Best titles of 2005... Your thoughts?

[Weirdy]

I keep thinking the title of this thread says "best titties of 2005... Your thoughts?"

[Nusumenai]

Pfft, MGS3 had the best story of the 3 and the best gameplay...  If it had been a bit more challenging, it would have been my favorite.

 

By the way, with all this talk of MGS3 I'll remind you it was made in 2004.

 

And it probably would have been the best of the series if it were not for the glaring flaw of altering the rader without adjusting the camera. The challenge was fine if you ask me but the actual balance was shot right out of the gate. But I understand they're going to change that whole dynamic for Subsistance.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I didn't consider them flaws at all. There were plenty of radars and ways to see your enemies without actually running up to them. It added to the challenge... and console games are dumbed down enough these days.

[Agozer]

Pfft, MGS3 had the best story of the 3 and the best gameplay...  If it had been a bit more challenging, it would have been my favorite.

 

By the way, with all this talk of MGS3 I'll remind you it was made in 2004.

 

And it probably would have been the best of the series if it were not for the glaring flaw of altering the rader without adjusting the camera. The challenge was fine if you ask me but the actual balance was shot right out of the gate. But I understand they're going to change that whole dynamic for Subsistance.

 

 

I didn't consider them flaws at all. There were plenty of radars and ways to see your enemies without actually running up to them. It added to the challenge... and console games are dumbed down enough these days.

I have to agree. MGS3 is set in the 60s after all, so no "hi-tech" gadgets like in the past games.

[Wizard]

MGS3 in a nut shell;

 

Gameplay = good

Graphics = pretty

Story = not as mind bending as previous titles

 

And I am saying this again, if you understood Neon Genesis Evangelion's ending, MGS2's should be a walk in the park.

[iamjack]

I didn't consider them flaws at all.  There were plenty of radars and ways to see your enemies without actually running up to them.  It added to the challenge... and console games are dumbed down enough these days.

I have to agree. MGS3 is set in the 60s after all, so no "hi-tech" gadgets like in the past games.

 

 

Yeah you can keep saying that, but the facts are that MGS3 used the same effective gameplay as MGS2, which was built aroud the idea that you could see where others were AND where they were looking. Realism is all good but it comes second to gameplay and I think they could have kept it intact without this kind of careless design.

[Nusumenai]

I didn't consider them flaws at all.  There were plenty of radars and ways to see your enemies without actually running up to them.  It added to the challenge... and console games are dumbed down enough these days.

I have to agree. MGS3 is set in the 60s after all, so no "hi-tech" gadgets like in the past games.

 

 

Yeah you can keep saying that, but the facts are that MGS3 used the same effective gameplay as MGS2, which was built aroud the idea that you could see where others were AND where they were looking. Realism is all good but it comes second to gameplay and I think they could have kept it intact without this kind of careless design.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You could see around corners with right analogue and you had so many radars to choose from. You could see enemies all around if you knew how to use them. I don't see your point really.

[Nusumenai]

MGS3 in a nut shell;

 

Gameplay = good

Graphics = pretty

Story = not as mind bending as previous titles

 

And I am saying this again, if you understood Neon Genesis Evangelion's ending, MGS2's should be a walk in the park.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Just because it wasn't as complex as MGS2, that does not mean it wasn't good. There was a lot of emotion attached to MGS3. I felt extremely sad after finishing the game.

 

... and graphics were pretty until the FPS hit the single digits.

[olaf]

this thread has degenerated down to an arguement about metal gear solid, i hope you're all happy.

[Nusumenai]

this thread has degenerated down to an arguement about metal gear solid, i hope you're all happy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I apologize... I started the thread and I derailed it... I'll get it back on track!

[Wizard]

MGS3 in a nut shell;

 

Gameplay = good

Graphics = pretty

Story = not as mind bending as previous titles

 

And I am saying this again, if you understood Neon Genesis Evangelion's ending, MGS2's should be a walk in the park.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Just because it wasn't as complex as MGS2, that does not mean it wasn't good. There was a lot of emotion attached to MGS3. I felt extremely sad after finishing the game.

 

... and graphics were pretty until the FPS hit the single digits.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thats why I bought the damn game, for it's story experience over it's rather simplistic gameplay. Immersion in said title = suck!

[BlackKnight]

By the way, with all this talk of MGS3 I'll remind you it was made in 2004.

 

Seeing as the release date in my world was March 05, well, forgive me thinking of it as a 2005 game. Sorry.. I'd have to retract Tekken 5 then which was released in 2004 as well...