The Instigator
Sylux
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Danielle
Con (against)
Winning
44 Points

MGS3 is "Da Bomb"

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/30/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,816 times Debate No: 10276
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (16)
Votes (7)

 

Sylux

Pro

Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater was the best PS2 game ever.
Refute. I DARE YOU.
Danielle

Con

Thanks, Pro, for starting this debate. To clarify, I'm arguing against the R1 assertion that MGS3 is the *best* PS2 game ever. Instead, I offer that GOW2 (God of War 2) is the better Playstation 2 game. I'm actually a lot more familiar with San Andreas and other GTA games which I feel to be superior; however, I figured MSG and GOW would make for a better comparison anyway.

1. Plot

MGS3 is essentially a game about a former American soldier stopping the Russian bad guys and saving a scientist. Wow. Talk about original [sarcasm]. On the other hand, God of War's game revolving around a mortal warrior battling Greek gods is incredibly innovative. Not only is it entertaining and a refreshing contrast to the typical shooting war games, but it's also educational in terms of dealing with Greek mythology. The epic battles between the gods and the story behind it is out of the box and interesting.

2. Ratings

Let's take other people's opinions into consideration on this one (including hardcore gamers).

[1] MGS3 --

Critics: 9.2
Users: 9.4
Game Spot: 8.7

[2] GOW2 --

Critics: 9.3
Users: 9.5
Game Spot: 9.2

As you can see, God of War out-performed MGS. The experts at Game Spot rank MGS in the level of "great" and GOW as "superb" which is considered a higher denomination. They also note, "games that score in the 9 range are also typically well suited to new players. Games that earn 9s are naturally uncommon, and earn GameSpot's Editors' Choice Award for their outstanding quality" [3]. So, GOW is more user-friendly and suitable for n00bs in additions to veterans alike. But let's not let Game Spot be the only judge. IGN ranks God of War ahead of MGS [4] as does Game Spy [5]. and Game Pro ranks God of War II as the best PS2 game EVER [6]. MGS has never held that title from anywhere as far as I know.

3. Game Play

So why is GOW2 ranked so high? The game is straight up fun. There are tons of challenging puzzles and mini-games intricately woven into the storyline which make the game unique and intricate. The settings and battle sites were glorious, the boss battles were "da bomb" and the combat was fierce; they even incorporated new magic and techniques and abilities into the sequel which made it even more interesting. In GOW2, there were new more awesome weapons, bigger and longer levels, and the movie-like scenes weren't drawn out or boring. As far as MGS lacking in certain areas, Game Spot writes, "The gameplay itself really hasn't changed much since the last installment, and it's aged noticeably during these past few years."

4. Graphics

Big time gamers go gaga over good graphics. I could easily fetch graphics ratings all of which list GOW2 as the superior candidate. However, let's let the viewers decide for themselves with screen shots from both games:

MGS3 -- http://cdn1.gamepro.com...

GOW2 -- http://www.swotti.com...

5. Characters

Snake from MGS is cool, but the characters (mortal warriors and gods) from GOW are infinitely cooler. The whole idea of using Greek gods is brilliant in general, because then protagonists can have both mortal and magical or god-like attributes sort of like super heroes. Snake is inferior because he's limited by his humanity whereas the protagonist Kratos from GOW flourishes because of it. Actually, it's a huge aspect of the entire story line (his mortality and the subsequent challenges) making him just an overall better and more well-rounded character. In addition, the villains (bosses) in GOW are cooler and more unique, instead of the same ol' Russian bad guy routine we've seen a million times. Game Spot writes, "These characters make pretty good foes, but with maybe a couple of exceptions, they're just straightforward comic book bad guys." I'll let Pro respond to this before analyzing further.

6. Controls

I'm not a video game connoisseur, but I struggled getting used to the MGS3 controls. I thought it was just me until GS said themselves that the controls by today's standards are rather awkward, and that if you've been playing other first-person or third-person action or adventure games, that you'll probably have to spend at least a good hour getting accustomed to this game's particular way of doing things. That's no fun. Further, GS notes that you're given very limited control over the game's camera, so you often feel like you're running blind in the game's environments, which tend to contain enemies who can see or hear you even when they're off screen.

8. Action

Many cite Kretos as the greatest game hero ever. I'll let this video speak for itself [7].

