ITT: games that are considered the best in their series, but actually aren't

ITT: games that are considered the best in their series, but actually aren't.

Well if MGS3 isn't the best, what is?

That's true, people call Snake Eater the best, but it really isn't since Subsistence exists.

Mgs1
Also pic related

wrong, it's mgs2

and ff9 is best

But MGS2 is the worst.
As well as FF9.
Stop with your low-key baiting please.

nigga u can't override my dubs

That's a funny lookin 8.

My man

This is not the best game in the series, or the best game ever made. Because the 3DS remake exists.

Z targeting was the best thing OOT did, though. And I appreciate it for that.

1, 2, Rising

...

MGS3 = Over rated babbys first MGS game
FF8 = Over rated babbys first FF game.
For the bonus, RE4 = Over rated babbys first RE game

Mein neger

It's the worst for weird meta reasons that make it the best. The game was made to be intentionally bad in chapter 2 with those annoying calls and everything just to make you mad and confused to prep you for the weird meta story.

In terms of being a good game with good gameplay 3 is clearly the best unless you count Rising, but MGS2 impacted me quite a bit more and made me reconsider a lot of what I believe to be true and for that reason I think it's the best in the series.

When it comes to mgs "best in the series" doesn't say much since they're all horrible.

sux 2 b u fam

End your life and post pics

u wot m8?

most people are too stupid to figure out how to get magic besides draw

babies first would be 7 and I think FF7 is one of the better Final Fantasies

I saw this because the system for FF7 is the easiest to understand at it's base levels

most people don't even get junction in FF8

It isn't as clear-cut for Resident Evil. 4 is by far the best action game in the series and it's overall well in tone with the stupidity of the plot and lore those games have.

All Metal Gear games are so shit that I can't choose the best one.

Do you mean the same game with a parrying mechanic based on the camera wich has one of the worst camera in a 3rd person game ever ?

...

Story:

MGS1 > 2 > 3 > 4 >>>>>> 5

Gameplay:

4 > 3 > 2 > 1 >>>>> 5

Just fuck off.

MGR is autistic and shit. Jedi Outcast/Academy is like a million times better.


Shit AI, shit controls, shit camera, shit inventory system, shit writing, shit soundtrack and score, shit gameplay.

You have no argument. You're just calling everything shit like yet another retard on Holla Forums. I said kill yourself.

WOTLK was objectively better than TBC and vanilla

You're a faggot

Sonic 2.

3 is the most difficult one

MGS1 would be babby's first MGS game

5 is by far the best in gameplay, don't be retarded

Shit post.

3's story was better than 1, certainly better than 2's

fact:
Up until MGS 3 or 4, the enemies are respawning mindless retards who walk on rail and forget everything after a while. Even in MGS 5 the enemies are still pretty retarded for modern standard.

Up until MGS 4, the camera is shifting camera shit, and before 3 the camera is mostly fucking top down.

The inventory system looks like shit. This one is opinion alright. But still, it's shit unlike Morrowind.

The writing is very rigidly focused on the laughably complex plot. The story is silly. Kojima has no grasp of aesthetics and mise en scene. The characters act and are named like autists too. Even flick directors like Brian de Palma would laugh at this shit.

Kojima's cinematography is simply garbage. It's one of the worst cinematography techniques I've ever seen, especially on MGS V. I don't need to explain that one.

The score has cheesy electronic drumming and cheap electronic symphony mixed with jazz composition. I know those guys aren't Vangelis and 90% of vidya music is shit, but shit, put a bit more effort.

Non fps controls is shit, end of point. Even MoH 1 and Turok on N64 had FPS controls.

The gameplay is meh. There's no feeling of freedom like in Thief or SC Chaos Theory. The design feels too rigid. Not for MGSV, but the game is boring shit with regenerating health and less things to do than fucking Fallout 4 anyway.

The whole point of the ai of metal gear is that its not smart, it doesn't learn, which means its rules are always the same and you can play around them, use its faults to your advantage, it's what makes them fun.

That's not tactical espionage at all.

Nigger, I hope you're joking.

