Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater

[Kinopio]

I was expecting the last few hours of the game to be dissapointing after hearing all the hype about how its the best thing ever. But it totally delivered.

[Tain]

One of my problems with MGS 3 is that whenever I got caught, I managed to get myself through simply by shooting the living shit out of everything. I just felt that the game really didn't do a good job of forcing stealth.

[MarkRyan]

I think hardware limitations had something to do with it. Imagine for a moment that the camera was less of a birds eye view and more of a RE4 type view. Now imagine that in front of Snake are a bunch of guys shooting at him. I don't think the PS2 could handle all that with the detail of the environments and the draw distance without a hit in the framerate.

I guarantee the camera design has zero to do with hardware limitations. If Konami wanted the game to have a Splinter Cell camera, the game would have a Splinter Cell camera.

Even the most capable development team for the PS2 would have trouble getting blood from a rock.

Well MGS3 looks gorgeous as is, as do Zone of the Enders, ICO, Ratchet and Clank, Jak, Gran Turismo... PS2 isn't exactly a rock, especially when KCEJ's got it.

And the camera worked in MGS1 because it was a pretty differently designed game from 2 and 3, I hope you can at least feel the difference between the games. The first MGS was more a throwback to the older games and how they played than 2 and 3 are, they feel like totally different games to me.

The camera is still very much a part of the game's design, in MGS, MGS2, and MGS3. If it helps, think of Metal Gear as an elaborate puzzle game, because that's basically what it is.

Trying to make a Splinter Cell level stealth game with an atrocious camera and archaic point of view is shitty game design.

Except that game design of MGS is just about nothing like Splinter Cell. If you're approaching MGS like you want to play Splinter Cell, you're going to find you can't. The only things that the games really share in common are an emphasis on stealth and Splinter Cell's attempt to copy the AI design of MGS. MGS is way more tactical and precise--as I said earlier, think of it as a three dimensional puzzle, not an free-for-all exploration.

One of my problems with MGS 3 is that whenever I got caught, I managed to get myself through simply by shooting the living shit out of everything. I just felt that the game really didn't do a good job of forcing stealth.

I agree--the game is too easy on Normal difficulty. I'm going to go through it on Hard one of these days to see if it feels better, but there's not enough punishment for getting caught (one thing I think Metal Gear Solid 2 did a lot better).

[MechDeus]

Well MGS3 looks gorgeous as is, as do Zone of the Enders, ICO, Ratchet and Clank, Jak, Gran Turismo... PS2 isn't exactly a rock, especially when KCEJ's got it.

ICO only looked as good as it did because of style, in terms of technical output the game was in permanant low-res. I can't recall if it was as bad as shifting Sky Gunner into low-res mode but I can remember being able to count the pixels while sitting on my couch.

[MarkRyan]

ICO only looked as good as it did because of style, in terms of technical output the game was in permanant low-res. I can't recall if it was as bad as shifting Sky Gunner into low-res mode but I can remember being able to count the pixels while sitting on my couch.

I just got done playing the game about an hour ago. The game is quite gorgeous. Who cares if its artistic brilliance or technical achievement--the game looks awesome.

[Kinopio]

I guarantee the camera design has zero to do with hardware limitations. If Konami wanted the game to have a Splinter Cell camera, the game would have a Splinter Cell camera.

All developers make sacrifices because of hardware limitations, resources, time, etc. I don't see how Kojima and co. are any different.

[MarkRyan]

All developers make sacrifices because of hardware limitations, resources, time, etc. I don't see how Kojima and co. are any different.

Because of something you're not understanding. The camera is part of the game's design--it's not just there like the water effects, and it's not just there like the way ammo and food items rotate. The camera is a part of the game. Tetris isn't in a straight-walled well because they couldn't render curves. Gran Turismo isn't based on Earth racing because they couldn't do space physics. Metal Gear's camera isn't what it is because they couldn't get a decent framerate with a chase camera.

[GohanX]

I finally got this game a little while ago, I played through it once, and it was so awesome I'm at the end of a second playthrough. I almost never do that with any game. I did it once with the original MGS, but that was only because I wanted to see how fast I could beat the game by always wearing the Stealth Camo and breaking everyone's necks.

One question I have though...

I've seen it mentioned that Ocelot is the Boss and the Sorrow's son. The resemblance is obvious, but I must have missed when it was pointed out in the game. When was that mentioned?

[Diff-chan]

I really dont see what the big deal with this game is. Im gonna give it another try soon but really... I dont see the big deal.

[George]

I really dont see what the big deal with this game is. Im gonna give it another try soon but really... I dont see the big deal.

As soon as you get to the point where you have the sniper rifle..you clear enemies with ease. That, and when you reach the big research facility, they have some crazy boss fights and a great endgame.

As well, the lack of long winded radio conversations is a big plus.