A remake we never asked for what a waste of development and money. Why would konami remake it when the mgs master collection is already out. It doesn't make sense!
When Delta got announced it was all "they better be completely faithful, we don't want MGSV gameplay in MGS3!" All these new previews - "It's just MGS3 with better graphics, where MGSV gameplay???"
@@theartofguessing It won't flop, because the controls and how the game was set up works, you just suck at it. Go back to playing the same games over and over again, with different Skins.
“Metal Gear Solid Delta is shaping up to be little more than a prettier, more intuitive version of 2004’s most essential stealth game” - said as if that’s a bad thing…
@@wacozacko89 because that's not what a remaster is remaster is reworking the existing assets and rendering to increase quality remake is exactly that, remaking assets from scratch
The hypocrisy of IGN's reviewers is something that is synonymous with their brand and identity, they never know what they want, and it's almost like they're playing devil's advocate.
Respectfully, it's called a remake of the original game, hence people would expect not only a giant bump in graphical details, but also improvements in terms of gameplay and movement. From what they described, it should have been called a remaster rather than a remake.
To be fair, if the devs are saying this is a remake then they are lying, it's a remaster. The whole point of a remake is they remake everything to modern day
Not every game needs a open world map design. The game was perfect 20 years ago and a lot of games were, all we ever wanted was improved graphics and controls. Save any changes for a new title. This is a love letter to a classic.
It is a shame about all the brief loading screens as the silent hill 2 remake will not have any Could it be that blubber team walks out with the better remake?
It didn’t need an open world, but a seamless transition between levels would’ve been nice and wouldn’t have changed the game in any significant way besides making it play more modern.
@@CammieRacingit’s like remaking the game for modern audience and keep the same outdated mechanic like loading screen, outdated boss fight like the Fear, and outdated AI which can be abused by said loading screen. At that point just do a remaster of the game because why keep all the flaws of the original the same? It’s silly.
It's insane how idiotic you all are. The whole preview's point is crystal clear: that game is not a remake, it's a glorified remaster. Problem is, the game is sold as a remake. Thus making it a terrible one. Ffs even the producer himself admits its not a remake in the video.
so you want loading screens between regions and old clunky 2000s movement mechanics? if you like all the original stuff, why not keep the original graphics aswell?? you make no sense at all lol.
@@turbotrup96 There where technical limitation to the ps2 hence why the map is designed the way it is but even now with a more than ever capable machine such as the ps5, it's still design the same way.
@Köennig remasters are made in the same engine and source code as the original, this is making the game entirely in a new engine, so no it's by definition a remake
The problem is the price and calling it a remake. They should have called it as it should be, a remaster, so everyone have reasonable expectation. But no, they want to charge us full price, so they called it a remake. Now people have higher expectation that this game will have similar gameplay to its latest game (MGS V). Don't blame IGN, but Konami.
You just don’t have the vision. The remakes for RE2 and RE4 wouldn’t have been nearly as fun or interesting if they only gave it a new coat of paint/gameplay mechanic improvements, as opposed to the overhaul they gave the games.
You just don’t have the vision. The remakes for RE2 and RE4 wouldn’t have been nearly as fun or interesting if they only gave it a new coat of paint/gameplay mechanic improvements, as opposed to the overhaul they gave the games.
@@iownu92 And not every remake needs to be held to that standard. They made the conscious decision to do that type of remake. Delta isn't that type of remake. Being a direct remake is perfectly fine. It doesn't NEED to be a completely new game.
@@TehPwnographer I'm not talking about Konami b-roll for Delta. I'm referring to the footage from World of Longplays on RU-vid of MGS3 Snake Eater from the HD Collection, which is used in this video.
@@downtowntrain2319People will praise a review that gives a an 8/10 game a 4/10 if they hate it It justifies their opinion so it is now a "well done critque by someone not bought off" Most people click wanting to hear specific things
He's got some fair points. The loading screens in between zones are really bizarre, in my opinion, especially since mgs5 existed almost 10 years ago. No re-recorded dialogue is strange. They could've brought back the cast to re deliver some of the iconic lines with some updated scripts. The original game is a classic but to remake or re-release it in 2025 you would think they would spare no expense
@@colinmalan7107 It's for the sake of gameplay flow. If there were no load screens, you'd have to deal with soldiers from every area next to each other and the game wasn't designed with that in mind. So if they wanted to do that, they'd have to start redesigning entire areas and mechanics to make it work and it'd become a different type of game entirely. Imagine firing an unsuppressed weapon in the original. Enemies close to you will hear it and go on alert, and may call for reinforcements that will spawn from basically thin air. If you did that with no load zones, you'd have enemies from other areas coming to investigate which would change movement patterns and could break the way the game is supposed to play. If you made too much noise near the bridge during the Virtuous Mission, enemies from Sokolov's lab would come and investigate and would totally break the way you infiltrate that area of the game. At that point, is it even really the same game?
