The first Metal gear game I played was 4, and then I bought 1, and I also watched a walk-through of MGS 2 and 3. My question is I just bought the collection today and was going to play them in chronological order, but a lot of people are saying to play them in sequential order. I was just wondering because I did look up the story, so I am not really that new to the series, should I still play in chronological order, or play them on release order. Thank You.

If you have a choice I guess I'd say Metal Gear Solid 1? I beat the 2nd and am almost done with the 3rd and I've never played any others and both games have been great. I've become a huge fan. So you could start out with any. Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater starts out the earliest out of all of the games, in the 60s. However it might be more fun to play a later entry and then see the ealier, younger characters. (Mainly Ocelot). Really it doesn't matter. Just PLAY ANY OF THEM because I havn't played all of them but I'm sure all are amazing. And I can say from experience that both 2 and 3 are great. They are more of experiences, with lengthy cutscenes and then gameplay sequences. But it all comes together as a fantastic game and franchise.

HD Collection? I', playing it by release order; MGS2, 3, and then Peace Walker. To me that made a little more sense since they probably meant it to be that way.

MGS3 is a bit hard especially how the gun is right smack in your face so you can't see the enemy..

...

Play the first, then second, then third, then fourth.

Don't even bother with the other ones (the spinoffs)

That's the order they were released. So you should play them in THAT order.

I would say that you should either a) play the latest game and then play the rest in order from the earliest, or b) just play them in oldest to newest order.

Thank you for all your replies guys, I decided to play them in release order. Again thank you for all your replays, and have a great day.

Release order because it will answer questions that come up in that order. Although I went and played the WHOLE series, (portable ops, peace walker, and the metal gear series) in chronological order after beating 4. It's more cinematic in chronological, but makes more sense in release order.

I first played MGS on the Essential Collection (not the HD one), and I played MGS1 -> MGS2: Substance -> MGS3: Subsistence. You really don't have to play Metal Gear and Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake since you can just read up about them in MGS1, but you really want to play it, it's on the HD collection, and they are on vizzed as well but MG1 doesn't run and MG2 is in Japanese and runs way too fast.

However if you want to play the games in chronological order, then the ones you should care about are MGS3 -> MGS Peace Walker -> MG1 -> MG2 -> MGS1 -> MGS2 -> MGS4

Portable Ops is after MGS3 but you really don't have to worry about it, Metal Gear Solid on Game Boy Color (aka the only E rated Metal Gear) is non-canon and takes place in an alternate timeline and so do Metal Gear Ac!d 1 & 2 on PSP, so don't worry about them.

There are also some other Metal Gear games coming out. Metal Gear Rising: Revengance takes place after MGS4, has you playing as Cyborg Raiden, and will be out next year, and the recently announced Metal Gear Ground Zeroes takes it back to Naked Snake after Peace Walker and doesn't have a definite release date yet (I bet on 2014)

Play the series in CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER, Going:

Metal Gear Solid 3
Portable Ops
Peace Walker
Metal Gear
Metal Gear 2
Metal Gear Solid
Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty
Metal Gear RISING: Revneangence
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots

A lot of people insist that the series should be played in chronological order, but I disagree. While Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater takes place before the rest of the series, and a few others take place between it and the original Metal Gear, they make references to things that happen in previously released games that won't be anywhere near as meaningful if you see them in the wrong order. I mean, it's called Metal Gear Solid 3 for a reason; you should play it between 2 and 4, and by extension, Peace Walker after 4, or at the very least directly after 3, no sooner.

Of course, by that logic, one should also watch the Star Wars movies in chronological order since the prequels are numbered 1-3, and I disagree with that notion as well, but I stand by my argument.

Honestly?
You could Play them in any order.
I favour release date order. But each has so much of the story packed into them you can play them in any order. The creators took a very comic-book approach to setting up each game. you can start-up at any point and get the goods. Then go around and play any one after the other one. It is kind of like "asking witch order the Bat-Man Graphic Novels should be read in." The developers took care of the story of each to stand alone. That is what makes the series so good. You do not have to go in any particular order.

I had a similar thing with the Devil May Cry series. I played the fourth one first. Then I went and did the third one. Then the second one. Then the first one. I may never play part five due to the dramatic overhaul they did with the lead character and ... what looks like his brother. I like the new Ideas presented in the previews allot though. I am a big fan of "Dark City" or "Matrix" style Plot devices. But still the Lead Character has always been a particular type of person in my minds eye. If they named him something else in "D.M.C. 5" I might have considered picking up a copy. But that is beside the issue at hand.

If a game series can not be played in any order then the developers produced a flaw in their products.
So far, I can not detect a flaw in Konami's Metal Gear series beyond the 8-bit N.E.S. titles.

Good Luck To All.
I'm done. Stick a fork in me.
Peace.

orionfoxgibson : Actually, Kojima wasn't even involved in the production of the NES titles.