• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

MGS: Snake Eater vs. Resident Evil 4

shantyman said:
Really? I thought RE4's voice acting was tolerable at best.
Click to expand...

:lol :lol I know what you mean. RE's story was ridiculous, how can the voice acting be good. All I have to say is "Miiiiiiike!!".
 
Really? I thought RE4's voice acting was tolerable at best.
Click to expand...

Actually, don't put too much faith in my comments about RE's voice acting. I loved the acting in RE2 as well.

It's so fitting for cheesy horror movie type games and doesn't quite become a big parody like House of the Dead 2's acting.
 
re4 is beautifully produced and has moments of sublime action dispersed through its length, but a lot of the game dragged for me, and its controls felt restrictive. its guns were fun to shoot, and the enemies reacted wonderfully to being shot, and these two merits saved the game's duller moments from outright tedium. its end sequence and ending, however, were deeply anticlimactic, and cast a mild pall over the rest of the game.

mgs3 is so completely envisioned and obsessively detailed that it resembles art, though i don't know that i'd call it art. the whole torture sequence is the best thing a videogame has ever done, full stop. it strikes a remarkable balance between scripted sequences and freeform gameplay. and a direct comparison to re4 illustrates just how much writing and cinematic technique can do for a game. its end sequence is transporting. i think it's clearly the better and more memorable game. and i wasn't really an mgs fan before 3 -- i think the first one is overrated shlock, and the second game was one of my bigger gaming disappointments ever.
 
RE4 for me. I couldn't get over the camera in MGS3 and from what I played the action was awful - it's a mess trying to see your enemy first and then shooting in first person (and not being able to move) before switching back. I plan to give subsistence a try though.
 
I've loved both series' since the first installments...And I love both Snake Eater and RE4. But if I had to pick one between the two, I think I would go with RE4 overall. But they're both two of the best games on their platforms.
 
or i could just put it this way: mgs3 took me four or five days to play through, while re4 took me nearly a month.
 
drohne said:
or i could just put it this way: mgs3 took me four or five days to play through, while re4 took me nearly a month.
Click to expand...

What the hell, did you run through MGS3? I thought the length of both games was comparable.
 
i played mgs3 in all-night marathon sessions, cos i couldn't put it down. i had to force myself to finish re4. and yeah, they're of comparable length and difficulty.
 
I enjoyed MGS3 much more than RE4.. they can't really be compared but I'll tell you why I prefer MGS3.

I found RE4's story got lame after a couple of hours. IMO it also gets monotonous since the gameplay revolves around shooting, shooting and shooting in different situations with different backgrounds and patterns. It 's not a revolution or (as I read a couple of times before) the best game ever made. It is quite good but I remember enjoying RE1&2 on PSone much more, cause it felt new and the story was not as silly. Maybe the Gamecube was in need of an "exclusive" AAA mature title with great graphics.. and maybe that's why it received so much praise... But that's my personal opinion.

MGS3 was more varied in terms of gameplay; CQC, sneaking, camouflage etc. and it's also one of the best story ever written for a game. The soundtrack, cutscenes and voice acting were awesome too, and it is a great looking game (I wasn't as impressed as when I first played MGS2 though).
MGS3's biggest problem was the camera angles, that's why I'm gonna buy it again when Subsistance will it store shelves.
 
MGS3 was a far better game in a cinematic sense, though I did appreciate the B-horror cheesiness of RE4. I thought MGS3 definitely had weaker gameplay, and that might change with Subsistence, but then there's also The Definitive Version of RE4 coming out too, so probably not.

Overall, it's tough for me to decide. I don't think RE4 will age quite as well as MGS3, simply due to the emphasis on action that will be outdated in a couple years vs. a game that relies very heavily on its story.
 
drohne said:
i played mgs3 in all-night marathon sessions, cos i couldn't put it down. i had to force myself to finish re4. and yeah, they're of comparable length and difficulty.
Click to expand...

I misunderstood what you meant- you blew through MGS3 because it was so good... I thought you were implying it was short.
 
