CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

Splinter Cell is a much better game IMO.
You feel like your actually Sam Fisher doing those stealth missions and they are incredibly realistic. Choas Theory is quite possibly the action game ever made. I CANNOT wait for Double Agent. It looks SOOO sick.

Then there's Metal Gear. Definately owns in plot but I'm going to say that the fact they threw bosses in made it incredibly stupid. There is no stealth in fighting bosses head on. There is nothing realistic about this game whatosever, and as most of you know, I love RPGs so that really matters little to me. XD

Seriously:
Sam Fisher >>>>>>>>>>>>>Solid Snake+


EDIT: I didn't add a poll because I know I am going to lose hopelessly.

Yeah well Solid Snake can beat up Sam Fisher... in battle... in chess.... in a dishwashing contest. EVERYTHING. Plus he looks cooler. AND
[spoiler]He's a clone too![/spoiler]
And with bosses. Whats the point of being stealthy if they know you're there? You can't have a boss fight if you're gonna sneak up behind them and slit their throat o.o Plus MGS is overall more fun. You dont HAVE to be stealthy by the way. But try playing MGS 3 Snake Eater on Euro Extreme.... the game ends once you get DETECTED by an enemy

I forgot to add that I don't like the original Splinter Cell and that the original sucks in comparison to the original MGS.

And yes, Soild Snake could beat up Sam Fisher because Sam Fisher isn't some sort of weird experimental
[spoiler]clone[/spoiler]

It's all up to opinion, but I think Fisher is cooler, but of course would lose in a fight.

Splinter Cell doesn't have bosses, because stealth games with bosses defeat the purpose of being stealthy.

The only pure stealth series: Thief: A Dark Project, Thief 2: The Metal Age, (and not great but still good) Thief (3): Deadly Shadows.

They offer great stealth atmosphere, lots of hiding in the shadows, very little violent contact is rewarded and all are steeped in steampunk/fantasy/horror lore.
Garrett has to be the best computer game anti-hero ever.

Highly recommended!

Oh, dear, here I go...

For sheer graphics and gameplay, Splinter Cell wins hands down, especially with Chaos Theory. Bump mapping=yummy. But then again, there's nothing in Splinter Cell games that can make tears come to your eyes quite like Metal Gear Solid 3's ending emotional cutscenes, and Splinter Cell has next to no replay value, really, other than a harder difficulty that just makes you take more damage. I played through MGS3 three times to get the stealth camo (I HATE FROGS.). Now, don't get me wrong, I adore the Splinter Cell series, I really do, but Sam Fisher never hid behind tongue and cheek quite like Solid Snake can. So most of my props will go to MGS for sheer memories' sake.

But from what little I've played of the Thief series, it's an excellent addition (excuse me, forerunner) to the stealth genre, and I throughly enjoyed my forays into its dark, ambient halls. Props there also.

So what's the best, you ask? Stealth games are fairly equal in my eyes. But Metal Gear does hold the most memories, so I'd have to say it's my close favorite.

I like Splinter Cell better. I sometimes forget that there is a controller in my hand when playing it, because the gameplay is so great.

The only MG game that I have played, however, is MGS: Twin Snakes, and not all the way through yet, so I cant really compare them yet.

"Stealth-wise," yes, Splinter Cell has more to it. There's alot more stealth-related situations you need to contend with.

"Fun-wise," MGS wins hands down. So what if it has bosses? It's a game, and I love how it can have such a great story and all and still remain as a good, solid game (compared to some other types, namely referring to some RPGs...).

Of the two, I'd love to go back and play MGS:TTS again, or even the others in the series (whenever I get a PS2), but I'd quite prefer to not contend with another Splinter Cell game for some time, thanks (come on, the final part on Pandora Tomorrow took me nearly 30 tries or more X_x ).

Good to see you've played some of Thief Zilch! The only other CAA member I know who's even played them is Ingemar.

SOCOM II and parts of SOCOM III


Wingzero22

Solid Snake Overall...

I have played the first 2 games in each series and MGS is soooooo much better...

Though Splinter Cell did have its moments

....Solid Snake pwns Sam fisher. Whats Sam gonna do shoot out the lights then use his ilumintated (Sp?) Headlamps to sneek around to try to knock out Snake. Yea...right ..the lights would get shot out and you'd just see a single red dot in the middle of the room where snake just lit his cig then the room would get lit up by snakes ginfire.

EDIT: Bosses Stupid !!??!?!?!?!?!?! They make the game so much better they all rule

Not in a stealth game. I prefer bosses, but as I JUST said, not in the stealth game.

I said SC was a better stealth game, but MGS really blends genres together, which I love and is primarily a stealth game.

Zilch wrote:But from what little I've played of the Thief series, it's an excellent addition (excuse me, forerunner) to the stealth genre,

You had it right the first time... Metal Gear is is much older than thief. Thief came out in 1998, Metal Gear came out in 1987... Oh, and most of the important gameplay mechanics from MGS started in MG2... MGS was just impressive because it was 3d and was completely voiced. MG2 was allready sorta like a movie, but MGS just blurred the line further. Yeah... Long before thief. Even MGS came out in 1998, which means that MGS and thief were developed concurrently. All stealth games (thief, Syphon Filter, Splinter Cell, any more I just don't know about) owe a debt to Kojima.

