Wow, Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence rules! (previously, MGS3 sucks)

Mr Durand Pierre

Mr Durand Pierre

CAGiversary!
Feedback
21 (100%)
I just started Metal Gear Solid 3 last night, and I really can't fathom why the series is so highly acclaimed.

Before 3, I'd only played a little of the first game and hated it, mostly due to the clunky third-person shooting, and dated graphics. But I knew both of those problems would be remedied in the third game, and with all the great reviews it had been getting (as well as the good deals at EB) I figured I would give it a shot.

And after playing it for about 4 hours it sucks. Really sucks. A lot.

For one thing, at least half of the 4 hours I've seen has been movies. This wouldn't be so bad if the game had a good script, but it doesn't. We're subjected to cliche after cliche after cliche. The plot twists are uninteresting since we don't give a damn about the characters. I'm sure I'm missing somehting since I know little of the first 2, but even so this is a prequel and should be easy for newcomers to grasp. In many ways it is easy to grasp, but uninteresting. And a lot of the dialogue is just awful. Like Snake hitting on women, and that woman who saves your game only to rant on and on about movies and philosophy every time. If I wanted a good story I'd read a book, or at least watch a movie (and like I was saying, at 4 hours into the game I've been subjected to at least a movie's length worth of talking and cutsenes).

This would be more tolerable if the gameplay was any good, but it isn't. For one thing, the game is WAY too complicated for its own good. Like to heal your wounds ther's a ton of supplies that you need instead of the RE style green herbs or first aid kits. You actually have to apply like 5 items to yourself to heal a broken bone. I like the idea of the stamina meter effecting your health and movement, but so far that hasn't played into things much.

But the worst thing about it is that the stealth just isn't fun. Now I like stealth games. I loved Beyond Good & Evil, and liked Splinter Cell. But due to the shoddy camera angles, and the fact that you can't really estimate an enemies line of sight or hearing, makes it more a game of trial and error. I can't fathom why they didn't use a third-person behind the shoulder camera like Splinter Cell, or Hitman. As a result you'lll often be spotted by offscreen enemies. It's every bit as cheap as it sounds.

And when you are caught you can switch into first-person and try shooting the enemies, but the guns don't have a crosshair and I seem to miss 90% of the time and have no idea why. So far it seems a better strategy is to just run around grabbing and knifing soldiers, but it's not very fun and I'm sure it won't last long.

After reading several extremely positive reviews of the game it's hard to believe we've been playing the same game. I'm sorry, but after 4 hours playing time plus on hour reading the manual, that's 5 hours I've devoted to this game so far with very little enjoyment out of it. I hear it gets better, but it will sure have to get A LOT better real fast if I'm going to keep playing it.

Edit: Check out my revised thoughts on Subsistence on page 4.
 
Sorry to hear you didnt like it, I on the other hand love this game...and cant wait for Subsistence...did you start this thread to stir the Fanboys into a violent rage ?
 
The worst part is that even though this sucks it is the best game in the entire series.

And by the way, START skips cutscenes, not X.
 
While I do not think it sucks, I do think that there are WAY too many cutscenes in it. I want to play games not watch movies. Thats why I dont even bother with Final Fantasy games anymore.
 
[quote name='musha666']While I do not think it sucks, I do think that there are WAY too many cutscenes in it. I want to play games not watch movies. Thats why I dont even bother with Final Fantasy games anymore.[/QUOTE]

Play Xenosaga or should I say go watch it..lol
 
Quite frankly I loved the game...though the fight with The End was horribly boring and long...or maybe my strategy just sucked...who knows?
 
[quote name='hokel']Quite frankly I loved the game...though the fight with The End was horribly boring and long...or maybe my strategy just sucked...who knows?[/QUOTE]

Yeah, everybody else that the end battle was awesome, but I wasn't such a huge fan. My eventual strategy was to put on the thermal goggles, look for footprints, and then when I found the old bastard I would shoot him with the tranq pistol.

