This is another game that's a bit hard for me to talk about. When I first beat this game and rated it, I hadn't touched the sequel yet. I knew the series was very "linked" in the way that experience with "the next game" would give me insight on how to feel about the previous one, so a mixture of that and my own procrastination lead to the delay of this review. Since I've beaten MGS1, I've played through MGS2. That game being what it is made me look back on MGS1 and the idea of reviewing games as part of a direct series differently. Like my reviews of the 2 mainline Klonoa games, it's almost impossible for me to separate MGS1 and 2. I don't wanna spend too much textspace talking about things SURROUNDING the game, so I'll hurry it up. This is absolutely a result of them being the only 2 games I've played in the series so far. When I play the rest, I might feel inclined to completely redo this review, but I think it being a product of my CURRENT experience works well for how these two games are meant to interact with each other (at least from my perspective.) That being said, I'm going to do my best to speak about the merits of the game I think about the most. Talking about how I talk about games as an intro to a review for clarity puts a bad taste in my mouth.

I like MGS1. I initially described it as "frustrating, archaic, yet wonderful", and I honestly think that's still apt. I'm constantly worried I'm saying "a whole lotta nothing" when it comes to these classic games, but for as good as the game's foundation is, it feels like it doesn't uphold itself to that standard. Maybe I just didn't adapt to the game as well as I could've, but a lot of the combat felt needlessly asking. Specifically, Sniperwolf's encounters and the penultimate boss gave me a feeling I never want when playing a game. Overcoming those challenges didn't feel satisfying, and maybe they would once I play the game again, but my current opinion of the experience is tainted by "I don't want to do those parts again." I think every great game has parts you don't want to repeat, but a REALLY great game has a good enough foundation to upend that feeling. It's what makes you turn on the game again. Where these segments come is obviously different for everyone (I imagine a lot of people don't like changing the temperature for the key cards. I thought it was a cool pace halter) but there's juuust enough of them in MGS1 to make me comfortable in my current experience for a bit. The game follows a really well done flow and has a very inventive groundwork and I think getting into the specifics of some of its mechanics or the surprises would be redundant, so I'd much rather talk about the things I took away from it.

Here's where I run into trouble. Everything I like about MGS1 worth talking about has almost nothing to do with the game. The visuals, the story, everything relative to the art- these are all things you can simply experience for yourself or even just look at and understand. What's always been paramount to me in reviewing or discussing games is how the uniqueness of the medium can interact with the basics of art. MGS as a franchise is fueled by that concept, but it's been talked about to death that I feel like I can't offer anything beyond surface level appreciations that abide to my preferences. I hate saying "just play the game for yourself" but I think in this specific case, you really should just play it for yourself.

I don't want to regurgitate the same things that've been said time and time again about this game, but I don't want to depict that I didn't like it either. It's my first experience, so again, maybe down the line I'll have a lot more of an interesting perspective... but for right now? It's good. You should play it at least once.

Reviewed on Jun 18, 2022


Comments