some of the micro-transaction practices of content being lopped off (save slots) but then does that belong in the review? Tough one, not sure I know the answer. On the Shadow of War point, I do agree that for me, it put me off buying the game but clearly PushSquare didn't feel the same.
On a completely seperate note, one thing I have seen from several review/outlets is that it feels like few people have fully played the game for an hour or so. The Jimpressions video by Jim Sterling (who I like and accept this is just a first impressions) starts by saying he uninstalled the game very quickly. I've not seen much mention of the story at all which I found interesting.
..not a single mention of the pervasive micro-transaction system?!? oooooh, now that's a baaaaad review... that says to me "I'm pretending this aspect doesn't exist, purposely omitting it and then basing my score completely on a very skewed view of the game"... it's virtually misleading readers.. how can any site ignore micro-transactions on this scale in a game review? that's not good for the integrity of this site, potential game-purchasers or indeed review readers... this is a massive misstep from Push Square... and really this review should be removed and re-done to reflect this... (of course it won't though...)
With the thrashing this game got around the other outlets, I am surprised about the score here.
Personally I think a sites review score should be relatively consistent even if the reviewer isn't always the same person. If the reviewer really believes that this game is as good, as complete, as polished and as well put together (inc intrusiveness and handling of micro-transactions, game-play, story etc) as any other games rated as an 8, then fair enough. At the end of the day, there is a the element of 'Personal Opinion' too even if writing a review for a publication. That review though is still representative of the whole of that 'publication'. You don't see the reviewers name when scores are mentioned but the publication (ie PushSquare gives this an 8, IGN scores it 6.5, Destructoid 5 for example)
I may not agree (and it seems that the majority of other reviewers don't too) but I will still defend the right of the reviewer to express their opinion. I also don't think that the situation with Konami and Kojima or the Metal Gear name should have anything to do with this review and should be judged on its own merit. I do think that 'always online' and Micro-transactions should be included in the review though. Not everyone will read every article about the game and some may only read the review to see if the game was worth buying. Both of these aspects are still 'important' - especially the 'online' aspect as statistically, only half of the Playstation owners have PS+. At the end of the day, a 'professional' review should still not be misleading and also contain information that many gamers have issues or concerns with. Like I said, many may not read every article by the website on the game and such issues. Even some links to the articles in the reviews if the reviewer doesn't feel that these are worth going into detail would be preferable to not mentioning them at all.
Like I said, I am NOT criticising the reviewer for expressing their opinion at all and will defend their right to their conclusions. I do think however, that they should also consider that their score is not just representing their own opinion but the opinion of the site too and should also contain information about any issues that are affecting gamers and games today. Even if Micro-transactions do not negatively affect the game at all, the fact that these are a hot topic and a concern should mean they get a mention - even if its just to say they are not overly impacting on the experience. After all, the review is also there to inform the reader and leaving things out like this could be seen as misleading.
If @LiamCroft thinks the game is as good as other games rated 8 on this site, then fair enough - that is his opinion and fair play for reviewing it without being swayed by other issues (like the Kojima situation). If people disagree, that too is their right but they have NO right to insult others, inc the reviewer or make allegations of bribery for having a different opinion.
I would argue that if someone goes against the grain and scores something accordingly to their own criteria, that is more objective than seeing what score the herd are going with and just following suit.
Any review is entirely "subjective", the key is finding a reviewer whose opinions and tastes match your own and letting them give you something to consider, the best review is always the one you give something yourself after you've experienced it.
I was recomended to Push Square by a friend, so far I have found the reviews helpful and would put more stock in them than other sites, but scores are never the be all and end all.
Push Square : Keep up the good work.
@BAMozzy - totes agree with you, but if you don't have a problem with micro-transactions in a game, then surely you have to at the very least state that they exist and that they don't in any way affect the gameplay (which I'm going to be honest, I'm not sure that's a true statement)... I'm Konami-neutral, I enjoyed the beta of this game and will probably pick it up at some point (price drop) - but to completely ignore such a large part of the set-up of a game like this is bordering on negligence - the gaming press need to at the very least acknowledge this poor practice (to air-brush it like this shows a complete lack of reviewing experience...)