Even on hard you have a huge pool of health and if an enemy catches you they barely do any damage thus encouraging running and gunning.
Only bosses do any noticeable damage.

The only difficulty in that game comes from having to open your inventory every now and then to change your camouflage and keeping an eye on how many suppressors you have left for your tranquillizer.

I like MGS3, but don't pretend that it's anything more than it is.
If anything, 2 is the hardest one since you're very likely to get raped if you ever get spotted, although you still have a chance to hide.

You didn't actually properly elaborate on most of your criticisms. You just continued to call everything shit and bad. All you did was specify what you thought was shit rather than provide actual reasoning on WHY it was shit.
The only point you tried to elaborate on was the enemy AI, and even then you claimed MGSV's AI was poor compared to the modern standard. What's this modern standard? Because we must be experience two separate gaming industries for MGS AI to look like shit in comparison.

This guy is right, MGS3 is not the hardest one. You take like ten times more damage in MGS 2.

However, on European Extreme MGS 3 was goddamn challenging. At least, since I was doing a no kill run.

Alright, now you sound like a snob.

It is. Wanting an ai that is smart or learns is like arguing that, say, Dark Soul bosses should not have patterns for you to exploit, or that procedurally generated maps are better than well crafted levels because they're always different.

And even then, mgsv pushes the so the farthest in the series for intelligence by making the enemies change their equipments according to your playstile. Anybody that claims the ai is dumb and that somehow makes metal gear bad, knows absolutely nothing about game design.

It is by far the most retarded argument you could ever make, and really just shows how little someone knows about the games and what makes them good.

You fanboys are pathetic.

I only recently finished it on hard, so my memory is still fresh, but I definitely plan to go back to it and try EE.

I wonder whose bright idea was it to tie something like that to how hard you press a button.

End your life, you projecting retard.

...

This is why you're a retard.

If that pissed you off it might be the problem us you, trigger-happy friend.

Your health pool is actually rather small. It only gets bigger if you sustain a lot of damage and live

Perhaps, but the point of the game is to evade enemies, which is more difficult because you don't have a radar that tells you exactly where they are, where they're looking and where to stand so that you'll be just outside their range of vision. You're dependent on your eyes for the most part, which is why the original Snake Eater was such shit because it kept 1&2's shitty camera system, which worked for 1&2 but was absolute balls for 3.

It might be easier to firefight the enemies and survive, but it's a lot harder not to get caught by them, which is the entire point of the game

...

Tales of Vesperia/Symphonia

This.

I agree, and that's the problem. There is no real sense of danger.
If you get spotted (and it will happen if it's your first time playing at least a few times) you don't have to worry about dying in seconds and can leisurely explore and pick up items while the enemy is trying to kill you.

Yes, you are supposed to avoid enemies, but the game hardly punishes you for playing it like CoD.
This is why I think MGS2 is a perfect example of a proper MG game when it comes to gameplay. The only issue is the fixed camera, but other than that it really forces you to not be seen.

You know how non-autistic people react when someone "offends" their favourite games?
They don't freak out like you, retard.

I've noticed whereas Snake can easily gun down soldiers in the first MGS, Raiden is practically at the mercy of an entire fireteam if you're not careful.

I like that difference.

I called you out and told you to fuck off while all you did was obnoxiously shitpost.

3's story was basicly 1's story but with some wacky jungles and 60s bond movie undertones.

For what? Disliking your "masterpiece"?

It's a simple thriller like 1 but it's not very much like 1.

I don't like seeing patterns in modern video games. Even Pac Man and Dig Dug are less pattern based than MGS1. I want an AI that makes the game feel natural and not like simon says. This is the same reason why I hate Dark Souls.

For some cases, this is true. I prefer both in my game though.

There's nothing intelligent about that though. It's a pretty simple finite state AI, enemies would get new equipments according to your score board. Intelligent AI are those who can do adaptive pathfinding and destine their own behaviors like the ones you see in FEAR, STALKER, and Oblivion.


And you sound like a pleb.

I called you out for calling an entire franchise shit without any argument and you responded predicatbly. Learn to read, retard.

