MGS4 print reviewers asked to not disclose install time, cut scene length, reports MTV

No.

No one.

.....

I'm pretty sure most people would think the governement. Since you know, they're trying to restrict our righhts. Kind of more important then games don't you think?

I think long bouts of whining about cutscenes IN A MGS GAME, while not affecting the game, sure affects my brain cell count cause I try to ponder just who exactly could be surprised and/or offended by this and I just end up getting dumber. Point being, how is this new?

i guess that depends....how high are we when we're watching our friends play? A few bowls and I'll watch all night

agreed, MGS is more of an "experience" than just a game

That's not the issue. Konami doesn't want the consumers to know how much of the game is cutscenes. Instead, they want people to buy the game by hype and not know what they're getting.
People are gonna buy this game thinking it's 100% action and Konami likes that. They want to keep the general public DUMB. There's money in DUMB.
The fans are gonna buy this game and enjoy it for what it is. They got that money already...but if word comes out that A.) This game is not for people that aren't fans of Kojima then B.) Konami makes less money.

It's Freedom of Press VS. Capitalism. Consumers should have a right to know if the reviewer thinks it might help the consumer decide on whether to buy the game or not. Essentially Konami is preventing reviewers from doing their jobs as they seem fit.

Fat guys on roller skates and vampire are far from intriguing.

There's more to the series than MGS2, and a shitload more to the story. We've talked about this, and you are stupid for reusing that argument, stupidhead.

Yeah man, you didn't mention the other 100 ridiculous things!
Moo!

Jokes aside Martez. Konami is preventing reviewers from telling you how much of the game is cutscenes NOT for you, but for other people that are going to buy the game thinking it's one thing and not the other.
Let me put it this way. "Now with 50% cutscenes" is not a good selling point economically. Why? Because a vast majority of gamers especially casuals (that bought gta and bought cod4 and bought halo 4 etc and made them million + sellers)don't like that.
If word gets out, they make less money. That's bull*&@ and you know it. If you make a game, sell it for what it is. If it doesn't make money for your company, tough cookies. Don't threaten people and remove them (the reviewers) of their freedoms and don't treat them like puppets. If they want to mention a fact about your game, let them.

vice city = better than gta4?

FAIL.

Hey, I'm not saying Vice City is better that GTAIV as a universal fact.
Its just that in my own opinion, the side stuff in Vice City, which was as much fun as its brilliant main story campaign, was completely gone in IV.
GTAIV, on the other hand, had a slightly better main story but really nothing else to offer. The Internet and the whole "make your friends like you" parts actually slowed down the game, making it less entertaining.
Honestly, not including the 9 assasination missions and 30 car thefts for Stivie, what else was fun besides the main missions?
The businesses were missing, the cab-driving/ambulence/fire-truck missions were missing and the boat load of easter eggs was not there (not saying IV didnt have eggs, but no where close to Vice City). There was no need for money, since you cant buy any houses (now Im stuck with 930k+, which I guess Ican use to pay 186000 toll fees).
Even the characters were not as entertaining, with Brucie being the only trully wacky one. Also, The best thing about the series; running away from cops, took a major blow to the groins. THe army was taken out (honestly, Where the f*ck are the tanks?!?!), and running away from cops became easier than ever, and therefore less exciting.
Putting cheat codes on the cell-phone was also kinda dissapointing, mostly because I loved the challenge of entering R1, R1, O, R2, Up, Down, Up, Down, Up, Down while flying on a motorcycle at a six star wanted level. And some of the best codes, like flying cars, all girls love you and many others were missing.
So I guess at the end of this long post I'd like to say that I loved GTAIV, but personally, despite the amazing graphics and intruguing story, found it largly inferior to Vice City (which was the perfected version of the trully ground breaking GTAIII)
Vote me Down if you must.

No need to vote down. Vice City was a lazy expansion pack instead of a decent sequel.

GTA3 was incredible. It was incredible because it wasnt bloated with features. With GTA4 they went back to the basics and trimmed the fat. I know for one that I didn't want to see what was next after playing through most of san andreas. They crammed so much shit into san andreas that it lost the whole feel of GTA.

GTA3 was closest to the original 2 (+exp), which in my books is a huge success. GTA4 mirrors that, which in my books cant be trumped by hawaii 5-0 music, bad clothes, poorly designed levels that were way too repetitive...the only thing saving that game was the makeshift multiplayer hacked in (by users) to teh PC version of vice

It's a given to us...the educated gamers. Not to some normal 12 year old with a completely bias Game Informer in their hand that will see the commercial and think it's a michael bay movie: the video game. Konami will gladly take their money and run.
Word gets around and to Konami word of this game not being for people that aren't fans of long-winded cutscenes and a story that you have to follow religiously (for 10 years now) to understand is bad for their wallets. This game cost a hell of a lot and they intend to do whatever it takes to make that money back...even stoop to this level of keeping consumers as uninformed as possible.
You are informed though and that's good. But you are not most consumers out there.

If someone who makes uninformed buying descisions gets upset when they don't like the game, that's on the idiotic casual buyer and not the developer no matter what they "tell" people not to write. See how easily we got this information? All someone's gotta do is google the game and read up.

I have no sympathy for idiots who buy the wrong game cause they didn't do research.

I think most people that play MGS do.
Heck, cutscenes were the best part of Subspace Emissary in Smash Bros. Brawl.

I like cutscenes as well. It's just that I prefer if they are kept to a minimum and that most of the story is told through actual gameplay.

Sigh, I think I'm just spoiled by Mass Effect.

Yeah, it really defeats the whole point of a product review. Just make sure to check the lowest-scored user reviews on GameFAQs or Amazon or whatever. Alot of them miss the point or have a strong bias, but they point out flaws and annoyances without hesitation.

*not past tense

You might as well define the difference between "objective" and "subjective" while you're at it. :)

read ign uk's review of the game.

they gave MGS a 9.9. the article above links to ign's review, but i guess since the positive review has nothing to do with the supposedly unethical konami restrictions, joystiq ONLY cited the "OMGWTFBBQ LONG CUTSCENES" from ign, rather than the "OMGWTFBBQ WE STILL LOVE THE GAME" part from the SAME review.

Ross, what ever happened to journalistic integrity? If you want to justify leaving out the positive 9.9 review from IGN, because it has nothing to do with konami's restrictions, YOU'RE WRONG.

the emphasis should exactly be that - DESPITE the long cut scenes and big install, THE GAME STILL... ROCKS! oh.. and ign gave it 9.9.

Ross you just dropped 20 spots on my list of joystiq bloggers, and there aren't even that many joystiq bloggers. Do you even like the MGS series? Randy should've reported this supposed news.

and who the fuck is eurogamer. sounds like they're trying to make a name for themselves by rating THE BEST MGS SEQUEL the lowest score. if ign scored mgs a 7, and eurogamer scored mgs a 9.5, you haters would all be citing IGN... tsk tsk.

Oh wow. That's very different from:

"FUCK MAN THIS GAME IS ART!!! ART!!!!"
- Gamepro.

who the fuck is eurogamer. most of you bitching about biased reviews said you were waiting for gamespot or ign, because gamepro review was done by a total fanboy, right?

well ign gave it 9.9 DESPITE konami's restrictions!

i BET if ign gave it 7, and eurogamer gave it a 9.9, all you haters would say, "oh look ign gave it 7! eurowho?"