What Are You Currently Playing? 6.65: Neighbor of the Beast

[talonmalon333]

MGS4 has the benefit of that final cutscene that takes place at the very end of the game, which is arguably the best one in the entire series.

MGS2's cutscenes are much shorter but they usually just consist of characters either standing still and explaining plot to each other, or doing the same thing only through codec.

[Foggle]

I much prefer MGS4's long strings of cutscenes with equally long sequences of gameplay between them over that shit from the Raiden part of MGS2 where you play the game for 2 minutes or less and then watch 5+ minutes of cutscenes. Pure torture.

[talonmalon333]

MGS2's cutscenes are also really sterile. Like I said, just people spouting exposition.

Do you really think MGS2 is better than MGS1?

[Foggle]

I think the gameplay is. I don't particularly care for either of them, though.

My opinion: VR Missions > MGS2 (Tanker) > MGS1 > Twin Snakes > MGS2 (Plant)

[talonmalon333]

I don't particularly care for either of them, though.

But you're a fan of the original MSX Metal Gear.

[Foggle]

The MSX Metal Gear is still fun and creative to this day, and absolutely amazing for its time. MGS1 is equally impressive for its time, but it really is more of a movie than a game - and not a very exciting movie at that (except for a couple parts). It suffers from the exact same problem the Plant portion of MGS2 does; there's a 5-10 minute cutscene for every 1-5 minutes of gameplay. I just don't have the patience for that kind of thing anymore. When I play a game, I want to play a game. MG1 may be dated, but I have a lot more fun with it.

[talonmalon333]

there's a 5-10 minute cutscene for every 1-5 minutes of gameplay

That only happens, like, two or three times in the whole game.

I feel like MGS1 just had really strong level design, great bosses, solid stealth gameplay, and an engaging story. Plus one of the best soundtracks in the series, and voice acting that holds up moderately well. Then you have things like the whole Psycho Mantis battle, and having to look at the back of the case to see a codec number. These two are fun little things only Kojima thinks of. People say his creations are more movie than game, but he has too much fun designing these things that I can't consider them anything but pure game, at least for most of the titles in the series.

The original Metal Gear is mostly a game I appreciate for historical reasons. I respect it, but I don't think it's that good anymore. The level design is standard and backtrack heavy, and the enemy AI is so primitive. Plus the game has plenty of cryptic moments a lot of games from the era suffered. I don't think MG2 is as good as you do, but I do think it significantly tops the original in literally every way.

[Foggle]

That only happens, like, two or three times in the whole game.

No, this happens constantly from the beginning. You spend the majority of the game walking between rooms where a lengthy cutscene plays as soon as you enter the next room. There is also very little stealth in it overall. Most of the gameplay stems from the (excellent) boss fights... which are also surrounded by long cutscenes.

I used to think that the first game wasn't as much of a movie as its sequel. All I can say is, after playing it again, my memory was deceiving me. Don't believe me, just watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpG9XIfFkE0

Do note that I also count codec conversations as cutscenes.

I feel like MGS1 just had really strong level design, great bosses, solid stealth gameplay, and an engaging story. Plus one of the best soundtracks in the series, and voice acting that holds up moderately well. Then you have things like the whole Psycho Mantis battle, and having to look at the back of the case to see a codec number. These two are fun little things only Kojima thinks of. People say his creations are more movie than game, but he has too much fun designing these things that I can't consider them anything but pure game, at least for most of the titles in the series.

Here's the thing: I completely agree with everything you say in this paragraph. But MGS1 really doesn't have much gameplay at all, and some of its set pieces were already done before in MG2.

The original Metal Gear is mostly a game I appreciate for historical reasons. I respect it, but I don't think it's that good anymore. The level design is standard and backtrack heavy, and the enemy AI is so primitive. Plus the game has plenty of cryptic moments a lot of games from the era suffered. I don't think MG2 is as good as you do, but I do think it significantly tops the original in literally every way.

I don't think the original Metal Gear is a masterpiece or anything; the AI is terrible and a couple of areas all but require a walkthrough to pass. But I still think it's very fun.

[talonmalon333]

No, this happens constantly from the beginning. You spend the majority of the game walking between rooms where a lengthy cutscene plays as soon as you enter the next room. There is also very little stealth in it overall. Most of the gameplay stems from the (excellent) boss fights... which are also surrounded by long cutscenes.

I used to think that the first game wasn't as much of a movie as its sequel. All I can say is, after playing it again, my memory was deceiving me. Don't believe me, just watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpG9XIfFkE0

Do note that I also count codec conversations as cutscenes.