@@Bunke987So basically it's a remaster? Sounds like a lazy port with better graphics even as a MGS fan myself that does sound disappointing. especially with the enemy not being able to follow you from area to area seems like a cash grab. I'll buy it for the better graphics at least, and hopefully the gameplay is a lot smoother.
Damn.... it's a bit sad seeing how everyone is fine with such a barebones remake when we've seen so many examples of great remakes like the RE ones. Listen... this game is pretty but that's basically it. They couldn't even make a seamless map? Come on people, why set our expectations so damn low.
"We didn't make it open world because we didn't want to remake the game from the scratch" "why they didn't make it open world" Those journalists are insufferable
Let's be honest, the jungle design where small areas are loaded in, needed to go. Like fighting the end...just make a fully open jungle map. We're going from ps2 to ps5 for crying out loud.
Kojima would have taken creative liberties that would have brought the game we know and love into the modern age, instead of just copying and pasting with a fresh coat of paint and selling for $70
@@benjaminlennox4249 He was the producer and supervisor. Everything in that game required his approval and suggestions. For example, the new director initially wanted to stay loyal to the original cinematics, but Kojima insisted that they take liberties. After the game's release, the fans threw a hissy fit over that particular decision.
@@jp3813 He didn’t take those creative liberties himself bud. None of what came out of TS were his actual ideas, regardless if he oversaw and approved them.
Faithful to a fault?? ITS MGS3? It’s a masterpiece. Changing it especially without Kojima would be like touching up the Mona Lisa. It just needs restored and updated for modern game standards. IGN really have no clue.
Are loading screens a staple of MGS3? Are enemy positions and AI a staple too? Was MGS3 not limited at all by old PS2 tech? Should we literally keep everything the same? They already released a remaster of this game in 2023, which is actually just a port of the 2011 Bluepoint remaster. People can just play that if that's what they want. This is supposed to be a remake.
2:27 my man what the hell you're even saying the transition serves as a mechanic to prevent the caution status or change the enemy location if the are on evasion mode 😅
The reviewer literally asked the directors and got the answer and still goes on a 4min rant about it. What does he not understand about it changing the game mechanics entirely?
Watch them giving the game a worse score than it probably deserves because Kojima was not part of the team and because the team made a true "1 to 1" remake of the original . From everything I've seen this looks fantastic.
IGN quoting Okamura for saying the goal was to stay as faithful to MG3 as possible, then review the game poorly for not taking mechanics from MGV is the most IGN thing ever. You guys are actually a joke ✌️
@block36079 it's not about opinions, it's about the stupidity of complaining about something that isn't there that literally no die hard fan wants implemented into the game. Take the open world aspect for example, that's one of the big reasons MGV was so poorly received, yes it was beautiful to look at, but it didn't feel like a MG game. Why would these devs wreck a classic by adding that?
the levels should have been opened up and expanded upon. the faithfulness should have only gone so far. setpieces, story, dialogue, characters, cutscenes, etc. are where the faithfulness should have been primarily kept.
And beyond just the effort of having to be remade, all of these elements are linked in tone. You can't keep the same feeling and impact of set pieces while changing the levels. The objective is singular, the story is linear, there's no reason to open the jungle. Each slice of map is a puzzle in the same way that each base or town in 5 is a puzzle. 5's story fit the openness, 3's doesn't. It would be an entirely different game
Why are so many people defending the dated aspects that have persisted? Obviosuly you've got to be faithful but also you have to change things when you can and it makes sense
3:30 i'm confused. so did they "remake" the game? or just reskinned / update/patch the original? because if this is indeed a remake, isn't that "building the game from ground up"?
You absolutely cannot sit here and be upset that a game your website has listed as one of the best of all time has gotten a remake that holds so much of that DNA you claimed to love. Absolute oxymoron.
"snake unfortunately does not move with the fluidity of his MGSV counterpart" That is the biggest issue here. Why make it with the horrible controls of the original and not use something similar to The Phantom Pain?
Watch the Gamespot preview. The presenter actually talks about how Snake controls and butchers this presenter’s opinion. Snake actually does control a lot like Venom Snake in MGSV. You can shoot over the shoulder like in MGS4 and you have a similar UI in MGS5 when it comes to equipping weapons.
There's so many comments here crapping on IGN but reading their opinions makes it sound like they hold up MGS3 at too high of a pedestal; a masterpiece with no fault. MGS3 HAD faults that needed changing in the remake and the game didn't look like it was adressing any of them. What a shame.
@@spyrochrisgaming it marketed as a faithful remake and he's complaining about the honest truth of the product. the criticism here is unreasonable given the ALREADY set expectation of what it is. He is literally complaining about what he should've expected.
some of IGN's criticisms are completely valid. who the hell wants loading screens between regions and cutscenes? who wants to play with old clunky movement gameplay? you can be faithful to an old game, but there are aspect that need to change for modern standards. looks like konami yet again, taking cheap shortcuts, just when we'd thought they wouldn't. sad.
