Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistance. is it worth the price tag?

[Guts]

Subsistence is a great game. I haven't played the original MGS3, but I'd imagine Subsistence's new camera makes the game a LOT better, I couldn't imagine playing with the old top-down view.

50? is pretty steep, but you'll get a good game for it.

[saif]

I actually have not played snake eater - only subsistence but I still played with the old style (or "proper") camera.

[J0e Musashi]

subsistence second to last ? woah

Deffo. 3 is the weakest IMO. Raiden sucks, but 2 is more enjoyable to play than 3 methinks. Integral/1 is so far ahead it's unreal.

[kernow]

Did you finish 4 yet ?

[NekoFever]

Subsistence is my favourite Metal Gear, and I still wouldn't pay ?50 for it at this point. Bearing in mind that I hated Snake Eater for the awful camera, though, it's definitely worth seeking out if you couldn't get into the original version.

Assuming that I'm only counting the best versions of each one, I'd rank the MGS games like this:

3 > 4 > 1 > 2

I enjoyed them all, to be fair. The first one just hasn't aged that well IMO, although I haven't played Twin Snakes so that might help, and MGS2 is just the weakest one. I don't even hate Raiden with the venom that some people do; it's just that the whole Big Shell act was a disappointment relative to the first part and the other games.

[Neon Ignition]

I'm another one for the thinking that MGS3 is the best one. The free camera is better but not50 quid better. For the setting and storytelling the other MG's don't come close to 3. Amazing ending too.

[Wools]

I adore MGS3 and it's my favourite Metal Gear by a mile.

Although Metal Gear has always had a ridiculous plot and characters who act with insane disregard for their own sanity, I?ve never really enjoyed those elements. After the remake where Snake is empowered with Ninja reactions I really enjoyed the jump to the far more rational world of Snake Eater. Well, at least in regard to the series!

I really enjoyed the back to basics approach of the game with Survival really being brought to the front of the game play and was all the more better for it. You had no radar, no ridiculous powers and no state of the art gadgetry. Guard movement was slower and deliberate so not only was it more difficult but the player had to actually, you know, hide from the enemy and use their own sense of sign and sound to detect the enemy and sneak round them.

In all, it was a far more grungy and powerful game and had little of the style and effortless special moves when compared to the rest of the series. It was all about lying in the mud and the grass, starving whilst worrying where the next meal was coming from rather than watching a stylish cut scene wondering when you?ll be able to fight a Japanese robot with women?s legs.

I love the entire Metal Gear Solid series but MGS3 really appealed to me as it appeared to cut the fat out of the game and let me play the game I?ve always wanted to play for the last decade.

And back to the original question! I far prefer the fixed camera of the original as it was intelligent and did not need any player input, although I can see the benefits of having a camera that can be positioned. I would suggest that you save a packet and pick up the original UK MGS3 and if the camera was that bothersome then pick up the Special Edition.

[J0e Musashi]

Did you finish 4 yet ?

About 8 times each now, in both Japanese and English on Big Boss Extreme. I have the highest rank available, all items, weapons etc. Gone back to Integral...

[saif]

I adore MGS3 and it's my favourite Metal Gear by a mile.
........

And back to the original question! I far prefer the fixed camera of the original as it was intelligent and did not need any player input, although I can see the benefits of having a camera that can be positioned. I would suggest that you save a packet and pick up the original UK MGS3 and if the camera was that bothersome then pick up the Special Edition.

I agree. I don't get the idea that we must have total input on the camera in games, The original MGS had a a great camera but it would be called gash now. No input required and the gameplay was built around the fact that the designers knew what you would be seeing at any point. In MGS3, the same applied but there was the ability to move the camera in a constrained manner with the right stick. I thought that was excellent and got a bit annoyed at always having to move the camera in 4 (excellent game though it was).

[Darwock]

Indeed, the benefit of being able to reposition the camera was that you could cheat the stealth sections. Adding it in the first place was a bobbins idea, you should play Snake Eater the original way if you ask me. Hiding in the long grass, waiting.. that's what it's all about.

[fallenangle]

I have to disagree - in any stealth game I want to see what the character you're playing can see not what the game designer decides you should see. Fixed, poor or limited camera positioning deliberately being used to handicap the player just seems like a rather artificial way of increasing the difficulty.

Even when they're giving you other clues to determining guard patterns or hiding positions IMHO a game like this stops being pure stealth and become something else. What that is I'm not quite sure but it undoubtedly makes it a different type of experience, not better or worse, but definitely different.

Of course, moveable cameras can be exploited in stealth games (I'm sure we've all done it at some point) but it is up to the designers to ensure that doesn't happen too often.

[Darwock]

You always have the option of FPS to see what the character can see, you shouldn't have the option of being able to rotate the camera to see whatever you want IMO

[Guts]

You always have the option of FPS to see what the character can see, you shouldn't have the option of being able to rotate the camera to see whatever you want IMO

But in MGS's case, you can only use first person perspective when you're immobile.

I agree with fallenangle, the fixed top-down camera worked fine in MGS and MGS2 but they we're mostly about running in tight indoor corridors AND they had the radar which showed where the enemies were looking, moving and so on, so your limited vision didn't matter so much.

I MGS3 you are in jungles and woods without even the radar to help you spot the camouflaged soldiers (and I can assure you it isn't too easy even when you rotate the camera). I can imagine gameplay becoming frustrating when you have to walk three steps, stop, go to FP to look ahead, walk another five steps, look around in FP etc.

Edit: The OP already said he didn't like Snake Eater so why would some of you recommend him getting it AGAIN when he has the option of getting the version that would clearly be more suitable for him? What worked for you didn't work for him.

[Neon Ignition]

I went through the series this year int he build up to 4 and found the free camera in MGS3 to be better than the traditional camera. Works either way but because the jungle is properly build up and over the character the game's immersion was doubled. It does make the game a lot easier though.

[rmoxon]

And back to the original question! I far prefer the fixed camera of the original as it was intelligent and did not need any player input, although I can see the benefits of having a camera that can be positioned. I would suggest that you save a packet and pick up the original UK MGS3 and if the camera was that bothersome then pick up the Special Edition.

Eh? the original game didnt really have a fixed camera, you could choose between two modes, or well you could choose a view where you could move the camera a bit or somthingn (as far as I can remember), and neither of them were very helpful, or at least that was how I felt when i tried to play the game. Course I didnt like the fact that most of the game was spent banadaging yourself up either and I'm sure the camera wont change that much.

Its the fact that the new camera is behind you as oppoised to a poor overhead veiw where you cant see much that makes me feel like its better for the type of gameplay within the game.

Anyway seems like the game isnt worth £50 so I guess I wont be bothering with it.