Zero Punctuation: Metal Gear Solid 4

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 . . . 31 NEXT
 

Pugjce:
People who hate the game mostly do so because they cannot define the game as serious in pieces, but ultimately an entertainment piece used to portray some semi-serious messages to an audience. They fail to suspend their disbelief because they think that since parts of the game are serious, or because fans think it is some grandiosely designed piece or art, the entire scope of the game should be taken to par with the serious business only police.

Fans of the serious either knee-jerk react to that attitude, or tend to view the game as art that transcends the genre. The issue here is that the game does not have the pretensions of thinking itself that, only its fans do.

That's part of my point, it's fiction and the medium the author chose to express his message can't be judged with arguments as "it isn't realistic" and such. But also we're "debating" another matter. The "bad writing" because of "lack of coherence in the story itself". I'm trying to 'prove' that using the in-game logic, it is coherent.

Evilducks:
It's obvious that he knows that rose and her child don't have nanomachines. The point is it doesn't make any sense for the AI's not to put nanos in them.

I already said it. Why would the A.I's put nanos in Rose? Rose isn't even a threat, nor a soldier. The A.I's put nanos only to soldiers in this stage. Why would an A.I break its own rule when it's not necessary? It is absurd.

Evilducks:
Everything? It is the essence of understanding what the nanobots do. How hard is this? Honestly?

Based in my hypothesis, it still hasn't anything to do with... Anything.

Evilducks:
A lot of people have son's, why would this one be any different. If Raiden having a son would be important at all to the AI's, don't you think they would have implanted nanos in his girlfriend?

You misunderstood. The child was important to Rose, that's why she hid it. The Patriots didn't have any intention to inject nanos to Rose, since Raiden was with her.

Evilducks:
Except the nano's should know, at which point the plot falls apart.

If the patriots didnt't discover the plan, it's safe to assume Ocelot didn't have nanos. Simple, huh?

Evilducks:
Solid grouped them together, you're nitpicking, badly.

Nitpicking? Just see the FIRST cutscene. Later in the game, The Patriots - when mentioned -are treated as a separated entity from Liquid.

Evilducks:
Yes, it's called a plot device, and a bad one in this instance.

Already explained.

Evilducks:
Then you proved his point that Kojima has filled MGS4 (and I think the series in general) with useless verbose blather to try and conceal a very simple plot.

I don't know what are you intending to prove. Of course it's a simple plot when one individual has ALL the information regarding it. One must be a little dumb to find it difficult after knowing everything.

Evilducks:
This is back to the Ocelot malarkey about convincing things that are in his brain that he is Liquid. Come on, simple plot that you just explained, keep up.

No, no. I was referring that "self-hypnosis" never happened. Please re-read what tempdude wrote.
He wrote: 'A great example is Ocelot. By the end of this game, he SPOILERS! Is Ocelot, who is pretending to be liquid snake by using hypnosis'
That scene never mentions "I'm ocelot and I was being hypnotized", it doesn't even mention "I'm ocelot". Although, it could be deduced with "I'm Liquid's doppelganger", which again, is inconclusive.
My point is, if he was going to debate something, he has to know about what he's talking about.

Evilducks:
Wait, liquid is his own mother? Now I'm confused. Loyal to who?

Liquid's Mother? Haven't you said we're talking about Ocelot? Come on, stop playing dumb. It becomes boring.

Evilducks:
Only relevant in pointing out the absurdity of the story. One of the major problems was all of the story threads he created 20 years ago when he made the first two Metal Gear games. The plot was never intended to go this far, it was just a very 'video gamey' stealth game. Unfortunately these less than serious plot points were dragged along as the story... matured? I suppose that's an appropriate term, though I hardly want to apply it here. Comics often suffer from this illness, many times resulting in rebooting the series to remove the useless garbage that builds up.

I don't see the problem here. He likes ninjas as a 'cool' character as he presumably thought that a fatman in skates would be cool. The aspect of the ninja itself isn't part of the story, the experimentation over the body is. Haven't we made an agreement about the fiction and reality?

Evilducks:
No, he never said because of the dictionary meaning of words that his view was objective (even if I tend to think he's the closest one to 'objective' that I've read here). So, you're the one not reading still.

Then what did he say? I simply stated his arguments were subjective when he mentioned the "dryness" and I receive a pretty laughable answer:
'No...It's not subjective. I'm not going for "interpretive language" here. It's all cold, hard, and dictionary based. '
In my very same answer, I indicated that if he was making a reference only to Terran, then leave that comment out of a "summarization". Am I still wrong?

Evilducks:
The problem with you arguing this is such a clear and simplistic story is that if that is indeed the case then it's bad writing in his inability to explain it in a much more concise and hopefully punchy manner. If the story isn't that simple then your simplistic explanation of it proves it is again bad writing because you think you know what is happening but don't and thus he failed to tell the story well.

