Rumor: Metal Gear Solid 3 Remake is a PS5 Exclusive, Might be Announced at PlayStation Showcase - News
by William D'Angelo , posted on 07 May 2023 / 15,896 Views
A remake of Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater has been rumored for a couple of years and a new rumor has popped up related to the remake.
XboxEra co-founder Nick Baker on the XboxEra Podcast claims he heard the Metal Gear Solid 3 remake might be announced at an upcoming PlayStation showcase and it will be a PlayStation 5 exclusive.
Windows Central Managing Editor Jez Corden has corroborated what Baker stated saying he has "heard similar about Metal Gear exclusivity for PlayStation." He also claims Sony landed a deal with Konami for Silent Hill, Metal Gear, and maybe even a new Castlevania."
It has been confirmed the remake of Silent Hill 2 is a PlayStation 5 console exclusive, with it also launching on PC. It will be a console exclusive on PS5 for 12 months.
A PlayStation Showcase has been rumored to take place before Summer Game Fest, which is set to take place on June 8.
As always this should be treated with a grain of salt until an official announcement is made.
Heard similar about Metal Gear exclusivity for PlayStation btw. https://t.co/xH1C7iJ0O3
— Jez 💀 (@JezCorden) May 7, 2023
Not sure on that. Just heard Sony landed a deal with Konami for Silent Hill, Metal Gear, and maybe even a new Castlevania. 🔥
— Jez 💀 (@JezCorden) May 7, 2023
A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012 and taking over the hardware estimates in 2017. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel. You can contact the author on Twitter @TrunksWD.
More Articles
MGS3 is hands down my favorite in the series. I would be so excited if they did remake this game!!
I am taking leave to play this. Or quitting my job. Which ever comes first, for this .
I'm not really a fan of moneyhatting, but if that was the only way to get Konami off their butts so be it. Hopefully Xbox and Nintendo gets love as well, and Konami finds enough success to keep making new games in their old franchises.
Konami probably aren't capable of getting any good games off the ground by themselves. Sony's obviously helping with developing, money and will be there to oversee the development, which means good games.
Not sure if Sony is helping with development directly, but remember Konami isn't developing these titles either. The Silent Hill 2 Remake is being made by Bloober Team, and no doubt this MGS3 Remake was outsourced as well. Sony is probably kicking in some money to Konami to get these off the ground and started, and probably paying for all marketing (which can be $100s of millions sometimes in and of itself). Konami then takes care of the rest and keeps the usual profits. Sony in turn gets the prestige of having them as exclusives, and selling some PS5 consoles as result.
MGS3 is my favorite and was my first Metal Gear game. Would love a remake. Though not fond of the exclusivity tied to it. Hopefully it's just timed
Heard about a MGS Remake for PS5 around the time it launched, along with the info that there would be Final Fantasy 16 exclusivity and Silent Hill.
I didn't hear that it would be MGS 3 specifically though. Which begs the question why they'd start with this one. I know it's chronologically set before MGS1, but still.
It would be a pretty weird move to remake 3 specifically. MGS1 might have been remade before but Twin Snakes is as old as MGS3 and what about 2? I guess maybe it's because 3 is the first chronologically? But the games still make most sense to play in order, so it would be a pretty iffy reason.
Maybe it`s a lead up to the remakes of the Zanzibar incident (Metal Gear 1 and then Metal Gear 2 afterwards).
One can dream. Metal Gera 1-2 remade, solid snake vs "V"Bigboss
It's the most liked game of the series, I'd say, so that's probably why. Beyond that, it doesn't necessarily make much sense, but that's probably a huge factor.
I understand that argument for Silent Hill where 2 is clearly more acclaimed, but it's not as unambigious with MGS. 1-4 are all pretty highly revered, if 3 is ahead it's only by a hair's breadth. But it is possible that's why, though I don't think it would be a good reason in this case.
