Ubisoft has a movie and television division and they haveban Assassin’s Creed project and others coming to hopefully increase the audiences for their franchises.

I can’t work out why they haven’t even done the cheap option of just porting the PS3 era HD Trilogy Collection to PS4, would surely be a licence to print money. While I’d love a proper remaster, especially to add HDR as that would really pop visually with the shadow / light detail, I would settle for being able to play on a modern system (I have a PS3 but the system itself is so sluggish, and the Sixaxis controller so poor, I would always choose a zippy modern port with a PS5 controller).

If it is a success then I imagine those small companies are now huge companies, but so rare it will happen. What I don’t get is artistically for the development team, once they launch a live service game and it beats the odds to become successful, those devs now are purely focused on how to get more from their players, maintain engagement and find a way to slot in brand partnerships. Have to imagine they would hope the success would mean they have more freedom in future projects, instead they become more creatively unfulfilled than ever

@Lexreborn2
True, there were indeed non lethal runs in MGS4. Perhaps I used the wrong wording, but I was more so referring to the 'guns blazing' aspect of the gameplay. This was something that wasn't easily accomplished in the prior games of the series. One reason being that you had limited ammo. In MGS4, you had virtually all the arsenal and ammo you'd ever need early on in the game by way of Drebin points. This alone made stealth all but unnecessary, and resulted in a much easier game than previous entries. That's what the article's alluding to.

@DaReapa

You could go guns blazing even in MGS1, I know 'cause I sucked at stealth at the time and I still beat that game by simply going gung ho on the lowest difficulty and replaying multiple parts over and over 'till I eventually made it.. And it was never the case that the games simply allowed you to just play Rambo instead of a spy with no punishment, you always had a much harder time trying to be a one man army on higher difficulties than just being furtive, so it was always very much stealth first and foremost, the supposed appeal to action in MGS4 was never an issue, they added more weapons and tactics which made all out war a more viable option in some parts but not all of the game and never the ideal course of action. In fact MGS4 have, just like all other MGS games (even the open world unfinished mess that was MGS5), a score system which will rank your run and the point system, like always, favored stealth, non-lethal approaches... Not only the rank/emblem is tied to playing stealth, the game had multiple item unlocks and trophies which you could only ever get by playing it furtively... Hardly anything required you to play guns blazing.

So can we please stop making bullshit up about MGS4 already? I don't know if you were mad the game skipped your platform of choice in favor of the PS3 or if it devalued your life achievement of beating a silly game by being a little more accessible or whatever else was the issue, but it was some 15 years ago, it's time to let go of this whole they abandoned stealth bullshit, they never did that, in fact, it was the second best stealth mechanics in the entire franchise, behind only MGSV, which allowed an even more complex stealth system (and even more open combat too if you wished, because that's what the increasing technology of different generations allowed) but I would argue MGS4 still took more advantage of their stealth mechanics than MGSV ever realized (largely because of open world vs linear structure, but still...). Yes, you could play like a normal shooter action adventure, but you could even more easily had played it like one of the best stealth action games ever. If you choose not to, that's on you.

In my opinion as far as modern stealth mechanics and freedom of approach I think V is the best we’ve had so far