I hear the gameplay is pretty solid. But is the underwhelming ending really that bad?
yes you should
yes
yes it is
>>341840654
>I hear the gameplay is pretty solid.
In the sense that the mechanics work very well, yes. The actual missions are fairly repetetive, for the most part.
What ending?
i had lots of fun, go for it!
>>341840654
The mechanics are very good. Unfortunately about 3 quarters through the game I got bored and I haven't picked it back up. They nailed the mechanics but made the missions completely dull.
The gameplay is good but there's too little actual content so you don't really have much chances to actually play the game.
You'll probably have about 20 hours of actual fun, but the rest is filler / empty world / rehashed missions / cutscenes.
No. It's pointless.
It's fun for the first hour until you realize how bad it is (maybe a couple hours if you didnt already play GZ)
>>341842628
this
>>341840654
Act 2 is where things get repetitive and you truly see just how rushed the game was. You literally repeat missions, but with "perfect stealth" or no kill runs, and they're mandatory to progress through the rest of the story.
That said, the gameplay IS pretty solid, and probably has dome of the better stealth mechanics available. The story is lackluster.
took me aboot 200 hours to beat the game. I took my time and did every mission. It's very repetitive though. Probably the only open world game that takes hundreds of hours that I've ever cared enough to beat.
MGSV is like a road trip to a shitty destination , you know you'll end in that city you hate , but the trip itself is awesome
>>341843225
weird i only did 1 of those and it gave more story missions.
I love the gameplay but the story is almost nonexistent and has almost nothing to do with MGS. Remove the name Big Boss along with flashbacks to Ground Zeroes and it's a whole new IP. All downhill after Act 1 and the game doesn't have an ending.
