MGS4 Genuinely Coming To 360?

[greatdevourer]

http://www.noooz.com/archives/2006/12/exclusive_metal_gear_solid_4_c.html

Not that I care, but anything to reduce the number of consoles you need to buy is a big help :)

[risc]

noooz.com you say?

[seenew]

noooz.com you say?

Hahaha.



Early on, I heard Kojima expressed some pretty high interest in the Wii... I wonder if it will ever get a port. There was a MGS on the GCN, wasn't there?

[risc]

There was a MGS on the GCN, wasn't there?

Yeah Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes.

[MacRumorUser]

In fairness, there has/have been rumors of rumblings from within Konami's board room trying to put pressure on hideo kojima to release this on the 360 for a good while, especially considering the success of the 360 in the USA and Europe where it has and will have taken a considerable lead over PS3 due to Sonys failure to hit 2 xmas's here.

At the end of the day, publishers are out to make money, and exclusives by third party publishers really dont make financial sense unless the platform it is exclusive too is willing to pay handsomly, somthing given Sony's troubles financially the last year, may be unwilling to front.

[clayj]

Didn't Microsoft take out a full page ad (or two pages, even) back during some trade show (E3?) practically begging Kojima to bring MGS to the 360?

[Dagless]

My crystal ball says this will come out on the 360, either a month before or after the PS3 version. She wanted more rupees for detailed dates :o

[seenew]

She wanted more rupees for detailed dates :o

Ha!

[SpankyPenzaanz]

Hahaha.



There was a MGS on the GCN, wasn't there?

There was also Sons of Liberty for original Xbox - horrible port of metal gear. It also went against the first splinter cell at the time I believe

[Chone]

Hahaha.



Early on, I heard Kojima expressed some pretty high interest in the Wii... I wonder if it will ever get a port. There was a MGS on the GCN, wasn't there?

Like Far Cry proved, ports of succesful, cutting edge games do no do well on Wii, yeah yeah I know graphics do not matter (yeah right) but they are also part of the presentation and some of those farcry vengeance shots look like a bad n64 game... I can't imagine playing metal gear solid 4 with the graphics of metal gear solid 1.

[MacRumorUser]

There was also Sons of Liberty for original Xbox - horrible port of metal gear. It also went against the first splinter cell at the time I believe

Bar framerate hitch which was over played by reviewers in the rain sections outside the ship how was it a horrible port.

It was 480p on the Xbox too, compared to 480i on the PS2.



I dont like MGS games anyway, so it doesnt bother me which format it comes out on.

[Chone]

Bar framerate hitch which was over played by reviewers in the rain sections outside the ship how was it a horrible port.

It was 480p on the Xbox too, compared to 480i on the PS2.



I dont like MGS games anyway, so it doesnt bother me which format it comes out on.

Ooh I love MGS games, Metal Gear Solid 3 was particularly awesome, the story and presentation is awesome which is why I say putting it on Wii would be a mistake, they would have to rely on gameplay and there is only so much gameplay can take you, not to mention the Wii could offer nothing substantial to the series, maybe a gimmicky control but the n64 graphics it would probably have (an exageration of course) would make it useless.

I thought the reason MGS2 was a crappy port on Xbox was because of several framerate issues throughout the whole game...

[Dagless]

they would have to rely on gameplay and there is only so much gameplay can take you, not to mention the Wii could offer nothing substantial to the series, maybe a gimmicky control but the n64 graphics it would probably have (an exageration of course) would make it useless.

Wow. I don't know where to begin with how wrong that is!

Olny so much gameplay can take you. Gameplay is the friggin GAME. It's what differentiates it from an interactive film. It's what made Rise of the Robots the best bloody looking game on the Amiga, but arguably made it the worst gameplay. Gameplay over graphics? Twilight Princess. 480i/p and it's beating the crap out of every other PS3 game. You know - the super console.

Tying in with what you said above about "graphics don't matter (yea right)". I don't even understand why you said that. You said they don't matter then bracket a "yea right"... hmm. No. I tell you what does matter - Art direction. a consistent and expressive style relative to the gameplay style IS all graphics needs. This is how cel shading is fine in Windwaker. It is expressive.

I'm guessing you're one of the people who look at impressionism artwork and say it's just because it's not photo realistic.

Would Yoshis Island have been better with photographs of dinosaurs and scenery? Would it bollocks have.

ps. Going back to what I quoted from you - you're implying that MGS hasn't got good gameplay. As good gameplay can be transported and scaled to any system. Mario Kart, Metroid, Zelda are all solid examples of good gameplay that can run on handhelds and big consoles, even if 2D becomes 3D or vice versa the core gameplay elements remain intact (Metroid - exploration and atmosphere. prime example).