Anyway, I thought the game was amazing. I feel that it is much harder to be unseen than it is in Splinter Cell, which is much more believable. As for your inability to aim in first person mode, I would chalk that up to you sucking because I found it to be easy.
 
[quote name='Epic Wolf']Sorry to hear you didnt like it, I on the other hand love this game...and cant wait for Subsistence...did you start this thread to stir the Fanboys into a violent rage ?[/QUOTE]

No. More to see if others agreed with me, since it's gotten such ecstatic reviews.

I'm to the part where you wake up in the morning and have to take out 8 ocelot guys. It's starting to get interesting, but the controls still feel really clunky, and I keep getting spotted. I hear it gets better after the first few hours. Am I almost to the point, or is there no chance of me liking it since I hated the beggining so much?
 
[quote name='Quackzilla']The worst part is that even though this sucks it is the best game in the entire series.

And by the way, START skips cutscenes, not X.[/QUOTE]

Right. But even though I don't like the cutscenes, I still don't want to skip them. I'm kind of a completionist that way.
 
[quote name='Mr Durand Pierre']No. More to see if others agreed with me, since it's gotten such ecstatic reviews.

I'm to the part where you wake up in the morning and have to take out 8 ocelot guys. It's starting to get interesting, but the controls still feel really clunky, and I keep getting spotted. I hear it gets better after the first few hours. Am I almost to the point, or is there no chance of me liking it since I hated the beggining so much?[/QUOTE]

It's really slow at the beginning, and I hated it until I got further into the game. I would get past that part and give the rest of the game a chance you might be pleasantly surprised later on ;)
 
[quote name='Mr Durand Pierre']No. More to see if others agreed with me, since it's gotten such ecstatic reviews.[/QUOTE]

Here's my review of Metal Gear Solid 3.

Almost every single review I've seen of it praises it as one of the best games ever, and I hardly ever see anybody saying they don't like it. I don't understand that, because I find it (and the rest of the series) boring, cheesy, clunky, and almost unplayable. Surely there must be more people like this out there? Unless they alraedy know better and know they hate it and so don't even try it in the first place.
 
Yes. MGS3 sucks hard.

The series started out good, but ended up as an overdramatic, wanabe cgi movie series.

Kojima is a joke.
 
I can see why alot of people don't liek the series or game, but it dosn't suck. Suck is a general statement...

Seeing that you haven't played the first two, I think the only way you can get what most others have experienced is by playing the other 2. The reason part 3 was created was not to be a stand alone game, but a conclusion to all the other games. If you can take it that way (after playing the other games) then I am sure you'll understand why so many other people enjoyed the game, even if you still hate it.

Even if you think it sucks, it's one very impressive game in a technical aspect... if you don't agree with me there then program something better.
 
Maybe it's just me, but I'd be perfectly fine with a MGS game that had NO gameplay whatsoever. Heck...I play it on very easy just to get through the gameplay ASAP :p.
 
[quote name='RelentlessRolento']I can see why alot of people don't liek the series or game, but it dosn't suck. Suck is a general statement...

Seeing that you haven't played the first two, I think the only way you can get what most others have experienced is by playing the other 2. The reason part 3 was created was not to be a stand alone game, but a conclusion to all the other games. If you can take it that way (after playing the other games) then I am sure you'll understand why so many other people enjoyed the game, even if you still hate it.

Even if you think it sucks, it's one very impressive game in a technical aspect... if you don't agree with me there then program something better.[/QUOTE]

Well I did start playing the first one, but I liked it even less. Partially due to the fact that I was playing it 8 years after it came out, so the graphics really turned me off, but I found the gameplay dated and clunky too. But I didn't even think that the writing to the first one was any better. It was still really pretentious, and philisophical, and cheesy.

But being a sequel only means that it shares story elements in common with the first two, but the gameplay would still be exclusive to itself, and that's where it fails.

And yes, it is impressive in a technical aspect, but so many games are these days, and in a few months or a year it won't be impressive at all.
 