9. Criticisms

While I agree that MGS3 is a cool a-ss game, it could have been improved (whereas GOW is virtually flawless). For instance, the story was too dense (dramatic and time consuming) and it seemed exactly like its predecessors. Game Spot writes, "So suffice it to say that the plot here is very much in the same vein as that of the previous two Metal Gear Solids... Unfortunately, the story gets off to an almost painfully slow start - you'll have to put up with a lot of wordy, sometimes tedious exposition in the first couple of hours, and these hours are almost literally devoid of gameplay."

10. Semantics

In case people are going to hold me specifically to the resolution instead of what the R1 argument is (that MGS3 is the best PS2 game ever), then I'd just like to point out that MGS3 is not da bomb or any bomb :p

Sources:
[1] http://www.gamespot.com...
[2] http://www.gamespot.com...
[3] http://www.gamespot.com...
[4] http://ps2.ign.com...
[5] http://ps2.gamespy.com...
[6] http://www.gamepro.com...
[7] http://www.gamespot.com...

[1] Is for Game Spot
Debate Round No. 1
Sylux

Pro

Thanks for replying to this boredom-spawned topic ;)

My opponent has stated that MGS is not a bomb of any sort (paraphrasing there).
I would like to begin by stating that Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater was indeed a bomb, and a specific bomb of a sort: a nuclear bomb. And not any nuclear bomb, but a nuclear bomb that can be shot from a moving mecha-tank, as well as another nuclear bomb that can be shot from a gatling-gun style wielded rocket launcher (the Davy Crockett).

I also believe that the, although reliable sources, were a bit biased in their opinions. This is basically comparing apples to oranges. The gameplay styles are completely different. If you've been a fan of the Metal Gear series beginning with the first game as I have (though I haven't been alive for that long), you would understand what I mean when I say that the gameplay in MGS3 can be considered a classic and time-testing (not to mention improved-upon) overhead view style. A few movements in the game are quite tedious, I do agree, but they are ingenuity and innovation upon a style of gameplay with an established fanbase.

I would like to ask that my opponent choose a different game to base gameplay opinions on. As well, the God of War storyline is completely uncomparable to the Metal Gear series as far as topic and content.

My opponent also quotes some reviewers with the opinion that MGS3 is mostly dragged-out video sequences, and no gameplay. Sure, this is true. Absolutely. But that is not to say that some players enjoy the deep feeling of the story and like getting more of a sense that they know what the heck is going on through cinematics. I do, and also enjoy pressing R1 at various points in the cinematics (hehehe >:D).

I'm Looking forward to the next round! ^_^
Danielle

Con

Thanks, Pro, for the response.

Pro's Round 2 Contentions:

1. Snake Eater was indeed a bomb
2. MGS3 and GOW2 are unfit for comparison
3. The MGS3 controls have improved
4. The drawn out movie sequences are useful
5. I should pick a new game for debate

Rebuttal:

1. First, I don't recall Snake Eater ever being a bomb. Can Pro prove this? Until then, it should be considered a point without merit. Further, this debate isn't about whether Snake Eater is a bomb, but if MGS3 is a bomb or more specifically "da" bomb :p

2. Alright, I could have gone with the Grand Theft Auto games (which were my personal favorite PS2 games) but decided to go with God of War 2 because I figured it was a more appropriate comparison. While the plots are indeed different, both games revolve around a similar style play and have a story behind their action/adventure fight sequences. You'll notice that Pro has not made any suggestions as to what game or types of game would be a more fitting comparison for MGS3 - not that it matters - which I will explain in Point 5.

3. The MGS3 controls may have improved from previous MGS3 games; however, that doesn't mean that their controls aren't still awkward or are better than the controls for GOW2, therefore this is a moot point.

4. I disagree that the drawn out movie sequences in MGS3 are that entertaining. This is a matter of opinion, I suppose, but since this debate is about the game itself and not the cinematic attributes of each game, I'd reckon that the game itself is what should be considered here and in that case, the sequences in MGS3 just take away from the actual game play at hand.