We gotta thank the 3DS for walking so Delta could run. Fun fact Campbell's Japanese va also voiced Doc Brown in Back to the Future's Japanese dub. The joke though isn't as concrete when dubbed to English.
@Yeshua_is-Cool uh no it is not a remake i'm thinking a REAL remake not a Re-Remasterd that Mgs "Delta" is Resident Evil games, Dead Space, Mafia: The Definitive Edition are real remakes Metal gear solid "Delta" is a Re-Remasterd game period
He's thinking along the lines of the Nier Replicant rerelease in 2021. Where cutscenes and level designs were kept 1:1 whilst adding QoL changes to gameplay and graphics got a huge facelift.
"We remade the Game to the Tee in order to capture what makes this seminal stealth action game so deeply loved rather than completely altering the structure and pacing in order to keep up with the nebulous desires of the modern audience, whoever they are" Fans: Based and Kojima pilled, IGN: No open world innit, disappointing outta ten mate
The thing is if konami made too many changes og people are gonna hate. But if not the new people will hate. They cant make everyone happy. They sided with the original players and that makes konami in a better light
your complaints are unreasonable - you can't just have the enemies run through the load screen areas - it would completely change the game. The producer is right they would have had to remake the game at that point. Obviously it was like that because that was what Kojima wanted.
@@Knowledge12370 It's for the sake of gameplay flow. If there were no load screens, you'd have to deal with soldiers from every area next to each other and the game wasn't designed with that in mind. So if they wanted to do that, they'd have to start redesigning entire areas and mechanics to make it work and it'd become a different type of game entirely. Imagine firing an unsuppressed weapon in the original. Enemies close to you will hear it and go on alert, and may call for reinforcements that will spawn from basically thin air. If you did that with no load zones, you'd have enemies from other areas coming to investigate which would change movement patterns and could break the way the game is supposed to play. If you made too much noise near the bridge during the Virtuous Mission, enemies from Sokolov's lab would come and investigate and would totally break the way you infiltrate that area of the game. At that point, is it even really the same game?
What is this reviewer on about? He is mad that they have kept it like the original. Im actually happy that they have kept it like the original. It did not need to change.
it's not about the length of the loading screen. it's about the seamlessness. like they said, enemies can't follow you past the loading screen. makes the game feel disjointed.
@@Cernunn0s90 you can still display names of the area without having to fade to black lmao, y'all act like this was some terrible to expect from a remake in 2024
@@billjones642 Do you want drones of them to endlessly follow you area to area until the game crashes? All you would gain is a walking through a couple feet between areas and you’d lose a lot of performance
There’s no such thing as faithful to a fault when the IP is considered sacred by those who’ve played it. Edit: After reflecting on my comment, and this review even further, it’s kind of an ultra-rare silent nod of acknowledgement on Konami’s part to change almost nothing about one of Kojima’s most beloved games whilst remaking it.
So they're basically making the same game, just prettier and with more intuitive controls? Excellent! Maybe Bloober Team should be taking notes here. At least somebody at Konami understands the assignment.
Some of yall are coping. I'm with IGN. The RE remakes are amazing because they modernize the games and aren't just a fresh coat of paint. MGS deserved the same quality of treatment.
idk, personally i'm with the crowd who thinks removing the door transition scenes killed a lot of the tension and would have loved a fixed camera angles option.
And as for IGN, You can't perfect a masterpiece like this, The story was phenomenal all you need is an update on the graphics to make it more enjoyable. You know how great it is to be able to introduce the old era game into a new generation of gamers.
Bro, IGN have to stop complaining about Remakes being not ambitious enough unlike this game RE2 remake had a lot of the people who made the original in it's dev team. This team doesn't have Kojima to lean on if they want to remake the game from completely ground up and the room for error is much smaller this way. It's way better if they stick to their roots and not fix what's not broken, but at the same time it does seem a bit disappointing that they couldn't mimic the fluid gameplay mechanics of MGSV.
if they had changed anything while remaking a Kojima classic.. without Kojima's input they would've had another Metal Gear Survive and we would never trust them again.
Honestly the loading screen bit is not a great selling point that is easily something that could have been improved upon with modern engines but hearing they were kept is lackluster.
If they are planing to have Delta be the start of the series of remakes then the time paradox part doesn’t work, it only works because it was MGS3 this is MGS: Delta that’s probably why it was removed from the game
That's not the point!!! They had the technology to make this game with Kojima's engine he made. But since they fired him they can't use his assets. So once again we are getting a mgs game that COULD of been because Konami mistakes
@@damacisbac6796 ....what are you talking about? They don't need his permission to use the Fox Engine, it's just outdated. Having people use a more widely adopted engine makes it far easier to train newer recruits and having everyone on the same page on the dev team.
@@damacisbac6796 they own the engine. they do not kojima's anything to use it. unnessecery to use fox engine anyway. We didn't want an mgs5 version of mgs3 anyway. How its being made is exactly how we wanted it.
The map design was never my problem with the OG. It was the slow menu treks and clunky controls against action heavy bosses. Updating the controls and interface is more than enough for me
