• 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?

Oh yeah, the music! How did I forget. MGS 1 has a classic, all-time great OST. Twin Snakes has forgettable garbage. Why they did that is beyond me.
 

Xenoblade

Member
Going back to play MGS1 you realize just how fast the dialogue is. Nobody has time. Everyone is rushing to get their lines out to save space on the disc!

Twin Snakes isn't perfect, and the characters lost their accents which sucks, but it is better than MGS1.
 

Ash735

Member
Going back to play MGS1 you realize just how fast the dialogue is. Nobody has time. Everyone is rushing to get their lines out to save space on the disc! .
I'd say this is more like "THEY ARE LAUNCHING NUKES SOON, TELL ME THE INFO!", along with the script edits and changes, it makes sense, the bad guys talk slower since they're not exactly in a rush, you could also argue it's less bloated and stilted compared to other games, I mean, look at Peace Walker, those tapes go on for days about nothing!
 

Morfeo

The Chuck Norris of Peace
Of the games I have played, I think only Metal Gear on the Nes, MGS4 and Portable Ops is worse than Twin Snakes.

Metal Gear on Nes is just such a mess of a game compared to the original, so that explains itself I think.

MGS4 has like one interesting chapter, but most of the game is just wasted potential imo, with the eastern european chapter being the worst since you just follow a person through the environments for a few minutes, instead of actually playing a stealth game that gives you various possibilities. I also think the game was too action-heavy in general, since you didnt really need to conserve ammo anymore. At least a few of the bosses were pretty cool.

Portable Ops was impossible to get into. The stamina-system made the game so damn tedious, and recruiting agents simply were not fun. Finally killed my enthusiasm for the series.

Games that are better than Twin Snaker: Metal Gear, Metal Gear 2, MGS, MGS2, MGS3, Ghost Babel.
 

Xenoblade

Member
My girlfriend who is not a gamer wouldn't touch MGS1, but played right through Twin Snakes. I think that counts for something.
 

KORNdoggy

Member
Twin snakes is horrible compared to the original, but its still fundamentally a traditional MGS game in terms of chtscenes, story, gameplay etc. MGSV however...isn't. And so i'd say that was worse.
 

Gospel

Parmesan et Romano
For all its faults, at least you were never forced to wait 2 in-game hours to upgrade weapons in Twin Snakes. And for that, it could never be the worst
 

SolVanderlyn

Thanos acquires the fully powered Infinity Gauntlet in The Avengers: Infinity War, but loses when all the superheroes team up together to stop him.

jwhit28

Member
I would say the worst MGS game is the original MGS3. Releasing MGS3 without full camera control was like releasing RE4 with tank controls. I was so disappointed. Twin Snakes is easily next worst though. How did they mess up the music so bad?
 

Jombie

Member
4. I think 1-3 are all very good to great, but the gameplay makes them unplayable for me now. I loved The Phantom Pain; maybe because I stopped caring about the story after 3. Gameplay is just too good to dismiss it.
 

DSix

Banned
Peace Walker is by far the worst of the canon games. The gameplay feels pretty mediocre and the boss battle are pure cancer to play.
 
Twin Snakes is the best version of mgs1. No point in plying the original, if you've got that one.

Worse:
Peace Walker(can't believe they followed up Portable Ops with this hot mess)
MGS1


Everything else is as good, if not better than TTS.

Really late reply, but you're joking right? PW is leagues better than PO.
 

micster

Member
The amount of hate for Peace Walker is depressing, it was an amazing MGS. However, Portable Ops was pure shite.
 

Persona7

Banned
I never understood the hate Twin Snakes get. Can someone explain it to me?

Kojima made a lot of changes personally. A lot of those things pissed off fans. A lot of fans also think that Silicon Knights ruined it but literally every single choice was made by kojima. It was originally going to be a direct remake but Kojima wanted to mix things up a bit.
 
I never played the original MGS for Playstation. My first Metal Gear Solid game was MGS2.

When I decided that I should experience the first MGS game, I played Twin Snakes. I don't regret it, I had a great time and still think it's a good game.
 
V plays the best but the missions and lack of storytelling I'm used to from previous metal games makes it the worst for me.

Just lots of wondering around in empty wide open desert or jungle areas does make a fun game to me.

I would have preferred a much tighter, linear and polished game like mgs2/mgs3.
 
V is a worse Metal Gear game than Twin snakes

I enjoyed V but I felt the MGS I loved truly died with Snake Eater

Edit: I get the feeling I'm going to be quoted infinitely now. To add context, I felt Twin Snakes was more my preference to a MGS setting. The ticking clock. The tighter setting. The still goofy yet still not as barmy as V narrative. Im not saying V to be controversial, I genuinely enjoyed it but far less than Twin Snakes. V felt removed from the series that I'd played upto 4. I recognise V played better than 4 but I still rank it above V for subjective reasons

I agree with you dude.
 

liquidtmd

Banned
Kojima made a lot of changes personally. A lot of those things pissed off fans. A lot of fans also think that Silicon Knights ruined it but literally every single choice was made by kojima. It was originally going to be a direct remake but Kojima wanted to mix things up a bit.

