MGS: Twin Snakes $34.99 used on gamestop.com

This is why I also love pawn shops. I got this game for 8 dollars from one (among other games :D) I am REALLY surprise how is so expensive now O_O Not that I'll part with my copy, is the only MGS game I actually like and I love the GC version (I have the PS1 and Gamecube version and played both from beggining till end...still enjoyed the GC version more)
 
[quote name='LegendK7ll3r']When did this suddenly become so rare? I've had my copy just sitting here, since I no longer play my GC (or Wii), maybe I'll just sell it on eBay.[/quote]
It really isn't rare.

Just one of those games that garners a good amount of hype and then when it's no longer in production, seller go apeshit with the prices on eBay, claiming it's "very rare."
 
[quote name='Tsukento']Honestly, every time I see someone moaning about how TS isn't like the original, it just makes it seem like all of their arguments are basically for nostalgia's sake. :\[/quote]
I played MGS1 for the very first time when the essential collection came out a few months ago and I loved every second. My favorite game ever. So don't think it's impossible to play for the first time nowadays. Never played TTS but I might at some point. Backlog is killing me though.
 
[quote name='CaoPi']Snake may be exaggerated like Superman in some cutscenes but fine game, overall![/quote]
***SPOILERS AHEAD***



That didn't bother me, since Solid Snake (along with Liquid Snake & Solidus) WAS created to be a "supersoldier". Though there were some parts where that stuff was unneeded, such as that cutscene right after meeting Meryl for the first time...cartwheeling INSIDE a hail of gunfire? Oh Snake, you turn me on...*ahem* >_>
 
You know, it's always funny when these arguments turn up, because everyone who likes the original is automatically called a fanboy? Come on. Get a better argument.

Anyway, I enjoyed TTS, but I still think the original is more faithful to the Metal Gear universe. For one, I was able to breeze through TTS, because the added control scheme makes things too easy for me. That, of course, is a personal preference, but nonetheless, gives the original a leg up. And yes, like it or not, some of those cutscenes are completely over-the-top. I know what you're thinking...the entire MG universe is over-the-top. Yes, yes it...but not the main characters. Name another time when Solid Snake or Big Boss jumped off a missile or dodged bullets like Neo? Never. They are humans...nothing more, nothing less. They are the greatest soldiers in that universe, but they still just human soldiers.
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']You know, it's always funny when these arguments turn up, because everyone who likes the original is automatically called a fanboy? Come on. Get a better argument.

Anyway, I enjoyed TTS, but I still think the original is more faithful to the Metal Gear universe. For one, I was able to breeze through TTS, because the added control scheme makes things too easy for me. That, of course, is a personal preference, but nonetheless, gives the original a leg up. And yes, like it or not, some of those cutscenes are completely over-the-top. I know what you're thinking...the entire MG universe is over-the-top. Yes, yes it...but not the main characters. Name another time when Solid Snake or Big Boss jumped off a missile or dodged bullets like Neo? Never. They are humans...nothing more, nothing less. They are the greatest soldiers in that universe, but they still just human soldiers.[/QUOTE]

Did you not read that part from TDA?

For all those people debating on the PS1 version vs the GC version, here are a few facts about the remake. The director of the remake originally had done the cut scenes shot for shot exactly like the original. Kojima was upset/displeased with this and told the director he wanted him to do them differently in the directors on style and not his. That's why there's a dramatic change in the cut scenes. Also for the voice acting, David Hayter took a paycut so he could get the original cast back to do their voices for the remake. I think Liquid Snake is the only character that didn't return.
 
I bought this and another Gamecube game for my Wii for like $10 TOTAL a couple months ago at my Blockbuster. I didn't think it was so hard to find or expensive.
 
[quote name='Mishimaryu']Did you not read that part from TDA?

For all those people debating on the PS1 version vs the GC version, here are a few facts about the remake. The director of the remake originally had done the cut scenes shot for shot exactly like the original. Kojima was upset/displeased with this and told the director he wanted him to do them differently in the directors on style and not his. That's why there's a dramatic change in the cut scenes. Also for the voice acting, David Hayter took a paycut so he could get the original cast back to do their voices for the remake. I think Liquid Snake is the only character that didn't return.[/quote]

I'm not even 100% what the point of your post is. I already know this, as a huge fan of MG. It doesn't matter why the cutscenes were changed...all that matters is that they are not consistent with the MG universe. It's just kind odd to see Solid Snake do things that he doesn't do in the original MGS, in Sons of Liberty, or Guns of the Patriots. Nor does Big Boss do any of them in Snake Eater or Portable Ops. They are just men. Men don't jump off of moving missiles or dodge multiple bullets.