Nah, as someone who probably prefers both MGS1 and MGS2 and doesn't like MGS4 nearly as much, I think MGS3 is clearly the most popular one. At least that's the impression I've been getting.
I don't know man, if you have to pick one out I guess 3 might be it, but like I said I don't think it's unambigiously the most popular. Personally I like 2 best and consider 1 and 3 about equal.
Well, I guess neither of us has any data to back up our views on this, but that's why I'd put my money on the matter anyway.
I don't know, but I get the impression that 1 and 3 are similary popular. Partially because 1 was the first of its kind, so it ended up in a category of classics along with Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, etc, as games that amazed people with what was possible, and defined a generation.
And personally I have a hard time ranking one over the other.
Mechanically I obviously prefer 3, and I thought the main plot of 3 had a much more impactful climax as well. But the setting in MGS1 (Shadow Moses) is probably my favorite. There's something about the atmosphere in that game. And I would say the cast was more consistently strong across the board, while in MGS 3, while it had some great characters, it also had a few duds, imo.
Gun to my head, I'd put MGS3 slightly above MGS1. But it's really close for me.
I can get behind a lot of what you're saying. Personally I think the MGS1 is the most balanced game in the series, whereas MGS3 has a bit of an imbalance, mainly because some of the weaker characters (i.e. the Cobras, really) leave some parts a bit lacking. I'm not sure even I would call MGS1 better, but I personally do kind of prefer it. I find MGS1, MGS2, and MGS3 all very good games without major weaknesses either. MGS4 is where major problems start appearing, although even the rest of the series is great.
"his source said he thinks* this confuses me
It's a weak rumor, is how I interpret that.
It may be refering to the part about it being in an upcoming showcase.
I remember when people were reporting that Silent Hill was in development, and by Bloober even. But the same people kept saying they think it will be in the next Playstation State of Play several times, before it happened.
Well the MGS3 remaster I played was good enough and MGS4 was great, but I certainly would like a remake of the first 2 to be on a good level.
Mgs is like the stsrt of the saga, i want mgs from the toast consoles back in the day remade .
Jez is a imbecile, he knows nothing but it might be teue because ita not the first time we heard this
Sony can fuck off with Castlevania. It was never a Sony centric series ffs
Incoming Downvotes
If the project wouldn't be done without someone going there to offer money to start nor Nintendo tried to have it launched there isn't much to complain.
Well, Castlevania games have traditionally not been released as multiplatform games, with some exceptions like SOTN and the Lords of Shadow series. But I guess this is more about Konami wanting funding in order to make games out of their own IP's. Or more likely, liscensing them out to a capable studio.
Remember when MS announced Redfall to be exclusive and everyone lost their mind..
You mean the game that was coming to Playstation. Then wasn't coming. Then got delayed. Then bombed heavily?
I do yes.
Oddly I don't think I saw any hate for Hi-FI. Maybe because it just appeared one day and didn't seem like it was stolen away? Who knows I can't speak for people I had no interest in either. I have no rhythm or joy in fighting vampires.
So you do remember the hypocrisy. Thanks for acknowledging it.
Think you missed the point of his comment there. Redfall had a PS5 verson that got cancelled.
We even have devs saying MS told them to drop the PS version. And on this case most likely Sony gone to Konami and offered money to get some of their old IPs to go back to development track with the caveat of some exclusivity.
Its called Moneyhatting Don.
Sure it is a moneyhat. But moneyhat can be on a case of a game that was almost finished and paid to delay one port (like Rise of the Tomb Raider) or can come from paying for a game to start being developed (like SFV).
Not same size of studio and the like, but yes the point is relevant. Wasn't a change from MS sponsoring the title to Sony though?
Gears 3 was also in development for PS3. Many games being made possibly have all consoles inmind during development. Also MS own Arkane. Sony dont own or make these titles.
