• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

LTTP: MGS2 X MGS3 X MGS4

Heartfyre

Member
I notice lots of people rank the MGS games in the order that they played them. I'm no exception.

3 > 1 > 2 > 4 > PW

Though you shouldn't interpret that scale to mean I don't like the games on the bottom. I absolutely adore all of them, but they're not all made equal.

My main fault with MGS4 is that there simply isn't enough gameplay in certain chapters, particularly Act 3 and 5. That said, I still love cutscenes, and I felt that it was a great story and emotionally powerful. Though I've never had trouble keeping up with the Metal Gear storyline and defy anyone who says it's convoluted.
 
But in that way, MGS2 is much less replayable, at least the final third. It's nearly an hour of cutscenes separating the Ray fight from the Solidus fight. The keycard sequence was the only weak point in MGS1's design. Well, other than the Rex fight.

You can always skip the cutscenes breh. also MGS2 is way more replayable because you have so many more ways of tackling scenarios. In the first game the limited mechanics and simpler level design only gave you a couple ways to beat something, but in 2 you have soooo many items, multileveld routes, 1st person aiming, a bunch of ways to interact with guards, and the big shell's design itself even let's you decide what order to do things and the guard patrols change and escalate throughout the game.

Other weak points in the first MGS:
- the other pace killing backtracking you are forced to do. You're about to fight sniper wolf and save Meryl and then NOPE you gotta go all the way back first. It's better than the keycard one because you have actual gameplay to go with it, but the timing of it was horrible.
-The part where you have to fight your way up the giant staircase using the game's crap shooting mechanic.
-those undetectable mines right before sniper wolf that you can only use guesswork to avoid.

The guy who did the great MGS2 post-modernism analysis on YouTube (superbunnyhop) also did an analysis of MGS1 and he says better than I can why the first one, well still great, has a bunch of flaws as an actual game.
 

Henkka

Banned
OP, you might enjoy MGS3 more on a second playthrough. The initial learning curve on that game is ridiculous, there are so many things you can do that aren't properly explained. And you should fight the End, seriously. It's the best boss in the series. I get the criticism that The Pain, The Fear, The End and The Fury aren't woven into the story like the bosses in previous games, but ... Those aren't the only bosses! Volgin, Ocelot, The Sorrow and obviously The Boss feature prominently throughout and are far better characters than freaking Fatman or Fortune.
 

Zocano

Member
Oh hey, OP realizes MGS1's bosses are the best bosses! Good to know.

I'm not a big fan of MGS but I've replayed each a couple times to just try and suss out what people love so much about them and my general conclusion is that MGS1 is the best in terms of utilizing its mechanics in simple yet really excellent ways supported by a great cast of boss fights. Story wise I think the series is garbage when it tries to be serious (almost all of MGS3 falls flat for me).

MGS3's problem with the boss fights is that there are still too many duds in the cast to not be completely outshined by the stars (The End, The Boss, The Fear). Even The Fear and The Boss, while mechanically intense, can just be easily cheesed into submission (NVGs completely break The Fear-- every time I play it, it just turns into an effective turret section).

I love MGS2's big dumb finale because it's so stupid but the game doesn't do much else for me outside of that. The boss fights are forgettable and the level design I just found sort of tedious.

MGS4 is... MGS4. Fan service it is, but I can't help but love how stupid it gets (Liquid Ocelot is the shining star).

For me it's something like 1 > 4 > 3 > 2

but if Ground Zeroes is anything to go by, Phantom Pain will shit all over the rest of the series now that the mechanics and controls are finally not frustratingly obtuse.
 

Henkka

Banned
There is a lot of wrong in OP, but this part is correct.

I don't understand people who rank 2 as the best one. Like, do you people enjoy escorting Emma? Or listening to Stillman go on and on about bombs? Or anything about Rose??

But anyway, I love how the rankings in this thread are all over the place. There is nothing close to a consensus, which just goes to show that all the games in the series are wild rides that resonated deeply with different people at different times.

Maybe we should have a GOTY voting style thread, find out what the real ranking is once and for all lol.
 

SomTervo

Member
Whatevs, OP.

By skipping The End you didn't just skip the best boss fight in the game, but one of the best boss fights in videogame history.

I kid, I kid – your opinion is totally valid and it sounds like you still got a lot out of all the games.

However ,you did majorly, majorly goof up by skipping The End.
 

