Do people really play Metal Gear games on keyboard/mouse instead of a controller? Apparently so, as Hideo Kojima fans have taken to the Steam forums and other channels to express their disappointment at how all of the Metal Gear Solid games in METAL GEAR SOLID: MASTER COLLECTION Vol. 1, including Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater, do not include keyboard and mouse support. This omission has been confirmed on the individual games’ release pages, which state that a controller is required to play. “Just play it on emulator,” recommends one poster.
Notice: METAL GEAR SOLID – Master Collection Version requires a controller in order to play. Playing with a keyboard and mouse isn’t supported.
Released in 1998, this was the first 3D title in the METAL GEAR series. The game pioneers 3D stealth action against the threat of war and global nuclear weapons, using live action footage, cinematic cut scenes, interwoven with innovative gameplay.
The storyline, a whirlwind of intrigue and betrayal, has been hailed as the greatest story of the 20th century and was the third title in the METAL GEAR series to become a hit in subsequent years.
Source: Steam
Discussion (8 replies)
Join Discussion →A keyboard and mouse should always be supported by any program that runs on a computer in order to interact with that computer program at the basic level. But who in the f*ck plays games like these with a mouse and keyboard? Some games are meant for mouse + keyboard, and some are meant for controllers. You wouldn't play a fighting game or a racing game with mouse and keyboard. Likewise I wouldn't play a first-person shooter or an RTS game with a controller. You use the right control method for the game type. Metal Gear games are controller games. Doesn't make sense to whine about the lack of mouse and keyboard support for games like these, or say you're not gonna buy the game as a result. If you're trying to play a Metal Gear game with mouse+keyboard, you're doing it wrong. I don't give a sh1t about the Metal Gear series so this doesn't affect me (though I did enjoy the 3rd game MGS1 on PS1, and I also really f*cking enjoyed MGRR), but complaints like these are just silly.
On the other hand I spent years complaining about the lack of keyboard and mouse support on consoles, and I'm glad Microsoft finally started changing things in that regard. Of course there were earlier examples of games on consoles supporting mouse and keyboard, like Quake 3 on Dreamcast, UT3 on PS3, Doom on PS1, etc.
The 90+ % who don't have a controller for their PC? Plus everyone who prefers it over the boomerang for TPS games.
It is understandable to make a game tailored to a controller on console, but if you are going to port it to PC it is part of the job to make it mouse + keyboard friendly. That's non-negotiable.
Source that 90+% PC gamers don't have a controller?
It's my best guess as It is literally impossible to measure, due to the fact that you don't know whether someone has a controller and just not using it or if they don't have one. Even if it is 75% or heck let's go absolute crazy and assume 50% have a controller, it would still be unacceptable to release an adventure game on PC with no KB+Mouse support. Imagine the reverse that someone released an FPS on console with no controller support.
You always support the default input method of the system it is not even a question.
And even if you love controllers and would want to play this game with one, you still shouldn't defend this move as it is a slippery slope. If developers want to cash in on porting old games to PC they must support all standard PC features..
Hmm.
While I think it's a good idea to support PC features, I wouldn't go so far as this.
Adding in proper PC things takes developer time and money. I guess it's - do you want more stuff on the PC, or do you just want whatever can afford to port over?
I was going to resort to the old quality vs quantity argument, but let's be honest, just because a developer can afford to implement this stuff on a PC doesn't necessarily mean it's a high quality game or port, so I specifically skirted around that particular case.
I think my point, rather than the QvQ case, is that I would like for it to be easier to port stuff to the PC rather than harder because you need to implement a lot of changes to your game to support PC-specific stuff.
I'd rather they make high quality fully featured ports. Either do it right or don't do it at all, because if they neglect such a basic feature who knows what else they are skimping on?
As for needing lots of changes, console emulators can emulate controllers with mouse and keyboard, while supporting almost every important game ever released. Then AAA publishers should be able to do it for one specific game, unless they are greedy and lazy. A port shouldn't have less features than playing the game on an emulator. There is no excuse for that.
PC-exclusive gamers who regularly play console ports are going to have controllers. Most gamers are multiplatform though, so if they own at least one console from the last few gens, chances are good that they have an available controller to use on PC.
For some games that is completely impossible to do. For example, there is absolutely no way a fighting game can be made to play well with a mouse and keyboard. Likewise, there is just no way to make an RTS game work well on a controller.
That I can agree with.
Well honestly I do agree with this too. And this is something that Japanese devs are particularly bad at.
And here I thought the consoles being x86-64/AMD64 was gonna allow this to happen. But of course, things never turn out the way you expect. Just like when games first started going digital, and we heard that because games would no longer come with physical boxes or instruction manuals, they would be cheaper. Riiiiiiiight. We saw how that worked out.
Yeah that is a good point.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
There are pro players who use keyboard in fighting games. Custom Hit Boxes with keys for movement are more common than traditional keyboards these days, but the control input is the same.