Gaming Metal Gear Solid series?

[CathyRina]

Goodness gracious, you started off with Metal Gear Solid 3: 15FPS Edition? Wow, it's great that you stuck around for the better releases, I admire your resilience.

Actually it felt like 25FPS during gameplay and 20FPS during cutscenes. 15 FPS would be just unplayable and I don't think anyone would greenlit it if it ran like that. Even Ubisoft despite how cinematic low framrates look like *cough*not*cough*

 

[Foxi4]

Actually it felt like 25FPS during gameplay and 20FPS during cutscenes. 15 FPS would be just unplayable and I don't think anyone would greenlit it if it ran like that. Even Ubisoft despite how cinematic low framrates look like *cough*not*cough*

According to Digital Foundry, the game "operates at a baseline of 20FPS" and dips below that when under stress, they even have an analysis video.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-analysis-metal-gear-remastered

You just don't "see it" because it sets the bar very low.

 

[CathyRina]

According to Digital Foundry, the game "operates at a baseline of 20FPS" and dips below that when under stress, they even have an analysis video.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-analysis-metal-gear-remastered

You just don't "see it" because it sets the bar very low.

Really? It didn't feel like constant 20 FPS when I replayed it a month ago. The cutscenes and the Fury was something different though. Anyway now with N3DS Kojipro could improve the game. But they probably won't.

 

[emigre]

MGS 3DS is a terrible port. Konami clearly didn't give a fuck especially by releasing the HD version so close to it.

 

[Foxi4]

MGS 3DS is a terrible port. Konami clearly didn't give a fuck especially by releasing the HD version so close to it.

I love the amount of optimizing that went into Peace Walker HD on the PS3 - I didn't realize how poor the game was resolution and framerate-wise on the PSP before I played the HD remake that sticks to a silky smooth 60FPS.

 

[zeello]

In short, I think it's a matter of resources. Create a fictional universe isn't easy and present it to the world without seeming a boring/complex lecture is even more hard. The only alternative left is: give a sample to the public with the first release > draw their attention > expand the fictional universe with sequels and prequels dealing with the growing fanbase. That's it.

You're saying that the first in a series is one designed to hook you into the series. That wasn't exactly my point but you're nonetheless agreeing that the best order is the order it was released. Prequels exist for a reason, sometimes you're meant to see the later stuff first, before being taken to unearth the previous events.

What you say is often or sometimes true for a franchise, where the first one is the one to reel you in, but another way to look say it is that the creator of a work would obviously not require you to refer to nonexistent, not yet released works to help flesh out the story. This can only be a problem if you choose to free-ride it and view the work in a different order than was released to the public.

 

[matpower]

Going kinda off-topic here, but if you are playing all Metal Gear games, I would reccomend you to pick Ghost Babel for GBC, even if it is not canon, it got the Metal Gear Solid gameplay style, only in 2D.

Now if you are playing the whole series, it would be better to play it on release order instead of chronological order, because of spoilers, since Kojima loves to break the 4th wall (Example, if you kill Ocelot/EVA or stay on the Game Over screen for too long, it will show "Time Paradox - Snake/Ocelot/EVA is dead", you even get an achievement for it )

 

[Hargrun]

You're saying that the first in a series is one designed to hook you into the series. That wasn't exactly my point but you're nonetheless agreeing that the best order is the order it was released. Prequels exist for a reason, sometimes you're meant to see the later stuff first, before being taken to unearth the previous events.

What you say is often or sometimes true for a franchise, where the first one is the one to reel you in, but another way to look say it is that the creator of a work would obviously not require you to refer to nonexistent, not yet released works to help flesh out the story. This can only be a problem if you choose to free-ride it and view the work in a different order than was released to the public.

No, I didn't agreed or disagreed with you on this order stuff. I just chose to go for a different line of thought (being neutral) because honestly I had never stopped to think about it until today.

Reading what you said, it's true. Many games (but not all) have their first release in order to hook consumers of the (eventually) complete product that includes prequels and sequels previously planned or not, but for several reasons (usually lack of resources, but sometimes a writer's choice) can't be released in the correct chronological order.

As a player you have the choice to play in the timeline order or not. There're people who meticulously plan their own order list to play (in the MGS case, for example, skipping the first one due "the terrible controls" simply reading a summary and others due whatever). But I personally prefer to play this way when possible. (Not the case of Ogre Battle Saga because I really hate RTS...)



After much thinking about it I can only conclude that we'll probably die without seeing the planned end of series like: Ogre Battle Saga, Shemnue, Shining Force (Camelot please), Xenogears... All because of money and/or copyrights issues.

 

[zeello]

sequels aren't always planned.. the way I see it, sequels are made for profit, just like the original. Just like series have their sequels canceled and we never see the whole story, we also have series where new stories made up to elongate a saga that was previously thought to be ended. Capitalism decides which IPs become sagas.

 

[Deleted member 332911]

Aside from sequels , I really love the spin-off games of a franchise , always a new experience . Funny this is that sometimes spin-offs are even better than many original games in my opinion. I'm a huge fan of Tekken series I played , loved , completed and mastered every Tekken games except Tekken 3D Prime Edition.
And I tell you one thing , my favorite Tekken games in the whole series (14 games) are "Tekken Tag Tournament" and "Tekken Tag 2" which are completely spin off games
Although , Naruto spin-offs are not so good in my opinion ,
do you have any spin-off in your mind which is better than the major games in the series?

 

[Abu_Senpai]

This has gobe wayyy of topic

 

[InfoAddict]

The first MGS game is the sixth title in the timeline while MGS3 is the first one. They're playing in the right order. (I unfortunately started on VR Missions.)

I meant more along the lines that the games he's tried are the crappest in the series.