I personally LOVE the series. It's what got me to love gaming again!

The 1st metal gear solid game got me started on rpg, action games.

The only game that really engrossed me like that was Snatcher on sega cd , done by non other than kojima. (where the hell is a us verion policenauts!?)

Because I never played a game that made me care about the charcters , and the story was awesome, I personally don't mind all the cinamatics in the games, I think they help with the overall experiance with the games.

I just think they don't need to be so long sometimes, and it should be ALWAYS be possible to skip or pause them, if the game/s are going to have them.
 
[quote name='Mr Durand Pierre']Well I did start playing the first one, but I liked it even less. Partially due to the fact that I was playing it 8 years after it came out, so the graphics really turned me off, but I found the gameplay dated and clunky too. But I didn't even think that the writing to the first one was any better. It was still really pretentious, and philisophical, and cheesy.

But being a sequel only means that it shares story elements in common with the first two, but the gameplay would still be exclusive to itself, and that's where it fails.

And yes, it is impressive in a technical aspect, but so many games are these days, and in a few months or a year it won't be impressive at all.[/QUOTE]

If you were not expecting a philosophically based story with long winded speeches about things, you stepped into the wrong series. Bashing Metal Gear for this is like bashing the 2D platformer for being linear. The game has always had these features, even back in 1987 with the release of the original.

also four years later, MGS2 is still an impressive title so saying that the technical merits of MGS3 will soon be surpassed is a little out there. Sure the next generation will have hit, but that does not mean that the things done with this game will be any less outstanding.

and the camera is being fixed with Substinence
 
This is one of the best games ever.

The games ending almost made me cry...it is sad.

But I loved this game + all the other MGS games.
 
To the OP:

A) Keep this in the Review Forum Where It Belongs(though seeing as though your ranting, and not giving an honest review since you havent finished the game...I dont know where it belongs)
B) Everything Casey said about two posts above
C) A game only sucks when facts prove that it is lesser in quality than another, not to be determined by opinion...you however do not have solid fact, and thusly your incoherent ranting, calls for a thread naem change to "I dislike Metal Gear Solid 3"
D)Your about a year late for an honest review, and at this point in time, nobody really gives a shit about what you think about a 8 month old game
E)Did you honestly feel a great need to post your opinion of a game...are you trying to warn people from buying it, because I think people have had enough time to make up there minds
F) Yeah I like the game...but im not being biased, although I wouldnt have taken the time to post this had it been about Psychonauts( Not because I dont like psyconuats, its just an example)
G)Wiz
 
[quote name='Ozzkev55']To the OP:

A) Keep this in the Review Forum Where It Belongs(though seeing as though your ranting, and not giving an honest review since you havent finished the game...I dont know where it belongs)
B) Everything Casey said about two posts above
C) A game only sucks when facts prove that it is lesser in quality than another, not to be determined by opinion...you however do not have solid fact, and thusly your incoherent ranting, calls for a thread naem change to "I dislike Metal Gear Solid 3"
D)Your about a year late for an honest review, and at this point in time, nobody really gives a shit about what you think about a 8 month old game
E)Did you honestly feel a great need to post your opinion of a game...are you trying to warn people from buying it, because I think people have had enough time to make up there minds
F) Yeah I like the game...but im not being biased, although I wouldnt have taken the time to post this had it been about Psychonauts( Not because I dont like psyconuats, its just an example)
G)Wiz[/QUOTE]

