Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Rotation Advertisements



We hope you enjoy your visit to this forum.


If you are reading this then it means you are currently browsing the forum as a guest, we don’t limit any of the content posted from guests however if you join, you will have the ability to join the discussions! We are always happy to see new faces at this forum and we would like to hear your opinion, so why not register now? It doesn’t take long and you can get posting right away.


Click here to Register!

If you are having difficulties validating your account please email us at admin@dbzf.co.uk


If you're already a member please log in to your account:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
Some objective reasons why Metal Gear Solid 2 is the worst in the series
Topic Started: Jun 1 2016, 09:18 PM (1,113 Views)
+ Pelador
Member Avatar
Crazy Awesome Legend

I'm going to try and list some objective reasons why Metal Gear Solid 2 is technically the worst game in the series. This means I'll be leaving out personal things I don't like about it such as how I think the setting looks ugly. That's obviously only my opinion and so it doesn't belong here.

First of all the setting. No not because I think it's ugly or boring. Well sort of related to that actually. Aside from the ship in the prologue, you spend the entire game on this giant oil rig. Now this wouldn't be so bad if parts of it looked drastically different. For instance even though in Metal Gear Solid One you are only sneaking around Shadow Moses, there are several parts of the game that show off different environments. But on Metal Gear Solid 2 it's the same orange and brown pipes and dark rooms everywhere you go. And you have to backtrack through some of these areas multiple times, taking out the same enemies in the same fashion, over and over again. Granted it's only my opinion that this is incredibly tedious and I did say that I would avoid opinions. However being asked to run back and forth through the same places, over and over is actually lazy game design. Now moving away from the setting, lets go into some other ways this game is very lazy.

Now this part I want to talk about next is admittedly not as bad on normal or easy, but it's still a valid example of the game designers running out of ideas. There's a long segment near the end of the game when you team up with Snake. This sounds great at first. But then it forces you to fight wave after wave of enemies. You beat them, move onto the next room and fight more waves of enemies. Then there's a boss fight and it's... wave after wave of enemies. Like I said before, it's tolerable on the normal difficulty or lower. But on European Extreme you will be spending about ten minutes in each room fighting enemies who can easily kill you or Snake. Instead of giving the player a single strong enemy or a complex task they need to finish, all the developers do is throw dozens of enemies at you for the next 30 minutes until you fight Solidus. It's a cheap and lazy way to pad out the game's length.

Speaking of Solidus, did you know that even on European Extreme all you have to do to beat him is stand still, block and counter? Despite all of his fancy moves and his tentacles all you need to do is block and counter. There's barely any skill to beating him at all. I say barely because you do still need to dodge his missiles. But aside from that he is still a complete joke of a boss. The final boss of a game should offer a lot more.

Other things worth mentioning.

Clunky swimming sections
An escort mission
Sniper section where you need to protect what's her face.
The boss afterwards where all you need to do it aim for his head and fire.
UAV drones
The button mashing torture part before you fight Solidus.
The game is too short.

Basically, this game fails in many areas where the other games did not. I'm not saying the other games are perfect by any means. But they avoid being as repetitive, frustrating and lazy as this one is. Four may have been way too easy but at least it changed the scenery. Three may have only had one setting but at least that setting had colour and character. One may have been more basic but it offered a lot more variety. Metal Gear Solid 2 falls short in almost every area.



Posted Image

http://www.youtube.com/user/jonjits
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Steve
Member Avatar
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.

MGS2 is my second favourite in the series but yeah I actually agree with pretty much all of this.


MGS never really did anything for me because I was too poor to own a PlayStation when it came out so going back to it some years after playing 2 on the brand new PS2 it was underwhelming but I see why it could be considered better for objective reasons.

2 tried to do a lot more things but it didn't refine them very well.


I feel like we should have had another section in the game, characters like Solidus we didn't see enough of that dude was f***ing awesome. In the end there wasn't really enough reason to hate him as a bad guy and want to defeat him.
Whereas Liquid was an a*****, even just his smarmy way of talking was enough for you to want to take him down.
The Boss you didn't want to take down because she was an awesome character...but you had to. Volgin was a dick too.


