Kojima says play MGS3 first if you're new to the series


I've been looking to play the series for a while and I've been conflicted since seeing this tweet. Everyone agrees when going through a series, you go in chronological order. However in this case its the creator himself telling people to experience his art out of order. Who do you listen to in this case?! Is it really ideal to play MGS3 first in the METAL GEAR SOLID (1998-2015) series? Interested to get opinions from those who have played out of order.
No way. You can't go back to the mess that is 2, after the glory of 3.

That's not to even speak of the gameplay improvements that came with subsistence that would making going backward even harder.
I feel Metal Gear Solid is the best place to start. It recaps the first two games well and establishes the world and characters in it. Plus, it and 2 helps the player learn about how big a deal Big Boss was, which helps lead into 3 and finally getting to play as the legend himself.
A lot of the little throwbacks won't be as impressive if played out of order. I don't even want to try to make sense of the Patriots reveal if played chronologically.
Lol, why would you go from MGS3 to MGS4. The story in MGS4 is FILLED with references to MGS1 and MGS2. I get what he meant from a gameplay perspective but MGS is (before MGSV anyway) all about the story. I definitely feel like playing them in release order is the way to go. MGS4 needs to be last at the very least.


Crisis Dino - Snake is in Smash
Kojima is wrong. Only for the fact of how the gameplay progresses. Going from MGS3 to MGS1 as a newcomer is quite the difference. Even if you go the Twin Snakes route.
I mean Metal Gear is weird, because the first two MSX games are integral to the story, but nobody would recommend you play them first (especially not the first Metal Gear, which is really rough today).
Release Order, for sure. Mostly because the first three are mechanically difficult to get into if you've played the later stuff. Especially 1.

Start with primitive gameplay and a bonkers fantastic story, end with an amazingly well designed game with a pretty decent story.
Honestly, while I think you could go either way. I prefer release order. The de-mystification of Big Boss is a huge part of MGS3's appeal. Seeing this big bad modern day Che Guevara-esque warmonger bad guy hyped up and made into a mega-legend only to see he was even more human than Solid Snake ever was in his youth was fucking amazing. Even just the physical resemblance was amazing. The Snakes are clones of him, of course, but for whatever reason this just never clicked with me that, oh, OF COURSE he would have looked exactly like Solid Snake at one point. Seeing it was like a big, slap myself in the head, this is awesome and I should have put two and two together moment.
George Lucas said it about Star Wars.
CS Lewis said it about Narnia.

They were wrong too. Release over chronological, every time.
I mean Metal Gear is weird, because the first two MSX games are integral to the story, but nobody would recommend you play them first (especially not the first Metal Gear, which is really rough today).
The first one is rough, but literally only takes a six hours with save states and a guide. Has some good boss fights too. Wouldn’t recommend going guideless though.

MSX2 Metal Gear 2 is miles ahead of MGS1 in terms of gameplay though. Makes going through MGS1 annoying. It’s still really good. Would still suggest a guide if you want to rush it, but it’s still a lot of fun either way.

Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker
Metal Gear 2
Metal Gear Solid: Portal Ops
Metal Gear Solid: The Phantom Pain
Metal Gear 1
Metal Gear Solid 3

Don't bother with Metal Gear Solid 1 or Ground Zeroes, they aren't canon.