Again you're falling in the previous fallacy. I hope you understand it.

Evilducks:
Kojima doesn't possess this skill. He indulges in the details to an extreme level that only pull you out of the story and force you to realize your just taking in inconsequential information that has no bearing on what is happening. I think sometimes Kojima forgets he has a visual medium and just reads pages of dialog to you. When you are in a visual medium you need to use it. The rest of the time he forgets you're in an interactive medium.

Let's suppose the liberty to get or dismiss the essential enciclopedic information is given, much like Deus Ex (another game with a similar conspirational plot). What would be the difference between skiping a cutscene and simply passing by an important character? Pretty much none. In contrast, the endings of Deus Ex pretty much lasted 2 minutes and could be picked up by anyone. In MGS4, if you don't care about the story, then you don't care about the conclusion[1]. Ergo, you're there for the gameplay, the graphics, maybe the music and the fun factor. MGS4 does that wrong? Well, if you don't want action, you CAN go for stealth. If you want action, the game is full of it.

Now, about the pacing... That's a subjective matter. I found it good. You don't? That's a shame. I don't know why you bring this up again.

Doug:
My head hurts after reading the latest page - so much debate over the story of MGS4 and whether its confusing or not - here's a hint - when 5 pages of arguements don't resolve the ingame elements, its probably confusing.

Pugjce:
Hideo knows what the game is, and he knows what it isn't.

Given he made MGS2, I'd say he doesn't. He thinks a game is a movie - tisn't.

AAAHHHHHH! SHUT UP!!!!! AAAHHHHHHH!

Evilducks:
Jumplion, saying somebody is being "burned" by everybody responding to him is immaterial without providing any examples of this actually occurring. I don't even believe you are arguing about the same thing he is. I'm actually curious as to what you think this discussion is about exactly.

Considering Tempdude0 has most of the facts in hand on MGS4 I think he's probably watched most, if not all of, MGS4. Since most of what he is arguing about is delivered through painfully long cut-scenes he doesn't need to be the one behind the controller, as the game-play is irrelevant to his argument.

You tell me, i think this whole argument is pointless as everyone has their opinion but to me Tempdude0 is trying to imply his opinion (or more accurately Yahtzee's) as fact. And i had an example of indigo_Dingo proving him wrong. Of course, it all depends on how you see "burning" as in my opinion tempdude0 is getting burned by his own points. You may think that he's the most sense out of anyone here but that is your opinion and i don't have to prove it to you because it is your opinion

I'm still waiting for a reply on what exactly this argument is.

@Eldritch Warlord: It probably is what EvilDuck said with the increased viewers or that everything that Yahtzee said about Halo 3 was correct but he says many things wrong with MGS4, oh deer i'm a jackass!! NOOOO!! Okay, no more arguing randomly! I'm clean.

VeryOblivious:
I already said it. Why would the A.I's put nanos in Rose? Rose isn't even a threat, nor a soldier. The A.I's put nanos only to soldiers in this stage. Why would an A.I break its own rule when it's not necessary? It is absurd.

Based in my hypothesis, it still hasn't anything to do with... Anything.

You misunderstood. The child was important to Rose, that's why she hid it. The Patriots didn't have any intention to inject nanos to Rose, since Raiden was with her.

If the patriots didnt't discover the plan, it's safe to assume Ocelot didn't have nanos. Simple, huh?

So, The plot device that the AI's only put nano's in soldiers works for Rose, but then is conveniently ignored when it comes to Ocelot. Considering they had ample opportunity to inject them when he was working with Liquid, not to mention they could have been inside the hand. Simple? Yes. Makes sense? No. It's idiotic to believe that the super conspiracy would forget to put nano's in a figure they've known was a key player for a very long time. It breaks even suspension of disbelief.

The other bit that is bad writing is retelling pieces of the past over and over again. They don't provide enough information to people new to the series to pick up what is going on and the provide too much for people who do follow the series. Absurdity of the story aside, this is the part that really annoys me about the writing and destroys the pacing (that and the unnecessary detail).

The rest of the plot analysis doesn't matter, these were the key points where you destroyed your own argument.

VeryOblivious:
Then what did he say? I simply stated his arguments were subjective when he mentioned the "dryness" and I receive a pretty laughable answer:
'No...It's not subjective. I'm not going for "interpretive language" here. It's all cold, hard, and dictionary based. '
In my very same answer, I indicated that if he was making a reference only to Terran, then leave that comment out of a "summarization". Am I still wrong?

