Board Thread:Metal Gear Solid V/@comment-64.40.147.86-20141024014837/@comment-1672596-20141029181048

Paranoid Donkey wrote: 216.185.63.214 wrote: People who repeatedly say we don't care have no explanation for their blind opinions. Here are some; It's just a game, and the guns aren't the reason I play the game. It has no bearing on the overall narrative, gameplay or fun of Metal Gear Solid.

What it is, is a minor detail. I get that it's an annoyance because up until now the game has had real weapons, but it's really not that big a deal other than breaking the uniformity. Which, to be fair, I admit can be annoying, but certainly nothing to boycott the game over. My stance on it is; "Yeah it kinda sucks that they don't have licensed weapons, but oh well.", I hardly see how that's a blind opinion at all.

216.185.63.214 wrote: TPP is going to sell less than Peace Walker. That's not true at all. TPP is coming out on four home consoles AND PC, which is, as a collective far less niche than the PSP was particularly in the West. And honestly if you're not going to buy the game based on the fact that the weapons aren't real, evidently you'd be better suited to Medal of Honor or something like that where guns are the main focus of the game. Again, not really caring about a relatively minor detail is hardly a blind opinion, it just means that it'll have no bearing on how much I, or others, enjoy the game.

Weedle McHairybug wrote: It's not so much the guns themselves so much as the fact that they are being extremely inconsistent with the timeline. As I said, that's something I can understand. I suppose, considering I don't care much for guns (not coming from a culture/country where guns are awfully present) I can't empathise, but I guess it's the same as how I was annoyed at them replacing David Hayter, not because of any skill he or Sutherland has, but because it broke with tradition in the games. So, in that sense, I understand your grievance.

It's important to note that we may yet see some licensed weapons, because we haven't seen the entire list of items in TPP yet, and even if we do, there can be a simple explanation such as "Diamond Dogs created new weapons/technologies (see: iDroid), which were ultimately lost when Solid Snake destroyed Outer Heaven" or something like that. It's a cop out, it's lazy, but I dunno, would you guys prefer it to be addressed like that, or completely ignored in the game? That's a genuine question by the way. I'm trying to get where you're coming from. Actually, I was meaning they basically did it at a point that was completely inconsistent with the timeline, especially when Peace Walker and even the MSX2 Metal Gear had licensed weapons. They broke tradition with Metal Gear Rising beforehand with using entirely fictional weapons, but at least that can be excused because most of the weapons were implied to have been developed AFTER the Patriot AIs shutdown.

And that explanation cannot explain why groups completely unaffiliated with the Diamond Dogs/MSF such as the US Marine Corps or the Soviets, heck, that African group in the recent demo have those weapons.