Then most triple A games nowadays are just for you. Just a tip, a smart AI is never going to be fun to play against and will most likely break or end up doing retarded shit.

Plain retarded

I'll give you its half finished, the story is underwhelming to say the least, many things didn't make the game and it becomes repetitive. However, it is still the best MGS game. It gives you plenty of gadgets and guns to approach objectives and bases differently each time. It gives you a huge amount of gameplay compared to its cutscenes, whereas previous games are weighted a lot more in the cutscene department.

Only rebuttal needed

I can't believe Shitnami became so bad they charged so much so just for a glorified demo.

Are you retarded, AAA devs keep focusing on polycount and shading instead of actual AI technology and procedural generation gameplay style that isn't boring. Daggerfall is still better than any proceduraly generated sandbox games even though it's a pretty simple game.

Then explain how did I and so many other people enjoy STALKER and FEAR very much? Bugs are inevitable and it's a challenge that has to be faced instead of avoided all the time, or else innovations won't happen.

What's wrong with having both manually crafted dungeons and procedurally generated dungeons? I just want "content beyond content" to extend replayability a bit.

Well no, you wouldn't notice their efforts into making a smart AI, because it doesn't work, and they end up retarded. But that's what you want fam, from what you said it seems like anything that isn't a mechanical AI is better, so there you go. Play some far cry to see the marvels of smart AIs.


I think I've heard maybe to people tops saying that Stalker had a good AI, and the praise seemed to be related more to how animals moved in packs rather than the AI actually being smart.

The question is why would you want a procedurally generated dungeon?
Literally every single procedurally generated dungeon I can think of was shit and much worse than handcrafted levels.
It's a lot of work for nothing.

You have to eliminate "gone rogue" special forces group and stop futuristic super weapon. Rescue VIP hostage(s). You meet possible love interest. VIPs dies. You fight every special forces member individualy. Your possible love interest helps you along the way. Big chase scene by wheeled vehicle. Destroy futuristic super weapon at the end.

Here are most of the key plot points that are in both games. So both has the same core plot. MGS3 is just different flavor of the same shit sundae.

This is the plot to every MGS game.

I just didn't like OoT because it had a weird presentation to its puzzles and direction. It wasn't even a matter of me getting stuck, I was just kinda confused because the game obviously wanted me to do something really specific but trying to find out what it was felt like I was fishing for clues or something. Something else could make perfect sense, of not more sense, in the context but the game wouldn't register it as an acceptable solution.

I guess I was spoiled by other games like Deus Ex where solutions are based off abstractions rather than scripted events. Luckily Breath of the Wild seems to be fixing this issue.

1) Like said, your plot description is so broad it could fit almost every MGS game
2) The Cobras aren't a rogue unit.

Thats why it's different flavored shit sundae. Shit sundae with different flavors. Shit sundae = MGS story. Different flavors = different games on the MGS series wich have the MGS story with different themes and settings.

They are, kinda. Cobras obey boss. Boss obey Volgin. Volgin doing his own thing outside of soviet union. So yeah, rogue unit.

Volgin works for Brezhnev

Too bad, you're going to have to live with it.

If you can't follow OOT's game logic to solve its puzzles, there is something wrong with you. Like literally a developmental learning disability.

Did you ment with?
Becouse source like metal gear wiki says: "Volgin then conspired with the Brezhnev faction and the military to overthrow the Khruschev regime and seize power."
"Volgin was shown to have a ruthless, brutal, and power-hungry personality, as one of the reasons why he desired to overthrow Khrushchev and install Brezhnev and Kosygin in his place was so he could secretly control the Soviet Union."
That last paragraph tells me that Volgin was indeed doing his own thing inside the soviet union.

You realise there is a difference between "for" and "with"

Im not saying that that metal gear wiki is reliable source to quote. But it was the most handy one.

Not much logic involved. Honestly most of it isn't even puzzles, just finding out what NPC you need to talk to next or what item you need to use here. It becomes extremely easy half-way through the game.

Nice trips, though. I'll give you that.

