MGS-ish stuff from RE6 thread

[KAI]

An action game whit a bishonen as a main character, that's why everyone hates it.

[Limbrooke]

Taking me honestly is the easy part, it's the views that naysayers seem to have such a hard time handling.

I already stated that MGS2's telephone directory of a control interface was not helped by the dual shock, which is where I feel a lot of the burden lies.

I asked how you would improve the controls, not what is meant by "shortcomings of the PS controller". Coming from MGS1 there isn't a huge change (not surprising given identical form factor/configuration of the old controller), in which case I'd ask do you take any fault in MGS1 on PlayStation control-wise? If so, if the controls are so off putting why bother having gone through either game in the first place?

[drauch]

We took it to PM. Looks like it's all Metal Gear now, guys.

[Kaiser]

Calm down everybody, no need to jump into each other's throats. I do agree with Skykid, MGS2 was an okay game but it lacked a lot to desire especially in the story department and more, by any means, it's not a bad game, it's just flawed. While MGS4 was way ahead in quality of MGS2, I felt while it FINALLY stopped the patriots stupidity, it also was stupid in the explanation department, "Nanomachines" YUP ANSWER TO EVERYTHING.

Don't get me wrong, MGS4 I loved in gameplay department (on par with first MGS), but the story lost a lot of points because it tried to fix the story that was crap in first place (Looking at you MGS2, MGS1 didn't suffer from that).

You know the best part? Ghost Babel was disregarded because Kojima claimed Snake wasn't himself much but it baffles me because it technically had the entire patriots plotline BUT WITHOUT the retarded long cutscenes and without retarded plot points which is hilarious because he basically disregarded the better of the games story-wise.

About Resident Evil right, did you guys think that without Shinji Mikami, the same levels of direction as RE1-4 had would continue?

You could not be more wrong, look what is happening to Megaman without Inafune (Xover UGH), you guys should be glad RE5-6 aren't as bad as Megaman Xover is... but i'm afraid it will eventually reach that level because Capcom doesn't know what they are doing anymore, look at Lost Planet 3, it's made by Spark Unlimited who produced two of most infamously known as subpar FPSes this generation, that doesn't say well.

Don't get me wrong, I liked RE5, I would probably like RE6 but a bit less but I WOULD not dare to write it off as a bad game while I haven't even played it because I am not part of the hate because it's popular to hate bandwagon.

And that's all I gotta say, stop the personal war, calm the truck down, we don't want to be seen as 4chan.

[Jonathan Ingram]

After assertively being instructed that my opinion of MGS > MGS2 is the minority

*facepalm* Where did I say that? Reading comprehension 101. I know that MGS2 would often come out the least favorite in polls of this nature because of Raiden alone. His character was created as a result of a focus test among Japanese females in an attempt to increase the series` popularity in Japan, which worked out very well in the end, but pissed off the game`s Western fanbase. Many would name Raiden as the sole reason they hated the game(even though they love him in MGS4 because a generic cyborg ninja with a flat personality fits their idea of "badass" much more than Raiden`s character in MGS2). Overreactions like "I quit MGS2 10 minutes into the Big Shell because of how much Raiden sucks" were actually not rare and I`ve seen this sentiment expressed more than a few times.

A mainline MGS game with Solid Snake/Naked Snake will come out ahead of MGS with Raiden as a main in popularity 100% of the time. Everybody and their mother knows that. So, you effectively proved nothing as I had never said MGS2 would beat MGS1 in popularity contest(point me to where I did).

To reiterate my statement from the previous post, what I find ironic is that someone who likes RE5 is baffled there are people who would hold MGS2 in high regard or prefer it to the first game even though neither MGS2 in particular nor mainline MGS games in general are CRITICAL FAILURES like RE5 and now RE6 and their quality remained consistent throughout.

Not surprising that most people who are against this view are shit at games.

Now try to prove that correlation. Should be interesting. You`ve already proved to be quite entertaining.

And stop pretending to be such an expert at arcade and action games. What is the basis for that and where did that even come from? From you thinking that Ultima, Wizardry, Fallout, Pool of Radiance, Planescape Torment, Bard`s Tale and Baldur`s Gate are visual novels? It`s pathetic that you even resorted to this bullshit. And admit it, you wouldn`t be able to pull off Akira`s one frame knee if your life depended on it. I`d wager that`s the origin of your complexes.