Oneself said:
MGS3 was more varied in terms of gameplay; CQC, sneaking, camouflage etc. and it's also one of the best story ever written for a game. The soundtrack, cutscenes and voice acting were awesome too, and it is a great looking game (I wasn't as impressed as when I first played MGS2 though).
MGS3's biggest problem was the camera angles, that's why I'm gonna buy it again when Subsistance will it store shelves.
Click to expand...

I posted this last year in an attempt to be provocative. I actually think the inventiveness and creativity Kojima brings to video games is very underappreciated. The many ways in which he thinks outside of the box is something I love:

http://new.ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=27109
 
John Harker said:
And I finished all the other ones, I don't know why. Never bothered to beat The End...
Click to expand...

Only one word: LOOOOSSSEEEERRR!

And for those who're blaming the MGS3 gameplay - play the game on Hard or Extreme. Then come back and we will talk about it.

I haven't finished RE4, only played a bit on GC, cause I don't own the Nintendo's purple cube, but it looks the same old RE to me. And I will probably be dissapointed after I finish the game, cause obviously, I'll play the PS2 version.

But Snake Eater is TGOTG for me. It's perfect in every aspect - graphics (OMFG Shinkawa!!!), gameplay, story, fun (OMFG Hideo!!!), sound (OMFG, Harry!!!) + it has enough evolutionary/revolutionary elements to take the maximum of this generation's hardware potential.

Well, only one game has chances to beat MGS3 for the "Game of the Gen" award (http://www.us.playstation.com/Content/OGS/SCUS-97472/Site/), but I doubt it will replace Hideo's third solid masterpiece in my heart.
 
I've said plenty about MGS3 before, I think some may have noticed how much I luv the game. :P It's game of the generation, and that's all there is to it.
 
Ive not played RE4 so ti wouldnt be fair for me to comment, but MGS3 has been my favourite game this gen and probably one of my favourite of all time. I was one of the few people who enjoyed MGS2 a lot, but MGS3 is much better Everything in MGS3 was damn near perfect. Im picking up RE4 for PS2 when its released but I doubt I will enjoy it as much as I enjoyed MGS3
 
Oneself said:
MGS3 was more varied in terms of gameplay; CQC, sneaking, camouflage etc. and it's also one of the best story ever written for a game. The soundtrack, cutscenes and voice acting were awesome too, and it is a great looking game (I wasn't as impressed as when I first played MGS2 though).
MGS3's biggest problem was the camera angles, that's why I'm gonna buy it again when Subsistance will it store shelves.
Click to expand...
I never had such a big problem with the camera angle even without the rader. I never had any problem with getting past. A camera angle like the one in MGS3: subsistence might be better aslong as it it moves quickly, unlike the ones in SC1 and SC2, but there is nothing wrong with the overhead camera angle. Hopefully Konami have both camera angles in MGS4 so people can select whichever one is better.
 
I didn't like the camera in MGS3 at all; it just didn't work without the radar! On top of that you add the low frame rate during gun fights and annoying screen tearing. :( At least the camera problem will be fixed in MGS3 Subsistence but I also hope they improve the frame rate and make it more consistent. Otherwise MGS3 is a fantastic game, I liked it a lot.

I haven't played RE4 but the camera system looks perfect with very small amount of slowdown, which I hope will be fixed by October.
 
I'm not ripping on anyone in particular, but it is really annoying when people say there is no radar in the game. There is, except it's the sonar. It wokrs the same, except it makes noise and is sttaic for each "ping."

It serves two purposes in the context of the game:

1. It's lower tech because it takes place in the sixties, so that makes it fit into the story properly. In MGS1 Mei Ling says the radar is tech that Snake has with him.

2. It makes using it more challenging as there are other considerations when using it (i.e. will an enemy hear it?).
 
shantyman said:
2. It makes using it more challenging as there are other considerations when using it (i.e. will an enemy hear it?).
Click to expand...