As far as we heard, there was never an intention to fully develop Gears 3 for PS3. It was more like a test. Redfall was intended to be a multi platform release. Then MS bought the company and told them to cancel the other versions. That's their prerogative. But it's not the equivalent of going to a publisher like Konami and paying them to use an IP that they didn't plan on developing a game for anyway. Redfall multiplat would have existed before MS got involved. But Konami are just going to sit on their IP's and do nothing new with them (aside from Remasters) unless other companies pay them for it.
Who says these Komani games werent in development and Sony jumped in to secure them?
What they dont say does not mean it does not happen. We only found out about Redfall due to the FTC.
If we were talking about a normal publisher, I'd agree. But this is Konami. It's been 11 years since they did anything with the Silent Hill IP. And just under a decade for Castlevania and Metal Gear. (Not counting Metal Gear Survive. But we don't talk about that.)
So this is all based on an assumption that Sony walked in and told them to make these games... not believing that Komani might have been under pressure with their other business model and walked back into gaming because they want to sell games again.. This is nothing more than the traditional money hat we have seen for decades. Not fooling me with this. You can believe it if you want.
You think it's more likely that after 11 years of not doing anything with Silent Hill, they decided to make a new one, and Sony found out and paid for exclusivity for a niche title that would have ended up on Playstation anyway?
It's just a coincidence that the only times we hear about them publishing high budget games, it's when another publisher paid them for it? If you think they decided to seriously get back into gaming , then where are the other announced high budget titles that they decided to publish on their own accord?
I don't know why you chose this hill to die on, because if you want to point out Sony moneyhatting, you could have just mentioned Final Fantasy 16. That would obviously have been made and come out in a timely fasion. But there's no precedence for Konami making high budget games any more.
People still fight over SF5 being kidnapped. They don't accept that Ono and others from Capcom at the time said they didn't had money to make SFV (before Sony announcement).
I believe Ono said that Capcom wouldn't greenlight R&D for SF5 until maybe 2018 or 19, the way their financial situation was going at the time. Capcom were in trouble after some failed mobile investments in the early to mid 2010's.
Yep, it was something like that (won't remember the real years, but it would be a very long before they started making it, still some people pretend that was all a lie and there was no way Capcom wouldn't make the game or that Sony helped it being made). Anyway, even if when we have evidence showing that a game only came out because of the moneyhat (also with Shenmue 3), people deny, imagine on a case that there is no tangible evidence they will go to the highest farfetched teories to say since you can't prove it is impossible than it may very well be true.
Yes, Komani are still a video game company. They decided to invest into their IPs again and as usual, Sony swoop on it.
We see this all the time. I didn't need to bring up FF16 but you did which proves my entire point.
Don't be so gullible.
Like they invested in their Contra IP a few years ago with a brand new entry in the series. Except it looks and plays like a mobile game. And is sitting at a Metacritic score of 52. The only time we see them put some effort and care into one of those IPs is when someone else is paying them for it.
I'd say I'm not the one being gullible here if you expect they've gone back to producing quality games on their own accord when there are no such games to show for it.
Stolen or purchased? Because I don't believe MS did anything illegal, but then again, I'm not a lawyer. Redfall and Hi-Fi were both original IPs, so nothing was stolen, and no platforms were ever announced. Like how Stellar Blade was ACTUALLY announced to be multiplatform, and Sony swooped in to publish as a PS5 exclusive is not stealing. It was purchased.
Being announced wouldn't make a difference I would say, unless Sony had any agreement signed (like Ghostwire and Deathloop) there is no commitment to really release (perhaps there could be a lawsuit from users complaining that it was promised, but I don't see Sony itself being able to sue). I guess he is just talking customer sentiment of being stolen (not that it is true anyway).
Well, that only means one thing. Either people like Sony the most... or its entirely a different situation. In either case MS is on a wrong spot.
Bring it on!
All these remakes originally landed on playstation and playstation 2 first anyway!
The remake will be named ROTOK ?
Not sure why you got downvoted.. oh right, this site.
I've been told my behaviour was ruining the mood, apparently
How dare you
Nahhhh, it is Sony fault that MS couldn't do it for 2 decades.
