Author Topic: OFFICIAL Metal Gear Discussion (Read 178848 times)

Sirmorphix · « **Reply #800 on:** March 05, 2004, 02:17:32 AM »

Anyone thinking some online reviews will pop up any time soon? I've been expecting at least a review from IGN by thursday, and Friday is already here.

SearanoX · « **Reply #801 on:** March 05, 2004, 10:54:20 AM »

Most likely we're going to see things appearing during the weekend, or perhaps Monday. Shouldn't be much longer now, though.

vudu · « **Reply #802 on:** March 05, 2004, 11:20:59 AM »

there's a review over at computerandvideogames.com. i've never read one of their reviews before, so i'm not familiar with any biases, etc, but it's a pretty decent review. i'll sum it up with one quote.

Quote
Despite [some] flaws, Metal Gear still manages to be a killer game. The best Metal Gear game ever.

check out the review here.

Sirmorphix · « **Reply #803 on:** March 05, 2004, 07:45:45 PM »

Has anybody looked at the "Twin Snakes Secrects" news post on Nintendojo? I want to look at it, but this game already has so few surprises in it for me. So if someone had read it, I was wondering if it spoils stuff for someone who has already beaten the original PSX version.

yellowfellow · « **Reply #804 on:** March 06, 2004, 03:56:52 AM »

not really, and there's not too much to the post as well. It has one "easter egg" and if you've played the PSX version of MGS then it's an obvious no brainer.
What it's about is psycho mantis' references to Mario sunshine, Zelda, ED, and some others. That's about the depth it delves into.
Oh, and i assume you are talking about "MGS: Secrets" post March 5th, right?

Perfect Cell · « **Reply #805 on:** March 06, 2004, 06:54:52 AM »

Play magazine alos reviewed it... They said it was good ,but not the ultiamte MGS

Bloodworth · « **Reply #806 on:** March 06, 2004, 08:58:08 AM »

Matt and Craig were at DICE, so that's probably why you haven't seen a review yet. Either way, I really feel that they've been covering it too much, and anyone that reads all of their bits on MGS is going to feel disappointed by the final game, simply because there aren't any surprises left.

CreedDBZ · « **Reply #807 on:** March 06, 2004, 05:30:27 PM »

So does anyone have any idea what is up with the release date? I know how the whole "shipping date" thing works out, but all of a sudden I see that it is now getting shipped on the 9th. I had always seen the date as the 8th. Plus, if you look in this week's circuit city flyer it has the game available friday and target has it listed as thursday. I know they are always a day or two later, but friday?! I really hope this game is still set to be available on the 9th. Does anyone have any info?

Berny · « **Reply #808 on:** March 06, 2004, 05:49:34 PM »

I've heard a lot of Thursdays. I'm not that concerned about what day next week it's released as I have exams to haggle with until Friday, at which point I will pick up and play this game until it is 2AM on March 22.

CaseyRyback · « **Reply #809 on:** March 08, 2004, 12:24:06 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Bloodworth
Matt and Craig were at DICE, so that's probably why you haven't seen a review yet. Either way, I really feel that they've been covering it too much, and anyone that reads all of their bits on MGS is going to feel disappointed by the final game, simply because there aren't any surprises left.

I totally agree. I played MGS2 far after the hype machine died down and had not read any of the reviws, and thought to myself that this was one of the best games ever. By not falling victim to the absurd hype, I was able to enjoy the game without constantly hearing how it was the greatest or the story sucked.

While I have not played MGS ever. I do know a lot of the story from MGS2, and a little from the other games(like MG on the NES). I do not see myself being disappionted, even though I am overly hyped for this game. Even if its not as good as hoped, Splinter Cell comes out in two weeks for the PC and hopefully the problems will be fixed(all those stupid keypads)

Sirmorphix · « **Reply #810 on:** March 08, 2004, 04:02:19 PM »

The IGN review for Twin Snakes is up.

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #811 on:** March 08, 2004, 04:08:01 PM »

Not a bad score, but nearly all of their complaints were with the original, not the remake. This seems to have become a habit of IGN's.

Perfect Cell · « **Reply #812 on:** March 08, 2004, 05:39:01 PM »

Bah, i dont really understand it, didnt MGS for PS1, get a higher score?

vudu · « **Reply #813 on:** March 08, 2004, 05:47:25 PM »

Quote
Our only real gripe is that it doesn't also always run at 60 frames per second. Instead, in wide-open environments and during combat sequences with lots of particles the action may hiccup. It's not a major problem, but it's noticeable

quite a different story than what game pro told. i'm glad the frame rate isn't a major issue. that was the one lingering doubt i had about this game.

