New Review Posted: Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater

[Daniel Weissenberger]

Matt Weise explores Metal Gear Solid 3, and drops a spoiler right in the first paragraph:

"There is a sequence in Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater that encapsulates why Hideo Kojima is one of the best game designers working today. It's a sequence in which the protagonist, Snake, is having a near-death experience. Trapped in the twilight between life and death the player is visited by visions of everyone they have killed throughout the game. The player cannot hurt any of the ghosts, but the ghosts can hurt the player. Snake must simply endure all the pain and agony he has caused, facing each and every enemy soldier he has killed, all baring the scars of exactly the way the player chose to kill them."

The rest of his examination of the game and its themes can be found here.

[Snack Eater]

I will agree with just about everything in that review, except for the final score. I can't even begin to describe how great the game really is, and yet it scored lower than Sons of Liberty, which had pretty much every flaw this game has, only amplified 1000X. (well, except for the camera)

But really, scores don't matter. The actual review is good and intelligent.

I would have liked to have seen a comment on the ending of the game, but that's just because I've got a boner for Kojima's dramatics the size of California.

[Reharl]

- - Spoilers ahoy! - -

A very good review, Matt, although I would probably award a slightly higher score as well.

I think MGS3 is the less complex of the Metal Gears, and that its story is rather predictable in that you're dealing with a character whose life has been thoroughly discussed in all the other installments. Nevertheless, it was a worthwhile insight into the motivations behind the creation of Fox Hound, Outer Haven and the rise of Ocelot. And let's not forget the joy it was to see a return to the good old epic boss battles, of which I think The End and The Fury were the main events.

Some things puzzled me at first, though, particularly the whole deal with the Philosophers. If I got it straight, the philosophers were almost like a first phase of the Patriots, or its predecessors, its creators. But MGS2 had given me the impression that the "La li lu le lo" were immaterial entities, born out of the flow of information and dependent upon it (thus explaining Solidus' plan to blow a nuke over Manhattan to disrupt the electronic networks). It now seems there were some initial Patriots who died away and that someone used the Legacy to create GW. Ocelot talking to the head of the CIA offers some pretty good clues as to who did it but it would be interesting to know the exact link between the Philosophers and the Patriots. This, I think is amazing: Kojima managed to explain a great part of MGS2 with a game set 40 years before its events.

By the way, did anyone walk away with the impression that this is the most refined of the Metal Gears (cinematically speaking)? MGS2 had some pretty beautiful imagery, but the way Kojima handles these characters is almost poetic. The final setting during the fight with The Boss immediately springs to mind but also the way Big Boss is shown interacting with the characters, EVA's redemption, The Joy's tragic sense of duty, and heck, even Johnny's optional cutscene after the torture room. The characters no longer seem like they're simply acting under the strictness of Kojima's ruler, they are given some degree of conceptual independance.

And you know, I really like that commentary about how game designers have the unique ability to cause you pain. I was thinking the exact same thing when I found out there were seven kerotan frogs to shoot during the bike sequences.

[Sajon]

Originally Posted by Solidsnack

I will agree with just about everything in that review, except for the final score. I can't even begin to describe how great the game really is, and yet it scored lower than Sons of Liberty, which had pretty much every flaw this game has, only amplified 1000X. (well, except for the camera)

I'm sick of giving 9's. I'm making a conscious effort to use more of the 1-10 spectrum. Based on how I was using it at the time I reviewed MGS2, MGS3 would be a 9.5. But I went with 8.5 because I think if Kojima's storytelling and camera were perfect that would be worth another 1.5. If a flawed game like MGS3 gets a 9, then that leaves us a ridiculously small margin for awarding perfection. I'm trying to give the scale some more breathing room.


