SP:C vs. MGS4

i'm just wondering what you guys think will be a better game overall.

i personally have never played any of the MGS games but i have played Splinter Cell Chaos Theory and i thought it was great.  I have also seen some of the videos for SP:C and i think it looks very good.

that's really the only thing i can base it on so i'm gonna have to say SP:C

what do you think?

Thats unfair, Splinter Cell already had its chance and failed with DA. That game was compared to MGS as well. Most lemmings thought DA would be better than MGS4, and it wasnt.

well i've played both and, to me, MGS beats the crap out of SC...

1st the story and overall atmosphere of the MGS games is incredible and SC games are dull in the comparison...

on the other hand...the controls in MGS are not for everyone...but they did fix the camera in subsistence to a more SC feel...

so basically MGS, to me, is far superior in almost every aspect... 

Thats unfair, Splinter Cell already had its chance and failed with DA. That game was compared to MGS as well. Most lemmings thought DA would be better than MGS4, and it wasnt.

leejohnson7

ubisoft has 2 studios. they made SC:CT in 1 and DA in the other. they are making SC:C in the same one in which they made CT so i am assuming it should be more like that than DA. 

TC r u serious ? MGS4 pawns SP:C in every division!.. the Stoy of MGS just owns everything on the market (almost)

well i've played both and, to me, MGS beats the crap out of SC...

1st the story and overall atmosphere of the MGS games is incredible and SC games are dull in the comparison...

on the other hand...the controls in MGS are not for everyone...but they did fix the camera in subsistence to a more SC feel...

so basically MGS, to me, is far superior in almost every aspect...

h_bacho

he's talking about the upcoming next gen titles... 

Splinter Cell is prettier and boring, but MGS is a lot more fun. majadamus

QFT the plots of SP sucks bigtime.i lost interest after the second installment

[QUOTE="leejohnson7"]

Thats unfair, Splinter Cell already had its chance and failed with DA. That game was compared to MGS as well. Most lemmings thought DA would be better than MGS4, and it wasnt.

ItalStallion777

ubisoft has 2 studios. they made SC:CT in 1 and DA in the other. they are making SC:C in the same one in which they made CT so i am assuming it should be more like that than DA. 

It still isnt fair to MGS having to defend its world class reputation every time a new game is anounced. Then there is the issue that SC goes too far into the political stuff and feels too much like a real life issue, then again i guess thats what tom clancy is all about.

The MGS series is the type of series that you remember specific things from, it stays with you and is a lasting experiance, I cannot say the same for SC. Endfinal

I played them and I can't remember much. I found them extremely boring. I forced myself to progress in the games just to see the cutscenes, the only thing I enjoyed.  

Splinter Cell is prettier and boring, but MGS is a lot more fun. majadamus

Watching 9 hours of nonsensical monolouges and redundant conversation between talking heads gets boring real fast. 

MGS4, was this a serious poll?springz300

yea, it was serious. what, you don't think anyone can have a different opinion than you?

just because you think a game is better doesn't make it better. i feel these 2 games are quite comparible and i think neither is leaps and bounds over the other like some people suggest.  i will compare the last 2 games from last generation. just look... 

gamespot MGS3 subsistence review - 9.0

gamespot SC:CT review - 8.6

gameranking for MGS3 subsistence - 9.3

gameranking for SC:CT -  9.4

...to me they look pretty equal. opinions are fine but don't say it like if someone likes the other game they are an idiot.

Thats unfair, Splinter Cell already had its chance and failed with DA. That game was compared to MGS as well. Most lemmings thought DA would be better than MGS4, and it wasnt.

leejohnson7

And how was MGS4 better? You can't really compare Double Agent to MGS4 because there is no MGS4 to compare to (the game hasn't been released).

just because you think a game is better doesn't make it better. i feel these 2 games are quite comparible and i think neither is leaps and bounds over the other like some people suggest.  i will compare the last 2 games from last generation. just look... 

gamespot MGS3 subsistence review - 9.0

gamespot SC:CT review - 8.6

gameranking for MGS3 subsistence - 9.3

gameranking for SC:CT -  9.4

...to me they look pretty equal. opinions are fine but don't say it like if someone likes the other game they are an idiot.