Maplar

Neo Member
Loved MGS4. Loved the fan service. there's no way they could have done anything with it besides tie up loose ends. it's a sequel to MGS2, which ended by posing 3 billion questions. MGS3 only gave more questions. If you want a metal gear game that does it's own thing there's always revengance

I'd have to agree with you. MGS4 was a ton of fun for me, so what if it was a nostalgia train?
 

SomTervo

Member
For what it's worth, for me:

MGS3 = MGSV:GZ > MGS2 > MGS1 > MGS4

They're all great except MGS4 which is a very, very flawed experience. It's still phenomenal from a game design standpoint, but they utterly fucked 85% of the level design and the cutscene volume is just obscene. Only Act 1 and Act 2 are in any sort of truly playable state at all (though Act 4 gets an honourable mention, of course)

Sometime after I beat TPP I will go back and re-play MGS3 and beat The End.

I've always been curious, why was MGS4 so highly regarded at first?

1. It's quite a technical achievement. It was a PS4 showcase back then. One of the best looking games on any of the home consoles.

2. The design of the game mechanics is absolutely phenomenal. You could physically do almost anything you'd want to do in real life.

The game just collapses because of level design, resources design, boss design, and story/cutscenes.
 

SomTervo

Member
Back when MGS3 came out I felt disappointed. I recognized that mechanically, it was the best game in the series and the bosses were fun, but at the time I was really into the whole lore and story aspect, and I thought the story, apart from the last 2 hours, was really disappointing. The bosses played no real part in it and neither did your support team really. I loved all the backstage drama of your codec support in MGS1 and MGS2 had some of that too. In MGS3 they're really just there for information and comic relief, which is nice, but I expected more. Nothing really happens in the story over a long stretch of the game, and the pacing near the beginning was pretty bad.

Thankfully MGS4 came out and destroyed my interest in the overarching MGS plot. I could let go of my silly hang-ups and finally enjoy MGS3 for what it was. It's now my favorite game in the series.

The bolded is very important and a great way of putting it.

Simply in terms of game design and pacing, MGS3 and Ground Zeroes are the only good games in the series.
 
MGS4? Gameplay? lol

This is stupid, it has BY FAR the best gameplay of the series. It's as large as mgs3, it just seems everyone runs through the areas or something. The cutscene to play ratio is just screwed up on the second half, it suffers from MGS2 syndrome. But the gameplay, absolutely sublime, one of the best games ever made.
 

SomTervo

Member
This is stupid, it has BY FAR the best gameplay of the series. It's as large as mgs3, it just seems everyone runs through the areas or something. The cutscene to play ratio is just screwed up on the second half, it suffers from MGS2 syndrome. But the gameplay, absolutely sublime, one of the best games ever made.

I think Ground Zeroes' gameplay is better because it trims it down a little bit. Makes it a bit more smooth. MGS4's gameplay is incredible but it's almost a simulator.

The main thing that kills it is the level design, which drops off into shit entirely after act 2, and yes, the fact that it is painfully cutscene heavy from the get-go. There are also a couple of shit sequences in act 1.

Act 2 is fucking great though. I love that one.
 

goonergaz

Member
I got a rubbish memory but if I had to put them in an order...

MGS3/1>2/4

I couldn't really split them - I love 1 & 3 too much and I don't hate 2 & 4 but know they are not as good...having said all that I can replay the tanker section endlessly.
 

Game4life

Banned
I cant believe there are people who think MGS3 is underwhelming and also skipped one of the greatest boss fights in any video game ever with 'the end'.

Never mind the story. What's MGS4's gameplay like? On par with the others?

MGS4 shits on MGS2 from a great height.
 
I hate sniper fights and I was afraid of The End :(

Also the fear was so easy. i could see him. no night vision required. i could just see him. i just waited till he stopped moving, shot. waits till he stops. shoot.

The Boss was just, shoot her as she poked her head out from a tree, cqc. then she runs behind a tree again. rinse and repeat.

the pain was just dive, swim, shoot, repeat.

the sorrow was interesting and really cool story wise, but not much gameplay.

Ocelot, Volgin, and Shagohod fights were fun though.
 
You can always skip the cutscenes breh. also MGS2 is way more replayable because you have so many more ways of tackling scenarios. In the first game the limited mechanics and simpler level design only gave you a couple ways to beat something, but in 2 you have soooo many items, multileveld routes, 1st person aiming, a bunch of ways to interact with guards, and the big shell's design itself even let's you decide what order to do things and the guard patrols change and escalate throughout the game.