-Matt

[Snack Eater]

Has there ever really been a perfect game? Something that didn't have some kind of problem? Kojima's games are flawed, but no more than any other A-list game. There are some parts in the Grand Theft Auto games that are awfully designed, and yet those get more recognition than a game that is, aside from a few camera problems that are more due to other games than the design itself? And sure, Kojima's storytelling isn't perfect, but what game's storytelling is? All the big names in game story certainly have flaws. Final Fantasy's formula is stale and derivative, as are more RPG storylines, and GTA, until recently, has had the storytelling depth of a puppet show. Kojima has a thing for long expositional scenes, but in MGS3's case they all occur early on to set up the rest of the story, and that's excusable. (though the bad historical figure impressions could have been minimized) He has a thing for cheesiness, which, aside from a couple choice moments, really isn't a problem this time around.

And the long cutscene complaint is tired. The best type of games will use cutscenes as a way of revealing the plot when the gameplay doesn't work. A good example is Max Payne 2, a brilliant game, where a majority of the plot is told in game, only using cutscenes to set up an area or show a character doing something that the gameplay system does not include. The levels are broken up by brilliantly written graphic novel segments, but it never takes you out of the game, only serving as a transition. Kojima, until MGS3, didn't quite grasp this. While he doesn't go so far to unveil crucial plot details during gameplay, he makes the player feel like they're taking a much more active role in what is appearing onscreen, through his occasionally clever use of the first person view option. Also, if the game is played the way it was supposed to be, the cutscenes are not a bother, but are instead a reward for making it past the devilishly hard stealth segments. After the bloat of the first two hours, the game establishes a perfect sense of pace, leaving the player to his own devices for half an hour at a time, something that never would have happened in the other two games.

There are three types of Kojima cutscenes:
1)Expositional, most heavy in the beginning and the end of his games. These give the player direction, as well as set up events to come, as well as provide twists or payoff in the end. Kojima sometimes stumbles when these sequences go on past the five minute mark, but for MGS3 he keeps control of them after setting up the plot in the first two hours, which are slow. Sometimes he uses the back-and-forth to build the characters.
2)Action, present purely for the player's enjoyment. Most of the time, these serve to entertain, and to move the player from place to place when necessary. The best example (from a cinematic standpoint) of these is the motorcycle chase in 3.
3)Dramatic. These are the real payoff, after beating a complex or tough part of the game. These often involve the death of a character, a boss, for example, or a monologue that develops a character further. The character monologues sometimes occur during expositional scenes to build some pathos on top of all the logos, to establish some sort of emotional connection to what is being said. Kojima, in the past, has milked his dramatic scenes to their fullest, with lots of teary over-the-top melodrama. In MGS3, he refines them, and makes them occur more through actions a character takes than what the character says, limiting the dramatic exchanges to a few lines instead of a page and a half of dialogue, enhancing the power without becoming too artificial or cheesy. The crowning example of this is MGS3's ending, which, for any fan of the series, packs a whallop on par with what Peter Jackson did for gay hobbit porn enthusiasts with Return of the King. There are a few exceptions in the game, such as (spoiler) The Boss's speech at the beginning of the game that quickly goes too far and becomes redundant after about twenty seconds, with a minute left in it. (nospoiler)

One gets the feeling that if Kojima gives it one more go, he'll deliver the knockout punch that will finally elevate video gaming above its nerdy roots and gangsta-rap-obsessed, false-celebrity-endorsed, plastic modern self. If only Halo 2, Half-Life 2 and San Andreas hadn't stolen the spotlight.

Now, if only he could ditch those silly names...

[ASS-asn]

I'd like to read the review but I can't stand spoilers especially for a game like this
but I already know I'm going to love(&buy) the game so it doesn't matter much

[fenrirmaynard77]

what's the connection between raiden and raikov, ?
i've heard rumors that it was all a VR mission played by raiden and snake, which i think are false.
But why does he do the same movements, and stuff, like the kick he did on mgs2.

[Sajon]

Originally Posted by ASS-asn

I'd like to read the review but I can't stand spoilers especially for a game like this
but I already know I'm going to love(&buy) the game so it doesn't matter much

The spoiler is only in the first paragraph. Just skip it and the rest will be fine. Aside from the first paragraph it is actually a 100% spoiler-free review.