Quote
didnt MGS for PS1, get a higher score?

ign.com gave the original mgs a 9.8 back in 1998. but you have to remember, these rating mean very different things, seeing as how (a) they were reviewed by two different people and (b) 5.5 years have passed between the two reviews and the gaming world is very different. stealth games seem to be a dime a dozen these days, where mgs was one of the (if not the) first stealth based game. either way, 8.5 is a respectable score, and seeing as how it's the same overall score as the other review i read (i'm not even counting game pro), i see a pattern forming.

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #814 on:** March 08, 2004, 05:49:34 PM »

The core material of Twin Snakes shouldn't be judged against the slew of other stealth games, though, considering it's a remake of the original stealth game.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #815 on:** March 08, 2004, 05:58:56 PM »

Sometimes IGN(matt/peer) have said they rate games against the standards set by a game's peers, aka the console's current library. MGS1 on PSX was rated based on what came before it, at the time it was released. Our MGSTTS, graphically in-game, has to stand up against the likes of say, Metroid Prime (which has a deliciously smooth framerate). On the control side, effective control schemes like those of Zelda:WW and Eternal Darkness also pre-date Twin Snakes, which could reasonably justify a dissappointment in the lack of analog character movement in Snake. Then there's the phenomemon of Snake's combat movements seeming vastly simplified compared to the cool stuff in the cutscenes -- I'm not sure how to explain that other than Konami is happy with that, just as players were happy with MGS2's boss fights. Then I remind myself MGS2 originally came out for PS2, and came out a while ago, where it was rated against the peers of its own time.

mouse, isn't the core material of Twins Snakes the ["modern" or "not that modern anymore"] gameplay mechanics of MGS2 that's applied to MGS1's old level design, though? So help me out: what should Twin Snakes be rated against?

akdaman1 · « **Reply #816 on:** March 08, 2004, 09:49:14 PM »

Well that is what I expected , I never really expected a 9.5 considering its a remake.

If you never played the original then this will be one hell of a game for u.

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #817 on:** March 09, 2004, 02:20:53 AM »

Quote
mouse, isn't the core material of Twins Snakes the ["modern" or "not that modern anymore"] gameplay mechanics of MGS2 that's applied to MGS1's old level design, though? So help me out: what should Twin Snakes be rated against?

Eh, no, that's the extra material added to the remake- I'm talkking about the vast majority of the game, which is based on the original. For instance, IGN faulted the game for having anticlimatic boss battles as compared to the cutscenes, when this has nothing to do with the MGS2 gameplay mechanics Silicon Knights added. The game still got a great score, I just can't help but feel most of Matt's complaints are superficial, and with the original game rather than the remake.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #818 on:** March 09, 2004, 06:48:49 AM »

I don't really have a problem with IGN's score (or Gamespot's which was 8.3 I think). I expect a remake to get a lower score than the original. I don't know if it's fair but it seems to be standard practice. The Cube version of Ocarina of Time also didn't get as high of a rating as the original. Technically Twin Snakes is probably better than the original MGS so if you use that logic it deserves a higher score but games are usually not reviewed against older games. If they were than Pong would get like a 1.

I do get a little pissed though if there isn't consistency with reviewing remakes or re-releases. Many of Nintendo's GBA re-releases get high ratings despite "dated" gameplay elements or in some cases being inferior to the original SNES version. However I imagine the reasoning for that is that often those games were not reviewed by the site the first time around so they feel they "owe" Yoshi's Island the rating it would have got back in 1995.

vudu · « **Reply #819 on:** March 09, 2004, 07:08:13 AM »

here are links to some more reviews:

gamespot.com
gamespy.com

looks like it's racking in somewhere between 8 and 8.5, which is great, all things considered.

Doerr · « **Reply #820 on:** March 09, 2004, 06:39:38 PM »

has anybody got it yet.
My local EB said thursday.

Sirmorphix · « **Reply #821 on:** March 09, 2004, 09:27:04 PM »

I was just wondering if anybody had it yet either. I took a vert brief look at Wallmart today between classes and unforetunately there wasn't anything there yet. I'm thinking Thursday, but hoping for late Wednesday.

Rhoq · « **Reply #822 on:** March 09, 2004, 10:47:05 PM »

I get mine today from GameStop. I received the phone call last night telling me that's expected in store this afternoon for pre-orders only.

Bloodworth · « **Reply #823 on:** March 09, 2004, 10:49:56 PM »

If I had money, I would have this game... and KOTOR, and Metroid Zero Mission, and FFCC (US ver), and an Xbox, and Xbox Live, and ......

vudu · « **Reply #824 on:** March 10, 2004, 09:31:48 AM »

i actually got my copy in the mail from ebgames.com about 2 hours ago. sadly, i'm at work and can't play until tonight. five o'clock can't come soon enough ...

(for those of you keeping track, that means i'm at work right now. shhh ... don't tell.)

News:

Author Topic: OFFICIAL Metal Gear Discussion (Read 178848 times)