What he said was Terra was using made up definitions of words in her arguments. The definitions of these words were not up for debate as they are clearly spelled out in the dictionary. It's not subjective as to what they mean. This has nothing to do with the argument at hand, it was a dispute between he and Terra that you broadened into a context that didn't exist.

VeryOblivious:
Let's suppose the liberty to get or dismiss the essential enciclopedic information is given, much like Deus Ex (another game with a similar conspirational plot). What would be the difference between skiping a cutscene and simply passing by an important character? Pretty much none. In contrast, the endings of Deus Ex pretty much lasted 2 minutes and could be picked up by anyone. In MGS4, if you don't care about the story, then you don't care about the conclusion[1]. Ergo, you're there for the gameplay, the graphics, maybe the music and the fun factor. MGS4 does that wrong? Well, if you don't want action, you CAN go for stealth. If you want action, the game is full of it.

Now, about the pacing... That's a subjective matter. I found it good. You don't? That's a shame. I don't know why you bring this up again.

I see you use examples, and a bad one at that, considering I've never played Deus Ex. Nice that you can follow your own logic and not confuse the argument in the same manner you accused Tempdude0 of. You're making bad assumptions about what I want out of the game. You assume because I can admit fault in something it means I don't like that aspect of it. I actually enjoy the story when I'm not being forced to rehash things I know over and over again or things that don't matter. It's a very fun and campy plot that I can't believe anybody would take seriously. This doesn't make it a masterpiece of writing, it makes it a pulpy game with adequate gameplay. It's a shame it couldn't have been better, if only he had an editor.

Evilducks:

Eldritch Warlord:
It may interest people to know that this thread currently has more than twice the responses of the Halo 3 thread.

Now I've never played MGS4 (or any Metal Gear game for that matter) so I won't say anything about it.

However, I will say that this game seems much more important to Sony fans than Halo 3 is to Microsoft fans. I wonder why ps3 people will rally so strongly around this one game while 360 people leave their biggest title to be torn apart.

At the risk of sounding like a pathetic fanboy I'll give my two theories. Either Sony fans need to rally because this is the only game on their system widely recognized as extremely good or Microsoft fans have too many high-quality titles to care what their system war foes think.

By the way, I'm not a pathetic fanboy. If I had the money I would buy a ps3 and several games for it. I'd still probably prefer the 360 because it has achievements and most multi-platform games are better on it.

you may have something there. but comparing Halo 3 to MGS4 is like comparing Peanut Butter M&Ms to a 5 Course Italian feast. After eating a bunch of M&Ms, you probably won't have room or appreciation for the feast, but you'll pick at it and make amateur comments about its garishness.

Eldritch Warlord:
It may interest people to know that this thread currently has more than twice the responses of the Halo 3 thread.

Now I've never played MGS4 (or any Metal Gear game for that matter) so I won't say anything about it.

However, I will say that this game seems much more important to Sony fans than Halo 3 is to Microsoft fans. I wonder why ps3 people will rally so strongly around this one game while 360 people leave their biggest title to be torn apart.

At the risk of sounding like a pathetic fanboy I'll give my two theories. Either Sony fans need to rally because this is the only game on their system widely recognized as extremely good or Microsoft fans have too many high-quality titles to care what their system war foes think.

By the way, I'm not a pathetic fanboy. If I had the money I would buy a ps3 and several games for it. I'd still probably prefer the 360 because it has achievements and most multi-platform games are better on it

Actually, tommorow on Wednsday there's going to be an update for the PS3 that allows players to earn Trophys. I'm not sure what games exactly will have those (Super Stardust HD will be the first) but i am totaly going to be a trophy whore.

Jumplion:

Evilducks:
Jumplion, saying somebody is being "burned" by everybody responding to him is immaterial without providing any examples of this actually occurring. I don't even believe you are arguing about the same thing he is. I'm actually curious as to what you think this discussion is about exactly.

Considering Tempdude0 has most of the facts in hand on MGS4 I think he's probably watched most, if not all of, MGS4. Since most of what he is arguing about is delivered through painfully long cut-scenes he doesn't need to be the one behind the controller, as the game-play is irrelevant to his argument.

You tell me, i think this whole argument is pointless as everyone has their opinion but to me Tempdude0 is trying to imply his opinion (or more accurately Yahtzee's) as fact. And i had an example of indigo_Dingo proving him wrong. Of course, it all depends on how you see "burning" as in my opinion tempdude0 is getting burned by his own points. You may think that he's the most sense out of anyone here but that is your opinion and i don't have to prove it to you because it is your opinion

I'm still waiting for a reply on what exactly this argument is.

Ah, as I suspected, you don't even know what you're talking about. You don't know what the argument even is and yet you claim somebody is being proven wrong.

