Viewing Thread:
"Splinter Cell Or Metal Gear Solid ?"

Which one is better ?

Lukeman wrote:
> I see your point about MGS2.
>
> At first it was awesome, but after playing MGS3 and then going back,
> I realized its not all its hyped up to be. Too many cut-scenes,
> Raiden was a loser, animations were pretty poor and repetitive....
> I'll give you Splinter Cell over MGS2.

I've only really played the remake of MGS2 and I have to say it the areas seemed short and the controls were very irritating. I got to the bit where you change characters and I'd simply had enough.

The level on the boat in MGS2 is pretty much one/two levels in SC:CT. That's too short, if it had been expanded I think I'd have been more impressed.

Hedfix wrote:
> I've only really played the remake of MGS2 and I have to say it the
> areas seemed short and the controls were very irritating. I got to
> the bit where you change characters and I'd simply had enough.
>
> The level on the boat in MGS2 is pretty much one/two levels in SC:CT.
> That's too short, if it had been expanded I think I'd have been more
> impressed.

Yeah, thats general concensus wioth MGS fans too. Tanker level on MGS2 = Great. Plant = crummy.

No, I was saying I thought the Tanker level wasn't up to much considering how short the game was.

A much bigger level was needed.

How much of the game is the tanker level anyway? If it's roughly half then that's way too short.

Hedfix wrote:
> No, I was saying I thought the Tanker level wasn't up to much
> considering how short the game was.
>
> A much bigger level was needed.
>
> How much of the game is the tanker level anyway? If it's roughly half
> then that's way too short.

Oh yeah..sorry! the Tanker level was no way half of the game. The main part of it was the plant, the bit with gay-hated-wig-wearing-Raiden...the other character.

Hedfix wrote:
> How much of the game is the tanker level anyway? If it's roughly half
> then that's way too short.

A quarter at the most unfortunately.

and the rest was running back and forth through the same areas in the plant level.

Yet it still got a 10/10 from OPS2...

Fair enough, but when MGS3 only got 9/10 than summat is horribly wrong. MGS3 is 10 times better than MGS2

Why MGS2 got given 10/10 - I really don't know.

I think they only gave it that because if it was really good and they gave it a really low score they would be a bit embarrased, especially seeming how good MGS was.

Lukeman, I find your views/whatever on my name, most disturbing.

Snake10 and Bullett are Lovers