By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Xxain said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Xxain said:

I have to disagree with this. There are several games series out there that you need to understand because they set expectations for the game. For Example Metal Gear Solid. MGS has some of the stupidest story elements of all time and if you walked into MGS wihout knowing its story history..it would be garbage, but because game and understand expectations for the story segments they become less stupid and more natural


I think your sentence flow is a bit off. I'm having trouble making out the last part.

But I should add I played MGS1, and the story still seemed like that even when I played the game. But more importantly, you can still know the story history by looking it up. You don't have to play all the games.

no..looking something up and experiencing it first hand is to different things.

better example:

Spoiler!!!!!!

 

 

 

In MGS4 and man is brought to life with pieces of others characters body parts and nanomachines. That is absolutely dumb... to the uninformed MGS player. Becasue the ive played the rest of there series and and lerant waht to expect from there stories and plot elements its less dumb and more naural.

 


That's not an uncommon thing in soft science fiction, so it doesn't seem that dumb. It only seems dumb if you think MGS is a series about total realism, and even that can be explained without playing the game.



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs