|
|
Post by A.G. on Mar 15, 2007 15:56:29 GMT -5
Have you guys noticed something interesting about the MG games that are on the same systems?
Both Metal Gear and Metal Gear 2 Solid Snake were on the MSX2, but the first game was by far more successful in overall sales even generating several remakes and/or ports. However, no question there in terms of quality. Metal Gear 2 Solid Snake is by FAR a superior game, and yet it generated much less success. I’ll grant you that Metal Gear 1 had more markets, but still. MG2 did not generate much attention.
The same issue was seen on the PlayStation 2. Metal Gear 2 Solid Snake was the most successful Metal Gear game to date in terms of sales. With over 7 million copies sold, it’s not too far behind the Halo2 powerhouse of 9 million. Interestingly enough, however, Metal Gear Solid 3 Snake Eater was far better made and yet only did about half the sales of MGS2.
Seemingly here, the game of lesser quality comes out on top in sales. It’s interesting...
|
|
|
|
Post by TheBrotherOfLight on Mar 15, 2007 16:08:12 GMT -5
Have you guys noticed something interesting about the MG games that are on the same systems? Both Metal Gear and Metal Gear 2 Solid Snake were on the MSX2, but the first game was by far more successful in overall sales even generating several remakes and/or ports. However, no question there in terms of quality. Metal Gear 2 Solid Snake is by FAR a superior game, and yet it generated much less success. I’ll grant you that Metal Gear 1 had more markets, but still. MG2 did not generate much attention. The same issue was seen on the PlayStation 2. Metal Gear 2 Solid Snake was the most successful Metal Gear game to date in terms of sales. With over 7 million copies sold, it’s not too far behind the Halo2 powerhouse of 9 million. Interestingly enough, however, Metal Gear Solid 3 Snake Eater was far better made and yet only did about half the sales of MGS2. Seemingly here, the game of lesser quality comes out on top in sales. It’s interesting... I actually don't think there's many flaws in the quality of MGS2, except maybe too little gameplay time to match the cut-scenes. The story is a matter of taste. I myself was a little dissapointed witth the way Snake Eater turned out, because even though the story is emotional like hell and has some superbly clever plot twists, it can't match the depth of MGS2 if you ask me. But it's an interesting thought and actually kind of true. Maybe the answer lies in the time of the games' releases. MG2:SS was released pretty much when MSX2 took its last breath. And Snake Eater came like when the PS2 was slowly fading since the news of PS3 and 360 was all over the gaming community. |
|
|
|
Post by A.G. on Mar 15, 2007 16:38:58 GMT -5
I think you misunderstood. MGS2 was an excellent game, however I was comparing the two on a technical level since they are on the same system. MGS3 has by FAR more details given the jungle setting. The gaming system is much more advanced with a much greater range of abilities. Think about it, run through a few stages of Snake Eater utilizing all the new stuff like Cammo, Stamina, CQC, etc. Then pop in Sons of Liberty. The game will seem SOOOOOO much more simply from a technical standpoint.
The flaws of Sons of Liberty lie primerely in the Codecs. WAAAAY too many and a lot of them are for no reason (like two characters using the Codec while standing face to face). The story is great, though I can see how some can view it as a bit long winded. Though I do feel that towards the end they started out throwing useless plot twists that made me gag a bit. Like Solidus saying he killed Raiden's parents or Ocelot laying out a long winded S3 explanation that ended up being false. I mean really, what the hell?!
But from a technical stand point, with both games being on the same system, Snake Eater did to Sons of Liberty what MG2 did to MG1... surpass it by a mile! Yet the sales were only half... go figure. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by TheBrotherOfLight on Mar 15, 2007 18:36:33 GMT -5
I think you misunderstood. MGS2 was an excellent game, however I was comparing the two on a technical level since they are on the same system. MGS3 has by FAR more details given the jungle setting. The gaming system is much more advanced with a much greater range of abilities. Think about it, run through a few stages of Snake Eater utilizing all the new stuff like Cammo, Stamina, CQC, etc. Then pop in Sons of Liberty. The game will seem SOOOOOO much more simply from a technical standpoint. The flaws of Sons of Liberty lie primerely in the Codecs. WAAAAY too many and a lot of them are for no reason (like two characters using the Codec while standing face to face). The story is great, though I can see how some can view it as a bit long winded. Though I do feel that towards the end they started out throwing useless plot twists that made me gag a bit. Like Solidus saying he killed Raiden's parents or Ocelot laying out a long winded S3 explanation that ended up being false. I mean really, what the hell?! But from a technical stand point, with both games being on the same system, Snake Eater did to Sons of Liberty what MG2 did to MG1... surpass it by a mile! Yet the sales were only half... go figure. ;D Dude, sorry! I guess I musunderstood.  Now I see where you're coming from and I couldn't agree more. |
|
|
|
Post by The Mad Jackyl on Mar 21, 2007 16:36:03 GMT -5
I think it had to do with promotion. Metal Gear Solid 2 had the backing of perhaps the largest hype-driven machine yet seen for a video game. That's when the Metal Gear fanbase was arguably at its most active on the various forums. The sequel to a game as ground-breaking as Metal Gear Solid held great promise. I think the hype caught everyone up, but everyone was more grounded with the announcement of Metal Gear Solid 3, knowing what to expect from Kojima & co.
|
|
|
|
Post by A.G. on Mar 21, 2007 18:05:06 GMT -5
Go MGS2... wait to ruin the hype machine.... LOL! ;D
|
|
Now I see where you're coming from and I couldn't agree more.