|
|
Post by Econs on Feb 23, 2006 3:02:54 GMT -5
Look, Metal Gear for the NES was bad.
HIDEOUS!
But we can't deny that that game was the begining of Metal Gear in America. For some of us oldschool gamers (EG Me), that WAS Metal Gear. That WAS Solid Snake and the old man with bad grammar WAS Big Boss. Then after we all started learning about MG and the old MSX versions then we said it sucked. And compared to it, it DOES suck.
But back in the day, the American version of Metal Gear KICKED ASS! We got to hide in boxes and shoot stupid Machine Gun kids with bad grammar. IT WAS FUN and you can't deny it!
Snake's Revenge on the other hand... Well, i'll say this. Good game, bad Metal Gear game. Take away all the MG elements from it, and it would have been better.
|
|
|
|
Post by A.G. on Feb 23, 2006 11:01:03 GMT -5
All true.
Both NES games were in fact good games, just not good Metal Gear games. And even Kojima admits that without the HUGE success of those two titles in America, there would not have been a Metal Gear Solid.
|
|
Solid Boss
Elite (level 2)
"You wanna know how I got these scars?"
Posts: 280
|
Post by Solid Boss on Feb 23, 2006 11:58:17 GMT -5
"I fell asleep zZzZzZzZzZzZz" that right there says it all, i first played the NES version, then the true MG, no comparison
|
|
|
|
Post by Otty on Feb 23, 2006 17:21:30 GMT -5
When I first played Metal Gear on the Nintendo as a youngster I found it a pretty good game. Until I saw the MSX version of Metal Gear and later on Metal Gear Solid for the Playstation. I thought by myself, what the hell have I been playing... ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by anthony on Feb 24, 2006 0:45:57 GMT -5
I just cant wait for the re-release of MG1 + MG2SS.
I found that when i played it using emulation it was a bit odd.
But thats maybe because i didnt have the controlls set up properly.
|
|
cernex
Snake (level 3)
Posts: 722
|
Post by cernex on Mar 4, 2006 1:19:23 GMT -5
All true. My only complain with the original MG (both NES and MSX, but MSX's codec feels more "lacking" if you ask me) is the codec.
For some reason, in both games the codec just didn't seem "well" done.
Everything changes in MG2: SS, of course...
El Cernex
|
|
|
|
Post by ipoder on Mar 5, 2006 21:23:01 GMT -5
seriously, MG for NES is where the famous quote "I feel asleep" came from. I'm sure MGF would not have existed if it werent for the MG port to the NES.
|
|
|
|
Post by A.G. on Mar 5, 2006 21:27:50 GMT -5
I never liked the game, personally.
Though I will point out how the Metal Gear series proves a VERY vital point in gaming design. A better system does not a better game make.
Examples:
NES > MSX2 yet MG and MG2 > MG (NES) and SR
Game Cube > PlayStation yet MGS > Twin Snakes
|
|
cernex
Snake (level 3)
Posts: 722
|
Post by cernex on Mar 11, 2006 2:46:44 GMT -5
Don't fully agree with that. The right phrase is "A better system does not always makes a better game", since you're blamming consoles for a mistake that, in reality, belong to game directors (in this case, the absence of Hideo on both Metal Gear and SR for NES, and "The Twin Snakes" (well, he wasn't really involved all that much)).
We all know that MSX's and PS1's Metal Gears are better than Nintendo ones, but that's because Hideo is missing, not because of the consoles powers or not.
I mean, look at REbirth for Gamecube: A HELL better than Resident Evil for PSX.
Also, a FAR better example of your theory is the case with Mortal Kombat II for both 32x and SNES.
Of course, we all know Mortal Kombat II for SNES is regarded as THE BEST version of the god forsaken game. 32X, being more powerful and everything, just wasn't a GOOD console, and that's THAT.
El Cernex
|
|
|
|
Post by ipoder on Mar 11, 2006 12:43:32 GMT -5
But who cares about Mortal Kombat Games? They're all the freaking same. No offence, but think about it.
|
|
cernex
Snake (level 3)
Posts: 722
|
Post by cernex on Mar 11, 2006 21:32:41 GMT -5
Well... yeah... you have a point in that.
But we're talking Mortal Kombat II here, possibly the MOST FAMOUS version of the franchise... and, c'mon, let's be honest, all of us played the arcade AT LEAST ONCE.
But, anyway, the point here is that THAT game is the perfect example of Arsenal's theory, not the Metal Gear games, as those are "not as good" as MG because of the absence of the director, not because of the system.
El Cernex
|
|
|
|
Post by thehappycamper on Mar 12, 2006 12:37:32 GMT -5
But who cares about Mortal Kombat Games? They're all the freaking same. No offence, but think about it. Blasphemy. |
|
cernex
Snake (level 3)
Posts: 722
|
Post by cernex on Mar 12, 2006 13:10:16 GMT -5
Well, Mortal Kombat III was a really bad MK, to be honest. They sortta fixed it in Ultimate, and they completelly fixed it on Trilogy.
Problem is, the endings were sortta improvised on both Ultimate and Trilogy, and we shouldn't forget that Johnny Cage was absent from MK III UNTIL Trilogy came around, thanks to the Daniel Pesina debacle.
It's no secret that, thanks to him, both Johny and the ninjas were removed from MK III.
Both, the point is that 'till MK Trilogy, all MK looked and played like the same. Yeah, it was fun as hell, but that doesn't remove the fact it was the same system. Of course, MK III had dial-up combos, but, it still played the same...
On MK 4, they finally removed the unused fatalities, the game was FINALLY 3D, and the characters could side-step... it succeded in adding new twists to the gameplay, but the game sortta failed to get the attention it deserved, mostly due to the end of the "arcade" era, and Capcom's fighting games.
Right now, they have both Deadly Alliance and Deception, games that don't play IN ANY WAY like the originals. Really good Mortal Kombat games, if you ask me.
El Cernex
|
|