I didn't even bring up the voice acting. Oddly enough, there is a funny story about that. When they did the original recordings for MGS, they quickly converted a house in LA into a recording studio. Unfortunately, when they went back to that audio years later, they realized that the GameCube's audio capabilities would allow you to hear all of the background noise, including the traffic outside the house. Thus, even though the vast majority of the MGS flashbacks consist of PS1 cutscenes, the audio is mostly from TTS, because the old recordings are pretty much junk on today's hardware.
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']They are just men. Men don't jump off of moving missiles or dodge multiple bullets.[/quote]
Yet Snake was able to destroy a walking, mechanical weapon of mass destruction on his own in Metal Gear?

WUT?
 
[quote name='Tsukento']Yet Snake was able to destroy a walking, mechanical weapon of mass destruction on his own in Metal Gear?

WUT?[/quote]

Using weapons to a destroy a machine...no matter how powerful that machine is...is not superhuman. Unlikely? Yes. Superhuman? No. If Snake flew at Metal Gear and used his heat vision, you would have a point. He didn't, though. Dodging bullets is superhuman. Jumping off a missile that was fired at you is superhuman. Snake and Big Boss have never shown any of these traits again.
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']Using weapons to a destroy a machine...no matter how powerful that machine is...is not superhuman. Unlikely? Yes. Superhuman? No. If Snake flew at Metal Gear and used his heat vision, you would have a point. He didn't, though. Dodging bullets is superhuman. Jumping off a missile that was fired at you is superhuman. Snake and Big Boss have never shown any of these traits again.[/QUOTE]

Forget Snake and Big Boss! Am I the only one who likes Raiden? I remember destroying all 20 of them on extreme. Back then people hating on MGS 2 just because Snake wasn't the main character. Now he's a total badass in MGS 4 and some people want to play as him.
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']Personally I thought this game was terrible compared to the original. I ran them side by side and the original is sooooo much better looking, so much more artistic.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, but that's just wrong. You can no way justify saying the PSX graphics are better than the GCN graphics. You can say you prefer the PSX graphics, but not say it's better.

mgs_notwinsmegaton_3_in.jpg

mgs_notwinsmegaton_1_in.jpg

mgs_notwinsmegaton_detail_2.jpg


Right?
 
[quote name='MasterSun1']Sorry, but that's just wrong. You can no way justify saying the PSX graphics are better than the GCN graphics. You can say you prefer the PSX graphics, but not say it's better.

mgs_notwinsmegaton_3_in.jpg

mgs_notwinsmegaton_1_in.jpg

mgs_notwinsmegaton_detail_2.jpg


Right?[/quote]

OMG! With those pics, I remember playing this game for PS1! I don't know about paying $40 bucks for it even if its store credit but I'll dif keep an eye open at BBs. Actually does Hollywood Video have "Keep it" values because I probbly have a better shot at find it there then at a BB.
 
[quote name='Tsukento']Yet Snake was able to destroy a walking, mechanical weapon of mass destruction on his own in Metal Gear?

WUT?[/quote]

Don't forget, he also destoryed a tank, a Hind, and a Harrier, oh yea and also three Metal Gear Rays at once. It's a game, some of the cs are over the top, but that's fine, if it was realistic, than you wouldn't have those cs cause Snake would be dead from being shot once.
 
I know alot of us hold onto MGS on ps1, but Twin Snakes was a much better game. Better moves, better music, more storyflow included in the begining optional briefing scenes.
 
I think it's best to play through MGS1 first and then play through Twin Snakes, to see what has been improved and to completely appreciate the improved visuals.
 