Don't get me wrong, MGS4 I loved in gameplay department (on par with first MGS), but the story lost a lot of points because it tried to fix the story that was crap in first place (Looking at you MGS2, MGS1 didn't suffer from that).

MGS4`s story turned out to be such a mess because Kojima caved in to the pressure from fans to tie up all the "loose ends" created by MGS2. The problem is, with MGS2 Kojima was doing his own thing and many story elements were not supposed to be taken seriously let alone tied up in future. Take Ocelot`s talking arm, for example. From what I remember, the original idea was to give him a robotic arm, but Shinkawa had a different proposition, the results of which ended up in the final game and it doesn`t seem like there was much reasoning behind the decision other than "for the lulz". The same goes for the undead vampire running on water. Stuff like that was never supposed to be explained, but that`s precisely what was done in MGS4 and we got "nanomachines" as a result.

[Skykid]

After assertively being instructed that my opinion of MGS > MGS2 is the minority

*facepalm* Where did I say that? Reading comprehension 101. I know that MGS2 would often come out the least favorite in polls of this nature because of Raiden alone.

Ah, in that case I misunderstood where you were coming from and apologise. There were several occasions where you seemed to be saying it was some kind of fact that MGS2 was held in high regard by fans, but I must have got it skewed amid all the banter.

But please stop talking about RE5. It's irrelevant to the conversation even if you're using it in a roundabout way to try and illustrate some kind of irony in my reactions to your MGS preferences: reactions that are vindicated by the polls on the previous page.
Since I don't hold RE5 above any other title in the series, it doesn't really have much purpose here.

I asked how you would improve the controls, not what is meant by "shortcomings of the PS controller". Coming from MGS1 there isn't a huge change (not surprising given identical form factor/configuration of the old controller), in which case I'd ask do you take any fault in MGS1 on PlayStation control-wise? If so, if the controls are so off putting why bother having gone through either game in the first place?

Er, I wouldn't improve the controls. I don't think the control layout or design is bad, I think KCET arranged them in the best way they could: it's the sensitivity and placement of the analog sticks that throw a spanner in the works when you're trying to execute your various stealth devices. It's the same in MGS4 if that helps any. Of course you always end the game like a pro, anything can be learned, but as Ex-Cyber illustrated: it's not optimal.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember controlling MGS's Snake and his simpler repertoire with the D-Pad?

[njiska]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember controlling MGS's Snake and his simpler repertoire with the D-Pad?

Yeah MGS is D-Pad only. I believe you can use the analog stick for movement, but it just functions like the D-Pad with 8 directions of movement at a constant speed.

[Shatterhand]

People arguing about Metal Gear series without ever mentioning Metal Gear and Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake.

Poseurs.


I haven't played MGS4 since I have no PS3 .. but that's my personal order of preference for the games:

1: MGS3
2: MGS
3: Metal Gear 2
4: MGS: Peace Walker
5: Metal Gear
6: MGS2

I do like MGS2, I think it's a pretty good game, it just isn't as good as all the other ones. And it has nothing to do with Raiden.

And this comes from someone who played Metal Gear when it was new. I was a fan of Metal Gear before it was cool, and I bought a PS1 the day I saw an announcement we were getting a new Metal Gear game for it.

[Jonathan Ingram]

People arguing about Metal Gear series without ever mentioning Metal Gear and Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake.

Quoting myself from earlier in this thread:

When it comes to originality, the first MGS is literally a carbon copy of MG2 for MSX except worse. No original ideas whatsoever.

I played MG2 on an MSX emulator after I had played MGS and it devaluated the latter quite a bit in my eyes. I would say it was quite a revelation. I don`t think there`s another action-adventure game from that era that holds up just as well today as MG2.

[Shatterhand]

emulator

Too mainstream.

That's the point, when I first played MGS, I was like "Why everyone is raving so much about this? It's Metal Gear and Metal Gear 2 again!"

But to be quite honest, it was pretty cool replaying some of the original ideas from the MSX games in 3D

[Strider77]

I don't think you're idiots or delusional, or even delusional idiots - it just amazes me that anyone would hold the second above the first.