A) I kept this out of the review forum because I wasn't done with the game and it was merely an initial impression.
B) It may be my fault (having seen little of the earlier games) that I didn't know the game would be so talky. But I still can't figure why so many people like the talking. It's just not well-written. Cheesy dialogue and an unnecessarrily long-winded plot slows things down a lot. If there was less of it it wouldn't be so intrusive.
C) I did compare the the game to Splinter Cell when I said that the camera made the gameplay cheap and trial and error based. And how hard it is to determine an enemies line of sight or hearing. I even stated other stealth titles and why I liked them better. And your proposed title for the forum sounds too politically correct. While I try to avoid the term "sucks" it does spark a lot of people's interest, so I get a lot of feedback.
D) I don't care about the date. If you don't want to read it, don't. Plus there have been many good deals on the game lately at EB, so I'm sure many CAGS have been picking it up lately.
E) Yes, I did feel a great need to post my opinion, and here's why; I WANTED to like this game. After reading the reviews and buying it I was pretty excited about it, and was hoping I'd figure out what I was missing out on. Like hearing from people who agreed with me, but were still won over by it by the end. Some kind of affirmation that it would get a lot better and was worth sticking with despite the beggining. Instead it seems like the only people who like it were already fans of the series from the get-go.
F) Um... okay

And Casey, the fact that Substinence will fix the camera is still no excuse. For one, it will have been a year between versions, and I'm sure Substinence will cost a lot more. Since this is the only version we know, whom so many love, this is the version I wanted to voice my say in.
 
Yes, the game is slow as hell at first and yeah, the story is totally retarded. It's like Anime- you have to let the stupid cliches slide or else you'll never enjoy it.

The gameplay, fortunately, gets MUCH better. After the intro with the song, the game just gets 10x better. and you get better at it as you go along, so the stealth loses that "trial and error" feel.

The learning curve is huge though-- I know someone that took 6 hours just to get to the Intro cutscene :rofl:

Try it for 4 more hours
 
The best game of 2004 sucks?
The best ending in a videogame I've seen in a long time and it sucks?
Thanks for coming out.
 
[quote name='Mr Durand Pierre']Well I did start playing the first one, but I liked it even less. Partially due to the fact that I was playing it 8 years after it came out, so the graphics really turned me off, but I found the gameplay dated and clunky too. But I didn't even think that the writing to the first one was any better. It was still really pretentious, and philisophical, and cheesy.

But being a sequel only means that it shares story elements in common with the first two, but the gameplay would still be exclusive to itself, and that's where it fails.

And yes, it is impressive in a technical aspect, but so many games are these days, and in a few months or a year it won't be impressive at all.[/QUOTE]


that's fine. If you don't like it then your entitled to your own opinion. many will agree and disagree. I say dont play any more since there is almost no way in hell you're atracted to the game.

as for the technical aspect, i think you are wrong. If you actually spend a good hour just fooling around with all the in-game stuff it's mighty impressive... mainly due to attention to non-visual detail (example... spin snake too much in the pasue screen and he hurls... wait, that example sux... awwe hell whatever). If you don't liek this then stay the damn hell away from AC!D or your brain will fry! (i like AC!D, but it's nothing super).

oh, and I do say one thing: MGS>Splinter Cell... but then agian that's IMO
 
[quote name='Apossum']Yes, the game is slow as hell at first and yeah, the story is totally retarded. It's like Anime- you have to let the stupid cliches slide or else you'll never enjoy it.

The gameplay, fortunately, gets MUCH better. After the intro with the song, the game just gets 10x better. and you get better at it as you go along, so the stealth loses that "trial and error" feel.

The learning curve is huge though-- I know someone that took 6 hours just to get to the Intro cutscene :rofl:

Try it for 4 more hours[/QUOTE]

I did!

I'm up to the part with "The Fear," and I have to say that I like it better each time I play it, but "better" is a relative term.

I've come to the realization that the main flaw in MGS3 (aside form the longass cutscenes) is the control. The game really does have A LOT of good ideas in it. I like the idea of the stamina meter, and the auto-recharging health meter that can get stilted if you don't fix your wounds. Hunting animals is a game mechanic that just never gets old. And I like how you have a ton of near equally important gadgets at your disposal. Switching from the mine detector, to the motion detector, to sonar, to thermal goggles is all really cool. It all looks so good on paper, but it just doesn't play out that way, due to faulty controls.

-For one, the crouching position hurts a lot more than it helps. Often I'll try to get up, only to crouch and go back to lying down again. Or I'll crawl into a wall and automatically start to crouch (and get detected). I've been playing the game for about 8 hours (so maybe 5 hours gameplay time) and that's still giving me trouble.