Wonder if they could have got away with a middle section before the Big Shell incident where you play as "Snake" some years before, seeing Solidus in action a little bit.
Then when you get to Big Shell you get the Raiden reveal and the real Solid Snake showing up. Could have been a more worthwhile twist. And then Raiden could also be less girly or heck actually be a woman.

It is quite ridiculous that they'd sent someone so green on such an important mission. They went over how different the real thing is to VR quite a lot.


Overall as much as I like him anyway I think Solidus was a big part of the problem, it was kind of hard to care about anything that was going on especially with all the weird s*** at the end(as funny as the Colonel messing up was) he and his plot as a villain weren't developed enough and a lot of it was very complex, especially for younger players. Complex but not particularly gripping.

In a nutshell:

MGS and MGS3 were all "We've got to stop Metal Gear, s***'s urgent!"

MGS4 was "Liquid is going to take over the f***ing world, Snake!"

MGS2 was like "Damn, Metal Gear is at it again..."
Posted Image


Definitely not a succubus, fear not
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Sandy Shore
Default Avatar


You're wrong. Utterly, and incomprehensibly wrong. Not only is Metal Gear Solid 2 the best Metal Gear game, it's a contender for "the best game ever made". Beyond it simply being a ground-breaking, landmark game, it's an incredible and genuine piece of art.

It's the first, and possibly the only game that makes a point that it is, in-fact, a game, and a sequel, by making them facts the focus point of the story. And it manages to do so by, not only by retaining its own canonocity, but expanding it, too. But, to prevent this from becoming a massive dissertation, I'll try to focus on your complaints.

You have this baffling notion that there are elements to this game that exist because it was the laziest option, while virtually every aspect has been meticulously thought out, and exist for very precise reasons. Beyond that, there is a painstakingly made plethora of detail that doesn't exist in other games of the same time: the still gorgeous rain effects; the destructible items that react depending on where and what's shot; the very detailed lighting effects that even play an important role in the first boss battle; holding up soldiers, and how shooting different parts of their body has a large number of different effects... Even the AI of the seagulls, and the conversation that ensues should you spend your time shooting them.

Some of which is all common place in a lot of games now, and very easy to take for granted, but for its time it was a huge deal. Almost the entire tech demo was devoted to showing off these things. You might complain about the dullness of the scenery, but it's dependent on the location, and the location is such for a reason that the game explicitly points out to you, both meta and "in-universe". Far from being lazy, it serves a purpose.

Also, since when is back-tracking inherently bad? The early Resident Evil games revolve around back-tracking, and at least two of them are masterpieces. Granted, they do it better, but Sons of Liberty has so much more to offer, and back-tracking is very minimal when you know the layout of the game.

You mentioned the Tengu fight as another example of the game being lazy, by simply throwing wave after wave of enemy at you, but, again, it's there to serve the narrative. The entire gameplay up until then has been dedicated to stealth, and you've been encouraged to rely on an overpowered, non-lethal weapon for the entirety of the game, for the purpose of not killing enemies. Engaging the soldiers in battle leaves you at a disadvantage, and will lead to frequent Game Overs. Just as the AI and the game start to break—along with the player's connection to Raiden—you're thrust in to a scenario that is the antithesis of what Sons of Liberty is meant to be about.

It's an action filled blood-bath, and you're left to rely on Solid Snake, who has a bigger life bar than you, who—unlike 99% of useless AI companions that are merely decoration pieces to make a player feel that they have team mates, but ultimately leave all the work for the player by shooting at nothing—absolutely decimates the enemies, and even bombards you with ammo. Even on the highest difficulty, and going for a no kill-run, the appropriate tactic is to draw the enemy fire so that Snake can clean up for you.

Your reliance on Snake is important because it comes just as Raiden's own perceptions of being super soldier are getting shattered. He pales in comparison to the real thing. I would also like to note that this is a fascinating way Kojima goes about cementing the legendary status of the main character - by making him unplayable, and having you witness him, instead of "being" him.

Solidus is no exception to this very particular way this game was made, either. He comes after multiple endurance tests—which can be hellish doing all these when going for the Big Boss rank—and requires the use of a weapon that the player has had virtually no experience or training with - for the sake of the narrative, of course. That "all you have to do to beat him is stand still, block and counter" isn't something a first time player is going to realise, while they're figuring out his pattern and how to use their new weapon effectively, and it's genuinely a blessing for anyone trying to get Big Boss rank, and doesn't want to go through all of the previous ordeals after a single mistake. Even then, swiping away his missile takes a precise rhythm, and cart-wheeling to safety can be easily messed up when you're getting nervous at the finish line.