[quote name='MasterSun1']Sorry, but that's just wrong. You can no way justify saying the PSX graphics are better than the GCN graphics. You can say you prefer the PSX graphics, but not say it's better.
[/QUOTE]

Graphics are more than polygons and textures. As I've said, the original is FAR more artistic. It's a night and day difference that's far more impressive than upping texture resolution or the like. It's also not something you can see unless you actually compare the games-which I did, when I was surprised by how unimpressed I was with the remake's looks.
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']Graphics are more than polygons and textures. As I've said, the original is FAR more artistic. It's a night and day difference that's far more impressive than upping texture resolution or the like. It's also not something you can see unless you actually compare the games-which I did, when I was surprised by how unimpressed I was with the remake's looks.[/quote]

...

Still have no idea what you are trying to say. Just give it up man. We obviously aren't sophisticated enough to compare the artistic qualities of both. Just be happy knowing you are right and we are wrong.
 
[quote name='primetime']...

Still have no idea what you are trying to say.[/quote]

I don't see how that's possible, given I've explained it multiple times in multiple ways. I assume you must be someone who thinks 3D automatically looks better than 2D also...
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']I don't see how that's possible, given I've explained it multiple times in multiple ways. I assume you must be someone who thinks 3D automatically looks better than 2D also...[/quote]

You must be someone who thinks 2D automatically looks better than 3D?
 
[quote name='primetime']You must be someone who thinks 2D automatically looks better than 3D?[/QUOTE]

No, of course not, why would you think that?
 
COMPARED TO THE non-Konami remake :roll:

Geez, is this the Gamecube fanboi brigade or something?

Better textures, more polygons does not automatically = better looking game
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']COMPARED TO THE non-Konami remake :roll:

Geez, is this the Gamecube fanboi brigade or something?

Better textures, more polygons does not automatically = better looking game[/QUOTE]

Yes it does.
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']COMPARED TO THE non-Konami remake :roll:

Geez, is this the Gamecube fanboi brigade or something?

Better textures, more polygons does not automatically = better looking game[/QUOTE]

Mgs1 looks like shit on hdtvs for the same reason sdtv looks like shit on hdtv's the scalers won't help. The low resolution of old sdtv's acts like free aa for games.
 
As far as the original game is concerned, I personally like the cut-scenes a bit more because I too think they were a little bit overdone in TS. The thing is that since Kojima made the call to change them to what they currently are... I have to say that it's his vision and his game and though it was not made by Konami... it still had input by the series creator. If you look at Snake Eater, the same dramatic flavor is apparent, and we can just chalk that up to Mr. Kojima's own style. When Snake lands after parachuting, he dramatically slides and has a super long ass dramatic pause that is pretty ridiculous.

As for the original being better... that is a hard thing to debate since it was totally different when the game came out. It was unlike anything else we had played before and that is why a lot of people might have that attachment to it. It was like an interactive movie! The remake to me is way easier on the eyes and apart from those crazy scenes it is a better version in my opinion.
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']COMPARED TO THE non-Konami remake :roll:

Geez, is this the Gamecube fanboi brigade or something?

Better textures, more polygons does not automatically = better looking game[/quote]

So what does? You do realize that "Artistic" is such a vague and subjective word. So where are you coming from?

Someone posted comparisons a few pages back showing that not only did Twin Snakes have "better textures, more polygons" than the original but also a better camera angle in the same shot (DARPA chief scene). You responded with, "The original also looks better than those screen shots make it out to be." O RLY?

This discussion is in no way similar to, as you said, "Claiming the remake looks better is like saying Rush Hour has better cinematography than Braveheart if you're playing the former on Blu Ray and the latter on DVD. Yes the technical aspects making up the picture are better, but it's artistic merit is far, far worse." We're dealing with largely the same game here, not Rush Hour vs. Braveheart...

If you really want to convince us that the original is "sooooo much better looking, so much more artistic" than Twin Snakes, either provide a sensible explanation of "artistic" (because I have no idea where you are going) or offer examples that counter the ones already posted, instead of discounting them entirely.

Your turn. Go. I'll be here all day.
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']COMPARED TO THE non-Konami remake :roll:

Geez, is this the Gamecube fanboi brigade or something?