-The crawling controls are really wonky, and it's difficult to turn around. I always end up backing up and having no idea how to get my guy to just face the other way while on the ground.

-Laying against a wall is uncomfortable, mostly due to the shift in camera, and having to hold the analog stick for so long at a time. Or I'll accidentally lean against a wall when I didn't mean to. There should really be a button to alternate from wall leaning to not ala crawling (Heck, they could even have used the crawl button when against a wall).

-The FPS desperately needs a crosshair or laser. In a game where precision matters a whole lot the difference between getting a head shot and putting a guy out vs a shoulder or body shot and giving off an alert is way too important a factor to ignore. I keep missing because I still haven't gotten the hang of where my gun shoots exactly.

-And switching back to third-person every time you're hit is really annoying and I have no idea why the designers included it.

And contrary to popular opinion, I don't think a third-person behind-the-shoulder camera would make the game any better. It would make things too easy, since the game was designed with the top-down view in mind. I'm generally a fan of unconventional control mechanics if they work well within the game. For example, I loved the Metroid Prime games and RE4, even though they had very unusual single stick aiming, where you couldn't run and aim at the same time. But they worked perfectly, because the enemies, AI, and level design were all well suited to that type of control scheme. If the MGS games wanted to do something different and stick to the top-down view that's cool, but there's still the other aforementioned control kinks preventing it from being as much fun as it should be.
 
there were no crosshairs in the 60's. They played around with the period a little, but sticking a laser on a gun would be completely out of place. Both 1 and 2 have lasers on the guns

and the controls are a matter of opinion. The controls for Metal Gear Solid in general are about as perfect as you can get. Once you become comfortable with them they are fluid and the button placement of everything is completely natural. Metroid Prime has far worse controls, though just like Metal Gear when it clicks in your mind and you get everything down you have no problem with them and can see why they were laid out that way
 
[quote name='Mr Durand Pierre']-For one, the crouching position hurts a lot more than it helps. Often I'll try to get up, only to crouch and go back to lying down again. Or I'll crawl into a wall and automatically start to crouch (and get detected). I've been playing the game for about 8 hours (so maybe 5 hours gameplay time) and that's still giving me trouble.
[/quote]
As long as you're using a Dual Shock 2 controller, this shouldn't be a problem. The buttons are pressure sensitive, so tapping X will switch between crouching and lying. Pressing X hard will get you to stand up instead. Takes some getting used to but it can save you sometimes.
-The crawling controls are really wonky, and it's difficult to turn around. I always end up backing up and having no idea how to get my guy to just face the other way while on the ground.
Click to expand...
Two ways to do this. First way takes a little longer, but you won't have to get up. Say you're facing right and you want to go left, you have to take a roundabout way, by turning up-right, up, up-left, then left. If you're not being watched, you can just go from lying to crouching, then hit left, and you should go directly to crawling left (IIRC, I haven't played in a while.)
-Laying against a wall is uncomfortable, mostly due to the shift in camera, and having to hold the analog stick for so long at a time. Or I'll accidentally lean against a wall when I didn't mean to. There should really be a button to alternate from wall leaning to not ala crawling (Heck, they could even have used the crawl button when against a wall).
Click to expand...
Agreed, this would've helped, especially when the wall is at an angle.
-The FPS desperately needs a crosshair or laser. In a game where precision matters a whole lot the difference between getting a head shot and putting a guy out vs a shoulder or body shot and giving off an alert is way too important a factor to ignore. I keep missing because I still haven't gotten the hang of where my gun shoots exactly.
Click to expand...
I really thought there was a sight. I think I got used to the fact that a little bit to the left of the barrel of the gun is where my bullets hit. Also, if you crouch down I think your aim is a little more accurate. Anyway I think the end is the most fun part, so if you can get there it may be worth it :D
 
Final thoughts on MGS 3:

I actually finished the game! And my final impression is not all that much different from my last impression. I still say that:

-it had great gameplay ideas marred by poor controls, and a not very functional camera. If they wanted to go top-down, it should have been zoomable ala Pikmin at the very least, so enemies wouldn't keep spotting you off camera. My other control complaints are listed above, so I won't repeat them.