Plus, the low-tech setting actually gave me different stealth feel. I mean, when you play without radar at all, you may encounter soldier who haven't seen before, be suprised, this makes the tension higher and also, even this happen, you're not completely helpless in the action. The balance between stealth and action is something which I liked the most in MGS3.
 
You couldnÂ’t see the enemy and switching in FPS view over and over again was annoying! The camera was tolerable in MGS2 because of the radar, without the radar its shit! And Kojima realized that and that's why he is changing the camera system for MGS3 Subsistence and MGS4.
 
Doom_Bringer said:
You couldnÂ’t see the enemy and switching in FPS view over and over again was annoying! The camera was tolerable in MGS2 because of the radar, without the radar its shit! And Kojima realized that and that's why he is changing the camera system for MGS3 Subsistence and MGS4.
Click to expand...
It did get annoying at times but the gadgets, such as the sensors did help. Playing the game without them didnt mean you were a pussy, you had to play the game with the sensors or esle it would have been really annoying.
 
I loved them both VERY much, but I think MGS3 gets a slight edge for me.

I enjoyed the gameplay of both titles a whole lot and was constantly amazed at what these titles offered. However, MGS3 has a higher attention to detail that always impressed and allowed each scenario to be approached from many different angles. That's not to say RE4 didn't allow a wide variety of actions, though. It's just that, by the nature of MGS3's gameplay systems, you could do more and each of those actions you might take felt fully supported and polished. The attention to detail is unmatched.

What made a larger difference, however, is the story and the presentation of it. MGS3s cutscene direction is simply the greatest we've yet to experience in this industry. It's all very professional and stylish. The camera work, animation, and scene design is really damn impressive. It also has a rather entertaining story to back it up along with great characters (particularly The Boss) along with my favorite game ending of all time.

I'd place them on equal footing as far as gameplay (with RE4's camera helping to raise it slightly above), but the presentation of MGS3 pushed it ahead.

RE4's cutscenes look decent, I suppose, but they have nothing on MGS3 (what does, though?) and the actual story is quite throw-away (I was really hoping for something cool here, but it failed to deliver). I also found the ending to rather disappointing (it was short and really didn't leave any impact on me).

Still, they are good enough for me to declare MGS3 the GOTY of 2004 and RE4 the GOTY of 2005.

I'm also very excited about MGS3-S, as the camera is pretty much my only major complaint. It does not work well in a wide open environment.
 
dark10x said:
What made a larger difference, however, is the story and the presentation of it. MGS3s cutscene direction is simply the greatest we've yet to experience in this industry. It's all very professional and stylish. The camera work, animation, and scene design is really damn impressive. It also has a rather entertaining story to back it up along with great characters (particularly The Boss) along with my favorite game ending of all time.
Click to expand...
IAWTP. The story in MGS3 and they way it is presnetd is by far the best in any game Ive played. From beginning to end it was constantly entertaining, but the ending of MGS3 was something very special. Ive never been too affected by endings in games, but MGS3's ending gave me a huge lump in my throat, it was just beautiful and so sad:(
 
Reading this makes me want to play MGS3 again, but I'm trying to hold out for Subsistence. When will it be available?

Both are excellent games. As for which is the best, right now I much prefer MGS3. Story, gameplay, etc... The problem with MGS3 though is that you can't just pick it up and play it. RE4's core gameplay is so simple that if I have an hour or two to kill, it's one of those games that I'll pop in and play. Also, the mood is much more tense in RE4, and the gameplay is faster. My son loves to watch me play RE4.
 
AniHawk said:
I don't think RE4 will age quite as well as MGS3, simply due to the emphasis on action that will be outdated in a couple years vs. a game that relies very heavily on its story.
Click to expand...

This makes absolutely no sense. :lol

ok, maybe that's what you were going for.
 
RE4 cribbed a lot from the metal gear series, but did it badly.

For instance,
the completely flat chick character that kept calling Leon on some codec-like device. She disappeared as soon as you get around that short possessed dude. Then he keeps calling you and the chick is just gone. Plus the dialogue wasn't funny at all between her and Leon. They should have skipped that, imo.
 