I remember reading this in many interviews around the time of Twin Snakes launching - funny how it's overlooked now and the narrative can change to 'they wrecked the perfection of Kojimas original vision'.

It was a collaborative effort.
 
The amount of hate for Peace Walker is depressing, it was an amazing MGS. However, Portable Ops was pure shite.

I'm still a junior member so I can't post new threads, but once I can I'll definitely have to make one for PW. It's a fantastic game, easily one of the best games on the psp, if not the best (and I've played pretty much all the good psp games)

Been re-reading a lot of old mgs threads on GAF (I'm new here) and seems like most people here loath PW, which is insane to me. Bought it day one, still play it for time to time. It's such an impressive game, Kojima and his team poured a lot of love into it.

I don't understand how anyone with a straight face can say PO is better than PW. And I even think PO deserves more appreciation, but PW is leagues better.
 

PHOTOSHOP

Member
people shitting on Twin Snakes cut scenes but got nuts over this fight in MGS4
MGS4-Raiden-vs-Gekkos.jpg
 
people shitting on Twin Snakes cut scenes but got nuts over this fight in MGS4
MGS4-Raiden-vs-Gekkos.jpg

I don't really think anybody goes nuts about anything in MGS4... (though Twin Snakes' biggest problems aren't in their cutscenes)

But to be fair I do kinda gush over Shadow Moses and the last segment on 4... it's the only part I really feel the game alive
 

Riposte

Member
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"

Pretty much every JRPG would be better if you couldn't grind or grind beyond a certain effect. Grinding to the point of negatively affecting the game harms the design of its combat system and encounters and only has value in two ways: 1) feeding into instant gratification, 2) allowing players to side-step said combat system and encounters - this is to say, it has very little value. The ability to break a game's balance is definitely something worth complaining about when evaluating the game, more so the more invasive it is (e.g., big difference between a game that overlevels you by playing it vs. having to grind for hours due to decreasing returns).

Your absolutist approach to "more options" is a somewhat common, but fundamentally flawed ideal. The meaning of options in videogames depends greatly on restrictions (the lack of options); it would not be outrageous to say the core of game design is the process of removing options (i.e., adding rules). Since I want to explain my point succinctly, I'll will just refer to the development of games. In their earlier, fertile state, videogames take on the form of testing environments where the developer has the ability to do anything they want with it (if not physically, then conceptually) and it only exits this stage when these tools/options have been removed - options such as, allowing the player character be anywhere they want and walking through obstacles, changing stats, and so on. Bringing these options back is plainly understood as subverting the game, that's why we call it cheating. If more options is the ideal, then the perfect videogame is one that hasn't been made at all; the perfect videogame is the game engine. In the real world, there is no game engine, only what's humanly possible, so the building of the game takes the form of outlining what the player is "allowed" to do (doing something you are not allowed to, while possible, is considered cheating).

While this line may be a little blurrier on sand-box games that involve using tools akin to building levels in game development, the value of restriction quickly becomes obvious in almost every other genre. The classic example is the platformer (2D, even more so), where the players inability to circumvent the obstacles laid before them is the very foundation of the game's interactivity. This is where we can connect back to Twin Sankes and its approach to layering new mechanics unto older designs. But we are talking about games in general, since you provided a pretty clean theoretical point to engage with. Options affect the meaning of other options and when we approach to the point of having too many options (thus harming any sort of coherency) we are actually approaching the point where it stops being a game.


Marerful mechanics.

Everything else was a letdown.

Mechanics is one thing, but I also liked the the audiovisual feedback that was draped over those mechanics, which is pretty vital, since that's the only way I could even sense what was happening on the screen, let alone appreciate it. That's just tip of the iceberg though, because MGSV actually does a lot of things well, despite some variation of your phrase often being said. The music and sound design is good (on and off the tapes). Likewise, the art design stands out even from games set in the same place and it handles the technical side of things well. Even if we say the "story" (whatever that includes precisely) is unsatisfying, that doesn't mean the cutscenes weren't well directed, that it wasn't thematically interesting, or the overall atmosphere (the combination all of the aforementioned elements) wasn't competent to good.

people shitting on Twin Snakes cut scenes but got nuts over this fight in MGS4
MGS4-Raiden-vs-Gekkos.jpg

Fairly big difference between the Snake and the Cyborg Ninja archetypes in these games.
 

Whompa02

Member
The Twin Snakes is trash and it shouldn't exist.

nothing more needs to be said.

Twin Snakes was a mistake

It was the worst output from Konami, and I'm glad Kojima never had any involvement with it.

It was garbage. It reminds me of a crappy Hollywood remake of a better movie.
 

Englebert3rd

Unconfirmed Member
I didn't mind Twin Snakes really, probably because I didn't play the original that much.
I'll try MGS1 again and finish it one of these days.
 

liquidtmd

Banned
nothing more needs to be said.

Twin Snakes was a mistake

It was the worst output from Konami, and I'm glad Kojima never had any involvement with it.

It was garbage. It reminds me of a crappy Hollywood remake of a better movie.

