Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 19, 2024, 02:46:22 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Archived: We distort. We decide.  |  Topic: f13.net turns 2: MGS3 Subsistence LE 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Go Down Print
Author Topic: f13.net turns 2: MGS3 Subsistence LE  (Read 13202 times)
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
on: March 18, 2006, 06:29:29 PM

Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075

Error 404: Title not found.


Reply #1 on: March 18, 2006, 08:56:56 PM

Blech, that sounds awful. I mean games that have a good story are nice. They immerse you and make you care, but I'll be damned if the story takes more time to watch than the actual gameplay. You can have a good story without doing that. Deus Ex and KOTOR both pulled it off nicely with interactive dialogues. Imo, all games should have dialogue options if your character ever speaks to anyone.

CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
Kail
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2858


Reply #2 on: March 18, 2006, 09:22:15 PM

I can see where you're coming from, but just for another perspective, the draw to MGS for me is the story, and (especially) the cinematics, and the fact that the gameplay is at least mediocre.  I cannot stand console RPGs. I want to like them.  I like the way they (often) look, they seem to have fairly interesting plots, the characters are often very intriguing, but I absolutely cannot stand the brain annihilating tedium of fighting hours of random battles over and over again (no matter how "deep" the combat system is alleged to be) to advance the plot.  Where MGS stands out to me is that it packs in a good, solid story with a game that the Drinking Bird couldn't beat.  The gameplay isn't awesome, I agree that Thief and Splinter Cell probably do it better, but it's infinitely preferable to me than having to dick around in little menus for twenty minutes to kill my ten thousandth cactrot.  And, on top of that, the cutscenes in MGS are very close together, so that even if the gameplay isn't sparkling with brilliance, you don't have to slog through much of it to get to the next interesting moment.

I guess if you don't like the cinematics, the game would really suck, but I do like the cinematics.  If I was going to call this game "art," it would be because Kojima seems to have an excellent grasp of cinematography, rather than because of any of the gameplay elements.  There are VERY few games with anything approaching this level of proficiency with cinematics.  Even a lot of story heavy games (Bioware stuff springs to mind) often have cinematics which consist entirely of two characters facing each other and reciting dialogue.  Kojima is one of the few designers who really seems to understand how to tell a story visually.

So, I dunno.  For me, I can accept the fact that it's not the greatest gameplay, but it is (again, subjectively) the best balance that I've found between story and game.  In a nutshell, it's a very well told story, and with gameplay that is vastly preferable to most of the other games with very well told stories.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #3 on: March 18, 2006, 09:28:54 PM

I like the cinematics too. That's why I like the third disc, Existence.

The first disc serves no purpose when you can just watch the story.
Paelos
Contributor
Posts: 27075

Error 404: Title not found.


Reply #4 on: March 18, 2006, 10:16:14 PM

If you want to make a movie, make a movie. Don't make a "game" that falls under the guise of a movie. It's just not right.

CPA, CFO, Sports Fan, Game when I have the time
Fabricated
Moderator
Posts: 8978

~Living the Dream~


WWW
Reply #5 on: March 18, 2006, 11:13:13 PM

I'm still not seeing where any of the amazingly awful and somehow even more overrated Splinter Cell titles are better.

If you thought MGS3 was heavy on cutscenes, then good god, feel happy you never played 2. It WAS awful. MGS3 was much more fun. I loved MGS3 since I enjoyed fucking with absolutely everything. Practically any weird little thing you could think of to do with the environment or during a boss fight produced interesting results, like tranqing snakes/spiders and tossing them on people. I replayed the gunfight with Ocelot a half dozen times to see all of his AI's quirks, like causing him to step out and challenge you to a flat out quick-draw duel, or throwing animals at him, dropping hornet nests on him, shooting his hat off and making him run around chasing after it, etc. etc.

Of course, the moral parts of the story are pure rambling bullshit about genes and memes being passed on and yadda yadda with a dramatic and confusing phonecall at the end after the credits. That's just Kojima. He did it in Snatcher too.

It's a fucking game for sure, but it's too focused on the narrative.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2006, 11:15:13 PM by Fabricated »

"The world is populated in the main by people who should not exist." - George Bernard Shaw
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #6 on: March 18, 2006, 11:30:13 PM

Splinter Cell was a short cutscene inbetween levels and all of the dialog and story was presented through actions. Grab a guy, he gives you a piece of intel... and then you can use him as a bodyshield. MGS? Walk into a room and get hit with 30 minutes of cutscene. I don't even see how they're comparable.

Also, the humor in Splinter Cell is 10 notches above the stupid movie dialogue from Para Medic. Don't even get me started on David Hayter. What an annoying fucking drawl he's got. Ugh. Just ugh.
Velorath
Contributor
Posts: 8980


Reply #7 on: March 18, 2006, 11:56:14 PM

I loved the first MGS.  MGS2 was so bad story-wise though that I didn't even bother playing number 3.

And the day I start watchings discs containing cinematic cut scenes from video games like they're fucking movies is the day you find my cold lifeless body hanging from my belt in my closet.  With the ease one can rent a movie these days and even have them sent to your house, there's no excuse for being that desperate for entertainment.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #8 on: March 19, 2006, 12:42:15 AM

MGS3 is a movie. You aren't watching cutscenes. You're watching the movie. I'm convinced the game was just tacked on to sell copies at $50 a pop instead of $15 for a dvd.
Sairon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 866


Reply #9 on: March 20, 2006, 05:24:01 AM

I enjoyed the fucked up story of MGS2 in fact and enjoy the cutscenes so I'm most likely going to get this, especialy since this new version is at a reduced price. Now since my PS2 is fucked as I've mentioned before, and I'm not really that desperate, I'm going to wait for PS3 and then get this and MGS4.
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 42628

the Confederate flag underneath the stone in my class ring


WWW
Reply #10 on: March 20, 2006, 09:25:07 AM

The thing about MGS2 was that the game was really not one game, but a lot of mini-games tied together with one long ass, confusing story. To me, the story was secondary to MGS2, because it was awful and tried to play with your head at the same time it was making fun of you for caring. And Raiden. He was "I want to stab this fairy in the face" annoying in that angsty, gay boy japanese way. HE NEEDED TO DIE, NOT GET THE GIRL. But the girl was annoying, so that's ok.

MGS2 really DID reward you with great gameplay, it just took a long while to get there. There is a sequence near the end where Raiden has to sword fight a guy, and the swordfighting interface is one of the most entertaining interfaces I've ever played. There should be entire MMOG's built around that interface, with voice chat. It was that good.

Unfortunately, it was about 15-30 minutes out of the game.

Pages: [1] Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Archived: We distort. We decide.  |  Topic: f13.net turns 2: MGS3 Subsistence LE  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC