| 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: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Some objective reasons why Metal Gear Solid 2 is the worst in the series | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 1 2016, 09:18 PM (1,114 Views) | |
| + Sandy Shore | Jun 2 2016, 05:17 PM Post #16 |
![]()
|
It's not "padded out" with cutscenes; they were a design choice that the developers put hundreds upon hundreds of hours in to. It's not a trick to try and make the game seem longer, they exist for the sake narrative. They're part of the game length whether you care to recognise that or not. Even without the cutscenes, you'll probably be playing this game on your first time through for the same length of time it would take you to complete a standard FPS campaign (a good five to eight-hours). Like the games that directly precede and succeed it, it becomes a lot shorter once you know where to go and what to do, and skip the story. The same is true of Resident Evil games, and others that exist within a limited space. The game even acknowledges as such by challenging you to complete it in under three-hours—along with other restrictions—so saying it's "padded out" goes to show how little you know. As for the boss battles: They're standard Metal Gear fare. Far from attempting to pad out the game length, they're very different from one another, serve very particular technical and narrative purposes, and, with the exception of the mass produced Rays, can all be beaten in a minute or two if you know what you're doing - but I wouldn't be surprised if you were to b**** about that, too. But it's not for fifteen-year-olds, so what sense is there in basing its accomplishments on their experience? That's just an age-rating imposed on the game. Furthermore, isn't this just your opinion on what fifteen-year-olds can and can not grasp? I really think we should stay away from judging the game on someone's age when they play it, or who did or didn't understand it, but what the game did actually do. So, something might only be considered the best if it appeals to the lowest common denominators, and is so baseline as to be understood by the mentally unable? You don't want to judge the work itself, but on the people who view the work? Because we judge things on what it did, the time and place in which it did it, and the effects it had because of what it did. It's the icing on the cake if they still hold up today, and, bearing the esoteric control scheme, this game absolutely does. By your criterion, Sonic Generations or Advanced are better than Sonic the Hedgehog 2; Street Fighter IV or V are better than II and III, and any game influenced by Ocarina of Time is superior, all by virtue of having come after. Guns of the Patriots, nor The Phantom Pain hold a candle to Sons of Liberty. If you want to talk about padding, Pelador, how about the fact that almost the entirety of the the second chapter is just harder versions of chapter one missions, which offer no purpose in the narrative; how the open world is essentially barren, and the Mother Base essentially useless; and how the game "ends"—though, it's such an incoherent mess, it's just an event that takes place somewhen—by setting up a third fight against Sahelanthropus, that ultimately got scrapped, and was instead shown as concept art. V was ultimately a collection of interesting ideas—the most important of which are attempts to replicate the meta of Metal Gear Solid 2—and high-ambitions, that all fall short of their intended goals. I don't really care to talk about 4. The only game in the series that could conceivably be put on the same level, albeit for different reasons, would be Snake Eater. Still, if I'm really wrong about that, I'd be happy to read why. |
![]() |
|
| Tinny | Jun 2 2016, 05:24 PM Post #17 |
![]() ![]()
|
I would also like to point out Citizen Kane is PG regarding the Pegi15/Mature (17+) rating argument, if anyone can find me substantial number of twelve year olds that'll understand that I'll eat my hat. Frankly I find that argument completely insane, because of the opinions of the MPAA/ESRB/PEGI regarding who can view that media and who can't, that means we must view a game as if it were built with that demographic in mind. I guess Citizen Kane needed to show a Tit and say "f***" before it can actually be good.
Edited by Tinny, Jun 2 2016, 05:25 PM.