-and it had a really good story marred by poor dialogue and overly long, poorly paced cutscenes. Seriously, from the time you get your last hit in on the final boss to the end of the easter egg after the credits there's nearly 40 minutes of straight movies. Some of the plot twists are interesting, but that is a longass time to expect people to stay interested without any gameplay whatsoever. Plus, it seemed like most of the plot to the entire game was contained in that 40 minutes. It makes you wonder what they spent so many countless hours on when that pretty much sums it all up. They should have presented it little by little throughout the whole game and had better character development rather than saving EVERYTHING for the end. They could easily have cut the cutscenes down by half without losing anything in translation. Even that would still be too much movie-watching, but far more bearable. Plus Snake and co are generally really one-dimensional. Snake grunts a lot and acts tough, but that's about it. That's fine for Zelda, but when your game wants to be very story heavy you need someone more interesting than that.

That's about it really. Aside from the intolerably long cutscenes, it's still a "fun" game in the way that games are fun. I mean I did play it all the way through. But it could have been soooooo much better. Though I finished it, I doubt I'll ever pick it up again.

Gameplay gets a 7.0
Technical aspects get a 9.5
and cut-scenes get a 3 for horrible pacing and bad dialogue (even though the part with "The Sorrow" was pretty nifty).

Overall I'd give it a 6 or 6.5 out of 10.
 
i dont understand it: i loved MGS2, but the new outdoor aspects doesnt work with the camera angles. Even worse, I've found that most of the time the easiest way to get through a part is to go rambo style. I just got past meeting the man who makes metal gear and I had never used CQC. I think Hideo Kojima is a genious and I personally like his crazy and unexpecting plot.

Fortunately i just borrowed it from a friend. I was disappointed but i will try Subsistance (or whatever the directors cut is called) just because I heard they are fixing the camera
 
[quote name='PaulEMoz']Here's my review of Metal Gear Solid 3.

Almost every single review I've seen of it praises it as one of the best games ever, and I hardly ever see anybody saying they don't like it. I don't understand that, because I find it (and the rest of the series) boring, cheesy, clunky, and almost unplayable. Surely there must be more people like this out there? Unless they alraedy know better and know they hate it and so don't even try it in the first place.[/QUOTE]

I agree I guess because Splinter Cell has ruined most other TPS for me because I love playing Splinter Cell.
 
I must say it was my favorite in the series. that is until I play the graphically updated Twin Snakes. I liked the psx story slightly better but Snake Eaters story was pretty good too.
 
[quote name='jughead']I must say it was my favorite in the series. that is until I play the graphically updated Twin Snakes. I liked the psx story slightly better but Snake Eaters story was pretty good too.[/QUOTE]
twin snakes was alright...not as good as MGS3, which is not as good as MGS2
 
[quote name='Mishimaryu']I loved the boss battles I'll take snake eater over a SC game anyday![/QUOTE]

Same here!
 
to the OP... if you can't stand this game (or don't like it mucha t all) steer clear of Killer7... it'll make your head explode with trying to figure everything out (though, I think I understand it all now...). I loved Killer 7 and MGS3, and do not agree entirly with the OP's opinion, but I do respect his/her opninion... but saying MGS3 sucks is too general of a statement, but then again that's just me.
 
[quote name='RelentlessRolento']to the OP... if you can't stand this game (or don't like it mucha t all) steer clear of Killer7... it'll make your head explode with trying to figure everything out (though, I think I understand it all now...). I loved Killer 7 and MGS3, and do not agree entirly with the OP's opinion, but I do respect his/her opninion... but saying MGS3 sucks is too general of a statement, but then again that's just me.[/QUOTE]

It is a general statement, but hey, it piques people's curiousity enough to read it.

