Your top ten most anticipated games of 2003

[Private Hudson]

Originally posted by OB1
[B]So just because there are seperate levels instead of two main areas as in MGS2, that makes it linear?

Having a set path to follow for the entire level makes it linear. I thought that was pretty clear, given the word "linear" present in every other sentence when I describe the main reason I dislike the game. But you've been making a habit of mis-understanding perfectly clear sentences lately, so I'll let it pass without drawing too much attention to it, and without rambling on about it unnecessarily so as to make myself look smart, when in actual fact I am making myself look like an ass.

SC's gameplay is not as linear as MGS2's gameplay becuase there are so many ways to accomplish your goals.

Like I said, there may be many ways to do it, You seem to care more about how linear the levels themselves are, while I care more about the gameplay.

The linearity of the levels effects the gameplay greatly. It's like saying Crash Bandicoot plays just like Jak & Daxter.

There is pretty much only one way to accomplish the goals in MGS2.

That's funny. Given that there are so many more obstacles, and patrolling guards, and different routes, and just generally different ways to go, it's hard to imagine it being only one way to accomplish your goals. In Splinter Cell, you may hide in the shadows and let the guard pass, or you may jump up and split kick the walls and let him pass under you, or you might shoot him (although another major fault in the game is the limited number of people you can kill). In MGS2, you might wait for them to pass, or you might crawl under some boxes, or you might take out the radio in his hand so he can't call for backup, then shoot him, or you might distract them and run/crawl/climb past etc. etc.

There really isn't much difference about the number of ways you go about accomplishing your goals. But the style of having a single path to follow for the entire mission is VERY ditracting (at least, AFAIC).

I just play it, and picture how awesome it would have been if there was one big environment, with multiple goals, and patrolling guards and radio check-ins (instead of the dead bodies MAGICALLY being found if you leave it in the open). Being able to explore different areas of your environment to find completely different routes to take to the end. NOT being forced to move FORWARD the whole time (being on the set path).

This is just the way I find the game, and it really just doesn't strike a cord with me.

I've replayed several levels in SC, and each time I did it a completely different way. This was also done in Deus Ex, but executed better in SC. After I played SC I realized just how un-stealth-like MGS2 really is.

Why bring up Deus-Ex??? They are completely different. Or are you comparing them for linearity? In which case... I don't agree, but whatever.

Anyways, I certainly agree that MGS2 isn't as stealth based as Splinter Cell.