|
![]() Above signature created by Graffiti
| |
![]() |
|
| + Pelador | Jun 2 2016, 05:27 PM Post #18 |
|
Crazy Awesome Legend
![]()
|
I didn't like Citizen Kane either. Quite a boring film despite obviously fantastic directing. If Metal Gear Solid two even had that to its credit then I might not be so harsh, but the story was far too pretentious and bare bones. It's meant to be a parody but it actually takes itself rather seriously. |
![]() http://www.youtube.com/user/jonjits | |
![]() |
|
| + Sandy Shore | Jun 2 2016, 07:03 PM Post #19 |
![]()
|
You're definitely talking nonsense. You're (unsuccessfully) attempting to discredit every aspect of the game because you're seemingly upset that it's so highly praised. Don't worry, though, it's less highly praised than you might think. Despite its high reviews and sales, it really only has a cult following. Though the pretension claim is a mere commonplace, you're the first I've seen claim that, as a 2001 game, it wasn't fantastically directed, or that it's some how bare bones - the exact opposite being what turns everyone off it. I was surprised you hadn't had a tantrum about the main character being some fag, but I see now that you're just making things up. You also passed up the opportunity to explain why the later games in the series are superior to it, too. I won't hold your inability to perform the impossible against you, though. Edited by Sandy Shore, Jun 2 2016, 07:04 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| + Steve | Jun 2 2016, 08:24 PM Post #20 |
![]()
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.
![]()
|
That only means it's for a smaller demographic then, which means it can't really be the best game ever can it? It can be anyone's personal best but it's not going to appeal to a grand portion of gamers. And...no? How many 15 year olds do you know that care about and grasp the complexities of politics and philosophy? Versus those who would just be spending like 10 minutes laughing at how you can kiss that picture of a model in a locker which I absolutely did not ever do. Ever. Or the seagull thing.
But what it did was deliver some mostly solid gameplay for it's time and tell a pretty complex story that not everyone who was of legal age to play it is going to get or care about. Versus MGS3 which told quite a great story through interesting characters and events that more people could understand, it didn't have such expansive cutscenes and as intricate plotlines but is still held in similarly high regard. Excuse the IGN but MGS2 has a 9.7 and MGS3 has 9.6 on IGN, so what does that tell you? How much of MGS2's success can we really attribute to how it was done and what it was all about versus just how much of a technical marvel the game was at the time? A lot of praise games get is how they are mechanically not as a story. Most official reviews aren't even of a whole game. Not a day goes by where I don't see adverts for games that are all pretty much "9/10 Absolutely stunning" "9.5/10 generation defining graphics" "10/10 yadda yadda yadda by the game plz"
Not what I'm saying, something that isn't particularly hard to grasp isn't necessarily dumb or weak as a story compared to something that is complex. Complexity just means less people are going to understand it, especially if it's themes are more adult orientated. EDIT For instance could you call The Godfather the best film ever when 10 year olds probably aren't going to get half of what's going on? Best film aimed at adults maybe but not definitively the best film ever.
But the only things that really hold up at a later date are story and gameplay depending on the genre. Gameplay focused games like Sonic games so far as I know should be considered better as they go along, unless people just didn't improve them with each iteration. (wouldn't know wasn't really a fan) The first ones to do something aren't by default the best either are they? The first book isn't the best book, the first FPS isn't the best FPS etc etc Even if the recent Call of Duty games are garbage by todays standards they still blow the mechanics of the original DOOM out the water, you couldn't even aim up in that. Should DOOM be considered the best FPS just because it popularized and practically created the genre as it is today? That's a pretty dumb reason to name anything the best. Also Phantom Pain doesn't exist. Just...forget about it...*sick noises* Edited by Steve, Jun 2 2016, 08:30 PM.
|
![]() Definitely not a succubus, fear not | |
![]() |
|
| + Sandy Shore | Jun 2 2016, 10:08 PM Post #21 |
![]()
|
"The best (something) ever" isn't a piece that appeals to the largest amount of people—it's been a long time since I've seen anyone hold that notion; you're basically arguing for popularity—it would, most crucially, be a piece that can be held up as important, influential, and something that epitomises its craft. You don't have to like Ocarina of Time to recognise what the game did, and represents. Shakespeare, while absurdly famous and well respected, is really quite unpopular, with a higher entry level than most other writers, and countless students scoffing and sighing at having to read his works - myself included. He's still a very convincing candidate for the best English writer, and possibly the greatest writer of any language. You don't think the absurdly popular J. K. Rowling has any claim to that title, do you? And no, "first" is not synonymous with "best" - Shakespeare is far from the first writer in English. I'm also miffed at your claim that The Godfather films are somehow lacking because they're not appealing or suitable to ten-year-olds... Beyond that, I'm interested in what you think qualifies as the best game ever made? The latest Call of Duty? Minecraft? The latest games are not the best games, and you're probably the first person to seemingly suggest as such. Very occasionally, something genuinely important comes along, and it might not be instantly recognised, either. Edited by Sandy Shore, Jun 2 2016, 10:09 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| + Steve | Jun 2 2016, 11:03 PM Post #22 |
![]()
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.