5. The idea that I should pick a new game for comparison is absolutely ridiculous. In R1, Pro made the assertion that MGS3 was the BEST Playstation 2 game and he *dared* someone to refute it... so I did, and then he wimps out and tells me to pick a new game. No. There is absolutely no reason why these 2 games can't be compared, as you'll notice because Pro hasn't provided one. Just because they might be different (and by the way - they're not ENTIRELY different so it's not like this is even a major concern) doesn't mean you can't compare them or better yet just make your own case for why one is better. Obviously MGS serves as the superior war type game whereas GOW reigns as the superior fantasy game. But this isn't about which is the best war or fantasy game. This is about which is the better game, PERIOD. Pro has completely failed to make his case. There was nothing that specified which type of game I had to choose, and the idea that GOW is too "different" is the biggest cop out I've ever heard. I'd suggest Pro try to debate the actual games at hand instead of making silly excuses :)

Con's Contentions:

1. I don't really have anything more to say regarding why GOW2 is better, so I'll just point out the dropped arguments from R1 that Pro did not address, which include --

(a) GOW has a superior plot
(b) GOW has better ratings from critics and gamers alike
(c) GOW has better game play
(d) GOW has much better graphics
(e) GOW has better and more interesting and unique characters
(f) GOW has easier and more functional controls
(g) GOW has better action sequences
(h) GOW has very few if not any criticisms
(i) GOW was the better sequel; it added different elements and the plot and villains weren't so redundant

And obviously, GOW refers to God of War II
Debate Round No. 2
Sylux

Pro

As listed by con, my 5 contentions remain.
I will now list the reasons why.

1. Snake Eater was indeed a bomb:
I'm sure that if you made a bomb and taped the game to it, it would be a bomb. Considering that it is your bomb, you can honestly say, with valid reference, that it is "da" bomb.

2. MGS3 and GOW2 are unfit for comparison:
GOW is mythology; MGS is war. GOW is 3D moving; MGS is overhead. GOW is close-combat sword fighting; MGS is shooting and stealth CQC.

3. The MGS controls have improved:
Aye, they have. There are still the three walking modes, two crawling modes, and the addition of first-person stalking and shooting.

4. The drawn out movie sequences are useful:
If you really want to understand the plotline, then yes, they are useful.

5. Con should pick a new game for comparsion:
See 2, and consider Wind Waker. ;)
Danielle

Con

1. By Pro's own standards, MGS3 is only a bomb if you MAKE it a bomb. It's not already a bomb :p

2. Just because the games fall under different genres doesn't mean that they are unfit for comparison. It still doesn't negate my comparisons regarding plot, characters, graphics, controls, game play, etc. all of which still stand regardless of the game's genre.

3. As I said, MGS3's controls may have improved from the previous games; however, they're still awkward and inferior to the controls on GOW2.

4. Who says the plot line is more important than the game itself? Either way, I said it was a matter of preference whether or not the movie sequences were long.

5. I've never played Wind Waker. Moreover, it was never specified which game if any that Con had to choose to battle MGS3. R1 indicates that I could have chosen any game and I did. Still, Pro didn't offer any other options until the last round (which is not allowed).

All of my points stand and haven't been refuted:

(a) GOW has a superior plot
(b) GOW has better ratings from critics and gamers alike
(c) GOW has better game play
(d) GOW has much better graphics
(e) GOW has better and more interesting and unique characters
(f) GOW has easier and more functional controls
(g) GOW has better action sequences
(h) GOW has very few if not any criticisms
(i) GOW was the better sequel; it added different elements and the plot and villains weren't so redundant
Debate Round No. 3
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Chaosflame 7 years ago
Chaosflame
...
/twitch
Wind Waker is a PS2 game? What?
Posted by Sylux 7 years ago
Sylux
Yeah, I'll do it next in Tech class.
I can't wait for the rap battle, though. I have a feeling it'll be an insane amount of fun.
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
You should post a round so we can do the rap battle lol
Posted by Sylux 7 years ago
Sylux
Oooooooohhhhhhhhh sorry :)
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
I wasn't attacking you, silly, it's debate lingo!
Posted by Sylux 7 years ago
Sylux
What's with the attacks? Cop out? Be a little more friendly, this is meant to be a very light-hearted debate. Hell, you could've even used Wind Waker as far as gamplay.
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
PS3 * ftw
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
P3 ftw
Posted by Sylux 7 years ago
Sylux
I got the demo for 360, and it was fantastic. I've also heard that they have these new rotten eggs that will drop a Majini no matter what, which also unlocks an achievement.
I can't wait to get that achievement >:D
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
We just got RE5 for PS3 :) Haven't really played it yet - just got to the first level or so.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by LaSalle 7 years ago
LaSalle
SyluxDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by monkeydude99 7 years ago
monkeydude99
SyluxDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:34 
Vote Placed by Maikuru 7 years ago
Maikuru
SyluxDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Chaosflame 7 years ago
Chaosflame
SyluxDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Vi_Veri 7 years ago
Vi_Veri
SyluxDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by CrusaderDebater 7 years ago
CrusaderDebater
SyluxDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
SyluxDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07