Screenshots & trailers
Review sentiment over time
Weekly positive-review rate (green) and review volume (bars). Dashed lines mark significant patches; the amber line is the start of the current scoring window. Hover the dots to see what drove a dip or a jump.
How this score was computed
The VGC Score is a weighted blend on a press-comparable 0-100 quality scale. Steam approval rates are first calibrated (95% positive on Steam ≈ 89.5 quality, since Steam approval skews high). Press and tracked creator reviews each count ~2x a player review and share one cap against player evidence (creator buy/skip calls pool into an approval rate, calibrated like Steam approval); all-time sentiment is capped and halved (it's context, not verdict); reviews of the current build carry the most weight when a fresh patch anchors the window; and a 'typical game' prior keeps small samples from pegging the scale. Because press reviews and Metacritic user aggregates describe the launch build, their weight decays as the game ages (3-year half-life after a 1-year grace). That's how a game that launched rough can outgrow its old reception once updates win players over. Reviews under 2h playtime (the refund window), non-Steam activations, and free copies are downweighted.
| Component | Positive | Quality (0-100) | Weight (pseudo-reviews) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Press reviews (OpenCritic) | – | 75 | 25 |
| Creator reviews (2 tracked) | – | 68 | 1 |
| All-time Steam reviews | 85% | 78 | 1000 |
| Metacritic user ratings | – | 67 | 63 |
| Post-patch Steam reviews (trust-weighted) | 93% | 88 | 34 |
| Calibration prior (typical game) | – | 72 | 50 |
Scoring window: last 30 days (no significant patch detected) · 96 reviews sampled · 79 total reviews in window · weighted 54.8 up / 3.8 down · computed 3h ago · full methodology →
Press & Creators reviews (113)
Individual verdicts from outlets we track: scored reviews first, most trusted outlets first among them. The small badge is each outlet's trust score: how well its scoring history aligns with players.
- 60
“[T]he game itself is far from a fully realized one. Its main mission can be completed in an hour, tops, and the story does little more than bridge the gap between 2010's Peace Walker and the upcoming The Phantom Pain.”
read full review ↗ - 50
- 73
“Kojima hands over our Metal Gear Solid dose with a prologue to Metal Gear Solid: The Phantom Pain, with the controversy generated because of the length of the game. It's arguable importance makes it a must have to understand the story of The Phantom Pain.”
read full review ↗ - 100
“It is just a polished spy game that has something to say, but not too much and not for too long. It speaks well. But for those of us who spent years tuning ours ear to Metal Gear's strange language, this is the first small sign that it might soon be time to throw all that work away.”
read full review ↗ - 60
“An amazing tech demo that now only holds a small piece of the story that’s needed. It’s a fun game, but instead, you should probably just pick up The Phantom Pain and enjoy that.”
read full review ↗ - 70
“The undoubtable quality of Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes feels carved from a bigger, better game, and perhaps that makes it a better showcase for players who don't know their Snakes from their Otacons. Too good to be a cash-in, too calculated to be satisfying and too intriguing to spurn, Ground Zeroes is a fiscal test of patience.”
read full review ↗ - 78
“As a prologue to The Phantom Pain, Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes is disappointing. But a demo it is not, and taken on its own, there is plenty here to enjoy.”
read full review ↗ - 80
“While it looks like one, Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes is not a demo. It could - and should - be cheaper, but that can't erase the fact that this is a product of a very high-quality and depth.”
read full review ↗ - 80
“Once again, Metal Gear Solid has shown that as a series, it's a master of stealth action in a small, yet extremely well crafted experience that you will enjoy and play multiple times, right up until the release of Phantom Pain.”
read full review ↗ - 70
“Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes is technically brilliant and commercially indefensible, the Fox Engine impresses, Camp Omega is brilliantly dense, and the gameplay points excitingly toward The Phantom Pain. Two hours for 40 euros is still not enough.”
read full review ↗ - 80
“Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes is a short, but mechanically very sound, sandbox stealth appetiser for The Phantom Pain. Just be aware that its value is in experimentation and replaying scenarios, rather than lasting narrative.”
read full review ↗ - 60
“Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes would undoubtedly make a powerful introductory mission to Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain, so it seems a little insidious of Konami to hold it to ransom. That being said, we really can't fault what little we played, as far as the mechanics and design are concerned, but although the additional content does go some way towards sweetening the pot, we find it difficult to recommend this on those merits alone. Although long-time fans of the series are likely to pick it up regardless, we believe that this single mission should never have been released on its own.”
read full review ↗
Slant Magazine
The Angry Joe Show
The A.V. Club
Kinglink Reviews
VGChartz
Cubed3
Pure Xbox
gamefinity
PC Invasion
Push Square…and 101 more tracked reviews.
Patch history
- Beta Implemented Bug FixesDec 29, 2014
- Beta Implemented Bug FixesDec 29, 2014