/vr/ - Retro Games

>>10608478
>>10608484
>something that includes MGS3
I've beaten MGS3 around 4 or 5 times, and it's definitely better than MGS1 or 2, but in terms of being a stealth game, Splinter Cell has better stealth mechanics.

>and each playthrough is very different from one another
That's not really that true at all, at least not until you get to MGS4 and 5. MGS3 has some leniency, but generally speaking you're extremely limited in how you can approach your objective, and this is ESPECIALLY true for MGS1 and 2 where if you go loud, you play "wait out the timer", when everything goes back to nice and normal, while if you alert someone in Splinter Cell, they stay alerted the entire level until you take them out.

MGS is also not even in the same league as Hitman or Thief in terms of player sandbox, of which there isn't any. Every approach is identical, every solution is the same as the last, and every encounter has the same exact repetitive gameplay cycle. You can't say the same about Splinter Cell, even in its most linear levels.

>>10609140
The "verticality" in MGS1 and 2 has the same level of depth as Doom does, IE, very little. Saying it has "Verticality" is the same thing as saying a midget has a "decent jump", for it's size, sure, but in comparison to actual games that have it as a primary facet of their gameplay, it's a joke and not really comparable.

>the level design in MGS2 goes into more nonlinear design with big shell
Yes, full of backtracking where the only option is instead of running down this corridor, you go down THAT corridor. Riveting. Splinter Cell meanwhile has completely different infiltration points on the map that can be on opposite ends, like in Chaos Theory on the Cargo Ship level which is basically like a living and breathing jungle gym.

>you'll be finding yourself utilizing more mechanics in MGS over SC.
No, you won't be. I played through all of them. Splinter Cell is objectively more deep gameplay wise, not even a comparison.