And I haven't played Killer 7, but I'd like to rent it (if HV, or BB ever get it around here). I hear it is a bit thin in terms of gameplay, but I'm a fan of shooting gallery action, and the visuals make me curious. But my question is this: how cutscene heavy is Killer 7? I'd say MGS 3 was about 33% cutscenes. What would you estimate the cutscene/gameplay ratio of Killer 7 to be?
 
It is a general statement, but hey, it piques people's curiousity enough to read it.

And I haven't played Killer 7, but I'd like to rent it (if HV, or BB ever get it around here). I hear it is a bit thin in terms of gameplay, but I'm a fan of shooting gallery action, and the visuals make me curious. But my question is this: how cutscene heavy is Killer 7? I'd say MGS 3 was about 33% cutscenes. What would you estimate the cutscene/gameplay ratio of Killer 7 to be?
 
I say the ratio for Killer 7 would be closer to Resident Evil in terms of cutscenes rather than MGS3. It's alot less scene digestion, but the plot is super heavy... be ready for alot of unanswered questions and some insanely deep philisophical nonsense. It's so far my favorite game of the year on the PS2, but alot of people either love or hate the game... I have yet to hear of someone who is in the middle about the whole game... not to mention, I just figured out more answers to Killer 7, but it just makes my head hurt with just knowing things.
 
[quote name='whoknows']This is one of the best games ever.

The games ending almost made me cry...it is sad.

But I loved this game + all the other MGS games.[/QUOTE]

Indeed.

This is one of the greatest game out there as far as ps2 line-ups. I am not a xbox fan, nor nintendo fan, but I have always thought that ps2 got shiety line-ups and it's all about quantity not quality. This game is one of a few that earned my respect, and it earned by doing so well in other perspectives, not grahpically good (be honest, MGS3 grahpics ain't that good at all).

At first few hours I thought this game was absolutly horrible, I know exact what OP means by spotted by enemies outside of screen, especially in the early jungle part where you reach the first camp (when you meet the girl very first time, and young revolver). This is one of the flaw of the game, which often I just run around and kill everything (screw stealth, eh)

Other than that problem, story-line, plot, character setting everything is flawless the more you play. By the end, you are truly hooked and everything should make sense to you.

I have not touched console game since ps1, to a point I was dissin' console since grahpically nowhere it's near quality of pc games (if you have powerful pc of course). Then there comes RE4, MGS3, and all the sudden I bought all the systems again :D

Anyways - MGS3 2 thumbs up. But it might not be for everyone, just like RE4. OP might just happen to hate it that's all. But if you hold the idea of "stealth" from splinter cells... you WILL be disappointed. These two games aren't even close.
 
For some reason I liked MGS3 more than MGS2 since well, the story was crazy since everyone is a liar in MGS2, plus the gameplay stepped up a bit in MGS3.
 
I loved MGS2, but I really didn't like this one. A big part of the reason is that because of the camera angles I became accustomed to using the radar. When they took that out of MGS3 I was being spotted by enemies offscreen. Sure you can say I suck all you want, but I play games to relieve stress and not to annoy the shit out of me. I did hear Subsistence will feature a better over the shoulder the camera, so I'll likely give that a try.
 
The controls in MG3 definitely take a little getting used to, especially if you didnt play MG2. Just to shoot accurately with a rifle, u had to hold down like 20 buttons. I remember one of my friends came over my house to play the game about a week after i had gotten it, and it was hilarious watching him try to kill a frog or a snake or something. He just couldn't get the controls down. In the end he just ended up watching me play, which was still ended up being pretty fun for the both of us.
 
I agree w/ the OP...

As much as I try to love the series... I just can't get into it... god knows how many times I tryed playing the 1st solid game... I remember watching cheats on g4TV... and there is tons of secrets...

Game is just too hard for me... Still Metal gear solid is a great series... I just didn't like it.. thats all... Oh Acid is just a bad spin-off IMO...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top