On the recent Gamespot podcast, there was a lot of discussion about MGS4 and whether or not it was going to command the sales that Halo 3 did. Initially, I wasn't sure what to think because taking on Halo 3 is a pretty scary feat. Also, there are a lot of factors that make Halo 3 vs. MGS4 kind of a "apples to oranges" situation. However, having said that, here's my take.

The initial problem is that, from a sales perspective, the MGS series really didn't command the sales that Halo did. MGS 1 was incredible and, hands down, was probably the greatest game on PSX if you weren't an RPG fan (respect to the FFVII). It had a great story, great graphics, and a unique play style. As the series has continued, the story is more complicated than ever and many players have fallen into the FPS realm that they aren't sure quite how to take MGS these days. Also, the world has shifted to FPS. I was not an FPSer on the original xbox, I really just used it to get surround sound and 480p out of games on the PS2 that didn't offer either. However this generation, I am a hardcore FPSer. I think this shift will also affect people who have to go back to the roots of a classic stealth game. Just ask Splinter Cell how well that's working out on this generation (not too good, all things considered).

I also think it's important to think about who plays Halo vs. MGS. Halo 3 was a necessity on the Xbox 360, if for any other reason than all your friends would be playing it. That's why I bought it even though I hadn't played the other two (at the time). No matter what I was playing online, I knew that the shift to Halo was necessary to keep playing with most of my true friends online. MGS has an online component, but the PS3 doesn't rely on online like the 360 and the core of MGS4 is not online play (that's a different game, Metal Gear Online). There's also the story aspect. Having played the entire Halo trilogy (in one weekend at that) and the (so far) MGS trilogy, I can tell you that the story is much more relevant in MGS. Halo 3 people weren't shocked or satisfied if they played through the trilogy. Mind you, playing through the current three MGS games may give you an elaborate story, but a difficult one to follow (I can't completely follow it) and a convoluted one. At the same time, when they start referring to Revolver Ocelot, Liquid, and many others (including the Metal Gear), players who haven't at least played one of the games will have no idea what's going on (or even who the characters are). With about 90 mins of cut scenes, that makes it hard to stay into the story and drag yourself through so much content. I wouldn't be surprised if first timers don't drop the game after so much plot.

The final part is the sales factor. How many 360s were around in 2007 for Halo's sales? How timely is Halo? I know there are less PS3s (pretty sure) worldwide than 360s from last year and the Halo trilogy spans about 3 less years than the MGS series. Also Halo 1 & 2 are BC on the 360 whereas the newest PS3s can't play the old MGS games (I guess MGS 1 works on all of them, but hey). So if Halo sold like 8 million copies worldwide, but there are less than 8 million PS3s out there, how can MGS 4 possibly beat it? What if we compared percentages of system owners to purchasers, that may be better. And while MGS4 is THE game for PS3, some will still skip it. Also, in America, our perception is skewed. Halo 3 was an FPSer and extremely popular in America, but in Japan it was a joke and very few played it. The reverse is true for MGS in Japan vs. America, so you might see a tighter amount of sales. I just don't know yet how I feel about Snake's ability to move enough copies to take on a powerhouse like Halo 3.

I can guarantee you one thing, though. The journey will sure be a hell of a lot harder and a hell of a lot longer than Halo 3.)