Quote:
 
Clunky swimming sections
This is a both a genuine complaint and a misconception. The swimming controls are perfectly fine, the problem is in having no previous experience with them. There actually is a place right at the very beginning you could get used to them, but the game doesn't let you know that you should.
Quote:
 
An escort mission
It's your subjective opinion that this is a negative. One that I agree with, but you did promise objective reasons.
Quote:
 
Sniper section where you need to protect what's her face.
Again, subjective.
Quote:
 
The boss afterwards where all you need to do it aim for his head and fire.
You make it sound like this was a wasted, or lazy boss battle. It doesn't take the place of you fighting Vamp, so they haven't failed to utilise him properly - it's just the culmination on the sniper section. It would be like complaining that you have to snipe that Imran fellow at the end of the Call of Duty 4 sniper mission. "All Gillied Up", was it?
Quote:
 
UAV drones
What?
Quote:
 
The button mashing torture part before you fight Solidus.
It's there because the game must include it for the sake of the narrative. Did you miss the entire part about the Solid Snake Simulation? Plus, it's not something everyone can endure, and I like a game that dares to challenge people.
Quote:
 
The game is too short.
The game has over five-hours of cutscenes, and it would easily take you that long in actual gameplay on your first time through. Ten-hours isn't at all bad, and that's low-balling it. A seasoned player can clear the game on European Extreme in around two-and-a-half-hours, sure, but it would require countless more to get to the point.

Beyond your complaints, a few reasons why the the game is so phenomenal, and stands out above even the other Metal Gears, is due to its social commentary and meta. It predicted wonderfully the use of the internet while it was in its infancy; how Governments would seek to regulate and control information (SOPA and PIPA), and how it will be affected by confirmation bias - communities of people that all believe in and reinforce their own convenient truths, with no way of filtering them out. It talks about how the media can be used to deceive the public, complete with Kojima using the media to deceive the entire fanbase and gaming industry prior to the game's launch.

Once the game turns itself on its head by pointing out the entire thing has just been a scene for scene rehash of the first, it then really turns itself on its head by having The Patriots (analogous to the developers) inform us that it was really just an exercise in misinformation that Raiden (the player) has been a part of to prove the effectiveness of the very thing the game proposes.

It, and Kojima, know exactly what the perfect sequel to Metal Gear Solid would have been, and the game offers it to you with a massive slap in the face - a slap that should really get you off. It shows you everything Sons of Liberty should be (the Tanker), before subverting your expectations by taking it away from you and forcing you to play the entire game as a character that appears to be everything Solid Snake isn't, while painstakingly running off of a script that runs completely parallel to the previous game. It then proceeds to berate you for not realising it, or even liking it, for anyone who played the first game.

"More of the same, you say? Well, f*** you! If that's what you want, then that's what you're getting!"

Just when it leads you in to believing that the purpose of the game was to explore the nature of what it meant to be a sequel to a highly anticipated success, it subverts the subversion.

I really could say so much more about what this game does, and how it does, but I think I've said quite enough. For the record, I would much prefer to play Snake Eater any day of the week, but Metal Gear Solid 2 is unquestionably the better game.
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Pelador
Member Avatar
Crazy Awesome Legend

And despite all that text, the game is still boring as s*** and too short.


Posted Image

http://www.youtube.com/user/jonjits
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Steve
Member Avatar
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.

Quote:
 
This is a both a genuine complaint and a misconception. The swimming controls are perfectly fine, the problem is in having no previous experience with them. There actually is a place right at the very beginning you could get used to them, but the game doesn't let you know that you should.


