|
Post by xerxes on Nov 15, 2011 2:29:59 GMT -5
FUUUUU--
Last boss is driving me mad. If his weak point is the soles of his feet, then the answer is mines right? Is that the only way to hurt him? Because I've unloaded a metric slew of those things on him and nothing happens.
|
|
|
Post by Snarboo on Nov 15, 2011 2:38:36 GMT -5
Last boss is driving me mad. If his weak point is the soles of his feet, then the answer is mines right? Is that the only way to hurt him? Because I've unloaded a metric slew of those things on him and nothing happens. *SPOILERS*Yes, the only way to defeat his second "invincible" form is using mines. You can use the same trick you used on the tank during this fight. I recommend luring him out of the boss room first.*SPOILERS*
|
|
|
Post by xerxes on Nov 15, 2011 5:35:37 GMT -5
Thanks! An easy battle once you do that. But it never would have occurred to me to simply run from him. In any other boss fight, doing so would serve absolutely no purpose. I guess I should have seen the clues, what with the series of rooms full of doors that won't open.
Another problem I had was, after killing the boss, Helicopter Steve tells you to use a "flare" to tell him where to shoot his incredibly accurate and low-impact missile. You're supposed to use the smoke bomb you picked up right before the boss fight. I'd forgotten about that, and was firing flares all over the place while the clock hemorrhaged nanoseconds...
|
|
|
Post by Snarboo on Nov 15, 2011 7:23:48 GMT -5
The smoke bomb thing confused me too. I had completely forgotten about it until I checked the inventory screen when the flare gun didn't seem to do anything. That still didn't stop me from dying once on the *SPOILERS*Metal Gear 2 sequence. I had no idea you had to hit it in the front with the guided missiles to do any damage. I thought hitting it anywhere would work! Surprisingly, guiding the missiles was the easy part after I got the timing down.*SPOILERS*
|
|
|
Post by Sketcz-1000 on Nov 15, 2011 8:01:09 GMT -5
You know what's hilarious?
I've been trawling online reviews after reading everyone's impressions here. And the consensus here seems to be: it's a pretty good game, let down by difficulty spikes and strange design decisions, but certainly it has merit, and it's similar enough to MG1 on the MSX to be enjoyed if you like that kind of Zelda-meets-James-Bone-stealth type of top-down gameplay.
And then the online brigade of haters are all like: it's absolute garbage and it gave me leprosy by watching my friend play it. Now my dog is dead!
It's especially funny when sites say they've completed it, but they've ripped off screens from Mobygames, which ripped its screens off from another site and then just blew them up with anti-aliasing (hence how I could follow the trail - is Moby allowed to do that?).
The Snake Soup fansite had an old review where the guy Ravi trashed it, but then after Kojima did an interview saying he liked it, the guy back-pedalled.
I want to say to all these diehard fans, stop when you reach Kojima's testicles otherwise you might just choke. They really are a bunch of fanatical, unthinking, incompetent zealots.
|
|
|
Post by vnisanian2001 on Nov 15, 2011 9:26:12 GMT -5
That's not all. They got so much shit wrong in their Ultra Games article. They were not conceived in 1983, they were conceived in 1988.
And TMNT I for the NES wasn't THAT bad.
I do have to admit though: This comment made me laugh:
"Now if the game was called "Football Hero's Revenge" and was about a college football quarterback who used to be a construction worker and became a spy, it wouldn't be so bad."
And I do agree: The Supercomputer is the dumbest moment in MG history. I mean, the game is CALLED Metal Gear I paid for METAL GEAR, not supercomputer, not bluescreen of death, M-E-T-A-L-G-E-A-R.
|
|
|
Post by Sketcz-1000 on Nov 15, 2011 12:26:14 GMT -5
The inside explanation for that is rather interesting... Actually. ;D
Remind me to put scans up when the article is out.
|
|
|
Post by xerxes on Nov 15, 2011 20:27:50 GMT -5
And that's a wrap for Nintendo Power's coverage. It was also covered in the UK mag Club Nintendo vol. 4 issue 2, but haven't found scans yet. "Metal Gear II: Snake's Revenge" was also mentioned in "Pak Watch" in issues 10 and 11. Issue 18 has it ranked as the 21st best selling NES game in Autumn 1990. After that, radio silence... Compare this to NES Metal Gear, which was ranked third in November '88 and remained in the top 30 up through January 1990. It was last mentioned in the magazine in November 1991! People were still harassing the game counsellors with questions. Also, to return to the whole "which Metal Gear is this a sequel to anyway?" issue, I noticed this in SR's credits... So yeah, I'm sure Kojima was REALLY surprised when this game was released. Definitely. *COUGH*bullshit*COUGH*
|
|
|
Post by vnisanian2001 on Nov 15, 2011 20:30:07 GMT -5
The tank is even harder in this game in that it can turn its cannon in any direction it wants, unlike the tank from the original game.
|
|
|
Post by Sketcz-1000 on Nov 16, 2011 3:56:29 GMT -5
Xerxes, what's your source for the sales figures on the MG/SR games? Is it online?
|
|
|
Post by Snarboo on Nov 16, 2011 7:57:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ryu the Grappler on Nov 16, 2011 13:28:19 GMT -5
I don't think Solid Snake's sales were much better though. If someone knows more about that, I'm very curious. I don't have sales data to back this up, but I don't think the MSX2 Metal Gear 2 did that well either. It was released when the MSX2 was practically dead (it was even the final MSX2 game released by Konami), which is why all the copies that still have the original case and manual tend to be auctioned on Yahoo Japan for over 20,000 yen (roughly $200). Even then, his back-pedaling was done in a rather backhanded way ("oh, I only said it was not good by MGS standards"). Then again, these are the same people who try to justify the bad storytelling of the later MGS games by over-analyzing every trivial insignificant detail. Xerxes, what's your source for the sales figures on the MG/SR games? Is it online? I'm pretty sure he took his data from old issues of Nintendo Power published around the time the games were released, which listed the top-selling NES games for each month. www.retromags.com/
|
|
|
Post by vnisanian2001 on Nov 16, 2011 13:59:38 GMT -5
While I was watching Snake's Revenge playthroughs on YouTube, I learned an interesting strategy:
When you're riding the monorails from building to building, make sure you stand at either the EXTREME far left, or the EXTREME far right. That way, the lookout guard won't see you.
|
|
|
Post by munchy on Nov 16, 2011 17:34:21 GMT -5
So I'm wondering, are the MSX Metal Gears the same games as the NES ones?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2011 18:14:53 GMT -5
So I'm wondering, are the MSX Metal Gears the same games as the NES ones? Yes and no, at least for the first Metal Gear. The original MG was developed for the MSX while a separate team handled the NES port. They mostly share the same bosses, although the Hind D fight was replaced by a less impressive duo of heavy machine gunners in the NES version, and as mentioned before, the big battle against Metal Gear was instead against a far easier supercomputer, while Metal Gear itself made absolutely no appearance in the NES version. The items and weapons are the same across both versions, but the main difference is in the actual map design. Some areas are similar, but the NES has several parts far different from the MSX version, the most noticeable difference being that you start in the jungle, while the MSX version starts right in the building. The NES version is generally considered inferior, as most of its new stage designs are for the worse, often having cheaper and more frustrating design issues than the MSX one. However, Snake's Revenge is a COMPLETELY different game from Metal Gear 2 on the MSX. I'd say MG2 is indeed the more solid one in comparison, but SR still has some things going for it... the least of which are the sidescrolling parts.
|
|