Reply
Highlighted
Mar 29 2014
By: JOKERSHENCHMAN PlayStation MVP 2052 posts
Offline

Ground Zeroes: A Dangerous Precedent?

[ Edited ]
38 replies 470 views Edited Mar 29, 2014

 (NOTE: There is a TLDR version at the bottom of the post)

As a long time Metal Gear fan, I was extremely happy when I saw the announcement awhile back for Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain. I was even happier when I found out that Ground Zeroes would be released in 2014 to give us a Metal Gear game to tide us all over until Phantom Pain was released in 2015. However, I was extremely unhappy to learn that Ground Zeroes is, altogether, less than 2-3 hours of content.

 

Excuse me?

 

When I saw Ground Zeroes price tag set at $40 on release, I was already assuming that it wasn't going to be a full-fledged game. Maybe 10 hours or so, which is short in comparison to most Metal Gear games. But when I began hearing news of multiple players speedrunning the main campaign at a paltry 8-10 minutes, and that the entire game features less than 2-3 hours of content with all the side missions, I was more than a little furious.

Even though the price has been dropped, the "game" is now $20 on PS3 and $30 on PS4, but this is still absolutely unacceptable. Everyone who bought this at release paid $40 for a DEMO. That's right, a DEMO for Phantom Pain. I've seen and played free demos that had more content than this full-on boxed release. Konami (and possibly Kojima, if he had any say in the pricing) is taking advantage of every Metal Gear fan who has been waiting for the next game in the franchise.

 

What's even more disturbing is the fact that most fans aren't even complaining and they bought it without question, not even realizing that they had just been robbed and that they had paid their hard-earned money on a DEMO that can be beaten multiple times in a single day.

Konami is setting an extremely dangerous precedent with this release. If they can charge $40 at release for a demo and get away with it, who's to say that more and more developers won't start doing this? We're already seeing this load of crap about "early access" happening with Steam and Kickstarter, where you are paying full price for a game that's not even finished so you can "play it before everyone else!" 

 

I'm not saying that Ground Zeroes, regardless of price or play time, is a bad game. I've heard from multiple sources that I trust say that if this is a taste of Phantom Pain, we have a lot to be excited for. I still desperately want to play it, but I absolutely refuse to purchase Ground Zeroes until it's less than $15 on PS4, because I will NOT pay any more than that for a demo.

 

What are your thoughts?

(TLDR: Early access and paying for demos are bad, m'kay?)

 

 

Added label "Ask the Community"  -FluffyKitty_0256

 photo 77fc1ce2-cb52-4a96-a32f-4b687a5d219a_zps58b38293.jpg
Message 1 of 39 (470 Views)
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 12/08/2000
Online
26938 posts
 

Re: Ground Zeroes: A Dangerous Precedent?

Mar 29, 2014

This again? 

 

You want my honest opinion? It seems that the stories that are being told on the internet are more important to some than the ACTUAL game. "Oh it's only two hours!". "It's only an hour!". "I heard there's a guy who beat it in ten minutes". "It's a $40/$30 demo!!". The outrage being expressed to some is taking the place of any real critique of the ACTUAL GAME. Why? Because this feeds into the whole idea that they're ripping you off. Even though you've been told from the beginning that this is prelude to a larger game, somehow you've been hoodwinked. And that games are getting shorter, and you're paying more for less, when the reality is that you're paying less for games than at any other time in the entire history of the industry, and you're getting more than you ever did in previous generations. 

 

Maybe I'm playing the game the wrong way, but I'm about four to five hours in, and honestly I have no idea how much longer this deal is. I don't know, but I really don't see how you can play this in ten minutes, unless you cheat. 

Message 2 of 39 (459 Views)
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 10/13/2009
Offline
2052 posts
 

Re: Ground Zeroes: A Dangerous Precedent?

[ Edited ]
Mar 29, 2014

CaptainAlbator wrote:

This again? 

 

You want my honest opinion? It seems that the stories that are being told on the internet are more important to some than the ACTUAL game. "Oh it's only two hours!". "It's only an hour!". "I heard there's a guy who beat it in ten minutes". "It's a $40/$30 demo!!". The outrage being expressed to some is taking the place of any real critique of the ACTUAL GAME. Why? Because this feeds into the whole idea that they're ripping you off. Even though you've been told from the beginning that this is prelude to a larger game, somehow you've been hoodwinked. And that games are getting shorter, and you're paying more for less, when the reality is that you're paying less for games than at any other time in the entire history of the industry, and you're getting more than you ever did in previous generations. 

 

Maybe I'm playing the game the wrong way, but I'm about four to five hours in, and honestly I have no idea how much longer this deal is. I don't know, but I really don't see how you can play this in ten minutes, unless you cheat. 


I'm not talking about whether or not the game itself is good or bad, I'm talking about how dangerous this line of thinking will become. And if you had actually read the entire post, you would've noticed that I've heard that the game itself is incredible and I desperately want to play it. But charging $20-$40 for (at maximum) five hours of gameplay is disgusting and unacceptable. 