@Rudy_Manchego I agree with your points,especially in regards to the Jimpressions video.
I just think having an ‘official’ stance on something like this- like Sammy’s comment #48, & linking other relevant articles prevents the comment sections from becoming unnecessarily hostile.
If ‘games’ as we know it are changing, shouldn’t the reviews also?
@johncalmc Just gamers being gamers. So much anger over... video games.
@naruball I personally wouldn't get angry over computer games, but the creeping in of these gambling systems, or ways of squeezing more money from punters, is insidious, and is happening in many aspects of society outside of gaming as well. The best tool we have against this is refusal, so I refuse to buy any games that do this; not out of anger, but principle. If others don't care about these things; fair enough, and I hope they enjoy playing the game.
Idk what's worse, this garbage review or the game itself?
@Fight_Teza_Fight Actually yeah, linking to relevant articles would actually be quite good from the perspective of acknowledging outside game points and principles.
I am here to review my experience with the game, and during that time, there wasn't a single moment where I felt the micro-transactions were limiting my enjoyment or being intrusive. In fact, outside of the main menu where you can purchase a new character, the purchases are buried in menus you may never see. Sure, they are there, but they're nowhere near as in your face as you and everyone else seems to think they are.
It's been really quite disappointing to see the community wave away the hard work I've put into delivering a timely review over the past few days, as I see comments calling it garbage, god awful, and that I lack reviewing experience despite writing for the site for nearly two years now. Thanks.
@LiamCroft - fair play for defending your review and mentioning micro-transactions in the comments (why didn't you say any of this in your review?!?!?!) the fact you don't mention micro-transactions ONCE in the review implies they don't exist, it's like you photo-shopped them out completely... I guess it just highlights a lack of balance (and experience) in reviewing that's all - hopefully your reviews will improve over time?
I would recommend adding in your micro-transactions comments into the review near the end - it will add balance and it will show that you're acknowledging their presence, whilst telling people that they're not in your face (apart from being the first thing you see in the main menu).
I just can't believe given the level of microtransactions - ranging from paying for an additional save slot - to paying for more inventory storage (which I reckon you'll definitely need later on) has zero impact on the game (and if you look at some of the screenshots, re: gestures, etc. - microtransactions are all over the place). I can't imagine it doesn't push you to buy daily boosts either... I play Fortnite PVE and late-game you really start to run out of resources and it absolutely pushes you to buy extra resources - I find it impossible to believe MGS hasn't been created with this very thing in mind - limiting resources, XP, etc. in order to coax you to buy more... but the fact that micro-transactions aren't acknowledged in your review means we'll never know... (or they don't exist)
The game sounds fun. I like the idea of recruiting others to help you survive. Thanks for the review.
The problem that I have with this review is not that it considers MG survive as it’s own thing outside the context and drama surrounding phantom pain.
The problem I have is that it fails to mention mitrotransactions at all, and the fact that the game “pushes” the boundaries of micro transactions by charging for save slots. I’m sorry, but the stigma of micro transactions should always be applied to the games that include them. We have to record and flag it, not ignore it unless it impedes gameplay, in order to track the issue and, yes, show some degree of protest.
An unspoken “acceptance” of micro transaction systems, regardless of their increasing frequency, is reprehensible.
As someone asked earlier in the thread, our stance on microtransactions is quite simple: we'll discuss them in the review if they affect our experience with the game.
A good example of a review where the formulated practically the entirety of our review is Need for Speed: Payback, as I felt they completely ruined the flow of the game. If they were buried in menus and could be completely ignored (as is the case in Metal Gear Survive) that review would have read differently.