Better textures, more polygons does not automatically = better looking game[/QUOTE]


I dunno man, I see where you are coming from with regards to how the original game is "more artistic" because of the changes that took place in the remake, and I can agree with you to a certain point. Things that were changed can take away some of the core essence of the game and you can argue that the changes in TS did just that (which would in turn affect the artistic style of the original). However, you can't deny though that some changes actually create some artistic flavor and can make it all its own. For example:

I am a huge Resident Evil fan (specifically part 1) and when Capcom re-made that game on the cube, I was totally going bananas to play it. The thing is that when I did, I realized that some of my favorite (cheesy) dialog moments were completely removed/changed and a lot of the game's cut-scenes were done differently. Plus, a lot of the stuff was in different locations which was strange. I loved the new graphics and stuff, but the remake did make me question if it was better than the original game. I popped in the classic and quickly realized something. I realized that the original game and the remake are two different games. Things were changed not to piss off the fans, but changed to improve on the game and in all actuality... make it an entirely new game. A game that fans of the original can play and be surprised and new fans can play and enjoy fully.

I can't honestly give a young teen RE1 on the PSX and expect them to play it from start to finish. Not with those ugly blocky graphics. For me, I am cool with it since my first memories of the game are playing it like that, but I wont deny how beautiful the cube remake is and how I prefer looking at that version any day. I also can't imagine a young gamer playing the PSX version and not talking shit about the cheesy ass dialog. It doesn't bother me much because I consider it part of the artistic flare of the title, but I will tell you that if a new game came out with that kind of voice over... I would be slamming it. What I can imagine is a new gamer playing RE for the first time on the cube and falling in love with the game the same way I did with the original. And to me thats an awesome thing. I truthfully can't see that happening with the original because standards have been raised with the newer games.

What I am getting at is that MGS on the PSX and MGS TS on the cube are two different games. Granted TS is a remake just like RE on the cube is a remake of the PSX classic, but there are enough differences to make them all their own. The scenes are different, some of the dialog is different, game mechanics are different (MGS 2 abilities), etc. It is a game that a new generation can play and actually enjoy because they are not looking at a dated game. Granted, the dated game is BA to you and me (since my first memories are playing that game day 1) but you have to at least appreciate the differences and how they appeal to the newer gamers. Graphics are not the most important part of a game to you, but I can assure you that graphics are important to a lot of people. Plus, the changes are nothing to someone playing it for the first time and make the game feel more up to date which was the whole point in remaking it in the first place. I think one can appreciate and own them both without feeling like he/she is betraying his/her first love.
 
[quote name='force_assassin']I dunno man, I see where you are coming from with regards to how the original game is "more artistic" because of the changes that took place in the remake, and I can agree with you to a certain point. Things that were changed can take away some of the core essence of the game and you can argue that the changes in TS did just that (which would in turn affect the artistic style of the original). However, you can't deny though that some changes actually create some artistic flavor and can make it all its own. For example:

I am a huge Resident Evil fan (specifically part 1) and when Capcom re-made that game on the cube, I was totally going bananas to play it. The thing is that when I did, I realized that some of my favorite (cheesy) dialog moments were completely removed/changed and a lot of the game's cut-scenes were done differently. Plus, a lot of the stuff was in different locations which was strange. I loved the new graphics and stuff, but the remake did make me question if it was better than the original game. I popped in the classic and quickly realized something. I realized that the original game and the remake are two different games. Things were changed not to piss off the fans, but changed to improve on the game and in all actuality... make it an entirely new game. A game that fans of the original can play and be surprised and new fans can play and enjoy fully.

I can't honestly give a young teen RE1 on the PSX and expect them to play it from start to finish. Not with those ugly blocky graphics. For me, I am cool with it since my first memories of the game are playing it like that, but I wont deny how beautiful the cube remake is and how I prefer looking at that version any day. I also can't imagine a young gamer playing the PSX version and not talking shit about the cheesy ass dialog. It doesn't bother me much because I consider it part of the artistic flare of the title, but I will tell you that if a new game came out with that kind of voice over... I would be slamming it. What I can imagine is a new gamer playing RE for the first time on the cube and falling in love with the game the same way I did with the original. And to me thats an awesome thing. I truthfully can't see that happening with the original because standards have been raised with the newer games.