ItalStallion777

Gamespot only dude. And btw gamer rankings includes reviewers that might not be very good. Plus each reviewer makes the overall score with different catagories like graphics and gameplay etc. but some dont, and some are different. Not comparable if you think about it. MGS is better acording to the majority.

[QUOTE="ItalStallion777"]

just because you think a game is better doesn't make it better. i feel these 2 games are quite comparible and i think neither is leaps and bounds over the other like some people suggest.  i will compare the last 2 games from last generation. just look... 

gamespot MGS3 subsistence review - 9.0

gamespot SC:CT review - 8.6

gameranking for MGS3 subsistence - 9.3

gameranking for SC:CT -  9.4

...to me they look pretty equal. opinions are fine but don't say it like if someone likes the other game they are an idiot.

leejohnson7

Gamespot only dude. And btw gamer rankings includes reviewers that might not be very good. Plus each reviewer makes the overall score with different catagories like graphics and gameplay etc. but some dont, and some are different. Not comparable if you think about it. MGS is better acording to the majority.

If you take statistics into consideration, sites like gamerankings are better indicators of how good a games is. Here is a lesson in statistics: As the sample size (in this case, the reviewers) increases, the average results will be better at representing the population's average results.

[QUOTE="ItalStallion777"]

just because you think a game is better doesn't make it better. i feel these 2 games are quite comparible and i think neither is leaps and bounds over the other like some people suggest. i will compare the last 2 games from last generation. just look...

gamespot MGS3 subsistence review - 9.0

gamespot SC:CT review - 8.6

gameranking for MGS3 subsistence - 9.3

gameranking for SC:CT - 9.4

...to me they look pretty equal. opinions are fine but don't say it like if someone likes the other game they are an idiot.

leejohnson7

Gamespot only dude. And btw gamer rankings includes reviewers that might not be very good. Plus each reviewer makes the overall score with different catagories like graphics and gameplay etc. but some dont, and some are different. Not comparable if you think about it. MGS is better acording to the majority.

fine ill just use the "They Say" on gamespot where they only use reputable websites.

they say for MGS3 subsistence - 9.3

they say for SC:CT - 9.4

same thing man. i guess they are pretty comparable.

[QUOTE="leejohnson7"][QUOTE="ItalStallion777"]

just because you think a game is better doesn't make it better. i feel these 2 games are quite comparible and i think neither is leaps and bounds over the other like some people suggest. i will compare the last 2 games from last generation. just look...

gamespot MGS3 subsistence review - 9.0

gamespot SC:CT review - 8.6

gameranking for MGS3 subsistence - 9.3

gameranking for SC:CT - 9.4

...to me they look pretty equal. opinions are fine but don't say it like if someone likes the other game they are an idiot.

ItalStallion777

Gamespot only dude. And btw gamer rankings includes reviewers that might not be very good. Plus each reviewer makes the overall score with different catagories like graphics and gameplay etc. but some dont, and some are different. Not comparable if you think about it. MGS is better acording to the majority.

fine ill just use the "They Say" on gamespot where they only use reputable websites.

they say for MGS3 subsistence - 9.3

they say for SC:CT - 9.4

same thing man. i guess they are pretty comparable.

I think you should stop spinning it to suite yourself and look at the "we say" which includes gamespots, and only gamespots opinion.

I like Splinter Cell more.

Splinter cell= casual, MGS=HardcoreMGS9150

I think it's the other way around. My brother is a casual and he couldn't beat the first stage of SC: CT with his friend.

i dunno about plot wise

and ive really never played either franchises

i dunno about mgs4's environment but i hope it's as interactive as sp:c's... because i'm finally really interested in the series 

leejohnson7, you said that most people think that the MGS series is better than the SC series. If that's what you really think, then instead of only using gamespot's ratings, you should use the ratings of as many reviewers as possible to get a better idea of which series the population thinks is better. Here is where gamerankings comes in. emawk

[QUOTE="ItalStallion777"][QUOTE="leejohnson7"][QUOTE="ItalStallion777"]

just because you think a game is better doesn't make it better. i feel these 2 games are quite comparible and i think neither is leaps and bounds over the other like some people suggest. i will compare the last 2 games from last generation. just look...

gamespot MGS3 subsistence review - 9.0

gamespot SC:CT review - 8.6

gameranking for MGS3 subsistence - 9.3

gameranking for SC:CT - 9.4

...to me they look pretty equal. opinions are fine but don't say it like if someone likes the other game they are an idiot.

leejohnson7

Gamespot only dude. And btw gamer rankings includes reviewers that might not be very good. Plus each reviewer makes the overall score with different catagories like graphics and gameplay etc. but some dont, and some are different. Not comparable if you think about it. MGS is better acording to the majority.

fine ill just use the "They Say" on gamespot where they only use reputable websites.

they say for MGS3 subsistence - 9.3

they say for SC:CT - 9.4

same thing man. i guess they are pretty comparable.