No, No... this is kind of an odd thing. Yeah I would rank MGS over MG2.... but part of that is for it's time etc. It's just that I play MGS2 and Twin Snakes more b/c going back to the PS1 version, it's just not as fun for me b/c the controls are so limited. But I think Twin Snakes is worse in ways.

It really boils down to the fact I just have more fun when playing them now. But for the record I would rank MGS2 last. But not at all b/c I think it's bad. When the HD collection came out I played the whole series in order including the MSX games.

I'm also none the wiser as to how using RE5 as some kind of throwback ammunition is even viable in the discussion, it's an entirely separate entity that has nothing to do with the points raised about MGS2. It's presence is like a failed desperation attack

I missed all this RE5 business.

RE is another example... REmake I really respect. I'd rank it very high, but I have more fun playing RE 4 & 5. I can just play those more often. For me quality vs fun factor, one can over ride the other.

I believe you can use the analog stick for movement, but it just functions like the D-Pad with 8 directions of movement at a constant speed.

No you had 360 degree movement... playing on the D-pad sucked. It was the 1st game I played using a dual shock. The reason I bought one actually.

[Skykid]

No, No... this is kind of an odd thing. Yeah I would rank MGS over MG2.... but part of that is for it's time etc. It's just that I play MGS2 and Twin Snakes more b/c going back to the PS1 version, it's just not as fun for me b/c the controls are so limited. But I think Twin Snakes is worse in ways.

It really boils down to the fact I just have more fun when playing them now. But for the record I would rank MGS2 last. But not at all b/c I think it's bad. When the HD collection came out I played the whole series in order including the MSX games.

What were we arguing about again?

So it's actually just Jon Ingram who prefers it to the original?

Strider, I understand you don't think it's a bad game - I don't think it's 'bad' per se either, just a victim of some bad decisions - but I'm dying to know what your reasoning is for putting MGS2 at the bottom of your list, humour me willya?

[BrianC]

1: MGS3
2: MGS
3: Metal Gear 2
4: MGS: Peace Walker
5: Metal Gear
6: MGS2

Just out of curiousity, where would you rank the NES Metal Gear, MGS GBC (Ghost Babel), and Snakes Revenge?

[Strider77]

but I'm dying to know what your reasoning is for putting MGS2 at the bottom of your list, humour me willya?

I had no issues with Raiden, it surprised me and I missed Snake being the lead a bit. But it wasn't a big deal to me. I didn't have issues with the length of the cutscenes and the amount. I also enjoyed the control... alot, it fealt like such a huge leap. The audio and visuals blew me away also.

But it did have my least favorite story. I still enjoyed it but it was the weakest and convoluted at times. Still like I said I was still engaged with the story. That and the environments could have been more varied with more locations. I really enjoyed playing it again on the HD collection.

3 and 4 are my favorite ones though.

[Ruldra]

Is MGS4 really worth playing? I remember people criticizing the game so much back when it was released, I ended up skipping it.

[Skykid]

Is MGS4 really worth playing? I remember people criticizing the game so much back when it was released, I ended up skipping it.

I think it is worth playing. I enjoyed it, although it begins to run out of steam in its final third. On one hand it offers some interesting reinvention and a lot more variety than you might expect, on the other it loses some of the classic elements of MGS, which is why it can rub purists up the wrong way.

The cutscenes are well directed, but some are just insanely long - you need to put a large chunk of time aside just in-case you get hit with 30 minutes of cinema.

The plot resolution is complete bullshit, but that's kind of a staple MGS thing and hardly unexpected (especially since the previous three games have dug such an enormously convoluted hole to try and patch up).

Its like Return of the King suffering from Return of the King syndrome adapted by Franz Kafka.

[DragonInstall]

My cousin thought Kojima lost his mind when he played MG2 and after. He said the story and characters were beyond retarded and the stealth elements felt lacking. I've only really played MG1(Great game) and dabbled with the rest of the series, and I kind of agree. Am I just not getting MG or expecting something I shouldn't be?

I don't know if I'm in the minority here, but when it comes to stealth I think Splinter Cell is miles above Metal Gear.

I still laugh at myself for never beating the jungle scene in MG nes as a kid. I could beat tons of hard nes games when I was little, but that damn Jungle scene... never could beat it during my rental.