What I am getting at is that MGS on the PSX and MGS TS on the cube are two different games. Granted TS is a remake just like RE on the cube is a remake of the PSX classic, but there are enough differences to make them all their own. The scenes are different, some of the dialog is different, game mechanics are different (MGS 2 abilities), etc. It is a game that a new generation can play and actually enjoy because they are not looking at a dated game. Granted, the dated game is BA to you and me (since my first memories are playing that game day 1) but you have to at least appreciate the differences and how they appeal to the newer gamers. Graphics are not the most important part of a game to you, but I can assure you that graphics are important to a lot of people. Plus, the changes are nothing to someone playing it for the first time and make the game feel more up to date which was the whole point in remaking it in the first place. I think one can appreciate and own them both without feeling like he/she is betraying his/her first love.[/quote]

I too would say this is one of my favorite remakes along with RE for gamecube. I'm a pretty big RE fan. If I were to buy essentials I don't think I can stand playing MGS 1 again. Not to mention now that I have an HDTV, upscaling would look all pixelated.
 
[quote name='CaoPi']I too would say this is one of my favorite remakes along with RE for gamecube. I'm a pretty big RE fan. If I were to buy essentials I don't think I can stand playing MGS 1 again. Not to mention now that I have an HDTV, upscaling would look all pixelated.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, one of my friends picked up essentials thinking that the MGS 1 was going to be a remake like Twin Snakes and when he played it on his HDTV he couldn't take it. He commented that it made the game difficult to play looking that bad and so he went out and picked up a cube and TS just to play it decently. The original is great for collectors and those who appreciate having it, but TS is a great version to play for those with HD TVs and an eye for graphics.
 
I thought TS was horrible became they never bothered to alter the game to fit the new first person mode. I mean, that made the game ridiculously easy.

And don't get me started on the "let's pack 900 million frames of Matrix slo-mo into every single cut scene we can" movies....
 
[quote name='Purkeynator']Yes it does.[/QUOTE]

If textures and polygons are really the only thing you see when comparing how something looks than you have no taste. Man, that's harsh, but geez. I don't care if you're comparing XBox 360 games-having a higher polygon count or higher resolution textures does not make a game look better automatically.

[quote name='BULL_Ship']Mgs1 looks like shit on hdtvs for the same reason sdtv looks like shit on hdtv's the scalers won't help. The low resolution of old sdtv's acts like free aa for games.[/QUOTE]

If your TV has a good scaler they should look identical to how it looks on a good SDTV.

[quote name='force_assassin']As far as the original game is concerned, I personally like the cut-scenes a bit more because I too think they were a little bit overdone in TS. The thing is that since Kojima made the call to change them to what they currently are... I have to say that it's his vision and his game and though it was not made by Konami... it still had input by the series creator. If you look at Snake Eater, the same dramatic flavor is apparent, and we can just chalk that up to Mr. Kojima's own style. When Snake lands after parachuting, he dramatically slides and has a super long ass dramatic pause that is pretty ridiculous.

As for the original being better... that is a hard thing to debate since it was totally different when the game came out. It was unlike anything else we had played before and that is why a lot of people might have that attachment to it. It was like an interactive movie! The remake to me is way easier on the eyes and apart from those crazy scenes it is a better version in my opinion.[/QUOTE]

I actually figured it was just nostalgia that was making think the original looked so much better, which is why I pulled it out and ran it side by side. It's night and day difference. The remake just has these functional but generic shots, the original uses interesting camera angles and framing-the remake is workman-like, is what I'm saying. It gets the job done but that's it.

[quote name='primetime']So what does? You do realize that "Artistic" is such a vague and subjective word. So where are you coming from?[/quote]

See above, though yea, it's subjective. I doubt many film buffs would think the remake looks as good (again, discounting the technical improvements), but not everyone's going to agree.

This discussion is in no way similar to, as you said, "Claiming the remake looks better is like saying Rush Hour has better cinematography than Braveheart if you're playing the former on Blu Ray and the latter on DVD. Yes the technical aspects making up the picture are better, but it's artistic merit is far, far worse." We're dealing with largely the same game here, not Rush Hour vs. Braveheart...
Click to expand...

No, but it's still the same situation in terms of the cinematography, which is mostly different (and worse) in the remake.

