I would have preferred a semi open world remake instead of recreating the areas 1:1

[Colonel Death]

Old games are designed the way they are because they are old not just because it's the intention of the developers. The screenshots they posted worry me a bit that this will ultimately feel a bit pointless and hollow.

The only upside I can think of is that maybe this game will be priced at 30 or 40 bucks and maybe it will be faster to remake the other games in the series so they can get done with the franchise and start working on a 6th game in less than a decade.

[Mr. Du Bois]

So we could pointlessly run around for 5–10 minutes before actually getting to the target, like in MGS5? Not thank you, I got tired of that gameplay loop. MGS3 pretty much always keeps you engaged with either sneaking, combat or hunting.

Considering at what state Konami is right now, 1:1 remake is the best thing that can happen. Right now, they don't have that trust to experiment with remakes like Capcom does.

[Colonel Death]

Originally posted by Mr. Du Bois:

So we could pointlessly run around for 5–10 minutes before actually getting to the target, like in MGS5? Not thank you, I got tired of that gameplay loop. MGS3 pretty much always keeps you engaged with either sneaking, combat or hunting.

Considering at what state Konami is right now, 1:1 remake is the best thing that can happen. Right now, they don't have that trust to experiment with remakes like Capcom does.

False. MGS 3 is nowhere near as complex as you are suggesting. You can survive only with fruits so hunting is the sidest of side things in the game, and with the help of the tranq getting through the small areas provides no challenge. You can only make it hard ish by challenging yourself to interrogate enemies.

MGS V's gameplay is meatier and more challenging. Just remove reflex and you will get stomped.

[Mr. Du Bois]

Dude, you're missing the point.
In MGS5 you are running around Afghanistan where there is like a small checkpoint with 3 soldiers every 5 minutes. And mission structure is usually "run thought 2-3 of these checkpoints to only then get to the main objective".

You can have all the nice and fluid movesets, but there is just too much open space with nothing to do. Making MGS3 larger is not a good idea. They can only expand the moveset like adding crouch walk, but mission/location structure should be linear.

[Colonel Death]

MGS 3 was linear because of limitations, not because cutting up the game into ridiculously small areas is a good or fun idea.

[wasabi™]

Not everything has to be an open world game, as others already mentioned I got incredibly bored half way through MGS 5 and had to push myself through it since it would take forever riding in a completely empty world pointlessly to the base only to do it again and again and again.

I'm glad they are sticking with the more linear approach, there's more than enough 3rd person open world games for people to enjoy if this isn't their cup of tea.

It's similar to the RE4 remake which I think worked quite well, I wouldn't have wanted them to change RE4 to an open world format just because there are not as many technical limitations these days.

[NeeLot]

Phantom Pain's open world barely has anything interesting to do outside of story missions. Personally I wouldn't be against them making game world seamless kinda like Dead Space remake does or adding some extra places to visit, but straying away from tight and deliberate level design would be a mistake.

Honestly I would prefer if they worked more on enemy AI personally. MGS2 has ♥♥♥♥ like enemies moving in formations, be able to spot your shadow, clear rooms effectively etc. all of which was made possible in large part because game is not open world. If they could also do it in already more open areas of Snake Eater, I would be a lot more happy while playing the remake.

[Lar Dass]

this was the worry people had when capcom were remaking the RE games, safe to say that this worry will be quashed when its a similar situation

[Derik-For-Real]

Originally posted by Mr. Du Bois:

So we could pointlessly run around for 5–10 minutes before actually getting to the target, like in MGS5? Not thank you, I got tired of that gameplay loop. MGS3 pretty much always keeps you engaged with either sneaking, combat or hunting.

Considering at what state Konami is right now, 1:1 remake is the best thing that can happen. Right now, they don't have that trust to experiment with remakes like Capcom does.

I would agree with that, but if its just a 1:1 remake, its not good enough, they have to make the game bigger by putting more areas to reach your goal in different ways.

They really have to add more to the gameplay nd the environment, people are expecting a solid mgs 3 remake, and this is the best mgs game ever made, fans will not settle with just 1:1 remake for a legendary game with a premium price tag.

This is also the most important mgs game of them all, ruining this is a huge blow.

[Boboscus]

Open world is the reason MGSV was so bad. Stop this nonsense.

[Colonel Death]

Originally posted by wasabi:

Not everything has to be an open world game, as others already mentioned I got incredibly bored half way through MGS 5 and had to push myself through it since it would take forever riding in a completely empty world pointlessly to the base only to do it again and again and again.

I'm glad they are sticking with the more linear approach, there's more than enough 3rd person open world games for people to enjoy if this isn't their cup of tea.

It's similar to the RE4 remake which I think worked quite well, I wouldn't have wanted them to change RE4 to an open world format just because there are not as many technical limitations these days.

Originally posted by NeeLot:

Phantom Pain's open world barely has anything interesting to do outside of story missions. Personally I wouldn't be against them making game world seamless kinda like Dead Space remake does or adding some extra places to visit, but straying away from tight and deliberate level design would be a mistake.

Honestly I would prefer if they worked more on enemy AI personally. MGS2 has ♥♥♥♥ like enemies moving in formations, be able to spot your shadow, clear rooms effectively etc. all of which was made possible in large part because game is not open world. If they could also do it in already more open areas of Snake Eater, I would be a lot more happy while playing the remake.

Originally posted by Boboscus:

Open world is the reason MGSV was so bad. Stop this nonsense.

MGS V sold millions of copies and has a higher metacritic rating than Witcher 3

[lilac]

Originally posted by Colonel Death:

Originally posted by Boboscus:

Open world is the reason MGSV was so bad. Stop this nonsense.

MGS V sold millions of copies and has a higher metacritic rating than Witcher 3

developers like activision and ea release the same game every year and they sell millions of copies every time. sales numbers mean nothing for the quality of a game

[NeeLot]

Originally posted by Colonel Death:

Originally posted by Boboscus:

Open world is the reason MGSV was so bad. Stop this nonsense.

MGS V sold millions of copies and has a higher metacritic rating than Witcher 3

And Avengers: Endgame has both higher ratings and was more commercially successful than Blade Runner 2049. What's your point?

[Stoibs]

The shift in genre and openworldness is exactly why I never even finished Phantom Pain.

It was.. some.. fine base-building/third person thing for what it was I suppose but it wasn't Metal Gear Solid.

I am glad this is seemingly going to remain faithful to the source material.

[Colonel Death]

Originally posted by sasha:

Originally posted by Colonel Death:

MGS V sold millions of copies and has a higher metacritic rating than Witcher 3

developers like activision and ea release the same game every year and they sell millions of copies every time. sales numbers mean nothing for the quality of a game

Actually sales numbers tell you which game people and enjoyed and want more of

Originally posted by NeeLot:

Originally posted by Colonel Death:

MGS V sold millions of copies and has a higher metacritic rating than Witcher 3

And Avengers: Endgame has both higher ratings and was more commercially successful than Blade Runner 2049. What's your point?

My point is that Avengers Endgame is a better product than BD2049(that movie sucked in comparison to the original)

[Colonel Death]

Originally posted by Stoibs:

The shift in genre and openworldness is exactly why I never even finished Phantom Pain.

It was.. some.. fine base-building/third person thing for what it was I suppose but it wasn't Metal Gear Solid.

I am glad this is seemingly going to remain faithful to the source material.

MGS V has infinitely better gameplay