I think you should stop spinning it to suite yourself and look at the "we say" which includes gamespots, and only gamespots opinion.

i'm not spinning anything my way. like that other guy said above, the more people you have reviewing a game the better because when you take the average of those scores you find a better estimate of how good a game is. yes i know this is gamespot but you would be naive to think that it doesn't matter at all.

MGS gameplay is the same old thing dressed up with a new story. He always gets captured he always fights Metal Gear there is always some twist with the main bad guy. The gameplay sucks the camera sucks and if it weren't for the crazy cutscenes the game wouldn't have anything to hide behind. SC is more fun to play and the plots are much more realistic plus it has one of the more interesting multiplayer modes around.JiveT

Just because the story takes some intellectual thinking to understand, doesn't make it a bad story. Just because you are a simple minded fanboy who is to blind to realize the story is different every game doesn't make it bad. I should't argue with you though, your example of a good story is probably Halo.  

I have to say, I always liked the MGS series more than the SC series, and I expect that it will be no different once both games are out. Then again, anything can happen.

Splinter cell= casual, MGS=HardcoreMGS9150

ill go with MGS4, just becasue i really love the MGS storyline so far

[QUOTE="MGS9150"]Splinter cell= casual, MGS=Hardcoreproject343

But MGs has been around longer than SC. So your statement about MGS is false.

MGS gameplay is the same old thing dressed up with a new story. He always gets captured he always fights Metal Gear there is always some twist with the main bad guy. The gameplay sucks the camera sucks and if it weren't for the crazy cutscenes the game wouldn't have anything to hide behind. SC is more fun to play and the plots are much more realistic plus it has one of the more interesting multiplayer modes around.JiveT

[QUOTE="JiveT"]MGS gameplay is the same old thing dressed up with a new story. He always gets captured he always fights Metal Gear there is always some twist with the main bad guy. The gameplay sucks the camera sucks and if it weren't for the crazy cutscenes the game wouldn't have anything to hide behind. SC is more fun to play and the plots are much more realistic plus it has one of the more interesting multiplayer modes around.Endfinal

Just because the story takes some intellectual thinking to understand, doesn't make it a bad story. Just because you are a simple minded fanboy who is to blind to realize the story is different every game doesn't make it bad. I should't argue with you though, your example of a good story is probably Halo.

[QUOTE="project343"][QUOTE="MGS9150"]Splinter cell= casual, MGS=HardcoreSolid-CELL

But MGs has been around longer than SC. So your statement about MGS is false.

btw it wasn't a statement, he was just stating his opinion. also he said nothing about the story, he just mentioned the stealth system. and what does MGS being out longer have to do with the story? new games can't have a great story now?

[QUOTE="JiveT"]MGS gameplay is the same old thing dressed up with a new story. He always gets captured he always fights Metal Gear there is always some twist with the main bad guy. The gameplay sucks the camera sucks and if it weren't for the crazy cutscenes the game wouldn't have anything to hide behind. SC is more fun to play and the plots are much more realistic plus it has one of the more interesting multiplayer modes around.SergeantSnitch

btw did anyone catch that irony? "the game wouldnt have anything to hide behind". It doesnt. We've seen its gameplay. Its awsome you blind fanboy!.  

Thats unfair, Splinter Cell already had its chance and failed with DA. That game was compared to MGS as well. Most lemmings thought DA would be better than MGS4, and it wasnt.

leejohnson7

Uh if anythign its unfair to OCnviction seeing how it will be comming out a year ahead of MGS4.

[QUOTE="majadamus"]Splinter Cell is prettier and boring, but MGS is a lot more fun. OldParr

QFT the plots of SP sucks bigtime.i lost interest after the second installment

Uh the gameplay in MGS is not fun at all. Its a chore to play and I only do it for the story.

As an owner of both got to go with MGS4