From wiki and this doesn't scratch the surface of little quirky note stuff ive read over the years

Silicon Knights would be developing under the guidance of Metal Gear creator Hideo Kojima and Mario creator Shigeru Miyamoto.[4]

Although The Twin Snakes was largely developed at Silicon Knights, Ryuhei Kitamura directed many of the game's cinematics while Silicon Knights implemented them into the game[5] to look identical to those in the original Metal Gear Solid, but upon inspection Hideo Kojima asked Kitamura to redo them in his well-known action style

Repeat: Silicon Knights were going to be more faithful to MGS when Kojima told them explicitly to go more nuts with the OTT cutscenes (i.e.'crappy Hollywood remake') that many on GAF and in this thread say they hate.
 

TheYanger

Member
From wiki and this doesn't scratch the surface of little quirky note stuff ive read over the years



Repeat: Silicon Knights were going to be more faithful to MGS when Kojima told them explicitly to go more nuts with the OTT cutscenes (i.e.'crappy Hollywood remake') that many on GAF and in this thread say they hate.

What's your point? I mean, Kojima always signed off on the project, whether SK wanted to be more faithful or not really means nothing in regards to the discussion: The game that was put out is worse than the original. It features controls and playstyle changes that aren't complimented by the actual design of the encounters or areas (People can say MGS1 is archaic all they want, the game was made around the way that game played and it was fine then and is fine now, it didn't receive universal acclaim 'despite' the way it played, it received it because of it), it features accross the board worse voice direction, as much as the less stereotypical accents are fine, the voices themselves are directed to sound like everyone is falling asleep compared to the original game, and the cutscenes (whether Kojima changed them to this or not has no relevance) are fucking ridiculous in a way that the original ones were not.

It'd be like taking Doom and making it play like Call of Duty, the game isn't built around it and despite being 'more modern' it wouldn't improve upon it in any way - it would diminish both aspects. It's pointless to add a bunch of shit to a game that doesn't make use of said shit, the gameplay suffers because of it. MGS2 was a fantastic game and the features it adds aren't pointless, they're just pointless when you put them in a game that doesn't do anything with them and instead they only remove the gameplay that first game already had.

The Twin Snakes is the absolute worst Metal Gear Solid mainline game, period.
 

liquidtmd

Banned
What's your point? I mean, Kojima always signed off on the project, whether SK wanted to be more faithful or not really means nothing in regards to the discussion:

The post I was quoting said

A) Kojima had nothing to do with the project

B) It felt like a 'crappy Hollywood remake' to them

I was providing a quote that stated

A) Kojima was involved

B) Kojima was involved in more than just sign off, in terms of telling the cutscenes director and editorial production to stray in a more OTT direction than the original

That was my point. It was pretty obvious.
 

Persona7

Banned
nothing more needs to be said.

Twin Snakes was a mistake

It was the worst output from Konami, and I'm glad Kojima never had any involvement with it.

It was garbage. It reminds me of a crappy Hollywood remake of a better movie.

Kojima had direct involvement and literally made every change personally. Every single cutscene directed by Ryuhei Kitamura was approved by Kojima directly.
 

GenG3000

Member
Remember when Big Boss lifted and made the Metal Gear trip in Peace Walker? Makes Twin Snakes crazy shit look tame even.
 
Peace Walker is the worst MGS game, far below Twin Snakes. I hated everything about it, from the staff grinding to the rocket sponge bosses. When I got to the optional boss fights where you need to knock out 40 guards that come out 4 at a time that requires you to repeat the same process over and over again with no mistakes, I quit that shit.
 
Funny, because this topic is full of hyperbolic claims about twin snakes being the worst thing that ever existed.

I'm not saying that MGS is shit - unlike all the twin snakes detractors ITT - I'm saying its plot is pretty ridiculous.
So its dancing a suspiciously close to fanboyism / nostalgia goggles line to declare MGS1s cutscenes GOAT and a masterpiece of grounded realism, and TTSs 00's XTREME Animu trash

I don't know, I quite liked Ryuhei Kitamura's movies back around the time Twin Snakes came out, and I found his influence on the cutscenes to be a net negative.
 
Peace Walker is the worst MGS game, far below Twin Snakes. I hated everything about it, from the staff grinding to the rocket sponge bosses. When I got to the optional boss fights where you need to knock out 40 guards that come out 4 at a time that requires you to repeat the same process over and over again with no mistakes, I quit that shit.

I agree the optional boss fights aren't very good, that's pretty much the only issue I have with the game.

But worst mgs game. Have you played portable ops?

PW is 100% worthy given the atrocious design of the PSP it's as perfect as a PSP game can be. Crazy deep and addictive single player campaign, what grinding tendencies it has is just buried under the depth of what it serves, actual encouragement to go outside to improve your lot via wifi over 100 side missions and packed full of secrets and easter eggs. It's easily one of the best looking psp games too, with hours upon hours of voiced audio (which is a huge plus considering most games on psp don't have this).

The co op has never given me a single problem and has always been great fun, the trading system is strict and fair and when all is said and done, deathmatch with your friend just for the lols. It's like the perfect SP handheld game and the perfect MP handheld game in one.
 
Top Bottom