First, because they didn't EMPHASIZE it. That's one of the problems with HL2, even though it has neural system AI. Notice how they put A-Life in Stalker and Oblivion, and good level design to support the AI activity in FEAR. Or GTA IV with it's smart softbody physics, no one does that anymore. Or a zoo building game, it's a great presentation of AI system but no one creates it anymore. There aren't many games out there that utilize GOAP either.

Who said that I hate Far Cry? Blood Dragon was decent.

Making animals migrate and move in packs is more complex than you think. Distance, direction, formation, there are many things to calculate. Another game that does this right is Operation Genesis.

And the praise mostly comes from the combat between NPC's, their ability in teamwork and flanking, their migrations, and how the game tracks their life in the zone.

Just to make the game less boring, what's wrong with that?

It doesn't matter when you have finished the main handcrafted dungeons. I just want to fuck around. It's not to hard to create, and if it's too hard, you can try a simpler layout. It's just the matter of making a program that can write a random maze array and put doors in the right places. It's been done an infinity times, there's a lot of documentation for it.

Solid>Phantom Pain>Revengeance>Substance


The others are all trash, especially Snake Eater(Subsistence)

For fuck's sake, this thread is full of retards and shitty bait

Has this been posted yet?


You're in Holla Forums, what did you expect?

Alpha 2 is better

CoD 1/2, Halo 1 and Doom 1 are better respectively. Doom 2 being a requirement for most wads does not count as a valid reason for being better than Doom 1. We're talking about the core game, not the mod compatibility.

I only see a movie.
By whom? On what merits?
By which metrics?
What is "series" in this context? There are metal gear games that aren't numbered, do those count?
By which metrics? What makes your opinion better than my dubs?

I know normalfags don't consider any of these to be the best in their series, but a ton of hipsters do and they're wrong.

Unless the FF you think is superior to Tactics is VI I'm not in the mood for this argument.

...

WRONG
MGSV & FF6

come on user the Gameboy color Games (they are all good).

mein neiggeir

...

If I could press a single button to make all your heads explode, I'd just tell you to go back to fucking reddit you faggots

meh i'd press it.

...

...

FFIX is overrated garbage.

Is that including ground zeroes?

On Holla Forums aren't most threads thinly veiled unpopular opinion threads?

Hi reddit

Hi newfag

Buggy, unbalanced piece of shit that ruined the competitive scene and attracted all sorts of autism with the character creation gimmick.

You're not wrong.

I don't think anyone has ever viewed SC3 as good.

Final Fantasy VI is overrated garbage, the worst of the SNES Final Fantasies, and third worst in the entire series (after FFXIII and FFIX.)

You'd be surprised how many times I've heard casualshits praise this game as the pinnacle of the series because muh singleplayer.

Same shit with SC2. It's not a bad game by any means, but the amount of Nintendrones who worship it is nauseating -especially when you consider that it's often babby's furst fightan and they only bought it because muh link. The damage done by Link in SC2 and character creation in SC3 is still being felt in the calibur community to this day.

yes

Voldo deserves better.

/thread
this is exactly what i left halfchan for

maybe you should go back there

Opinions are not facts user. Also the best MGS is the one we will never get.

Single Player's great, though. I went straight from III to V, so I miss Cassandra and Taki. Natsu ain't too bad, though.


I hope you're not one of those guys that claims Tactics Advance games are better than the original. If so, pic related.

...

These kind of threads make me realize just how stupid many of you are. I want to blame americans or millenials but i don't know.

I very much doubt that you are any better than the ones you complain about.

I could say the same about you.

Hallelujah

...

...

checked

It had the best battles.

And you can't factually say that one of these games is objectively better than the others because each game does at least one thing better than all the rest.

It's really fucking good and my personal favorite, but not the best.

Obligatory.

(you)

Well 5 is unfinished and no amount of good gameplay can fix that, 4 is Hilde ringout city with shit balance, 1 is an even worse ringout city. What game is the best 3AE?