[Ed Oscuro]

My cousin thought Kojima lost his mind when he played MG2 and after. [...]

I still laugh at myself for never beating the jungle scene in MG nes as a kid.

For the love of goodness, add the "S" in MGS please.

I had no issues with Raiden, it surprised me and I missed Snake being the lead a bit.

I wonder how this sentence came into existence.

Reasonable alternative: "Raiden's game surprised me, and I missed Snake being the lead a bit, BUT I had no issues with it."
Otherwise the stuff after the comma (especially "I missed Snake being the lead") seems to undermine your argument.

[Jonathan Ingram]

Too mainstream.

But practical and effective.

I don't know if I'm in the minority here, but when it comes to stealth I think Splinter Cell is miles above Metal Gear.

I think that Splinter Cell`s main problem is that it`s linear to a fault. The Call of Duty of stealth games, if you will. The variety of ways with which you can approach any given situation in MGS3 is mind-boggling. Splinter Cell is nowhere near as flexible in its design.

[Ed Oscuro]

The Call of Duty of stealth games, if you will.

lol

CoD is the newer franchise, just to start...yes, pay some damn respect to the elder franchises. Personally, it was a mind-boggling advance in stealth series compared to what had come earlier, at least in terms of presentation and "realism" (verisimilitude, at least). Good story and one of the first games that really seemed to fit the "blockbuster" category by bringing movie-like production (as opposed to MGS with its pretensions of being a movie).

Splinter Cell has the Thief / Deus Ex (sort of) / No One Lives Forever approach to stealth and character dialogue, which is pretty straightforward (y'see, you have your "bonus" eavesdropping conversations, regular conversations including branching dialogue (except in Thief), and then cutscenes; there's little mixing between categories. How much each advances the plot is up to how whimsical the designers were feeling), and it certainly has some linearity. I don't think the "linearity" of those games was really much at fault - Deus Ex, out of that list, is clearly the least linear - but as I recently saw, it also has the worst combat gameplay of all the titles mentioned so far, by a wide margin (worse, or at least more annoying, than Thief, I'd say).

[Skykid]

I had no issues with Raiden, it surprised me and I missed Snake being the lead a bit.

I wonder how this sentence came into existence.

Reasonable alternative: "Raiden's game surprised me, and I missed Snake being the lead a bit, BUT I had no issues with it."
Otherwise the stuff after the comma (especially "I missed Snake being the lead") seems to undermine your argument.

Almost a case for 'cognitive dissonance'.

I don't know if I'm in the minority here, but when it comes to stealth I think Splinter Cell is miles above Metal Gear.

That's why I said I don't think MGS is a paragon of stealth design in video games because there's been room for improvement that hasn't really materialised. SC is linear, as JI said, but it has plenty of limber features that MGS could use to its advantage. MGS4 introduced some neat ideas, but nothing that genuinely reinvented or drastically improved the system beyond its predecessors.

That said, MGS's control and detail over its stealth is much more impressive than SC or other similar titles, just trickier to absorb.

[Ex-Cyber]

My cousin thought Kojima lost his mind when he played MG2 and after. [...]

I still laugh at myself for never beating the jungle scene in MG nes as a kid.

For the love of goodness, add the "S" in MGS please.

Are you sure he meant MGS2 and not MG2? I mean sure, MGS2 is known for turning into a total mindfuck, but MG2 does feature "I think they are deadly poisonous Zanzibar hamsters... genetically engineered from rat and hamster DNA [...] Gotta go... the pizza-man is here.". Granted, that's probably a gag translation, but I don't know if it was Konami or some subcontractor or what. ISTR that the manual for Snake's Revenge was full of similarly bizarre stuff, though Kojima probably didn't even know of that.

[Ed Oscuro]

If you're going to write "MG nes," chances are you wanted orange and got lemon-lime. The machine would not make a mistake!

[Jonathan Ingram]

lol

CoD is the newer franchise, just to start...yes, pay some damn respect to the elder franchises.

Of what relevance here is the age of the games and the order in which they came out? Do you have a problem with how it was worded or what? Splinter Cell is to stealth action games is what Call of Duty is to first-person shooters. That okay?