Microtransactions are prevalent enough now that they need to be taken in context in my opinion. We covered them elsewhere in the site, and as Liam has said multiple times now, they didn't have any impact on his experience with the game. Our stance with reviews is that we discuss the interesting stuff (positive or negative). In this case it's clear that the microtransactions aren't as meaningful as commenters seem to think they are.
@get2sammyb I can't believe how a game (arguably) built around micro-transactions (inventory slot, extra save, daily boosts, emotes, resources, £40 for 6000 in-game credits, etc.) doesn't 'ruin the flow' of playing (they inevitably do, as grinds are grindier, resources scarcer, and progression slower as a result). This is a classic MxT - based gaming along the likes of Fortnite PVW mode.
To ignore this entire aspect of the game / game economy TOTALLY (no mention good or bad) - is just ridiculous. And just because MxTs are now seemingly the norm, doesn't mean a) they're fine and shouldn't be decried and b) they should totally be air-brushed from a review. It's completely and utterly misleading to the reader (and really bad journalism).
Like I've said, I've got nothing again Konami, enjoyed the beta, and always take review scores with a mahoosive pinch of salt. But the day gaming sites completely ignore MxTs and skew reviews in such a blatant way like this on a regular basis is the day I stop visiting them.
@OneManDroid Have you played the game longer than Liam?
@Anguspuss exactly, dunkey said the same! The game doesn't look that good but I'm glad someone is enjoying it, not everyone can like the same stuff
@AFCC it’s a minor correction he is in the process of making a review... the rant felt like an appetizer but the review will prob be that main course since he’ll go long & he’ll go hard on this game...
The game is a spin-off and long as Konami returns to stealth I'm happy enough to play Survive, though the microtransactions are a disgrace.
@get2sammyb so why didnt the review say that about microtransactions. ITs obviously a big deal to gamers and effects a game. Simple thing is if you add them to one review you include them with all reviews. If they are part of the game they should be in the review how they impact the game. Plus in my opinion any game containing them should be forced on the PS store etc to display them and cost as well as on the back of the box. But a review should contain what is in the actual game and how it effects the game.
It just seems to me that everyone is upset because this game has Metal Gear in the title and isn't don't by Konjima. Even though Kojima is overrated that's beside the point. People already decided that they will hate this game because people think they own an Allegiance to Kojima or something. Yes he may have been screwed over by Konami but that's business. I bet if this game didn't have the Metal Gear name in it people wouldn't cry over the score or bash it as much as they do.
@Anguspuss And if Liam played the game in its entirety and felt they had zero impact on his experience, then what's he supposed to say? He's not going to add any value to his review at all by talking about meaningless things. He may as well add a sentence about what the touchpad does as well, or perhaps explain what colour the lightbar is during gameplay.
Where do we stop?
@get2sammyb anyway what color is the lightbar during gameplay
@Anguspuss I'm sure Liam will be happy to respond when he gets a chance.
I think with microtransactions being such a topic of contention between gamers and a review being something that is supposed to inform people of reasons they may like or dislike a game that they should at least have had a couple of sentences talking about them. You can try to trivialise it by comparing them to the colour of the lightbar, but we all know that a lot people would actually find a bit of information on microtransactions as being useful . If a game had inverted axis for control, but the reviewer never had a problem with that aspect, I would hope it would still be mentioned.
As a very basic point it seems to me the information that any additional save slot beyond the first costs money is a relatively big deal to anyone who either has others who want to play the game in the house, or just likes creating multiple characters and starting from scratch. On a more paranoid (maybe) point I fear that drop rates in games are just a few variable tweaks away from making microtransactions that seemed unneeded at first into the only way to get a smooth gaming experience, a fear that is much easier to implement with the current move towards 'live services'.
