What if MGSV was actually good

that's kind of an odd thing to notice, but in retrospect i can see what you mean

everybody does

jew-b-i shills must have just clocked into a shift

Attached: 1551194537954.jpg (852x581, 201K)

It was meh. It could have been 10x better if they had bothered with any sort of depth to the gameplay and didn't have astoundingly shit-tier AI. But then Ubi$oft would have to care about the quality of the product they're putting out.

I actually also bought this game a few days ago, around the 25% through the game mark I started to burn out, but idk what happened the game started to become super fun again, I'm almost lvl 30 so I can get to tier 1 soon, whatever that does.
Haven't touched the MP yet, but I've no interest in the PvP to be honest.
This is my SOG Spic Hunter

Attached: aviator.jpg (1920x1200, 320K)

for me the increased difficulty on tier 1 made it a lot more fun, even on extreme you can kinda just coast through firefights

Is that what Tiers do? increase the difficulty? In which way, health/damage bloating or AI changes?

it might make the ai a bit more aggressive but i didn't really test it or anything, mainly it just makes you take more damage.

Gameplay wise MGSV felt more smoother but Wildlands had a way more interesting map and coop.
I think the game had a lot of potential but they never really added anything good post launch and the DLC were shit.

how active is it

What are you talking about?
It has the same problem MGSV had of pointless grinding, repetitive missions and shitty, non-existant story, except Wildlands also has absolute garbage controls on top of that.
Special mention to vehicle controls, I have absolutely no idea what they were thinking, they feel so fucking bad.

Ubisoft was sitting on a goldmine with this game but completely fucked it up, the game had so much potential, it really pisses me off since there are no tacticool games like arma 3 in console and this was the closest to it, hopefully we get a better sequel announcement at E3

Attached: YOU ARE REALLY MAKING ME LOOK BAD.png (532x530, 399K)

I had a lot of fun in coop. Repetitive missions in single player probably would be boring.
Some events were great. The Predator one and Splinter Cell in particular.

Attached: 460930_screenshots_20181216205701_1.jpg (1920x1080, 773K)

there still are people who play this game but mostly PVE due to the fact that a lot of people like to roleplay as special forces units, and because PVP sucks ass because of the horrible controls and also because they hired the same monkeys who did the shitty matchmaking in Rainbow six siege

Attached: Fuze The Dude.png (1920x1080, 2.34M)

>Not going to lie, pretty pumped for this one!
Not falling for it Ubisoft shill

Ubisoft doesn't give a shit about this game, the only thing they do with it is add paid cosmetics and microtransactions so its really unlikely that they'll pay for shills

>if your momma was alive son she would be proud of you

>MY MOTHER IS DEAD??

basically every departure from the design philosophy of 1-4 was a disaster

if they just took the base game mechanics and made a traditional MGS game it would have been way better, but the plot would still be one of the worst stories ever created

Its not good. Do yourself a favor and don't start playing it. The first 45 minutes is fucking awesome but after that its the most pointless video game i can remember. There's a set up to a story but no actual resolution or payoff or anything even remotely compelling

youtube.com/watch?v=pGkHLZaeN7M&t=904s
>7:20
The dialogue is so cringy

This. Combat is okay and dialogue is pretty funny. Player 1 is a sarcastic asshole to everybody. My only issue is game modes like "prestige" or "realistic" are too ambitious for what the game offers. Realistic turns all enemies into aimbot gods that can gun you down instantly across the map, while making even the shirt wearing basic baboons take 20 shots to the chest to kill. I get the idea of a "realistic" sneaky murder sim, but the coding isn't there to back the idea up. The Large-scale environments look solid though, I mean really fucking good. Game is okay. Buy it if and only if you buy it for free.

it's barbies for dudes
you dress up a guy and shoot drug dealers

It's okay
The campaign has way, way, way, way too much filler
>go here to kill these guys so you can kill the guys above them to kill the general of the region to kill the crime lord
Far Cry 5 did the same thing better where you just have fun in one region and rack up points then kill the leader of that region, rather than killing all the leaders of sub-regions to kill the regional leader to kill the crime lord
The map for Wildlands was grossly, needlessly large too. I loved the different areas, especially the salt flats, but it felt really samey and unnecessary most of the time, and it felt empty and lifeless. I'd rather have a smaller, concise, better designed map than a gigantic one.
Combining the design aspects Wildlands and FC5 would be best, take lessons learned from both to make a good game. I want to play with my buddies and have fun in a map and not be forced to kill all these little guys to advance the story. I want to find new guns and attachments and clothes to have fun with, I want to take over outposts and slowly conquer the map.

I've watched gameplay videos of Wildlands. The movement, controls, shooting, AI seemed really dodgy to me. What about Wildlands is so much better? I actually liked MGSV and want more of that formula.

>pointless grinding
If you mean capturing animals and building grade 12 weapons or whatever, then that's entirely optional. From what I've personally tested, you can quite far into the game without even capturing translators into your team, or upgrade any gear whatsoever.

Attached: 54756457657888.gif (498x243, 1.25M)

omg the cringe

Nothing, really.
The map feels more alive than MGSV's, i'll give it that, but that's it, everything else is worse.

VOCAL CHORD PARASITES
100 MILLION YEAZRS
MINE CLERAING

MGSV is better than Wildlands, don't listen to these shills. Wildlands has far worse gameplay than V.