[BlizzardBomb]

Early on, I heard Kojima expressed some pretty high interest in the Wii... I wonder if it will ever get a port.

Probably not a port, but there is a Kojima game lined up for Wii. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_%27S%27)

[zap2]

[QUOTE=Chone;3158382]Ooh I love MGS games, Metal Gear Solid 3 was particularly awesome, the story and presentation is awesome which is why I say putting it on Wii would be a mistake, they would have to rely on gameplay and there is only so much gameplay can take you, not to mention the Wii could offer nothing substantial to the series, maybe a gimmicky control but the n64 graphics it would probably have (an exageration of course) would make it useless.
/QUOTE]

So the Wii..which has better graphics the the PS2(which is the System that had MGS3, your favorite MGS)...would suck with MGS4 because its graphics are not good enough(were they good enought on PS2?), and the controls would not a big enough improvment?

So why would a game (MSG4) with better graphics AND better controls(on Wii) not be better then MSG3 on PS2?

[Chone]

Wow. I don't know where to begin with how wrong that is!

Olny so much gameplay can take you. Gameplay is the friggin GAME. It's what differentiates it from an interactive film. It's what made Rise of the Robots the best bloody looking game on the Amiga, but arguably made it the worst gameplay. Gameplay over graphics? Twilight Princess. 480i/p and it's beating the crap out of every other PS3 game. You know - the super console.

Tying in with what you said above about "graphics don't matter (yea right)". I don't even understand why you said that. You said they don't matter then bracket a "yea right"... hmm. No. I tell you what does matter - Art direction. a consistent and expressive style relative to the gameplay style IS all graphics needs. This is how cel shading is fine in Windwaker. It is expressive.

I'm guessing you're one of the people who look at impressionism artwork and say it's just because it's not photo realistic.

Would Yoshis Island have been better with photographs of dinosaurs and scenery? Would it bollocks have.

ps. Going back to what I quoted from you - you're implying that MGS hasn't got good gameplay. As good gameplay can be transported and scaled to any system. Mario Kart, Metroid, Zelda are all solid examples of good gameplay that can run on handhelds and big consoles, even if 2D becomes 3D or vice versa the core gameplay elements remain intact (Metroid - exploration and atmosphere. prime example).

Alright, I knew my comments would earn me a reply like this.

Well first of all I think you are not getting me quite right which is understandable given the nature of my comments.

To begin with, I am not saying MGS gameplay is bad because its awesome but MGS is also great because of the way its presented and its technical achievements (I'm going to stop calling it graphics because thats a small word for what I'm referring to), just like FarCry, Farcry is not good because its revolutionary in the way you shoot and fight bad guys, its revolutionary because it puts you in an enviroment thats incredibly fun to play with and is very inmersive, the jungle, this is not possible on the Wii because its just not powerful enough so you end up with a crummy rendered linear jungle that just doesn't appeal as much anymore and you end up with a boring game, its not about graphics because FarCry Instincts was not as good looking as FC PC but it still offered the same feeling I described earlier.

MGS is a game that also depends on this feeling and would be a shame if it had to go because of technical limitations on a console, that is all I am saying.

And about that "yeah right" thing well, I'm just saying that there is an eyecandy whore in every one of us and everyone always hopes for better graphics, otherwise no one would be complaining how Wii games look the same as GameCube's, after all graphics don't matter? Right? I'm also trying to say that "graphics don't matter" only apply to certain games, for example I could care less about how Warioware looks, or even if Zelda has blurry textures or whatever, when I'm browsing for games like Elebits, I skip the graphics section completely. On the other hand graphics and other technical achievements are very important for me when I go play a shooter, thats what keeps the genre fresh for me because every game portrays different enviroments and styles and without faster and better hardware that kind of variety would just not be possible.

See every game relies on "feeling" and "style", games like Zelda and Warioware and many many others don't rely on incredibly fast and advanced hardware to have that but other games like say Far Cry and Metal Gear Solid, do, its that simple.

I do agree with most of what you said, and by the way Yoshi's Island is one of the more technically impressive games on the SNES, without the power of the SuperFX chip, it might have lost its comic book, cartoonish style... see where I am getting?

Ooh I love MGS games, Metal Gear Solid 3 was particularly awesome, the story and presentation is awesome which is why I say putting it on Wii would be a mistake, they would have to rely on gameplay and there is only so much gameplay can take you, not to mention the Wii could offer nothing substantial to the series, maybe a gimmicky control but the n64 graphics it would probably have (an exageration of course) would make it useless.