Good story

Only if you mean in the sense of "so bad it`s good", but even then I`d have to disagree. The first game I recall being about some Georgian dictator Kombayn Nikoladze(I only remember him because of the name Kombayn which literally means 'harvester' in Russian) waging cyber warfare on the US. Horrendous garbage worthy of Tom Clancy`s name. About on par with Call of Duty 4 and Crysis. The second and third games` stories I don`t remember much about, but I do remember that I started skipping the story related stuff in Chaos Theory because early in the game it mentioned Che Guevara as some sort of terrorist who would`ve totally nuked everything had he got his hands on nuclear weapons, or something to the extent. There`s more than enough of this shit on TV for me to tolerate it in games as well.

...and one of the first games that really seemed to fit the "blockbuster" category by bringing movie-like production (as opposed to MGS with its pretensions of being a movie).

That`s not a positive quality in my book. I generally tend to dislike Western-made "blockbuster" games on consoles. Wouldn`t play most of them more than once. Metal Gear Solid`s "cinematicness"(if there`s such a word) is thankfully limited to its cutscenes(which I tend to skip past the first three playthroughs after I`d "hunted" every codec conversation possible) and the games actually feel very... game-y outside of them which is something I like.

Deus Ex, out of that list, is clearly the least linear - but as I recently saw, it also has the worst combat gameplay of all the titles mentioned so far, by a wide margin (worse, or at least more annoying, than Thief, I'd say).

If not for the masterpiece of videogame design that is Deus Ex`s Hong Kong area(and New-York, to a lesser extent), I don`t think this game would be held in high regard at all. It has way too many boring infiltration missions and neither combat nor stealth are particularly well realized. I find No One Lives Forever 2 to be a vastly superior game(slightly marred by re-spawning enemies in some of the missions). Shame that so few people know about this series.

[Strider77]

I wonder how this sentence came into existence.

Reasonable alternative: "Raiden's game surprised me, and I missed Snake being the lead a bit, BUT I had no issues with it."
Otherwise the stuff after the comma (especially "I missed Snake being the lead") seems to undermine your argument.

You get the idea... Raiden be surprise, me still like snake, me miss snake of small amount... me still get sleep at night. I am typing this crap at work so sometimes I am doing it quickly between things or coming back to it mid sentence much later.

[KAI]

I don't know if I'm in the minority here, but when it comes to stealth I think Splinter Cell is miles above Metal Gear.

天誅

[Jonathan Ingram]

天誅

Best AI in a stealth game. Story on par with Silent Hill 2.

[Ed Oscuro]

I don't know if I'm in the minority here, but when it comes to stealth I think Splinter Cell is miles above Metal Gear.

天誅

Nice night! You will only bring great shame.

lol

CoD is the newer franchise, just to start...yes, pay some damn respect to the elder franchises.

Of what relevance here is the age of the games and the order in which they came out? Do you have a problem with how it was worded or what? Splinter Cell is to stealth action games is what Call of Duty is to first-person shooters. That okay?

Nope.

About Tom Clancy series: Of course the Georgian stuff or any "let's find a nation that might harbor some terrorist or warlike element" will appear silly and overdone, especially if you're one of the people who don't like to hear about it. American nationalist groups get some critical inspection later on in the series, but these aren't real groups and so I think these things only pull in knee-jerk "my nationalism is insulted" responses from people who don't try to separate those things out. If you could overlook that, there's still some interesting stuff going on in the games. No need to stop with the first one, of course. The storyline of the first Ghost Recon game seems to have anticipated the Georgian-Russian conflict (not written by Mr. Clancy, of course), so I wouldn't say these are always subject to badness.

Deus Ex is great because of how silly it is. The writing and acting of the story bits is quite good actually, just in an unconventional way. It's got a huge backstory which actually fits together quite well. In gameplay, the variety of approaches you can pull off is unfortunately not matched or even attempted by many other games (although System Shock 2 probably matches it, if not betters it - plays better too, if all combat-oriented); a game would probably need a more comprehensive physics and gameplay engine to really better it these days. The Alone in the Dark reboot attempted this (with improvised weapons and the like) but the entire game wasn't well received.

I think No One Lives Forever, the original, is better than its sequel. Neither is close to being a bad game, though.