[quote name='force_assassin']...
I am a huge Resident Evil fan (specifically part 1) and when Capcom re-made that game on the cube, I was totally going bananas to play it. The thing is that when I did, I realized that some of my favorite (cheesy) dialog moments were completely removed/changed and a lot of the game's cut-scenes were done differently. Plus, a lot of the stuff was in different locations which was strange. I loved the new graphics and stuff, but the remake did make me question if it was better than the original game. I popped in the classic and quickly realized something. I realized that the original game and the remake are two different games. Things were changed not to piss off the fans, but changed to improve on the game and in all actuality... make it an entirely new game.[/quote]

In the case of Resident Evil and it's remake that's true. I don't think one is really "better" than the other because they're both made with similar skill (for their time at least), and both play well, and are different enough that they're sort of different games. They complement each other well IMO and if you're a big fan, you'd probably want both. The remake's graphics are as jaw droppingly awesome for when it was released as the original was in early '96, which doesn't hurt either.
The Metal Gear remake doesn't work for me. It's much uglier than the original was for when it was released, just from a technical standpoint (doesn't really live up to the better 'Cube games of it's day). It also lacks as I've said the cinematic flare of the original.
Doesn't help either that it was a colossal waste of time for the developer. I hope every single one of you going on about this game own a copy of Eternal Darkness....

What I am getting at is that MGS on the PSX and MGS TS on the cube are two different games. Granted TS is a remake just like RE on the cube is a remake of the PSX classic, but there are enough differences to make them all their own. The scenes are different, some of the dialog is different, game mechanics are different (MGS 2 abilities), etc. It is a game that a new generation can play and actually enjoy because they are not looking at a dated game.
Click to expand...

But it isn't the same thing IMO as it doesn't look as good (or sound as good...). Everything done with the presentation in Resident Evil was improved IMO, but not so with Metal Gear. The main thing improved was the basic technical elements. IMO it should never have been "remade" so soon if that was as good as they could do it. You could still walk out and buy a real copy of the game.

I'd also disagree about someone not being able to enjoy these games now for the first time. If it's a good game, it's a good game. If they have a true love for the medium they're going to enjoy it as is if it's aged decently (as many games have). Heck, even today many of us switch between games running on hardware hundreds of times apart in power, but it doesn't matter. The DS is only a Playstation 1 on a GOOD day, but many of us still sink hour after hour into it, and then switch to a 360 or PS3 or PC game and enjoy those.
 
So you're saying the original has better camera angles, therefore it is more artistic? Because that's all I'm gaining from your responses.

It's irrelevant to the matter at hand whether or not Twin Snakes stacks up graphically to the best GC games. Why even bring that point up when you completely discount the technical differences? It's also irrelevant whether or not the developer could have been working on something else. I know you realize that's just a silly point.

Based on the screenshot comparison that was posted earlier (of the same scene), my personal experiences playing both, and pure common sense, I disagree with your take on the original having better camera angles (making it more artistic? I think this is what you are arguing, but it's still quite unclear). I also propose that similarly to the way you think graphics alone do not equal "artistic," camera angles alone do not equal "artistic" either.
 
Okay this thread needs to be closed. This "deal" is no longer available, and everyone is just arguing over the two versions of the game.
 
[quote name='bigdaddybruce44']You know, it's always funny when these arguments turn up, because everyone who likes the original is automatically called a fanboy? Come on. Get a better argument.

Anyway, I enjoyed TTS, but I still think the original is more faithful to the Metal Gear universe. For one, I was able to breeze through TTS, because the added control scheme makes things too easy for me. That, of course, is a personal preference, but nonetheless, gives the original a leg up. And yes, like it or not, some of those cutscenes are completely over-the-top. I know what you're thinking...the entire MG universe is over-the-top. Yes, yes it...but not the main characters. Name another time when Solid Snake or Big Boss jumped off a missile or dodged bullets like Neo? Never. They are humans...nothing more, nothing less. They are the greatest soldiers in that universe, but they still just human soldiers.[/quote]

Big Boss is a regular human, Snake is a supersoldier...
 
[quote name='Wolfpup']


I actually figured it was just nostalgia that was making think the original looked so much better, which is why I pulled it out and ran it side by side. It's night and day difference. The remake just has these functional but generic shots, the original uses interesting camera angles and framing-the remake is workman-like, is what I'm saying. It gets the job done but that's it.


