Board 8 > Would MGS 1 still be fun now?

(+) Yeah! (+)

To put it another way, I don't think TTS is poorly designed as much as it exposes flaws in the original's design that should be exposed to make the experience more enjoyable.

--
No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Eh, not being able to freely aim isn't a detriment of the original. MGS1 never asks that of the player, and the game is designed entirely around the fact that you can only aim from the third-person. There's nothing wrong with adding that in in a remake, but you can't leave everything else as is, because it wasn't meant to be played that way.

--
peace comes from within

There are a lot of places in MGS1 that have me going "this is frustrating I know exactly where the enemy is but can't hit him because I can't aim at people that far away." I realize you can "get better" at this but it's still not a satisfying skill to develop like most games with challenge should be imhhho.

TTS fixes those moments-- of course, most of those areas are now kinda trivial but like I said "flaws that should be exposed."

--
No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

I don't few it as a flaw at all. It would be flawed if the game needed that to work, but that's not the case. All you get by aiming from Twin Snakes is a fundamentally broken game. Cameras that were once a threat no longer are, guards' paths and lines of sight relied on you not being able to shoot them from across the room. It just sounds like to me you didn't like what the game asked of you, so you're calling it a design flaw, but that's clearly not the case. Not giving you easy mode is not a problem!

--
peace comes from within

Choking sucks so bad in MGS1. You stick to walls too easily which hinders your sneaking ability when you want to get behind someone.

--
Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son of a ***** in space.

don't know what's $10 on psn but can't go wrong with vagrant story!

--
The future must protect the clone's past.
"Maybe it's a tentacle, molesting the planet itself. - Aschen Brodel.

That doesn't hold because while the game may have been designed with this in mind it's still not satisfying difficulty to overcome. Those areas seem like you're conquering the control scheme rather than conquering the area or the boss.

Like, Superman 64 for instance, the ring courses would be trivial if you could control how Superman flies-- the way they are given that he can't fly worth a crap makes the game pretty difficult. Does that mean the game is well designed because you can't control how Superman flies for beans and that makes areas difficult, or would people rather play a game where you could rightly fly properly even if it means that a lot of the areas in the game became easier?

(Extreme example, but I think it fits. Not trying to compare MGS to Superman 64 I'm just saying that difficulty that's in the design isn't always a good thing... and yes I think the poor flight control was realized in Superman 64 otherwise why would they make you fly through rings so damn much)

Only in MGS would fans defend not being able to control the camera or being able to look around like a super soldier should be able to as being a good thing! You want a Metal Gear game that's designed to properly not include a first person perspective and not introduce any "artificial difficulty" as a result? Metal Gear would be a more fitting candidate, not MGS.

--
No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Haha. Metal Gear I don't think so. MG2, maybe.

In any case, I disagree completely about it not being 'satisfying.' It feels good clearing out a room in MGS1 when you do it without using your gun to shoot everyone. There is nothing frustrating about the control scheme in that regard; in fact, MGS1's control scheme gets frustrating when you do have to shoot in first-person! It's fine in MGS2/3, but it doesn't work with the way MGS1 was made. If you want to do it right, you have to remake MGS1 to account for those extra gameplay options, which is why Twin Snakes, fundamentally, is broken. If you're okay with that, that's fine. It's not a 'nostalgia' issue, though, or something 'only MGS fans' would defend. I'm fine with first-person aiming done properly.

--
peace comes from within

Well I'm not saying Metal Gear is better than MGS or even good-- I'm just saying that the camera is never presented in a way that you feel like you're being limited.

In MGS for me it feels like I should be able to hit guys from way off screen if I know where they are. If he shows up on my radar in clear view of Snake's line of sight I should be able to pop him with one shot if I want, providing I could do it if he was on screen-- guns can shoot off screen and you can do it, but you have to like, shoot wildly, and/or wait for him to get closer, and/or get an angle that you shouldn't really need to get but have to because the shooting is limited. Like I'm a "melee them down silently" type in MGS games generally, so it's not like I'm one to even do this that much-- but not even having the option just feels limiting.