I think the main problem with the swimming was the camera more than anything else. That flooded section you have to swim through with the few pockets of air was awful because the rooms were so tiny the camera would be right up Raiden's arse and you could hardly see what direction you were pointing in, all while you were slowly drowning. It was needlessly awkward.
Swimming should have been more fleshed out or taken out entirely.
Posted Image


Definitely not a succubus, fear not
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tinny
Member Avatar


Pelador
Jun 2 2016, 02:44 AM
And despite all that text, the game is still boring as s*** and too short.
How is it either of those? I actually enjoyed it greatly. I wasn't bored at any point, the codec conversations were interesting, the sneaking was fun, gameplay well tuned and the vr missions were also great to spend time with on a purely gameplay level. Also boring is in no way an objective analysis.
Posted Image
Above signature created by Graffiti

Posted Image
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Pelador
Member Avatar
Crazy Awesome Legend

Yeah sorry. That wall of text just annoyed me. Probably because it's 4am and there's no way I can be expected to read all that now let alone point out why he is wrong on all his points. But damn Lazuli, keep it short and sweet in future. It really isn't important enough to spend so much effort defending.


Posted Image

http://www.youtube.com/user/jonjits
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tinny
Member Avatar


I thought he was working through his points rather quickly myself. He didn't really dilly dally or restate any of his points, he made his point, provided some examples, and moved on to the next point. Heck I've made long posts over less important things I think.

It's probably because you should be asleep or something at this time :p Four AM is pretty early to be up reading.
Edited by Tinny, Jun 2 2016, 03:12 AM.
Posted Image
Above signature created by Graffiti

Posted Image
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Steve
Member Avatar
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.

I don't feel it can really be labelled "the best game ever" purely on the basis that a grand portion of it's audience are in no way going to be grasped by or understand it's narrative. Here in the UK it came out a 15, which obviously gives it a limited target audience anyway but I doubt that many 15 year olds at the time understood it.

I've probably completed it like 30 times and I still can't really remember what the overarching story was about :rofl: though most of those were when I was like 8-11 years old(come at me, police)

All the philosophical s*** could drag at times though, unless you were completely invested in what was going on there were a lot of "Oh God just let me play the damn game" moments.


Thinking of it now I may go back and play it again on the HD collection to try grasp the story a bit more. Although it probably won't take me long to complete so not sure how well it'd be absorbed :D
Posted Image


Definitely not a succubus, fear not
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tinny
Member Avatar


I'm not sure why an age rating should restrict what stories a game can tell. If a game lacks blood and guts and tits that doesn't bar it from telling a mature story, and frankly what most games do that actually attain a mature (I believe it's an 18 in Europe) do not deserve to be called 'mature.' in the least. I mean is anyone gonna really look at Doom and tell me that anyone over the age of twelve is gonna have trouble understanding the game? You have to keep a game's intended audience in mind as well as what they were going for and how well the executed it.
Posted Image
Above signature created by Graffiti

Posted Image
Member Online View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Steve
Member Avatar
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.

Tinny
Jun 2 2016, 03:21 AM
I'm not sure why an age rating should restrict what stories a game can tell. If a game lacks blood and guts and tits that doesn't bar it from telling a mature story, and frankly what most games do that actually attain a mature (I believe it's an 18 in Europe) do not deserve to be called 'mature.' in the least. I mean is anyone gonna really look at Doom and tell me that anyone over the age of twelve is gonna have trouble understanding the game? You have to keep a game's intended audience in mind as well as what they were going for and how well the executed it.
Yes but how many 15 year olds would really have understood the deep political and philosophical narrative in MGS2? I doubt that many people of that age really had the attention span to grasp it considering the length of some of the cutscenes and anyone who didn't grow up on MGS has even less chance of getting it as they're overall less invested in it.
Not to mention those who just don't care about politics and such anyway.


Whereas something like Final Fantasy 7 which is widely regarded as the best game ever has a story any able minded age group can get in to and enjoy and basically all of it's elements could appeal to everyone at the time. It didn't have to dig deep to be a great game.
It was a huge step up from it's predecessors in many ways but at the same time anyone could hop on to it because it's story wasn't connected to any of the others at all, so it's far more accessible.