And the often-used excuse that this is a "prologue" or "prelude" to Phantom Pain is not a valid excuse for the price tag. Not. One. Bit. If you can't see that you paid way more than you should have for a DEMO, than I'm truly sorry.

As an outsider looking in, I don't see how you could stretch this game past a few hours unless you crawl everywhere.

And I don't see how you can say that "we get more with this generation than we ever did."

Paying $60 for games that are broken on release, paying extra for content that should have been in the game in the first place, microtransactions, pay-to-play, monthly subscription fees, service subscription fees, overpriced DLC and expansions, ETC. ETC.

I remember paying less than $50 for games in the N64 days and actually getting a full GAME, not a demo, not something that requires DLC to even work properly, not something I have to pay $15 a month just to play after buying it for $60.

 

These are the first few speedruns I found out of the multiple YouTube pages filled with them. Most of them at 100% completion and S-Rank. In under 30 minutes.

Welcome to the new world of gaming, paying way more for way less.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rO-pBfQLOs4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sptR4lRTHfk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dINNhfwVgI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=losiUB4NG0E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfwlKgEyUaU

 photo 77fc1ce2-cb52-4a96-a32f-4b687a5d219a_zps58b38293.jpg
Message 3 of 39 (451 Views)
MVP Support
Registered: 08/18/2009
Online
7989 posts
 

Re: Ground Zeroes: A Dangerous Precedent?

[ Edited ]
Mar 29, 2014

I bougth the game last week and got my PS4 two days ago and i don't regret my purchase.The game is really good it takes 2-3 hours to complete the campaing but the additionals missions extend the amount of time you will invest in completing the game.Kojima said a lot of times the game was a prequel to MGS V Phanton of Pain so you could get a taste of the next MGS game.Whenever you decide to buy it or not is up to you.Some people call it a demo and that just opinion due to the fact that content will not be available on MGS V Phantom of Pain if you want to play part of the game you will need to buy MGS V GZ.

KANE-FIRE

Message 4 of 39 (439 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 10/13/2009
Offline
2052 posts
 

Re: Ground Zeroes: A Dangerous Precedent?

Mar 29, 2014

KANE-FIRE wrote:

I bougth the game last week and got my PS4 two days ago and i don't regret my purchase.The game is really good it takes 2-3 hours to complete the campaing but the additionals missions extend the amount of time you will invest in completing the game.Kojima said a lot of times the game was a prequel to MGS V Phanton of Pain so you could get a taste of the next MGS game.Whenever you decide to buy it or not is up to you.Some people call it a demo and that just opinion due to the fact that content will not be available on MGS V Phantom of Pain if you want to play part of the game you will need to buy MGS V GZ.


So now I have to buy and play Ground Zeroes before I can even fully enjoy Phantom Pain? That's like paying full price to see a 10 minute movie just so you can go to the next theatre and pay full price to see the whole thing.

 photo 77fc1ce2-cb52-4a96-a32f-4b687a5d219a_zps58b38293.jpg
Message 5 of 39 (436 Views)
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 12/08/2000
Online
26938 posts
 

Re: Ground Zeroes: A Dangerous Precedent?

Mar 29, 2014

I'm not interested in "speed runs" for the short attention spanned, and you've just proven my point for me. You feel that they're going to make games shorter, and you hold this up as evidence. Not for nothing, but "gamers" think ANY price is too much for a game. You say $60, they want $40. You say $40, they want $20. You say $20, they want $15". In all fairness if you've paid the same amount for a remastered game that is over ten years old, then you have no business complaining about the price of Ground Zeroes. 

 

The reason why everyone is using the word "demo" because it implies FREE. Meaning you feel that you're entitled to a free copy of this game because you've convinced yourself it's a demo because of the length. Again, I don't see how anyone can blow through this in ten minutes, unless they're either cheating, or using some dishonest editing. 

Message 6 of 39 (434 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 12/08/2000
Online
26938 posts
 

Re: Ground Zeroes: A Dangerous Precedent?

[ Edited ]
Mar 29, 2014

JOKERSHENCHMAN wrote:

KANE-FIRE wrote:

I bougth the game last week and got my PS4 two days ago and i don't regret my purchase.The game is really good it takes 2-3 hours to complete the campaing but the additionals missions extend the amount of time you will invest in completing the game.Kojima said a lot of times the game was a prequel to MGS V Phanton of Pain so you could get a taste of the next MGS game.Whenever you decide to buy it or not is up to you.Some people call it a demo and that just opinion due to the fact that content will not be available on MGS V Phantom of Pain if you want to play part of the game you will need to buy MGS V GZ.


So now I have to buy and play Ground Zeroes before I can even fully enjoy Phantom Pain? That's like paying full price to see a 10 minute movie just so you can go to the next theatre and pay full price to see the whole thing.


If you buy The Lord of The Rings trilogy in book form, you'll have to read The Hobbit as a prelude. Same idea. 