Other weak points in the first MGS:
- the other pace killing backtracking you are forced to do. You're about to fight sniper wolf and save Meryl and then NOPE you gotta go all the way back first. It's better than the keycard one because you have actual gameplay to go with it, but the timing of it was horrible.
-The part where you have to fight your way up the giant staircase using the game's crap shooting mechanic.
-those undetectable mines right before sniper wolf that you can only use guesswork to avoid.

The guy who did the great MGS2 post-modernism analysis on YouTube (superbunnyhop) also did an analysis of MGS1 and he says better than I can why the first one, well still great, has a bunch of flaws as an actual game.

Hmmm, I remember trying to skip the cutscene at the end my second time through. Maybe my save file got deleted or something. I feel like if you skip the cutscenes, MGS2 is probably the shortest in the series.

Anyways, MGS2 has several crap gameplay sequences as well. Fatman was really the only interesting bossfight to me. Olga, the chopper, and Solidus were decent at best, and Fortune, Vamp, and the 20 Rays were absolutely atrocious. And let's not act like there wasn't a lot of annoying backtracking through the struts as well.

Anyhoo, it just comes down to opinion I guess. I love all four games, even though they are all flawed.
 

Zach

Member
(BIG NOTE: I skipped The End! Sorry!)

giphy.gif
 
Hmmm, I remember trying to skip the cutscene at the end my second time through. Maybe my save file got deleted or something. I feel like if you skip the cutscenes, MGS2 is probably the shortest in the series.

Anyways, MGS2 has several crap gameplay sequences as well. Fatman was really the only interesting bossfight to me. Olga, the chopper, and Solidus were decent at best, and Fortune, Vamp, and the 20 Rays were absolutely atrocious. And let's not act like there wasn't a lot of annoying backtracking through the struts as well.

Anyhoo, it just comes down to opinion I guess. I love all four games, even though they are all flawed.

Solidus is one of the best boss fights in the series! Olga is a good showcase of the 1st person shooting and environmental interaction, Vamp is an awesome fight (did you know you can shoot out the lights so he can't pin your shadow with a knife?), Ray fight is pretty good but it goes on too long and is a little on the easy side.

Their is tons of backtracking in the struts but it's the good kind of backtracking. Ie the design is such that you're never too far from your objective, you have the freedom to choose which struts you want to go through to get to your objective, and it highlights the amazing level design because every time you go back to an old strut the guard routines and security measures change so you have new gameplay to work through. 2 may have the least amount of gameplay in the main campaign (well, it has more than 4 at least) but substance version adds soooo much with the VR missions and snake tales, which further highlight the fantastic mechanics and versatility of the level design as your interactions with the small spaces are wildly different just depending on your objectives, guard layout, and tools at your disposal. I really wish 3 had additional missions like it.
 

luka

Loves Robotech S1
i have a lot of respect for anyone who sees mgs4 for the pandering, thoughtless drivel that it is.

that said, i think you should hold off on peace walker for now. instead, spend some time with mgs2's vr missions and snake tales, which really fleshes the game out and will make you appreciate it's brilliant stealth puzzle box design. then replay mgs3 and fight the end this time.
 

LogN

Member
I really don't get the hate for 4. I absolutely loved it, sure the Ocelot twist was dumb, but I still loved it.
 
My ranking is 3>2>1>4 and here's why:

I came into the series on 3,so naturally have some attachment to it but even disregarding that, it's filled to the brim with creative cues that enhance your experience; from the camo system to the syncing of music with the countdown timers, everything just worked. The story and characters shined like diamonds amidst an interesting backdrop of pseudo history, and political intrigue. 3 is an unforgettable experience I'll never forget. I'm pretty sure I haven't even found all the hidden R1 scenes yet.

My reason for putting 2 higher than 1 is due to the fact that by the time I played 1,it felt incredibly dated and difficult to control after my time with 2 and 3. Nevertheless, 2 had that crazy story going on, and I must admit, I'm a real fan of shit hitting the...uh, fan in fictional media.

Y'know, I had a lot of fun with my first time in MGS4. It felt like a good close to the story, even if it was all nanomachines. The gameplay is crazy deep, but you never really get the chance to utilise your skills past act 2. The characters got their nice send-offs;
Snake lives, Otacon gets his shit together again, Meryl gets married... Wait what? Never mind. At least Raiden gets his family back and... Oh, Rising happened
. Well, at least it's not a Pachinko machine.
 
Top Bottom