I haven't played Thief, though. Since we're comparing MGS to Splinter Cell, MGS is an interactive sci-fi movie. Splinter Cell is a simulator. Neither are really games, but MGS is more interesting to me than Splinter Cell because it wasn't made to be an accurate simulation. It's just meant to be fun sci-fi movie with lots of reality hidden deep inside of it.

Yes, Metal Gear came out earlier than Thief, but Thief was the first true stealth game.

Warrior 4 Jesus wrote:Yes, Metal Gear came out earlier than Thief, but Thief was the first true stealth game.

How do you figure? Why is thief a "true" stealth game and Metal Gear isn't? You had to sneak in metal gear, you had to avoid making noise and hide and such... I'm not getting this. Is it simply because there were moments of action in the Metal Gear games? I don't think that's a fair statement. If we're talking about MGS, developed concurrently with thief, your end score actually goes down for ever person you kill and every time you get caught. That sure makes it sound like stealth is a high priority.

Bobtheduck wrote:You had it right the first time... Metal Gear is is much older than thief. Thief came out in 1998, Metal Gear came out in 1987.

D'oh, you're right, Bob. While Thief may have been the first modern stealth game, Metal Gear was one of the first games to put an emphasis on not being seen.

Indeed. I believe someone over Kojima pretty much found the whole "stealth game" idea laughable.

"Who would play a game where the goal is to not shoot stuff?"

Apparently alot of people would.

Metal Gear here (1987)

Yes, but it still had a lot of action. Thief didn't have that. The whole concept of hiding in the shadows and avoiding the slightest contact scared a lot of trigger-happy people away.

Don't forget Agent 47, guys. The new Hitman was a ton of sneaky fun.

Link wrote:Don't forget Agent 47, guys. The new Hitman was a ton of sneaky fun.

*Smacks forehead* Yes that game was a ton of fun

How 'bout Batman Begins, the game where doing anything moderately "scary" causes all the guards to immediately drop their guns, at which time you can rush in and beat them down from the shadows. Or beat them in plain view with your wide array of useless gadgets.

Don't worry Myoti Chaos Theory was alot more accesible than the first two. There's not nearly as much trial and error and you can save at any point. I'm sure Double Agent will be the same way.

I'm a huge fan of the Splinter Cell and Metal Gear franchises. Heck I own every game of both series. I don't really compare the two in terms of which is better because while both have stealth they're not really going for the same thing. Splinter Cell is a Tom Clancy game which means its about realistic combat in realistic near future scenarios. Metal Gear is about being in an technological action movie.

Thief wins. You all fail.

If the bosses in Metal Gear make it less enjoyable for you, I don't want to know what your standard of fun is, Tom. XD

Seriously. The bosses in Metal Gear are one of the best parts. Revolver Ocelot, Cyborg Ninja, Fatman, Vamp, The End, The Fury, The Boss...........so many good memories fighting those characters.

Hands down, MGS for me.

Kkun wrote:If the bosses in Metal Gear make it less enjoyable for you, I don't want to know what your standard of fun is, Tom. XD

Exactly... I mean, let's not mix our genres, only pure genres are ever good... Games have to be completely realistic to be fun. That's why flight sims and strict sports simulators have completely made arcade style games obsolete...

As for thief vs MG, MGS wasn't "pure" stealth, it gave you a choice whether you wanted to stealth it all the way (which you could do in any difficulty level) or run and gun (which wouldn't be smart in extreme mode) but you could play the game entirely stealth, and that actually gave you a better score, which helped determine your place on the online rankings (in MGS2, I think) or just gave you bragging rights.

Besides, Metal Gear isn't really trying to take the stealth genre, it's trying to take the interactive movie genre, and since MGS, they've been the best at that for sure... It works much better with action games than it does with RPGs. RPG's are more like interactive video novels, now... Japanese style ones, anyhow... American style RPGs... Can't get into them... That is entirely different topic, however.

Warrior 4 Jesus wrote:Yes, but it still had a lot of action. Thief didn't have that. The whole concept of hiding in the shadows and avoiding the slightest contact scared a lot of trigger-happy people away.

You obviously haven't tried playing Metal Gear Solid on the European Extreme difficulty =p

Completely agree Ingemar! I've been trying to tell them. But they just won't listen! (lol)

On a slightly different topic, I heard Peter jackson w*** about how he was going to help make a new type of game, that was neither game nor movie, but blended the two together... Maybe that's what you get when you only play Halo... You fail to realize that said "interactive movies" allready exist... Metal Gear Solid 1-4 being the best of the bunch...

Now, I'm interested in seeing what sort of Game PJ wants to make, and since he's setting out ahead of time to make an interactive movie, I'm sure I'd love to see what he comes up with, but he needs to do a bit of research... Play MGS3, for one...

So, what I'm saying, basically, is I don't care if MGS isn't as good at the stealth thing as newer games that built on the foundation laid in MG1 and MG2 (and later MGS). I don't play it for the stealth, first and formost... I play it for the interactive movie experience, and that's something the other stealth games don't really have.

Warrior 4 Jesus wrote:Completely agree Ingemar! I've been trying to tell them. But they just won't listen! (lol)

And for the record. I've played Theif before. I didn't like it o.o Using the bow was hard and took forever. Didn't do much damage. And the sword only had 2 attack moves. Horizontal slash and vertical slash.