I would agree with them, if it weren't for the fact that you can complete the game without first person view, or using any of the new mechanics. It really craps on their entire argument of it being unbalanced.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
What Metal Gear Solid games are worse (or not as good) as The Twin Snakes?
- Thread starter sphinx
- Start date
Let's not pretend that the MGS series didn't start getting completely batshit from MGS2 onwards. The original MGS is the odd duck compared to the deranged ramblings of subsequent sequels. TTS might not have been true to the spirit of the original game but it was in line with the tone of 2, 3 etc. Looking at the way the series descended into oblivious self-parody over recent years, Twin Snakes is pretty much what you would expect from Kojima circa 2004. It's silly like MGS2/3 but not as silly as what followed.
AuthenticM
Member
amen
LordRaptor
Member
This is like someone arguing how Michael Bays Pearl Harbour is a much better film than Inglorious Basterds because of how its so 'grounded' in historical fact.
When the truth is they're both dumb as shit, except ones self aware enough to have some fun with it.
I care about gameplay but for me, narrative and atmosphere for these types of games is king. I know it sounds backwards but for these kind of adventure games I HAVE to enjoy the story and themes - to the point where I can forgive gameplay mechanic faults. This funnily enough came to my mind this morning when the 'Is Silent Hill 1 worth playing' thread popped up.
MGSV has some damn slick gameplay, but its a long game that's asking me to spend 30+ hours in its world. The strength of its narrative to get me to do that is essential, far more so than Twin Snakes' shorter more linear world. However its broad scope doesn't automatically make V overtake TTS as an experience
honest question, from someone who hasn't played most of the mainline games.
what do you mean by this??
when I think MGS I think "Tactical espinonage in a military/futuristic, anime-like world"
which means, a dude will try to sneak and infiltrate without being seen and random bad guys will try to stop him.
in this sense, is the gameplay of TSS really that different from MGS 1,2,3, and 4?? aren't you, like, just sneaking and infilitrating all the time everywhere in every game?
has every game incorporated major changes to the formula?
This gets even better now.
Pulling a shit comparison to take everything out of context because no arguments left.
Truly, GAF never disappoints.
I prefer the PSX version, but I always consider the MGS4 the worst of the mainline MGS games. I haven't played PW and MGS5 partially because of my feelings for MGS4. MGS4 is still a game worth playing, but it was turning point for me where it killed the series for me a bit (mostly due to the story). Before MGS4 I tended to replay the games a lot.
Shadax the wizard
Member
I like Twin Snakes ¯_(ツ
_/¯
_/¯Octavianus
Banned
Yep.
LordRaptor
Member
If you think the storyline of MGS1 is 'grounded' and the exploits of "average joe soldier", I don't really know what to say.
There's not a lot of discussion to be had there. even less so when your stance is "Because it is and saying otherwise is shit comparison dont change gaf hurrr durrr"
theepicoftyler
Member
Twin Snakes is a fun novelty. MGS2's gameplay mechanics totally removes any bit of challenge or difficulty from MGS1.
Crimsonclaw111
Member
Peace Walker
Portable Ops
MGS4
All easily worse than Twin Snakes.
Portable Ops
MGS4
All easily worse than Twin Snakes.
Pinko Marx
Banned
Telling someone to not use mechanics in a game has and always will be a weak argument in any context it's used it. You're basically asking someone not to play the game to its fullest. If someone was going to play TS like MGS1, why not just play MGS1?
Yeah.. Unfortunately it didn't really work.
The world of mgs 1 wasn't made for the gameplay of mgs 2.
WrenchNinja
Member
4, 5, Peacewalker
Sir Ilpalazzo
Member
Every MGS game is very different from the last, yes, they aren't just incremental sequels. They all have their own character, and the big reason TTS is weaker than the original is because they kind of just grafted MGS2's mechanics / player abilities onto MGS1 without changing the game around it enough to make them fit. It can be said to "play better" because it gives the player more freedom, but that's not necessarily a good thing - imagine how diluted Super Mario Bros. Would be like if it had the controls and player abilities of Super Mario World.
Naw, they have the option to play it with the new mechanics, or to play it as the original. Its not taking anything away. The fact that these people use the new mechanics, says it all. The original is an outdated mess. The sooner the detractors can come to grips with it, the better.
privitsan02
Member
Twin Snakes isn't very good, but at least its fun, especially if you've never played the original. The Phantom Pain isn't even that, straight up terrible and most probably the most overrated game I've ever played.