@OneManDroid @Constable_What you guys are simply nitpicking and should admit that you are trashing the review because it goes against your mob mentality of hating this game with a dire passion. At the same time you are complaining about him not mentioning something in a review that you already know. You can find plenty of game reviews on here and other sites that don't include any mention of microtransactions. Just thought of this one because it's also not a $60 game like survive but has micro transactions: https://www.pushsquare.com/reviews/ps4/rocket_league
@brutalpanda well then you've clearly not read anything I've said... :/ (you know, the part about me saying I'll be buying this game and I've got nothing against Konami..) yeah, that'd be the nickpicking part then...
@OneManDroid I read the first thing you said and am replying to that "not a single mention of the pervasive micro-transaction system?!? oooooh, now that's a baaaaad review..."
@LiamCroft don't worry about it, I never been to push square before this review haha so there's that but I think it's a fair review and you are honest which is always best. You may lose a couple of trolls that will forever say "its the guy who gave Survive an 8" which is elementary school talk, but its probably for the best to not have trolls support you because that means you will have to dislike things you like and vice versa and then you fail the people looking for an honest perspective.
Hang on ... a reviewer is getting scolded for offering different perspectives? That's what a healthy reviewer "ecosystem" should strive for!
This is one of the problems with "modern" gamers: you expect all reviewers to think the same, to have the same perspectives, the same priorities. Like some kind of puppet who just copies whatever the more popular reviewers and critics are saying.
You claim to want 'honesty' in gaming media, but what you really want is a mimic who reflects your own bias.
Imagine having 100 reviewers give each and every game a 8/10 rating. There would no point for 99 of them to exist as reviewers, since they all give the exact same score. This is the reality you are arguing for.
'No', it's great whenever a reviewer disagrees with the Big Media and the mainstream. There's far too little of that.
Wow that's a interesting review. Im glad you didn't hop on the hate train and actually gave your honest opinion. Kudos
@XurAgentofthe9 I think that's easily the best way to react.
@dark_knightmare2 sure, it doesn't prove anything, but come on it's 2018 and they can't make enemies climb things? And why wouldn't I cheese through this game when the combat looks so awful?
The game really looks interesting but badly executed
@Derpie1 He sure hates microtransations like the one in this game lol
@AFCC why yes... yes he does.
@brutalpanda I gave a reasonable response as to why the review was bad. I'm not jumping on any bandwagon. Also Rocket League was a PS Plus game when it first released, and didn't have much in the way of microtransactions if any at all when it released. They added microtransactions months after launch, and guess what? People were upset.
@LiamCroft If the microtransactions aren't as in your face as everyone thinks, then that should have been in your review to reflect that. Especially with as much flak as the game received beforehand. At the very least mention the other articles in a line.
I'm not saying change the review or take it down, but maybe take this into consideration in your next review?
I'm sorry you're disappointed, but frankly, I think most people in the comments are dissapointed from one thing or another. If you thought a lot of people wouldn't be, then I'm also sorry if that at all came as a surprise.
I'm also sorry I called your review god awful. That may have been a touch too harsh. I'll stand by it though.
Good luck with your YouTube career!
Just here to help push the comments closer to 200 👀
@brutalpanda Rocket Leagues Microtransaction economy was part of a big update months after the review.
been playing it for ages you dont need to spend on microtransaction you unlock the items bye playing think the microtanasction are there for players like most gamers chuck money at them to get the best stuff faster
I never expected this to be any good and have no interest in owning it, but god forbid a reviewer should like it, eh? Here's the thing about, "objective" reviews. A review is an opinion. Judging the quality of a thing requires having an opinion on it. Reviews aren't meant to be objective. What people are actually asking for is an "unbiased" opinion and we have that here. Anyone that thinks a small, relatively obscure site like Push Square is getting paid to give games a good review had better pass along some of that good stuff they're smoking.
5/10 at best, this game is a turd...
Objective Game Review:
"This game is on the Playstation 4, it uses the Fox Engine and it is called Metal Gear but may or may not feature the titular walking tank from earlier entries in the series. It does however, involve shooting, stealth and survial, and an alternative version of the mother base from a prior entry. There is a tonal shift from military conspiracy to horror.