The only thing Tempdude0 has been 'proven' wrong on (much like myself) were details of the story. The details were never what the argument was about. We don't care that a ninja was made by NASA, it was just an example. He got an example wrong and admitted that indigo_Dingo pointed out a plausible answer that invalidated that particular example. Tempdude0 has admitted his ranting nature, which leads to lots of WORDS WORDS WORDS, which, when picked apart, will lead to minor flaws. The argument remains sound though.

How about you pipe in about victors when you actually figure out what is being discussed. Also, quit being a fanboy, this review was hardly scathing. Yahtzee even endorsed it if you could get through the first 5 games, hell, you probably only need to play 3 of them.

yzzlthtz:
you may have something there. but comparing Halo 3 to MGS4 is like comparing Peanut Butter M&Ms to a 5 Course Italian feast. After eating a bunch of M&Ms, you probably won't have room or appreciation for the feast, but you'll pick at it and make amateur comments about its garishness.

Both stories were equally sci-fi pulpy to me. Neither would entice me to read a book about them. I've read good books, these are not them. They are enjoyable in their own ways, but not literary masterpieces that will be remembered for all time.

Evilducks:

Jumplion:

Evilducks:
Jumplion, saying somebody is being "burned" by everybody responding to him is immaterial without providing any examples of this actually occurring. I don't even believe you are arguing about the same thing he is. I'm actually curious as to what you think this discussion is about exactly.

Considering Tempdude0 has most of the facts in hand on MGS4 I think he's probably watched most, if not all of, MGS4. Since most of what he is arguing about is delivered through painfully long cut-scenes he doesn't need to be the one behind the controller, as the game-play is irrelevant to his argument.

You tell me, i think this whole argument is pointless as everyone has their opinion but to me Tempdude0 is trying to imply his opinion (or more accurately Yahtzee's) as fact. And i had an example of indigo_Dingo proving him wrong. Of course, it all depends on how you see "burning" as in my opinion tempdude0 is getting burned by his own points. You may think that he's the most sense out of anyone here but that is your opinion and i don't have to prove it to you because it is your opinion

I'm still waiting for a reply on what exactly this argument is.

Ah, as I suspected, you don't even know what you're talking about. You don't know what the argument even is and yet you claim somebody is being proven wrong.

The only thing Tempdude0 has been 'proven' wrong on (much like myself) were details of the story. The details were never what the argument was about. We don't care that a ninja was made by NASA, it was just an example. He got an example wrong and admitted that indigo_Dingo pointed out a plausible answer that invalidated that particular example. Tempdude0 has admitted his ranting nature, which leads to lots of WORDS WORDS WORDS, which, when picked apart, will lead to minor flaws. The argument remains sound though.

How about you pipe in about victors when you actually figure out what is being discussed. Also, quit being a fanboy, this review was hardly scathing. Yahtzee even endorsed it if you could get through the first 5 games, hell, you probably only need to play 3 of them.

I really don't want to get into a pointless argument here, but i'll defend what i think needs defending.

Finaly, someone understands that i have no idea what this whole pointless argument is about! Why are you even arguing? Are you trying to achieve a false sense of security that you just happend to be a better arguer than the people that you are arguing against because apparantly your opinon is better than everyone else?

Okay, i have been reading Tempdude0's arguments from I believe page 20 or 21. I understand what he's saying i just don't understand his reasons and what exactly he's defending. If i started where Terra started arguing with Mspencer then i would probably have a better idea of why the hell all of you are arguing in the first place. And you say that i am claiming that he is being burned when i have clearly stated that in my FUCKING OPINION he is being proven wrong tremendously. I'll say it again, if you think that he makes the most sense out of everyone else then that is your OUCKING FPINION and in no way give you the right to say that i am wrong because my opinion just happend to be different then yours.

From what i can deduct, this whole argument IS about the plot and details of the story as both of you are saying (from what i can see) that the MGS series is badly written. Saying that obviously means that the details of the story and the plot itself is (in your opinion) badly written. I'm not sure if you yourself know what you're arguing about.

I do admit, however, that it was a bit hypocritical for me to argue in something i don't know fully but i thought i knew enough of it anyway.

And i am not a fanboy, infact i have stated time and time again that i have never played an MGS game up until this point and i didn't find the plot at all too confusing (aside from a question or two)

When everyone replied to someone trying to disprove them through various quotes (I.E. You, VeryObvlivious, Tempdude0. ect..) then it really shows that this whole thing is pointless.

I am just waiting for you or anyone else to quote every paragraph i wrote and say a bunch of random shit that has nothing to do with what i wrote or just trying to nitpick at a sentence or two of a few letters and totaly exploit it to something i did not intend for it to be intended and then i reply saying what i really meant and then you nitpick on something I wrote back.

tis' an endless cycle.