It's not like you're doing nothing but walking between rooms. In those rooms you are avoiding guards and cameras. The stealth gameplay isn't as deep as the sequels but it doesn't really need to be. MGS2 is more movie for how long the cutscenes are and how indulgent they are.

Here's the thing: I completely agree with everything you say in this paragraph. But MGS1 really doesn't have much gameplay at all, and some of its set pieces were already done before in MG2.

I agree that it's a bit weird how some of the set pieces are taken directly from MG2. But at the same time, I can understand it as MG2 didn't get released outside Japan initially (at least I don't think it did, I know it at least didn't get released over here), and it wasn't even that popular in Japan. So I get why they brought back those set pieces.

Also, I would put the Raiden portion of MGS2 over MGS1's GameCube remake.

[Foggle]

It's not like you're doing nothing but walking between rooms. In those rooms you are avoiding guards and cameras. The stealth gameplay isn't as deep as the sequels but it doesn't really need to be. MGS2 is more movie for how long the cutscenes are and how indulgent they are.

Well, yeah, you have to avoid cameras and guards most of the time, but there are quite a few parts in the second half where literally all you do is walk around. I don't mean to disparage what gameplay is there, I just don't think there's enough of it. The pacing makes it fail to hold my attention like MG2 and MGS3 do.

I also think the ratio of gameplay to cutscene time is what mostly impacts the feeling of it being a movie. But it's certainly far superior to MGS2 in that regard.

Also, I would put the Raiden portion of MGS2 over MGS1's GameCube remake.

At the end of the day, it's still MGS1, even if it's a bastardized version. The bomb defusal/Fatman fight and swimming sections are worse than anything in TTS IMO.

[talonmalon333]

Well, yeah, you have to avoid cameras and guards most of the time, but there are quite a few parts in the second half where literally all you do is walk around. I don't mean to disparage what gameplay is there, I just don't think there's enough of it. The pacing makes it fail to hold my attention like MG2 and MGS3 do.

I also think the ratio of gameplay to cutscene time is what mostly impacts the feeling of it being a movie. But it's certainly far superior to MGS2 in that regard.

Those part where you walk a few steps and then trigger a cutscene, I mostly remember in the last few hours of the game in that room with the elevator (forget where exactly it is but I think it's in front of that giant freezer room). But at the very least, the story developments in those parts are good as that's when some of the twists and character development moments take place. It's not like MGS2 where the conversations are devoid of life and are just exposition.

At the end of the day, it's still MGS1, even if it's a bastardized version. The bomb defusal/Fatman fight and swimming sections are worse than anything in TTS IMO.

Fair enough. Those two parts of MGS2 are dreadful.

[Foggle]

The writing is definitely better in the first game (as is the acting, surprisingly enough), but I still found myself greatly preferring the gameplay over the story (as I always have with Metal Gear).

[Spark Of Spirit]

So I started playing the original Paper Mario on the VC again and I still have to stick with my original opinion.

It's not a flawless classic.

The battle system is far too basic, there isn't really much to do on the maps (the first chapter has an absurd amount of dialogue for a chapter that not much happens in at all), the partner characters are fairly interchangeable personality-wise outside of about three of them, the story is standard and doesn't really do much, and the game is unquestionably one of the easiest RPGs ever.

On the other hand, the game itself has easily aged the best of any N64 game, the humor is funny, the bosses are incredible, the Peach segments are very clever, and some chapters on their own are easily up there with the best of all the Mario RPG series like the "Invincible" Tubba Blubba, Trials in the Toy Box, Hot, Hot Times in Lavalava Island, and Dark Days in Flower Fields. There is a lot of great stuff in the game.

I still like the game and always will, but I do think it gets a lot of passes for things other RPGs get slammed for. That and its sequel was so far beyond it in every way that it is hard going back to it sometimes. But it is still a great game.

[talonmalon333]

So I started playing the original Paper Mario on the VC again and I still have to stick with my original opinion.

It's not a flawless classic.

The battle system is far too basic, there isn't really much to do on the maps, the partner characters are fairly interchangeable personality-wise outside of about three of them, the story is standard and doesn't really do much, and the game is unquestionably one of the easiest RPGs ever.

I still like the game and always will, but I do think it gets a lot of passes for things other RPGs get slammed for. That and its sequel was so far beyond it in every way that it is hard going back to it sometimes.

Sounds like you're talking about its SNES predecessor.

[Spark Of Spirit]

No, I'm talking about the N64 game, actually. SMRPG gets spit on from kids who grew up on the N64 all the time, it's not overrated at all.