--
No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

We have two different viewpoints here, I guess. I'm fine with the limitations MGS1 has compared to its successors because it's designed around them. Guns will auto-lock within a certain distance, making the shooting easier when the time does come. Radar gives you an idea of guard route and line of sight to work around. For me, it's not a frustrating experience because I don't try to play it any way other than how it should be. I guess I can understand feeling that way going backward, from 2 to 1, but I can switch between them no problem. The basic control scheme in MGS didn't change very much until MGS4; you were just give new abilities along the way, and the games presented new challenges based around those abilities.

--
peace comes from within

UltimaterializerX posted...
No game has aged worse.

I'll never understand this concept.

MGS1 was fantastic back in the day. I find the general MGS-format (i.e. balance of gameplay/video) stale nowadays, but MGS1 compels me anyway each time I play it.

MGS:TTS is a fair alternative, but HM's spot-on. Go for the original.

--
http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/3492/eponaharr.jpg
Nominate E P O N A.

it is still fun

just be stealthy and try not to engage in gunfights!

--
Black Turtle
all you need

Would MGS1 still be fun now?

I suggest you find out for yourself really. In all fairness, people who've played MGS during the time of its release will go on to say yes its still gonna be fun and they will probably defend the game to death. Just go check out the MGS board and make a negative topic about the game, you'll probably be labelled an immediate troll or get you ass totally flamed.

But since you're planning to play the game 13 years after its release, it would probably be wiser to listen to people who've played it years after its release because there is a higher chance that you're gonna feel the same way.

That being said, if you want my opinion then here it is;

I'm one of those people who played MGS during the time of its release. During that time the story and the dialogue was groundbreaking. Solid Snake basically CREATED VOICE ACTING. Seriously from the likes of Resident Evil and probably any other game at that time to MGS, it was a massive jump. So naturally I was blown out of my mind.
Let me tell you that I've played both Metal Gear 1 and 2 before MGS so I had quite a few expectations for MGS and heck the game exceeded my expectations more than I could ever dream of. That's an example of how much an impact MGS had on millions at that time. And I'm pretty sure the millions are gonna back up the game even though it has its flaws and I'm one of the them. Nostalgia or whatever, but MGS has created a Star Wars IV-VI like cult in the gaming industry so no matter how reasonably you point out a flaw it isnt gonna matter to us.

Now let me critically point out the flaws in MGS. Yes the FP mode could have been better but it isn't useless not when you're playing on the higher difficulties with no radar. The controls are not the best but definitely not a bad as some people exaggerate it to be. Seriously people complaining about MGS' controls should play Super Mario 64. I honestly didn't have any problem with the controls but I did have minor annoyances with the choking grapple. The lack of aiming is what most people complain about but MGS does a very good job of auto-targetting in 3rd person mode. Implementing new gameplay in the later games has definitely made MGS1 look a lot worse in gameplay than it was.

With all the flaws out of the way, I get into whats so good about MGS..... OK here's the IMO just so I get the fact-opinion obsess-ers away ^_^

The story and the way its presented in MGS1 has been one of the best in the history of video games and that's coming from a guy who's played over a 100 RPGs. The only video games stories I'd rate over MGS1 are Suikoden II's simplistic yet fantastic storyline and of course Xenogears. The presentation of the codec, the content and the dialogue are fantastic and still the best in the MGS series. Boss battles are simply fantastic and so much better than MGS2. The pacing of the game is also incredible not to mention the characters who are so much more memorable than the ones in 2, 3 and the new ones in 4

I don't know what it is about MGS1 that makes me go back to playing it over every once in a year atleast. I do replay the other MGS titles but not nearly as much as this one. And this is the only Metal Gear game which I actually miss after not playing it for some time. That is why I rank the MG series in this order and suggest you to atleast give MGS1 a try. And screw Twin Snakes, just play the original and play the game as it's supposed to be.

MGS1 > MGS4 > MGS3 > MGS2 > MG2 > MG1

Sorry for the long post mate, just giving my intake on one of my favorite games ever.

--
Rock n' Roll and Glam Metal... It never died