In the case of Resident Evil and it's remake that's true. I don't think one is really "better" than the other because they're both made with similar skill (for their time at least), and both play well, and are different enough that they're sort of different games. They complement each other well IMO and if you're a big fan, you'd probably want both. The remake's graphics are as jaw droppingly awesome for when it was released as the original was in early '96, which doesn't hurt either.
The Metal Gear remake doesn't work for me. It's much uglier than the original was for when it was released, just from a technical standpoint (doesn't really live up to the better 'Cube games of it's day). It also lacks as I've said the cinematic flare of the original.
Doesn't help either that it was a colossal waste of time for the developer. I hope every single one of you going on about this game own a copy of Eternal Darkness....


But it isn't the same thing IMO as it doesn't look as good (or sound as good...). Everything done with the presentation in Resident Evil was improved IMO, but not so with Metal Gear. The main thing improved was the basic technical elements. IMO it should never have been "remade" so soon if that was as good as they could do it. You could still walk out and buy a real copy of the game.


I'd also disagree about someone not being able to enjoy these games now for the first time. If it's a good game, it's a good game. If they have a true love for the medium they're going to enjoy it as is if it's aged decently (as many games have). Heck, even today many of us switch between games running on hardware hundreds of times apart in power, but it doesn't matter. The DS is only a Playstation 1 on a GOOD day, but many of us still sink hour after hour into it, and then switch to a 360 or PS3 or PC game and enjoy those.[/QUOTE]


You make a lot of good points man. I give you props. I personally own them both and am happy to call myself a big enough fan to appreciate both of them in their own right. Some remakes totally suck, some remakes are decent, and some remakes are totally awesome. I think the RE remake was a totally awesome one and the MGS TS a decent recreation. Thinks could have been better, but things could have been worse. I know there are people out there like us that can pick up a dated game and play it and appreciate it for what it is, but people that are living in this graphical heavy era might be more inclined to play a copy of MGS TS vs a copy of the original MGS based on the sole issue of graphics. It might be a shame the same way that its a shame that people judge books by their covers, but it is a reality. Again, there are people on the other side of the spectrum that will still play a dated game... start to finish... and those people, like us, are called gamers.

I personally like TS because of the way it looks and the updates it was given (and is easier on my eyes), but I still appreciate the flare of the original as well. It really is up to the user on which is better. I can honestly rest easy knowing that someone who is a graphics whore can play TS and still get very close to the same experience/memories as I did back when I played the first version. The same can't be said about some remakes.
 
I got lucky and picked this up at a block buster near me for $10 a few months back. It came in a crappy block buster case and without the manual but it had the real front insert so unless you open the case you would never know its not the original case. Disks were close to mint too.
 
[quote name='Purkeynator']Coming this Friday: Cagcast #124: The Twin Snakes. (Arousing follow up to Cagcast #122 Double Dragons)[/quote]

ewww
 
Damn now I regret I traded this game off on Goozex. I never figured it would go up in price! Damn, oh well. I will probably find this again for cheap. Put it back into my inventory.
 
[quote name='s0undwav3']Damn now I regret I traded this game off on Goozex. I never figured it would go up in price! Damn, oh well. I will probably find this again for cheap. Put it back into my inventory.[/quote]

I just traded mine off on goozex not too long ago also.
 
[quote name='force_assassin']You make a lot of good points man. I give you props. I personally own them both and am happy to call myself a big enough fan to appreciate both of them in their own right. Some remakes totally suck, some remakes are decent, and some remakes are totally awesome. I think the RE remake was a totally awesome one and the MGS TS a decent recreation. Thinks could have been better, but things could have been worse. I know there are people out there like us that can pick up a dated game and play it and appreciate it for what it is, but people that are living in this graphical heavy era might be more inclined to play a copy of MGS TS vs a copy of the original MGS based on the sole issue of graphics. It might be a shame the same way that its a shame that people judge books by their covers, but it is a reality. Again, there are people on the other side of the spectrum that will still play a dated game... start to finish... and those people, like us, are called gamers.

I personally like TS because of the way it looks and the updates it was given (and is easier on my eyes), but I still appreciate the flare of the original as well. It really is up to the user on which is better. I can honestly rest easy knowing that someone who is a graphics whore can play TS and still get very close to the same experience/memories as I did back when I played the first version. The same can't be said about some remakes.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough :) I'm hoping Too Human turns out well. Six years between games is a bit ridiculous! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top