*shudder* that was disturbingly fun....

The world would be a very dull place if everybody just accepted everybody else has an opinion. If this is getting to you then stop reading it. You admit you don't understand whats being argued and yet feel inclined to insert your opinions on the debate.

I don't want to break it to you but I will anyway. Just because somebody has an opinion doesn't make it impervious to being wrong. If I had the opinion that we didn't land on the moon I would be wrong, it would be my opinion, it would just be wrong. Perhaps you need something less debatable (though I find it equally absurd). If I was of the opinion that there was no oceans on the planet Earth, it would be my opinion, but it would still be wrong. I could come up with stupid arguments all I want to defend my stupid opinion, it wouldn't make it any less wrong. Whatever person told you that all opinions are valid should be slapped. This is the case when it comes to subjective topics, but in most cases somebody is wrong.

There are very simple and agreed upon principles to what makes a story well written and this story doesn't follow them. Rules about exposition, timing, pacing, fluff, plot devices, etc. Maybe if it only broke rules in a couple places there would be room for debate, but this breaks the rules of good writing so often that it isn't really up for debate in my opinion.

So, in the end I can say your opinion is wrong all I want when it is indeed wrong. It may be your opinion that it's not, but you're still wrong.

Evilducks:

yzzlthtz:
you may have something there. but comparing Halo 3 to MGS4 is like comparing Peanut Butter M&Ms to a 5 Course Italian feast. After eating a bunch of M&Ms, you probably won't have room or appreciation for the feast, but you'll pick at it and make amateur comments about its garishness.

Both stories were equally sci-fi pulpy to me. Neither would entice me to read a book about them. I've read good books, these are not them. They are enjoyable in their own ways, but not literary masterpieces that will be remembered for all time.

MGS4 has atleast a half way believeable story. In halo 3 the master chief can fall through an ATMOSPHERE(Thats a huge distance) And not die from say heat, reentry, I dunno hitting the ground in a big metal suit? He gets up yet a few bullets kill him? WTF?! MGS series is atleast trying to fix some of its earlier kiddy mistakes and atleast it half way wraps up all the plot lines and characters.

Evilducks:
The world would be a very dull place if everybody just accepted everybody else has an opinion. If this is getting to you then stop reading it. You admit you don't understand whats being argued and yet feel inclined to insert your opinions on the debate.

I don't want to break it to you but I will anyway. Just because somebody has an opinion doesn't make it impervious to being wrong. If I had the opinion that we didn't land on the moon I would be wrong, it would be my opinion, it would just be wrong. Perhaps you need something less debatable (though I find it equally absurd). If I was of the opinion that there was no oceans on the planet Earth, it would be my opinion, but it would still be wrong. I could come up with stupid arguments all I want to defend my stupid opinion, it wouldn't make it any less wrong. Whatever person told you that all opinions are valid should be slapped. This is the case when it comes to subjective topics, but in most cases somebody is wrong.

There are very simple and agreed upon principles to what makes a story well written and this story doesn't follow them. Rules about exposition, timing, pacing, fluff, plot devices, etc. Maybe if it only broke rules in a couple places there would be room for debate, but this breaks the rules of good writing so often that it isn't really up for debate in my opinion.

So, in the end I can say your opinion is wrong all I want when it is indeed wrong. It may be your opinion that it's not, but you're still wrong.

Well, atleast you didn't sound as snobbish in this post then your last one and for that i am grateful.

But it still doesn't make any sense to me why you guys are arguing about MGS having bad writing.

"Rules about exposition, timing, pacing, fluff, plot devices, etc. Maybe if it only broke rules in a couple places there would be room for debate, but this breaks the rules of good writing so often that it isn't really up for debate in my opinion."

However, all of that is purely an opinion. The whole "bad writing" argument is purely an opinion as there cannot be a fact that the series is badly written. I personally believe that hte MGS series is very well written if a bit clustered at times and that is my opinion. Is it wrong? No. can it be wrong to someone else? Yes. Does that still make my opinion wrong? No.

This "debate" isn't really a debate as just people with different opinions of MGS arguing and it never ends well (i should know, i have arguments with my friend all the time, hell a recent one i had was between a game having bad graphics or bad art direction. guess which one i was?)

And one mroe thing, i'm not saying that we should all just stop arguing all together, quite the oposite infact i love arguing if it's civilized and just for the sake of arguing, but this particular "debate" is pointless as no one understands where the other is coming from and everyone else thinks the other is a retard.

This is my final post in this thread unless someone replies to this one in which case that will be my last reply.

Two things: Stop saying that because MGS4 is not a literary masterpiece, it is not good. The fact that you'd have to debate this point to the ends of the internet world can likely be crediting to the fact that the game is much better then you're giving it credit for. Or maybe you dislike it, whatever. God forbid we all like the exact same things.