Best wishes.
Best wishes.
Acquiescence
Member
For what's a remake of one of the most celebrated games on the PS1, it's crazy how little I've heard about The Twin Snakes and people talking about it in general.
I agree...but only in part.
I'm not a fan of MGS series but MGSV is the worst of the entire series in terms of characters and plot, along with Peace Walker.
BUT, on counterpart, it's by far the best VIDEOGAME of the entire series...its gameplay, and level design is ridiculously better compared to the other MGS games.
And thx to that, MGSV for me is the best one of all, fuck the plot...
In the previous games what you did most of the time was getting from A to B, solving a set sneaking challenge to slip through. You did that for multiple sections with loading screens in between. In V, you get dropped off into a huge sandbox level and are told to complete various objectives in it. Sneaking challenges come up naturally depending on where you go and how and when you get there.
Combined with all the different tools you have at hand and valid approaches to any given objective, that makes up for one hell of a difference in gameplay and is the reason why the game is praised for it so much.
I think there have always been major changes to the formular (2 was more of an improvement to 1 though, so that's probably an exception), but this is easily the biggest change.
But what does that even mean, 'a bad MG game'? Because IV ramped up everything to 11, so shouldn't it be the best MGS game by that notion. V delivered the best gameplay in the series by a longshot, which fixed my major gripe with it, while falling short on the typical Kojima-spectacle. But I don't really care about that if it means that the game plays as slick as it does and does so for dozens of hours.
brandonh83
Banned
I've shat on MGSV for over a year now and it's still a much better game than TTS. Utter travesty.
Strangelove77
Member
I won't get too deep into it, but I'm one of those hardcore Twin Snakes haters.
That being said, I'm not a fan of the psp games. The story is there(especially Peace Walker) but the gameplay wasn't. So TS is better than those two. Everything else is leagues ahead.
That being said, I'm not a fan of the psp games. The story is there(especially Peace Walker) but the gameplay wasn't. So TS is better than those two. Everything else is leagues ahead.
Sir Ilpalazzo
Member
If a game gives you the option to do something, obviously the players are going to do it. If that something makes the game worse, the fault isn't with players, but with the developers for not handling balancing well.
Pinko Marx
Banned
Your argument doesn't make any sense. Why would you play a game and purposefully neuter yourself? That says nothing about the mechanics and just a fact about people playing a game. Theres absolutely no reason to boot up TS and say to yourself "I'm going to play this exactly like MGS1".
But I'll admit the original game hasn't aged well in several ways. It still holds its spot as a gaming classic.
If people thought the first-person view for Twin Snakes was a game breaking mechanic, then they haven't played MGS on the PC. You can use first-person view in that game as well and it very much (to a point) has the same graphics as the ps1 version. I think the Twin Snakes was great for what it was, and I didn't notice much in the game (cutscenes aside) that was excessively different from the original, and I've played it many many times. Also, the 4th one was easily my least favorite, didn't even finish it. When Raiden break dancing metal gears strapped to his ankles isn't 'over the top bullshit', then I don't see the problem in Snake slow-motion dodging a rocket.
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
Peace Walker and MGS V
TS is a burning trash fire but at least one that's fun to look at.
TS is a burning trash fire but at least one that's fun to look at.
mmhh no, I think you have it backwards.
you are complaining because you are getting more options, makes no sense.
that's like complaining about an JRPG because it offers gamers the possibility of grinding to level 99, thus breaking the game and then saying "this game is a turd, I grinded to level 99 and battles are now boring, bad developer made an unbalanced game"
GametimeUK
Member
Metal Gear Solid 4. That game completely falls to pieces aftw the first 2 acts. There are no real traditional sneaking segments after chapter 2. A follow mission, bunch of robots, action scenes and boss fights. Yawn.
Twin Snakes... I actually love that game. As a nostalgia trip it's awesome because it's cool to play the game with the visual fidelity of the gamecube. Mind you, stand alone it isn't anything special gameplay wise because of how broken the new mechanics are. For nostalgia though I just love going through the environment and story. Shame about the soundtrack.
