By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Cactus on 15 June 2009
Edit Thread
JEDE3 said:
Cactus said:
JEDE3 said:
Cactus said:
Necromunda said:
Cactus said:
JEDE3 said:
If it doesnt involve snake then its a spin off.

Metal Gear Solid 3 and Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker don't involve Snake.

What are you talking about? Last time I checked they involve Naked Snake.

I was basing what I said off of his definition of a spin-off:

"Same universe. Following different characher. Who has been seen in previous games. Following a different story...."

I'm just trying to prove that by calling MGS:R a spin-off based on his logic would mean that MGS3 would have to be labelled a spin-off as well. MGS3 and MGS:PW (and Portable Ops) are the only games in the series that do not feature Solid Snake, who had a large role in every single other game. By his definition, they should be considered spin-off's.

I still think we should all wait for more information to see where MGS:R fits into the overarching story before we judge it.


Its all following the same story though.

Exactly. Give me a link proving that MGS:R's story is not intertwined with the rest of the series and I'll drop my entire argument.


... its not snake.

So if the story takes place between MGS2 and MGS4 and tells the story of Raiden's dealings with Sunny and the Patriots, you would still consider it a spinoff? I know that I wouldn't, since it sheds light on events pertaining to the main storyline of the series...

Anyway, I'm done arguing. I think we just have different opinions on what a spinoff is.