Second: If, at any point during a debate, you reference some rule, in this case the "supposed rules of writing" (which any good author would tell you that the purpose of literary devices and "rules" are to know them so that you can break them: this is a very basic creative lit concept, feel free to dispute it, though), and then assume that since your opposition in the debate does not follow these rules he is somehow immediately wrong, please feel free to get up, go to seek anyone who is involved in any sort of formalized debate team/teaching, and then ask them to explain to you why such an act is debate suicide.

Your opposition will never take you serious, henceforth, nor will most onlookers.

Saying "You're entitled to your opinion, but you're wrong anyway" is pretty much equivalent to referencing the Nazi's. You've taken the point of a debate, and pushed it down a hill, because you have too much nerd-rage or feel the need to make sweeping generalizations.

Your credibility, it has gone out the window. Say goodbye.

Bulletinmybrain:
MGS4 has atleast a half way believeable story. In halo 3 the master chief can fall through an ATMOSPHERE(Thats a huge distance) And not die from say heat, reentry, I dunno hitting the ground in a big metal suit? He gets up yet a few bullets kill him? WTF?! MGS series is atleast trying to fix some of its earlier kiddy mistakes and atleast it half way wraps up all the plot lines and characters.

No, it's really not. You're pointing out the difference between cutscenes and gameplay. MGS suffers from gaps in this just as badly as Halo ever has.

Jumplion:
However, all of that is purely an opinion. The whole "bad writing" argument is purely an opinion as there cannot be a fact that the series is badly written. I personally believe that hte MGS series is very well written if a bit clustered at times and that is my opinion. Is it wrong? No. can it be wrong to someone else? Yes. Does that still make my opinion wrong? No.

Try arguing that when you turn a paper into a professor in college, let me know how it works out for you. Make sure you retell the same points over and over again and leave big plot holes. Let me know what any student of literature will tell you about its quality. Your opinion may be different, but it can definately be wrong.

Remeber, just because you like something doesn't validate it as good literature. I enjoy many things that are bad, it makes them good to me, but it doesn't make them good.

Pugjce:
Two things: Stop saying that because MGS4 is not a literary masterpiece, it is not good. The fact that you'd have to debate this point to the ends of the internet world can likely be crediting to the fact that the game is much better then you're giving it credit for. Or maybe you dislike it, whatever. God forbid we all like the exact same things.

Second: If, at any point during a debate, you reference some rule, in this case the "supposed rules of writing" (which any good author would tell you that the purpose of literary devices and "rules" are to know them so that you can break them: this is a very basic creative lit concept, feel free to dispute it, though), and then assume that since your opposition in the debate does not follow these rules he is somehow immediately wrong, please feel free to get up, go to seek anyone who is involved in any sort of formalized debate team/teaching, and then ask them to explain to you why such an act is debate suicide.

Your opposition will never take you serious, henceforth, nor will most onlookers.

Saying "You're entitled to your opinion, but you're wrong anyway" is pretty much equivalent to referencing the Nazi's. You've taken the point of a debate, and pushed it down a hill, because you have too much nerd-rage or feel the need to make sweeping generalizations.

Your credibility, it has gone out the window. Say goodbye.

I never said the game was bad, I said the game has bad writing. Stop arguing against points I never made, god forbid we actually have a real debate.

Breaking so-called "rules-of-writing" when done in a creative way is one thing. Breaking rules in a way that is just poor storytelling is another. Being overly repetitive can be clever when it proves a point, it is bad when it bores the audience. Saying it breaks the established rules of a genre is suicide if you rely on the rules alone. It's not even that all good writing follows a certain set of guidelines, it's that most bad writing contains certain flaws. These flaws being readily apparent in this story. Unless you want to argue that pointless repetition is 'good writing' in this context?

MGS4 repeats the stories of the previous games in a way that doesn't provide enough information to those new to the series and in a way that provides far too much repeated exposition to those who are familiar with the series. Tell me why this is good writing. I'll tell you why it is bad writing. It pulls the reader out of the story, it forces them to repeat information they already know, it talks down to the audience.

If opinions cannot be wrong, then what is the point of debate? Last I checked, it was to prove or at least convince either that person or a 3rd party that the opinion is flawed.

Evilducks:

Jumplion:
However, all of that is purely an opinion. The whole "bad writing" argument is purely an opinion as there cannot be a fact that the series is badly written. I personally believe that hte MGS series is very well written if a bit clustered at times and that is my opinion. Is it wrong? No. can it be wrong to someone else? Yes. Does that still make my opinion wrong? No.

