Metal Gear Solid 4

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

10 May 2006, 03:02 PM
MechDeus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zerohero

WTF? where in game did it state this?

Multiple times.

Quote:

Last time I played it (which was last year), they put rockets onto the Tank just to transport it, and the Metal Gear in the game was perfect transporter of rockets/nuclear weapons because it could move them to locations faster.

The entire point of them having rockets on a tank (which is pretty LOL by itself) was so that it could launch the nukes further, giving it a greater range then any other other mobile missile launcher. That also meant it could "toss" them before firing, thus giving it an undetectable location.

p.s. In case you missed it, remember how a gigantic chunk of the game took place at an airstrip for the sole purpose of them having a stretch of road long enough for the tank to get enough speed so that it could chuck it missiles? Yeah.

p.p.s If you still don't remember the sole focal point of the design of the titular creation, feel free to check out GameFAQs where they have story faqs that talk about it. An excerpt:

Quote:

Rather than fire from a standstill, the Shagohod could accelerate up to 300 mph and launch the missile on momentum and light thrust, so that its onboard rockets would act as a second stage and increase its threat radius to approximately 6000 miles.

Quote:

Originally Posted by g0zen

First, it wasn't a Metal Gear and it wasn't trying to be. It was the Shagohad.

Boy, you sure got me on name semantics. It was the Metal Gear of the game, no matter if they called it the Sword of the Unicorn.

Quote:

Second, the idea was that using a rocket-powered tank to launch the missile at high speed into the sky you wouldn't waste fuel used for initial takeoff which would increase range. In theory, it could work.

Sort of like Communism.

Quote:

Obviously it's not very practical but why does it have to be?

It made for some sweet battles at the end of the game but as an idea it was hilariously bad.
10 May 2006, 03:04 PM
Zerohero

Quote:

Originally Posted by MechDeus

Multiple times.The entire point of them having rockets on a tank (which is pretty LOL by itself) was so that it could launch the nukes further, giving it a greater range then any other other mobile missile launcher. That also meant it could "toss" them before firing, thus giving it an undetectable location.

p.s. In case you missed it, remember how a gigantic chunk of the game took place at an airstrip for the sole purpose of them having a stretch of road long enough for the tank to get enough speed so that it could chuck it missiles? Yeah.

p.p.s If you still don't remember the sole focal point of the design of the titular creation, feel free to check out GameFAQs where they have story faqs that talk about it. An excerpt:Boy, you sure got me on name semantics. It was the Metal Gear of the game, no matter if they called it the Sword of the Unicorn.Sort of like Communism.It made for some sweet battles at the end of the game but as an idea it was hilariously bad.

We'll like I said , I haven't played it in a year, and only beat it once. Now MGS 1, and MGS 2 I've played multiple times.
10 May 2006, 03:10 PM
g0zen

Quote:

Originally Posted by MechDeus

Boy, you sure got me on name semantics. It was the Metal Gear of the game, no matter if they called it the Sword of the Unicorn.

Don't be a douchebag, you were wrong and I called you on it. Deal with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MechDeus

Sort of like Communism.

What?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MechDeus

It made for some sweet battles at the end of the game but as an idea it was hilariously bad.

Meh, Star Wars was a hilariously bad idea but the REAL US government went along with it, the "Missile Shield" is a hilariously bad idea but the US went with it, hell the Ospery and the F-22 are hilariously bad ideas but they're operational. You're really not making your case that it was 'wacko fiction' by just saying it's a bad idea.
10 May 2006, 04:07 PM
Jetman

That video was pretty good,except for Raiden's high heels. I also was hoping Liquid Snake would have been cloned by now so we wouldnt have to see Grandpa Ocelot as the main enemy. To me Ocelot just got dumb, and uncool, after the Frankenstein arm thing. He was an interesting enemy in MGS1 with a mysterious background and that was it. It was cool to see him in MGS3 but that was all he should have appeared in.

Vamp is dumb too. I'm glad he isnt in this one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by g0zen

hell the Ospery and the F-22 are hilariously bad ideas but they're operational.

Not to derail such a fantasticly enlightening thread, but why is the F-22 a hilariously bad idea?
The Osprey,maybe, but the F-22 is a fine piece of equipment.

I guess it has cost issues, and some cooling issues, and the wave of the future may be UCAV's but I wouldnt call it a bad idea.
10 May 2006, 04:12 PM
Dolemite

The rocket tank thing gets funnier the more I hear about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by g0zen

Don't be a douchebag, you were wrong and I called you on it. Deal with it.

I'm sure he will.

Man, you take your Metal Gear seriously. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetman

That video was pretty good,except for Raiden's high heels.

And black lipstick. Don't forget the black lipstick.

Quote:

Vamp is dumb too.

And Fatman. Don't forget Fatman.

All my favorite MGS villains were in 1. Those guys were all cool (except for maybe Liquid Snake, sure wish he'd fuck off already).
10 May 2006, 04:15 PM
MarkRyan

Just asked a co-worker next to me about the MGS3 physics. He studied physics at Yale (has a Masters) and says the idea behind the Shagohad isn't too ridiculous at all. Basically turning a single stage rocket into a double stage rocket.

Now the dude that controls bees and the guy that's a human spider...
10 May 2006, 04:16 PM
Jetman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dolemite

And black lipstick. Don't forget the black lipstick.

I didnt think that was lipstick. I thought he was part cyborg and his jaw fell off or something? If that's just part of the suit, then yeah more gay points for Raiden.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dolemite

And Fatman. Don't forget Fatman.

Oh, I didnt. Him and Doctor Octopus Snake can both go to hell too.
10 May 2006, 04:17 PM
g0zen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetman

Not to derail such a fantasticly enlightening thread, but why is the F-22 a hilariously bad idea?
The Osprey,maybe, but the F-22 is a fine piece of equipment.

I guess it has cost issues, and some cooling issues, and the wave of the future may be UCAV's but I wouldnt call it a bad idea.

It's trying to be too many things at once; stealthy, long-range, fighter/bomber, etc. Do the weapons really need to be in ports that open? No. Sure, it looks cool, but its entirely unnecessary and costly. The F-22 is a money pit and has been acknowledged as such by the Senate who regret funding it in the first place.
10 May 2006, 04:17 PM
Diff-chan

A lot of people with advanced degrees just make up bullshit and say it to people to impress them.

Actually I do that sometimes and people are too stupid to know it. Math BS FTW.
10 May 2006, 04:17 PM
MarkRyan

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetman

To me Ocelot just got dumb, and uncool, after the Frankenstein arm thing.

Dunno if it helps or hurts, but he's basically 100% Liquid in MGS4.

Quote:

Vamp is dumb too. I'm glad he isnt in this one.

The MGS4 artwork released at last year's E3 showed Vamp. He's probably in the game.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page