-Matt


P.S. NOTE TO GC_DANNY - This is why you should have listened to me.

[Sajon]

[quote=Kant Lite]As much as I love his work, there are moments in the Snake Eater review that made me want to reach through the screen and slap Matt in the face. You'd think that after a decade of reviewing games with cut-scenes and hubristic aspirations, Matt would have realized how to condense expository information, but no. Matt still likes to drop research papers and spoilers on readers at key moments, often at the expense of intelligibility and pacing. [quote]


Jesus Christ, Kant. Grow up. :P


-Matt

[Sajon]

Originally Posted by Solidsnack

And the long cutscene complaint is tired.

In a sense you're right, but I'm trying to speak to an audience that may not be familiar with games as well as we are. For people relatively new to the medium, those cut-scenes are a huge turn-off. I've seen it happen. They are just a brick wall people smash into and then it is very difficult to convince them how to appreciate the game. My girlfriend used to study screenwriting in college, and there were moments of MGS3 where I could feel the embarrassment in the room when she was watching me play. If games are ever going to reach out to wider audiences, it is important to not let people like Kojima off the hook when it comes to stuff like this. Yes, I agree it is much improved and, for me, it isn't really a big deal. But I still come down hard on it because I see it as the biggest barrier to a game like MGS3 reaching out beyond its core fanbase.


-Matt

Matt,

I want to give praise for your review of Snake Eater. I thought it was well-balanced. I have one question, however. You wrote:

Players take control of Snake, decorated WWII vet and espionage specialist, as he is being air-dropped into a remote area of southern Russia in 1964.

I may have missed something in the game, but my understanding is that Snake was a vet of the Korean War and not the Second World War. The Boss, however, was a vet of the Second World War. In what conversation or cut-scene did you learn that Snake was in World War II?

[Sajon]

Originally Posted by shockleyhaynes

I may have missed something in the game, but my understanding is that Snake was a vet of the Korean War and not the Second World War. The Boss, however, was a vet of the Second World War. In what conversation or cut-scene did you learn that Snake was in World War II?

My understanding is that Snake fought in WWII as a regular soldier but didn't become The Boss's student until the Korean War. In all honesty, I don't remember when it was said he fought in WWII in Snake Eater but I remember getting this impression somehow. From the instruction booklet maybe? Another possibility is that I remembered it from Big Boss's original timeline from the MGS1 strategy guide, where it explicitly states he fought in WWII. However, that Big Boss timeline has obviously been revised though some elements of it have obviously been kept (BB being part of the Green Berets, for example.)


-Matt

[Brad Gallaway]

Matt Saith:
"I don't remember when it was said..."

Jesus, the reviews on this site are going straight down the toilet! Did you even PLAY THE GAME?!?!


...sorry, i couldn't resist.

; )

[Hypatia93]

I'm so confused.. Matt (Sajon) are you the reviewer? I only ask b/c all the other reviewers are so obvious in their names.

Anyway.. about the review. Excellent work. I'm not an MGS fangrrl like many here, so the number seemed just fine to me. I think the review said what a prospective buyer/player needed to know (with your spin, of course) and that's a good thing.

Although I got this game for Xmas, I've not gotten very far. I started on "normal" setting, and I fear the game's harder than I remember the other two being on the same setting (or is that just me?). Furthermore, I had some problems with simple controls for the /longest/ time, coupled with repeated invasions of more troops whilst I was "honing my skills" on a few of them, and finally, thinking I'd pause a cutscene b/c of a pseudo-emergency (only to skip it), made me move on to other pastures for a bit.

However, I must thank Doug, without whose guidance I surely would not have gotten that far.

[Sajon]

Originally Posted by Hypatia93

I'm so confused.. Matt (Sajon) are you the reviewer? I only ask b/c all the other reviewers are so obvious in their names.

Yeah. Sajon = Matthew Weise.


-Matt