Complexity isn't necessarily telling a better story, you can have a brilliant story that isn't complex at all but is filled with tons of great characters, general emotion within the story and probably above all how that is all executed.
Disney movies are a great example, not many of them have a great amount of depth but they can still have adults in tears. Not afraid to admit I was holding them back during Inside Out and movies rarely get to me because they're so predictable :cool:
Posted Image


Definitely not a succubus, fear not
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Buuberries
Member Avatar
No

Pelador
Jun 2 2016, 02:44 AM
boring as s*** and too short.
that's what she said :/
¯\(°_o)/¯
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Sandy Shore
Default Avatar


Pelador
Jun 2 2016, 03:00 AM
Yeah sorry. That wall of text just annoyed me. Probably because it's 4am and there's no way I can be expected to read all that now let alone point out why he is wrong on all his points. But damn Lazuli, keep it short and sweet in future. It really isn't important enough to spend so much effort defending.
So, you can't be bothered to read my post, and yet you reckon you could point out why I'm wrong on all of the points I made in it? What makes you think it's a matter of importance, or that it requires any effort to defend? No more than the effort it took you to rant about what you don't like about the game.

If I didn't know any better, I would say you were bitter about being told how wrong you are. At any rate, by what measuring stick is this a short game, and if it were so boring then why are you complaining about how short it is?

Steve: You seem to be conflating the age rating with the intended audience. A rating of fifteen means "you should not be watching/playing this if you are you under fifteen-years-old", not "this product is for fifteen-year-olds."

The primary intended audience is anyone who played the first game, though it's certainly not limited to it. Also, no one would argue that Metal Gear Solid 2 is great because "it's complex", but because it does what it intends to do incredibly well, and it does things worth doing, that others haven't done before or since. It's genuinely intelligent, and a fifteen-year-old's inability to recognise that would be no mark against the game itself.

Even disregarding anything that someone might (wrongly) perceive as pretentious or incomprehensible, the game was still a technical marvel at the time, garnering an abundance perfect and near-perfect reviews from people that didn't fully understand it, even complained about Raiden and/or the length/content of the cutscenes, but were nonetheless in awe of the gameplay itself.
Edited by Sandy Shore, Jun 2 2016, 02:34 PM.
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Pelador
Member Avatar
Crazy Awesome Legend

I don't find the game interesting enough to bother arguing about in great detail. The reason I made the thread was just to point out that despite all the criticism of later games and the positive praise for this one, it really doesn't hold up compared to them. I basically wanted to share my disappointment and disdain for this incredibly over rated sequel.

And it is a short game, it's just padded out by long cut scenes and drawn out boss battles.


Posted Image

http://www.youtube.com/user/jonjits
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
+ Steve
Member Avatar
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.

Quote:
 
Steve: You seem to be conflating the age rating with the intended audience. A rating of fifteen means "you should not be watching/playing this if you are you under fifteen-years-old", not "this product is for fifteen-year-olds."


It is however for ages 15 and up, so regardless a good portion of those playing it who were of age were still too young to get a lot of what it all means, it's messages would have been lost on many.

Quote:
 

It's genuinely intelligent, and a fifteen-year-old's inability to recognise that would be no mark against the game itself.


Not disagreeing there, just to be the best game ever it should broadly appeal to more people really. If a huge portion of people can't understand and enjoy it as a story or an art piece it's failed to mean much to a lot of people.
Even if it's fun it's not definitively the most fun ever. I probably killed like 10,000 seagulls in the game for lols but I still had way more fun in DMC3 overall.

Quote:
 
Even disregarding anything that someone might (wrongly) perceive as pretentious or incomprehensible, the game was still a technical marvel at the time, garnering an abundance perfect and near-perfect reviews from people that didn't fully understand it, even complained about Raiden and/or the length/content of the cutscenes, but were nonetheless in awe of the gameplay itself.


I don't see why this matters today, no matter how much of a technical marvel something was at the time it still sucks in comparison to what comes later, that's no reason to praise a game outside of it's own generation.

It doesn't measure up to games today mechanically, even s***ty games, it was one of the best of it's time for sure but that's not awe that can cross over to the present in any meaningful way.
The technical side of things matters least for something being timeless, they make do with what they have at the time and it's always going to be overtaken eventually.
Unless there comes a time where we just can't advance the technology for whatever reason.


EDIT Yeah it really is quite short even if you're not a speed runner it doesn't take that long. The tanker mission can take like 40 minutes alone if you take out the cutscenes.
Edited by Steve, Jun 2 2016, 03:13 PM.
Posted Image


Definitely not a succubus, fear not
Member Offline View Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
0 users reading this topic
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Video Games · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1

Theme Designed by McKee91