Try arguing that when you turn a paper into a professor in college, let me know how it works out for you. Make sure you retell the same points over and over again and leave big plot holes. Let me know what any student of literature will tell you about its quality. Your opinion may be different, but it can definately be wrong.

Remeber, just because you like something doesn't validate it as good literature. I enjoy many things that are bad, it makes them good to me, but it doesn't make them good.

(i'm probably going to completely contradict what i'm about to say but it's not problem as i do it all the time.)

Okay, first things first, by god do not reply to this. I don't want to go into another argument about opinions, i just want to show you what i mean from what i'm posting. no more arguing, it doesn't matter anymore.

So, first of all, there's a difference between an opinion and an opinion backed up by facts (prepare for the contradicting points >_>;) Obviously, when you turn in a paper to your professor you have to back up your opinion with facts. You can't just give him/her a paper with your opinion on something without backing up your opinion.

now, before you say anything, yes the whole arguing on here about MGS is opinion, but all of these opinions are backed up by even more opinions; thus creating a stupid argument.

An example of this would be my up-and-coming rant on mainstream (god i have to stop advertising that, it'll be a while before i finish it). I'm not going to just put my opinion on the Escapist without backing up them with real facts and not more opinions on what i'm discussing.

Another example would be that some of you are saying that the story is clustered and fucked and you back it up by explaining the story the way you see it. You may think that the way you stated the story would be confusing but for someone who understands the story it may just seem simple to them. So the person who said that the story was clustered or whatever just backed up his opinion with an opinion.

Do you understand what i'm trying to tell everyone? I'm not going to say the most obnoxious thing ever "*Insert username here*, did you read all of my posts?" or "*insert name here*, try reading my post again" because i absolutely hate people who do that, YES i read your post(s) as much as i could so i wouldn't sound like a retard so shut up!

But now i'm ranting if i havn't already.

So, can we put this to rest now? Can Solid Snake/Hideo Kojima be left alone in peace?

Alot of people are saying that there could be another mailbag showdown but has anyone really wrote something that can be trashed by Yahtzee? I don't know I was just asking?

agerdemon:
Alot of people are saying that there could be another mailbag showdown but has anyone really wrote something that can be trashed by Yahtzee? I don't know I was just asking?

Probably in e-mails sent to him.

DAMNIT, i lied to myself...

Evilducks:

Bulletinmybrain:
MGS4 has atleast a half way believeable story. In halo 3 the master chief can fall through an ATMOSPHERE(Thats a huge distance) And not die from say heat, reentry, I dunno hitting the ground in a big metal suit? He gets up yet a few bullets kill him? WTF?! MGS series is atleast trying to fix some of its earlier kiddy mistakes and atleast it half way wraps up all the plot lines and characters.

No, it's really not. You're pointing out the difference between cutscenes and gameplay. MGS suffers from gaps in this just as badly as Halo ever has.

Okay i have thought about it yes snake gets burned, Yes snake somehow take explosives all this is true. but still atleast he feels the pain and heres a major thing that makes it differnt. There was no book you had to read to figure out why the hell did he just come flying out the sky they didn't make you have to buy a FUCKING BOOK.(Something that you will most likely have no sway you read it nothing more nothing less.) MGS4 left no cliffhangers when it said it was the final story. Unlike halo 3 that just says "Okay you finished the fight but now we need a lot more money so how about you keep buying the games where you have to deal with idiot AI's and even stupider enemies more like a comedey instead of a shooter and then when you go online you have to deal with kids. And then buy the books so you know why the hell this guys going to become a freaking monkey with a raygun." Hell it may seemed cluttered with dialouge but its actually dialouge that gives you the answers. Do you think the art of war could be wrote on one page? No because theres a whole lot of explanations same thing goes with mgs4. Nearly every cut scene( Minus a few with a little comical relief but still most of those still had a point.) had a use for the most part. If you delved into the dialouge a bit you could find various answers to why is snake dying who the hell is the The Boss and why did zero build the patriot AI.

This is simply not working. Evil is predicating his entire argument upon what he views are the varying rules of writing, debate, ect. Various other posters are doing the same.

Ultimately, from what Evil has stated and the manner in which he has posted, I cannot say that I'd grant him the title of "trusted, imperical source" in the issues of debate, or conception of creative writing. Once you make an argument about what you think is right, against what others think is right, and simply cease stating relevant facts, the debte has ended. Now we're playing I'm right because I'm a man whom knows about writing and fact, and you're wrong because you seem to be an idiot."

Thems no-where-lands, gents. Thems no-where-lands.

Pugjce:
Once you make an argument about what you think is right, against what others think is right, and simply cease stating relevant facts, the debte has ended. Now we're playing I'm right because I'm a man whom knows about writing and fact, and you're wrong because you seem to be an idiot."