Twin Snakes... I actually love that game. As a nostalgia trip it's awesome because it's cool to play the game with the visual fidelity of the gamecube. Mind you, stand alone it isn't anything special gameplay wise because of how broken the new mechanics are. For nostalgia though I just love going through the environment and story. Shame about the soundtrack.
Sir Ilpalazzo
Member
Options can be bad, and giving the player more power isn't always good. TTS's issue is that if you want to balance the game, you aren't just ignoring one or two broken moves (like in certain 3D action games) or broken / overly generous player progression systems (like in a lot of RPGs), but multiple core mechanics.
I'll bring up SMB1 again. Imagine SMB1 was exactly the same game it is now, except if you press up and B, you could instantly turn any level into a water level and have Mario swim over everything. Obviously this would be dumb and game-breaking - an option that has no real reason to exist because all it does is dilute the game design (make the game worse, less interesting to interact with). The game would be made better by ignoring that mechanic - but to do so you have to go out of your way to play the role of game designer, making up your own rules to fix the game the developers didn't care to balance properly (and of course, it's never very interesting and always a little hollow to win at a game you yourself are making the rules for)
LordRaptor
Member
More like if SMB had later SMB games abilities to store an item for later that drops on demand if you lose your existing item.
Is the game easier? Yes.
Does it fundamentally change how the game is played? No.
You also have to presuppose that FPS mechanics in TTS 'ruin' the game by making it easy, when the truth is that MGS1 is already an incredibly easy game.
With awful voice acting and pointlessly redirected cutscenes. It's awful.
No it's not. The new mechanics don't end at just the first-person aiming system. You also now have the beefed up AI for guards. Guards can now notice you if you're just outside of their vision cones. This wasn't as much of a problem in MGS2 because the levels were designed with that feature in mind. MGS1 wasn't, and leads to a lot more problems because of it. There's less areas to hide in during room clearings, the more cramped areas make it much easier to get spotted. Because of this, the best option for sneaking across a room is always going to be "as soon as you enter room, stand in one spot and pick off every guard from first-person view". The bossfights weren't updated with this regard either, turning stuff like the Ocelot fight into a shooting gallery where you never have to move an inch once the cutscene ends.
Even if you deprive yourself of the most overpowered option in the game, you're not getting the same experience as MGS1. If they were going to add in MGS2's mechanics, they should have updated MGS1's level design to accommodate for it. As it stands now, from a mechanical standpoint (not even regarding voice acting, music, cutscene direction, the weird changes in dialogue, the lack of any bonuses, how fucking ugly it is), it's an inferior game. If you want a good remake that does it right, play Resident Evil on Gamecube.
Edit: I also have to point out that for the most part, out of all the updated mechanics brought over from MGS2, first-person aiming is the only one that sees any use. Rolling, ledge-hanging, leaning, bleeding, and hiding in lockers are all pretty much pointless, as there's never any ledges to hang from, they didn't add many lockers to hide in, and leaning/bleeding just makes the game easier when you can squat down and recover a bit of health while aiming from almost any direction. There's also the fact that you start the game with a full, huge healthbar and max ammo capacity from the get-go, instead of having you build your your lifebar and ammo capacity as the game progressed ala MGS1.
Sir Ilpalazzo
Member
Not a good comparison, since the FP aiming already fundamentally changes how you approach MGS1's challenges. Plus giving the player more HP in SMB1 would be a massive change anyway.
And yeah, MGS1 isn't really that challenging - but it is at least balanced as-is and doesn't really need to be any easier.
Your point is, what, that because the differences aren't to ridiculous extremes that they may as well not be recognised? That because the first game takes itself a bit more seriously that it has no credibility?
The differences between the two games' cutscenes aren't even subtle, but even if they were, there's still an entire world's worth of detail in subtlety. Things don't need to be black and white.
I can't stand this bullshit notion that every game has to be some fourth wall breaking, in-joke cracking waltz for fear of being viewed as stupid and not 'self aware'. It really puts a dampener on the realm of FICTION.
Napalm_Frank
Member
Peace Walker/Portable Ops. And even then I think I prefer PW just because it's not a bad remake of a classic.
DrunkShogun
Member
Portable ops and mgs4. Portable ops was the first game on handheld ignoring babel and the controls never worked and gameplay wasn't the best. Mgs 4 as great as a fan service game it is had issues with content and the direction it decided to go with.