Oh yeah, the codec stuff was extremely stupid. Well, I guess I didn't mind it TOO much in the castle (it didn't make a lot of sense, but was cheesy as hell and often entertaining). The girl from "wherever" that you contact early on was worthless, though.

What was worse was the fact that they used the EXACT same animation routine everytime the thing rang.
 
Doom_Bringer said:
You couldnÂ’t see the enemy and switching in FPS view over and over again was annoying! The camera was tolerable in MGS2 because of the radar, without the radar its shit! And Kojima realized that and that's why he is changing the camera system for MGS3 Subsistence and MGS4.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between : "Kojima realized that." and "Kojima realized that people wanted a third person camera." And the latter is the right way of saying it.
 
I've played RE4 from start to finish, and completed all of the additional modes as well (Mercenaries and Assignment Ada). It far and away was the greatest RE -- and possibly greatest action/adventure game -- I've played in recent memory. Definitely the GameCube's finest.

As for MGS3, I haven't played it, though I plan to get to it someday. It's sitting on the shelf staring at me.
 
RE4 is much better. MGS3 is too lacking in the gameplay department to compete. Also the whole movie feel thing was cool years back. Now its just annoying. But playing anything after RE4 makes it look bad. :)
 
I haven't played MGS3 yet, since I'm waiting for Subsistence. I look forward to it, but I have a hard time imagining it'll topple RE4, my GOTG.
 
Umpteen said:
God of War ftw.

but RE4 was huggy, too.
Click to expand...
Ooooh, touche... I forgot about God of War!

But still, only because I'm such a huge RE fan, RE4 takes the crown. GoW is most definitely a very close second.
 
Deg said:
MGS3 is too lacking in the gameplay department to compete.
Click to expand...

I'll never understand people who say this. To me, it's quite obvious which game offers more variation and polish. But whatever.
 
I can't remember what I said the first time, but now in retrospect.....

I had an incredible time with both games. They were very different experiences and often enjoyable for different reasons. I want to say RE4 since it was such a surprise, but then again MGS3 was everything that I expected - and I expected a lot.

If I had to choose -- RE4. It never let up, while MGS3 had its down moments.
 
Ceb said:
I'll never understand people who say this. To me, it's quite obvious which game offers more variation and polish. But whatever.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The fact that it's gameplay > story for a lot of people is far from an automatic RE4 bid. RE4 offers far less variety in gameplay and the core gameplay never changes. MGS3 constantly throws different styles of gameplay your way, and they're always there for you to experiment with. RE4 is a blast, but it's shooting with a gun, then a bigger gun, then a bigger gun. And for the more difficult opponents strategy comes into play. I mean, I loved the scenarios like the shootout with Leon, backs against the wall, and other sections. But it doesn't match the way MGS3's story and environment completely changes the way you have to act to a certain degree. It's just incredible, and the story really fuels some of the gameplay.
 
Well, I really have nothing to add to this thread, but would like to say that DC apparently had the best rated games of 1999 and 2000.

Chau.
 
AlteredBeast said:
Well, I really have nothing to add to this thread, but would like to say that DC apparently had the best rated games of 1999 and 2000.

Chau.
Click to expand...
Lazy?
 
MGS3 was fantastic, RE4 was ... boring. I stopped playing when i got to the area with the fire breathing dragon statues, i couldn't make myself keep going. I ended up selling off RE4, and my GC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Resident Evil 4 Remake: Ashley's Cut Level
Trailer Indie 
9
280
Matt_Fox replied
Resident Evil Requiem | 4K Path Tracing & NVIDIA DLSS 4 Trailer
Trailer Platform  2 3
112
874
xVodevil replied
LTTP: Resident Evil Revelations 2
36
340
Froggo replied
Resident Evil documentary by NHK
Trailer 
1
108
hououinkyouma00 replied
RRELTTP: Resident Evil HD
37
618
nkarafo replied
Top Bottom