 

And how is ten hours "short in comparison for Metal Gear games"? The running time of the original Metal Gear Solid is roughly FOUR HOURS, minus the cutscenes. The running time for Metal Gear Soid 2 is about the same. The longest running Metal Gear game is probably Snake Eater. Metal Gear Solid 4 runs about ten hours minus the cutscenes. 

Message 7 of 39 (429 Views)
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 07/06/2008
Online
4200 posts
 

Re: Ground Zeroes: A Dangerous Precedent?

Mar 29, 2014
Totally agree, I always say I am a huge Metal Gear fan, I do support the franchise 100% but when developers & publishers pull crap like this then no I will not hop on the bandwagon. Capcom has done shady stuff with on-disc DLC and look where they are now, Konami sells us a demo but because it's from Kojima Productions that makes it OK? Umm NO! If we support stuff like this then more developers will sell us games in parts or demos just to get a taste of the full game & I am one who will not support that business practice. I am perfectly fine waiting till The Phantom Pain gets finished so I can enjoy all of MGS5 at once & by then Ground Zeroes will probably be $5 or $10 or bundled with The Phantom Pain or it might even end up being free on PS+
facebook.com/gamer316
Message 8 of 39 (419 Views)
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 10/13/2009
Offline
2052 posts
 

Re: Ground Zeroes: A Dangerous Precedent?

[ Edited ]
Mar 29, 2014

CaptainAlbator wrote:

I'm not interested in "speed runs" for the short attention spanned, and you've just proven my point for me. You feel that they're going to make games shorter, and you hold this up as evidence. Not for nothing, but "gamers" think ANY price is too much for a game. You say $60, they want $40. You say $40, they want $20. You say $20, they want $15". In all fairness if you've paid the same amount for a remastered game that is over ten years old, then you have no business complaining about the price of Ground Zeroes. 

 

The reason why everyone is using the word "demo" because it implies FREE. Meaning you feel that you're entitled to a free copy of this game because you've convinced yourself it's a demo because of the length. Again, I don't see how anyone can blow through this in ten minutes, unless they're either cheating, or using some dishonest editing. 


You are completely missing the point. The speed runs are an example of how little this game has to offer in terms of content. And I never once said this game should be free, but charging $40 AT RELEASE for a game that has less content than I've seen in OTHER GAME DEMOS is mind-boggling. I would gladly buy this if it was $15, because I would be getting what I paid for. I will gladly pay $60-80 for Phantom Pain upon release, because it's a full game, not a "prelude" or "prologue" or "taste of what's to come."

I do not feel entitled to a free copy because I feel it's too short, in fact I don't think I've ever felt entitled to a game once. What I do feel is that the price should be dropped because of it's paltry, pathetic length, not because I feel entitled to it or want the price to be something that fits my wallet better. I have NEVER in my life seen something so short sell for so much, and people like you defend it like it's a full-fledged game when it's clearly not meant to be. You think this would go over well if it was $10, even $20 more at release? That's not that much cash, and everybody, most likely including you, would be in an uproar because they charged $60 for a few hours. How is $40 that much different?

 photo 77fc1ce2-cb52-4a96-a32f-4b687a5d219a_zps58b38293.jpg
Message 9 of 39 (416 Views)
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 10/13/2009
Offline
2052 posts
 

Re: Ground Zeroes: A Dangerous Precedent?

Mar 29, 2014

CaptainAlbator wrote:

JOKERSHENCHMAN wrote:

KANE-FIRE wrote:

I bougth the game last week and got my PS4 two days ago and i don't regret my purchase.The game is really good it takes 2-3 hours to complete the campaing but the additionals missions extend the amount of time you will invest in completing the game.Kojima said a lot of times the game was a prequel to MGS V Phanton of Pain so you could get a taste of the next MGS game.Whenever you decide to buy it or not is up to you.Some people call it a demo and that just opinion due to the fact that content will not be available on MGS V Phantom of Pain if you want to play part of the game you will need to buy MGS V GZ.


So now I have to buy and play Ground Zeroes before I can even fully enjoy Phantom Pain? That's like paying full price to see a 10 minute movie just so you can go to the next theatre and pay full price to see the whole thing.


If you buy The Lord of The Rings trilogy in book form, you'll have to read The Hobbit as a prelude. Same idea. 

 

And how is ten hours "short in comparison for Metal Gear games"? The running time of the original Metal Gear Solid is roughly FOUR HOURS, minus the cutscenes. The running time for Metal Gear Soid 2 is about the same. The longest running Metal Gear game is probably Snake Eater. Metal Gear Solid 4 runs about ten hours minus the cutscenes. 


And that prelude is a full book that is just as long as the rest of the trilogy. It was not 25 pages of a prologue people paid full price for. Oh, what was that you were saying about "we get more now than we ever did?" And the cutscenes are part of the game, so I don't understand why you keep bringing "minus the cutscenes" up. 

 photo 77fc1ce2-cb52-4a96-a32f-4b687a5d219a_zps58b38293.jpg
Message 10 of 39 (410 Views)