So the Wii..which has better graphics the the PS2(which is the System that had MGS3, your favorite MGS)...would suck with MGS4 because its graphics are not good enough(were they good enought on PS2?), and the controls would not a big enough improvment?

So why would a game (MSG4) with better graphics AND better controls(on Wii) not be better then MSG3 on PS2?

An excellent point as well, if MSG4 was ported to the Wii improving on graphics and better controls, it would be without a doubt better than MGS3 on the PS2... but then you would see how the game would be on the PS3 and 360 and it would lose its appeal... why? Read all I wrote above. So if MGS4 was a Wii exclusive it would be great but the game would not be as good as its PS3 and 360 counterparts, just like a Warioware port for PS3 and 360 would not work as well as its motion enabled Wii cousin.

[zap2]

[QUOTE=Chone;3158798]just like FarCry, Farcry is not good because its revolutionary in the way you shoot and fight bad guys, its revolutionary because it puts you in an enviroment thats incredibly fun to play with and is very inmersive, the jungle, this is not possible on the Wii because its just not powerful enough so you end up with a crummy rendered linear jungle that just doesn't appeal as much anymore and you end up with a boring game, its not about graphics because FarCry Instincts was not as good looking as FC PC but it still offered the same feeling I described earlier.
/QUOTE]


Far Cry was NOT the Wii, but crappy devs. The Wii can do MUCH more then Far Cry did

[Chone]

[QUOTE=Chone;3158798]just like FarCry, Farcry is not good because its revolutionary in the way you shoot and fight bad guys, its revolutionary because it puts you in an enviroment thats incredibly fun to play with and is very inmersive, the jungle, this is not possible on the Wii because its just not powerful enough so you end up with a crummy rendered linear jungle that just doesn't appeal as much anymore and you end up with a boring game, its not about graphics because FarCry Instincts was not as good looking as FC PC but it still offered the same feeling I described earlier.
/QUOTE]


Far Cry was NOT the Wii, but crappy devs. The Wii can do MUCH more then Far Cry did

Yeah probably but I was just trying to make a point on how graphics can kill certain games.

[greatdevourer]

To summarise Chone (I guess - long posts involve things such as paragraphs, and I don't have the concentration span to read more than 3 lines...) and quote summat I posted earlier on a different forum (that time about manga), good art doesn't make it, but crap art breaks it

[pcypert]

Regardless of gameplay...if you take a game designed for one thing and then squash it down for and try to force it to go somewhere else it's not going to be the same and most times will be really lame. Look at a lot of ports on the mac. Even ones with great stories have people turned off because of slow performance, etc.

Wii can have great gameplay all day long...but I think they'll suffer in the ports department as the games designed for a lot more power get stripped down a bit to come over. They can still be good, but there will be a lack gameplay aside.

Paul

[greatdevourer]

http://www.joystiq.com/2006/12/17/heightened-rumor-metal-gear-solid-4-not-a-ps3-exclusive/

Joystiq now say so too

Now all we need are SE to think the same way about FFXIII/Versus

[Chaszmyr]

I won't believe MGS4 will be on Xbox 360 until I hear it straight from Konami or Microsoft.

[furious]

never played MGS. so hopefully it does.

[Sky Blue]

The internet was aflutter with rumours this weekend, as reports speculated that the massive PlayStation 3 Metal Gear Solid instalment, Guns of the Patriots was stealthing its way over to Xbox 360 - rumours that Konami has since debunked to CVG.

"Konami has no plans to bring Metal Gear Solid 4 to the Xbox 360 at this time," a Konami representative told CVG, reiterating that the Hideo Kojima stealth-em-up was still "exclusive to PlayStation 3."

The original internet report pointed at the MGS instalment branching-out onto multiple platforms due to Konami's concerns that there won't be enough PS3s in gamers' hands by the time it hits shelves.

Though going by the company's official word, it looks like there'll be no Solid Snake action on Microsoft's console for the time being. We wouldn't totally rule out a 360 version in the long term, but you can bet the game will be exclusive to PS3 for at least a year.

We'll be sure to pipe up if Konami flips its stance.

there you have it

[MacRumorUser]

Konami has no plans to bring Metal Gear Solid 4 to the Xbox 360 at this time,

Careful wording, they are keeping there options open. They are not ruling out completely.

[2nyRiggz]

Not with the money Sony is drilling into konami to keep this on the PS3.....maybe a year after it launches on the PS3. Have you ever played splinter cell on a PS2/GC and it just doesn't feel the same...Thats how it feels when I play MGS on other consoles..feels like its missing something.



Bless