Metal Gear Solid: PS1 or GC?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Gugand
Gugand

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Gugand
Member since 2004 • 25 Posts
One thing I hope to do someday is to own all of the Metal Gear Solid games that follow the "main" storyline (which should be possible via the Internet). I do hope to buy Metal Gear Solid 4, Metal Gear Solid: Portable Ops (which should explain how Big Boss became evil), Metal Gear Solid 2: Substance, and Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence. But my main problem comes with the original Metal Gear Solid. I can easily buy the PlayStation 1 version as part of the $30 Essential Collection, but the GameCube remake The Twin Snakes makes improvements with several aspects of the game (the graphics being one of the most obvious). Then again, people have complained with some of these changes.
To put it simply, which version of Metal Gear Solid should I buy, the PlayStation 1 version or the GameCube version?

NOTE: I don't have a PlayStation 1 or a GameCube, but I do have a PlayStation 2 and a Wii, which are fully backwards-compatible with all PS1 and GC games, so I don't have a problem with consoles.
Avatar image for Lothenon
Lothenon

1177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#2 Lothenon
Member since 2003 • 1177 Posts
What makes the GCN-Version annoying is that there are bullettime-effects every ten seconds.
Avatar image for DJ_Lae
DJ_Lae

42748

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 73

User Lists: 0

#3 DJ_Lae
Member since 2002 • 42748 Posts

I'd imagine most people will tell you to play the PS1 version because it's more authentic, but I would say go with Twin Snakes.

I'll be honest - the original Metal Gear Solid has aged horribly. Yes, Twin Snakes makes the game easier (since it allows MGS2 style controls without changing any of the level or enemy design) and the cinematics are a bit over the top, but it's considerably more playable.

Of course, if you're going to get MGS2 and MGS3 anyway, the collection would be a better deal and if you have a hard time playing MGS1, pick up Twin Snakes and play that through before continuing the series.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#4 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
The PlayStation version. I hear the GC version is alright but it is a reinterpretation of Kojima's vision and not canonical. If you want all the main MGS story, you have to get the PS version... and even then, the PS version is probably easier to find since good used GC games are becoming a rarity these days.

Silly me... I completely forgot about the Essentials Collection...
Avatar image for Lothenon
Lothenon

1177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 Lothenon
Member since 2003 • 1177 Posts
I want to object the statement that MGS on the PSX has "aged horribly", which is simply not true. Unless you're one of those games that cannot go back to PSX graphics and controls, MGS still plays fine today. The only thing that has "aged horribly" is the dialogue. Back in 1998, the way MGS told a story was revolutionary, but nowadays you can't help but to laugh at the B-movieesque way MGS was written and staged. But thats a flaw both versions, PSX or GCN, have. But while on the PSX nostalgia helps your mind remember that this is a '98 game, the sillyness of the script becomes painfully obvious in MGS2-style GCN-graphics. The fact that every second shot is in slow motion doesn't really help, either.
Avatar image for deactivated-5f4694ac412a8
deactivated-5f4694ac412a8

8599

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 36

User Lists: 0

#7 deactivated-5f4694ac412a8
Member since 2005 • 8599 Posts
I wanted to get Twin Snakes over the original one, but no matter where I looked, I could not find it. I really don't know if you are going to be able to find it. It's really difficult. I got the Essential Collection and beat the first one. Not the second or third yet. 'Twas fun.
Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#8 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
I want to object the statement that MGS on the PSX has "aged horribly", which is simply not true. Unless you're one of those games that cannot go back to PSX graphics and controls, MGS still plays fine today. The only thing that has "aged horribly" is the dialogue. Back in 1998, the way MGS told a story was revolutionary, but nowadays you can't help but to laugh at the B-movieesque way MGS was written and staged. But thats a flaw both versions, PSX or GCN, have. But while on the PSX nostalgia helps your mind remember that this is a '98 game, the sillyness of the script becomes painfully obvious in MGS2-style GCN-graphics. The fact that every second shot is in slow motion doesn't really help, either.Lothenon

I would also have to agree with you on this and even go a step further. MGS is still as good as it was back in the day. I played it again just over a week ago for the first time in nearly a decade and was amazed at how little it has aged (if at all) since then (since I was able to fully understand the story). I find it to be a "timeless" game that can never age. For what the game is on the PS it is still a fantastic game.

People just don't take games for what they are anymore, they feel the need to compare them across genres, platforms and generations.