Through out gaming history there ave been clashes between two top series and this is no exception. Metal Gear has a stealth feel to it that no game has yet to beat where the main objective is to destroy a metal gear and then fight the final boss. Resident Evil has a reputation as the best survival horror game of all time where the objective is to escape zombies and monsters passing puzzles. Each series has had record sales and I'm a fan of both. A debate between the two is a good way to see which is better in prospective of others rather than reviews. Feel free to post your opinion on which is better and your reason.
Yeah, why compare it? Its in no way the same. It could be change which is better survival horror game for psx? silent hill or RE?
What Loonylion said. Also, is this because a Metal Gear Solid game (a remake of MGS: 3 Snake Eater) and a Resident Evil game (Resident Evil: Revelations) have both been announced for the 3DS? I hope that the RE game is like RE: 4 and not an on-rails shooter : / MGS: 3 on PS2 was OK in my opinion, I hated that I couldn't see where I was going because of the stupid camera-angle though (I played the regular version; not the special edition with extra camera-angles). Trying to get all the frogs almost drove me insane, I never did get them all : ( I didn't like that enemies re-spawned and that Snake got weak and tired if he went for more than a few minutes without eating a rat. I didn't like the primitive shooting controls either (Snake felt so cumbersome and awkward to control, he has this in common with Leon from RE: 4). The fact that Snake couldn't perform "instant kills" on enemies that were immobile was also irritating IMO (having to crouch in the mud to slash a tranquillised crocodile with a knife a million times to kill it looked ridiculous, and felt ridiculous too). I wasn't fond of the ridiculously camp voice acting either or the fact that it seemed to be trying to be more like a film than a game. Most of the boss battles were so daft that it made it difficult for me to take the story seriously. Having to constantly ajust the camouflage was annoying too. I liked the sniper boss battle (and the thing that you can do prior to it to change what happens). The graphics looked really good (at the time). I also enjoyed carefully taking out all the enemies in an area (although games like Splinter Cell have been way ahead of MGS when it comes to stealth-assassinations since... the first Splinter Cell). The attention to period detail (disregarding the story elements that were fictional, obviously) impressed me. I loved RE: 4; I've played it to death on both PS2 and Wii. One thing that I wasn't fond of was the limitation of movement. I know that movement was purposely limited to make shooting more tense; but being able to move a little whilst aiming (perhaps at the expense of accuracy) wouldn't have done the game much harm. Leon's limited capabilities when it comes to walking and aiming sort of make him seem incompetent; he does OK when fighting villagers and monks armed with mellee weapons, but he's incredibly inefficient when it comes to dispatching enemies that use weapons line crossbows. In cut scenes he's able to perform all sorts of amazing feats, but under player-controls he can't even lean out from behind a pillar to return fire on a guy wearing a ram's skull for a mask sniping him with an antique crossbow from six metres away : / When the game was first released, a lot was made of the ability of enemies to surprise a player with spontaneous appearances where the player wasn't expecting them (in contrast to previous REs; where enemies had set positions that they always appear at). In practice though; an experienced player, whom has played through the game at least once, can predict when and where enemies will appear (and areas are so small that it's usually possible to predict the paths that they will take to reach a player also). By my second play through; I was killing chainsaw guys within moments of them appearing without being in any danger purely down to the fact that I knew where they were coming from and how they would come at me (the part where the two ladies with chainsaws chase you along platforms and up and down ladders as you try and find a key scared the hell out of me the first time I played it though ). Weapons that turned out to be useless were crap too. I'd like to see the ability to move and fire, the ability to take cover anywhere (and not just in specific places as with RE: 5), multiple paths through an area, less predictable and more intelligent enemies, less useless weapons, partially destructible scenery/objects and the player character to be able to use more of the sort of skills shown in cut scenes in a new RE for 3DS. Those 3DS RE screenshots look too good to be the in-game graphics though...
this is dumb, they are not the same, one is horror action, and the other is stealth action game, but yeah, i didnt like the change in camera view they made on the re series, and they took out alot of the horror that the game had. try comparing resident evil with dead space, or metal gear solid with splinter cell. from these i would choose dead space and metal gear solid
I think this should be in the gaming lounge tbh, theres not a lot to debate over. I prefer resident evil
I'll keep this short... When I first saw this, my first thought was: Wow, that's like comparing apples to steak.... they are nothing alike
This. This isn't eve a debate. Though if I had a choice, it'd be resident evil I prefer the monsters than almost inhuman soldiers any day.
MGS is just hardcore either way. i love RE as well but MGS just so much fun. i even had fun with the deck/FF tactics feel of MGS:acid
I take MGS any day then RE, especially the new ones... also its stupid to compare those game, its like comparing James Bond (spy flick) to Evil Dead (horror thriler).
Blaphemy!!! how can you compare both games???? MGS Reings supreme.... Resident evil is great but over the years had been sucking a bit. Metal Gear Solid is reimagining itself release after release... all hail kojima.
Yeah, I was just about to say. If your going to say "This game is better than that one" you have to pick two similar games, like say Halo and Half-Life, or Beneath a Steel Sky and Tales of Monkey Island. But right now it's like comparing Pokemon to Gears of War. They're too different to be compared. If it was, lets say, Splinter Cell and Metal Gear, that works.