The only hard part of FOXHOUNDing 3 is escaping Groznyj Grad prison naked, and that's easy to cheese if you use the knockout cigarettes. You could even argue that Big Boss rank on 4 is harder because of the motor chase in Europe. 1 and 2 are at least as hard as 3.

its tru tho

Competitive matches with the top characters and players is entartaining, but that's it. Vid related is good evidence of why it sucks.

I loved 64 to death, but it's not better than TTYD. On par, sure. SPM isn't Paper Mario

I replayed some Brawl last night, and it just made me appreciate Melee more. Can't say much about 4 since I only played the 3DS version.

The entire series is mediocre to start with so saying Melee is the best is like saying someone won the special olympics

Then what is the best game? Brawl is dreadfully boring once you clear subspace enough times, and smash 4 has a similar problem with smash run. The floatyness makes matches feel so much less enthralling.

I love 64 and it's the most balanced smash, but I get tired of back and forth zero to deaths eventually
PM doesn't count

As magicscrumpy once said, that argument only applies at the top level of play. Even then, people like triple R, qerb, and a rookie are there to give low tiers representation.

If I fought a random dude in smash, it probably wouldn't be hard to beat him with roy or kirby.

64 has the best simplicity, no airdodges and highest hitstun
Melee has the best pacing, directional airdodge(and wavedash) and still good amount of hitstun
Brawl has the best single player content removed introduced the new airdodge and lowest hitstun of all
4 has the best balance, roster size and variation, more fair mechanics and more hitstun than Brawl (it also has a portable version and a native online play that actually works)

Smash 4 is the one I prefer. Patches allowed for a surprising balance level for the amount of characters, ledge trumping is much better than getting easy stocks by edgehogging and not being able to chaingrab is better too. For glory is a nice way to play it against another player instantly, I don't think I fought CPUs for any other reason than unlocking stuff.

I would get it if it was in any smash game other than smash 4. In smash 4, the floatyness and the insane recovery ability that most of the cast has allows people to survive to insane percents that make matches take ten years. Ledgetrump only serves to increase the survivability in a game where characters already have way too much.
I will admit that nothing beats for glory in terms of convenience. I didn't like the gameplay nearly as much as I liked melee and the fact that it was omegas only was dumb, but it was certainly convenient.

I'd argue that Final Fantasy IV,V,VI,VII, and maybe even IX are all better than Tactics. They at least succeed at being decent JRPGs. Tactics is a Tactical RPG that fails both in the Tactical and RPG departments.

I mean now that Super exists and has much better gameplay…

whats the point of super when red and blue exist.

**To have better story and more refined mechanics than R/B

Goddammit.

...

Final Fantasy 6
Super Mario Bros 3
Sonic CD
Silent Hill 2

You mean the same mechanics as 64 and Brawl? The only difference between it and Brawl is the magnet ledges in Brawl that make recovery far too forgiving (though not nearly as much as in 4). Unless you're talking about Battlefield itself, which does have poor ledges.
You mean the game where physics are actually consistent? The lack of momentum in Brawl and 4 is jarring as fuck for any game with platforming mechanics. Yeah, it's got a lot of exploits, but so does every other Smash game - I'd argue that Brawl has even more.
I'd actually rank it as the 2nd most balanced. Brawl is probably the worst when it comes to viable characters at top level and balance at low levels, with 4 being slightly better at top level but faring just as bad at low levels. In Melee, a good fundamentals can allow a decently skilled Roy or Pichu to beat some techskill spamming schmuck. In Brawl however, characters at the bottom like Dorf or Link are pretty much doomed to being inadequate at every level of play.
pls

5 is probably second best in terms of gameplay. I used to think it was the best before realising how shallow the moveset you have is compared to the one you have in 4.

MGS4 would be the best game in the franchise by far if every level was like Acts 1, 2 and the part where you're sneaking through the deck of Outer Haven in Act 5.

No. Soul Edge

I played 1 and 3 all the way through. 2 I have tried 3 times and have only made it about 6 hours in. MGS2 sucks. It was swimming as a tech demo for PS2, but drowned hard.

4 I've only finished the first act. 5 I only played the tutorial. 3 is genuinely a great game. I can see 5 being amazing, but I haven't put the time in. Black Desert has been taking up all my time.