Despite expectations that come with the name; It has not been made entirely by Hideo Kojima.
There are microstransactions that you can purchase, alternatively you do not have to. These serve as a similar mechanic to "cheats" or buffs, but now involve a cost per use. Note : These cost the player and make the company responsible for the game additional money over the initial unit price, if the revenue exceeds the cost of the title, this is called profit, and in a free market economy, this is a core objective of a business. Your purchases and expenditure are not capped by the title.
There is music which gives certain ambeince and accompaniment to events happening on the screen.
The controls are responsive; I press a button and something happens, there is not a single button that does not have a use.
The graphics are realisticly grounded and the physics show a good level of sophistication and correlation with the real word. If you have played Metal Gear Solid V, you should expect a reasonably similar visual experience.
You can purchase this game in shops and digitally.
Objective Score with 0 being "This is NOT a game you can play on PS4", and 1 being "This IS a game you can play on your ps4" : 1/1 - 100% : Editors Choice.
Some of these comments... wow, just... wow.
Initiating tactical deployment of relevant quote: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
That's all I got.
Whew! This comment section was WILD.
The Konami hate is so boring at this point. I swear some people are just Jim Sterling's mouthpiece without any of their own thoughts. Whatever happened with Kojima, it doesn't automatically make anything Konami develops bad, and each game is worth being judged on its own merits regardless. The complaints that it's not a proper Metal Gear Solid game always make me giggle. It's not a Metal Gear Solid game, it's just set in the Metal Gear universe, as with Metal Gear Acid and Metal Gear Rising. I could understand the frustration more if it was called MGS6.
Ah well, for what it's worth I probably plan to give this game a go when I've got the time!
@RPE83 Exactly, an "objective" game review is a dumb thing that no one should actually want. You pretty much just proved that. Point to you.
@Derpie1 We now have his review...an epic 2/10 and a lot of ranting lol
The game looks worse and worse to me!
But does this game match the likes of say Superman 64, Ride to Hell: Retribution, Bubsy 3D, The Slaughtering Grounds, etc?
@Derpie1 thing is...it's 2018! Those games were bad but they were rushed or had hardware limitations! But in 2018 getting a 2 is really really bad!
Also I think we can't compare scores too much...like, 10/10 Zelda I can accept it, but it doesn't compare to 10/10 Last of Us! Know what I mean?
Commet 217 wow.....
@RPE83 the game has a 1.4/10 user score on metacritic. it has a 61 rating from critics. those numbers speak for themselves. mg: survive is a steaming pile of poo that will be long forgotten in no time, if it hasn't already. i will be weary of all future pushsquare reviews from here on out. lack of honesty has hurt the credibility of this website.
@Porco Please watch the language. Thanks
@Tasuki my apologies.
The Last Jedi had a much higher critical review than user score, and that said more to me about the users than the critics.
Look, I'm not saying it's a great game, I'm not saying it's an awful game. I haven't played it and I have little interest in doing so truthfully.
I'm just saying I don't understand why people get so upset over subjective reviews, and quote other reviews when attacking scores and opinions, to the level where with no proof, evidence or effort towards obtaining either, people are happy to fire off accusations concerning integrity and brown envelopes.
It seems that the only way some people would be happy is if every single outlet or person told them the same thing, basically what they want to hear, or essentially what they've already decided for themselves anyway.
If Push Square gave this 6/10 and said "Conclusion : See Metacritic", I am not sure that is better that perhaps being too effusive in praise.
If Push Square re-reviewed this and went "Go on then gang, you got us, it's really a 5" , people would moan they had no integrity either.
I'd rather and respect someone more who wrote something thoughtfully, honestly, stood by their words and have a conclusion that tallied with that, than just have metacritic or consensus led safe "opinions" that's the same as everything else.
We're all different with different opinions, so why would everyone review the same thing , exactly the same?
Tap here to load 200 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...