![]()
|
If it's going to be the "best" it should appeal to a broad range of people when it comes out at least. The best book ever couldn't feasibly only be liked by 5 people and still be claimed to be the best(unless there were only 5 people) could it? Unless you're comparing literary techniques to something like The Hungry Caterpillar. Popularity isn't always the best way to gauge something but it's not entirely untrue to say something is the best based on it, it depends on why it's popular. TLOU is easily one of the most popular games of last generation and consistently considered the best of it even though I'm pretty sure GTAV at least sold better(On PS3 anyway obviously throwing 360 in to the mix skews the results) Skyrim probably sold more too considering the hype. To say popularity = best is obviously untrue but to say the two concepts aren't related, also untrue.
(for arguments sake let's say Shakespeare is definitely regarded as the best writer) What makes him objectively the best today though? In his time certainly but now? If so little people read, enjoy and understand his works is he still the best or is it just an honourary title given his writing achievements at the time? What makes his works the best versus something like the GoT series? Have writing techniques and such just not improved or do people just consider Shakespeare the best...because it's Shakespeare surely he's better?
I mean it's lacking were it to be in the running for the best movie ever made because if we say half the people in the world are children(discounting ages where they're undeveloped mentally) then half the world at least can't possibly enjoy the film. It's not aimed at children in any way. It can be the best film ever that's aimed at adults but not overall, not if you pick something like say Lion King that could have a 5 year old and their 60 year old grandmother in tears. Then you have to account for how tastes change too, when kids become adults they aren't necessarily going to enjoy The Godfather are they? "Best ever" is a huge claim. Best in a specific genre or at a specific time isn't. ...why would I suggest those games? I'm not sure what could be the best ever made, not really my place to make such a claim. My favourite? Probably Fallout 3 or MGS3 but that's just personal opinion. It would be crazy to claim Fallout 3 is the absolute best considering how broken it is. |
![]() Definitely not a succubus, fear not | |
![]() |
|
| + Emmeth | Jun 2 2016, 11:12 PM Post #23 |
![]()
I ♥ Yoeri
![]()
|
Actually pretty rude to say "You are wrong" about a thing that's 100% subjective. I love the game myself, but can see flaws in at least the control scheme. For what it's worth, it IS clunky and slow for the time it is NOW, but back then it was innovative and fun. That's what you get with evolution of gaming, some games don't hold up unfortunately, but it doesn't make it less of a great game unless you judge it by time. MGS2 happens to be my favorite installment of the franchise mainly due to the story and unique boss fights. I thought every character was very well though-out and created fantastically for continuity (in case of future games). The atmosphere is just like the other MGS games; Unique in their own way. That's what I like about Kojima's video game design. He creates the same game but very different from the other, if you know what I'm trying to say. The soundtrack and SFX are incredible, they make the atmosphere of the game even better. I can't stress enough how taken I was by the whole audio aspect of the game. The gameplay is pretty much the same every single game with minor differences, so in that regard MGS2 doesn't offer anything new. Anyway, it's a game of it's generation and regardless of genre it still can be considered a masterpiece or "one of the best games ever". |
![]() My Twitch Page | |
![]() |
|
| + Steve | Jun 2 2016, 11:24 PM Post #24 |
![]()
Greetings. I will be your waifu this season.
![]()
|
Totally agree with all that. Off topic but can't wait to see what Kojima's next game will be like, it will be interesting to see how much Konami held him back over the years. And maybe, quite possibly, how they guided him to greatness a little. |
![]() Definitely not a succubus, fear not | |
![]() |
|
| 0 users reading this topic | |
| « Previous Topic · Video Games · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
4:35 PM Jul 13
|
Theme Designed by McKee91
Powered by ZetaBoards Premium · Privacy Policy


















4:35 PM Jul 13