Evilducks:
MGS4 repeats the stories of the previous games in a way that doesn't provide enough information to those new to the series and in a way that provides far too much repeated exposition to those who are familiar with the series. Tell me why this is good writing. I'll tell you why it is bad writing. It pulls the reader out of the story, it forces them to repeat information they already know, it talks down to the audience.

I stated a question that continues debate around relevant facts. You choose to ignore it, you don't appear to have been interested in debate at all.

Simon_TR:

katsabas:
AAAAAAAAAAAAnd mailbag showdown nr.2

I hope so; the first one was priceless. Besides, what games are there left to review...

The Lego Indiana Jones?

Roblin:

Evilducks:
The problem with you arguing this is such a clear and simplistic story is that if that is indeed the case then it's bad writing in his inability to explain it in a much more concise and hopefully punchy manner. If the story isn't that simple then your simplistic explanation of it proves it is again bad writing because you think you know what is happening but don't and thus he failed to tell the story well.

Now...

As far as Terra is concerned, I think you don't understand things unless they are spelled out in unbelievable detail. This shouldn't be the burden of the writer. If they want to go and create an encyclopedia of information for you to read on your own time because the universe is interesting to you, then great for you and him.

The problem arises when you include this encyclopedia into the narrative of the story, it destroys the pacing of a story. A story needs a good flow, or pacing, for it to be 'good'. This has nothing to do with patience or length. Right now my favorite books are the Song of Ice and Fire series by Martin. These are not short books, but he keeps the pace flowing in a way that makes you want to read more, makes you want to learn about where a character is going. Very little detail he gives you isn't important to the current sub plot or over arching plot.

Kojima doesn't possess this skill. He indulges in the details to an extreme level that only pull you out of the story and force you to realize your just taking in inconsequential information that has no bearing on what is happening. I think sometimes Kojima forgets he has a visual medium and just reads pages of dialog to you. When you are in a visual medium you need to use it. The rest of the time he forgets you're in an interactive medium.

Clearest argument yet! People claim Kojima is a frustrated filmmaker, but there are mountains of screenwriting textbooks that stress that too much expositional dialogue is deemed as BAD WRITING. The inability to tell a story with economy is BAD WRITING. Back-story and character development is VITAL, but there are more subtle and artful ways to portray it than simply telling the audience. You would think Kojima's knowledge of cinema history would have taught him that.

Pfft... Look at me talking as if it's a film.

The games main plot can be summarised in a few paragraphs, if you want to edit out the crucial details and understanding, yes. However, we need to also consider all the subplots and character revelataions.

And where is an example of this unneccesary dialogue? You actually need to give examples. I can think of one (UND PRECISELY VON) example of meaningless dialogue, the one where Snake and Otacon were trying to figure out why Liqid would be going to Shadow Moses if he needed to get an unrestricted Nuke. I had figured out before them that Ocelot was planning to use REX to launch part of its Nuclear stockpile at JD, and went along with their thirty second road to understanding. Thats 30 seconds.

Plus, I think you might be once again misinterpreting the artistic nature. The juxtaposition of grim and bloody warfare with boring expositions is supposed to reflect the harsh nature of the battlefield, and the frankly boring things that get fought over upon them. Least thats my interpretation.

hah tactical espionage action - TEA (yes im british)
i was kinda the same hearing people talk about this in school with the whole ocelot died liquids arm takes over blah blah blah. seriously what the hell? i know the first games had kind of odd story points but that is ridiculous
personally i believe the game should have been a one hit wonder. none of the wierd ass sequels. though i can see why people like but just come on and old snake? when is that ever a good idea
rant over - hoping he reviews BF:bad company next should be decent

agerdemon:
Alot of people are saying that there could be another mailbag showdown but has anyone really wrote something that can be trashed by Yahtzee? I don't know I was just asking?

I doubt it. But then I doubt he'd be above making up letters, pretending they were sent to him, and then mocking them.

Kukakkau:
hah tactical espionage action - TEA (yes im british)
i was kinda the same hearing people talk about this in school with the whole ocelot died liquids arm takes over blah blah blah. seriously what the hell? i know the first games had kind of odd story points but that is ridiculous
personally i believe the game should have been a one hit wonder. none of the wierd ass sequels. though i can see why people like but just come on and old snake? when is that ever a good idea
rant over - hoping he reviews BF:bad company next should be decent

I really shouldn't, but...
The reason they showed an aged to Snake was as a metaphor for Snakes ways and rules of battle were becoming outdated and obsolete, replaced by "modern warfare".

I've never really played through any of the MGS games so I can't say I like the story, but from the pieces I've heard from it I do find it oddly interesting. Even if the story does suck it's better to be original and suck than copy something that sucks and suck harder than they did.

Jumplion:

@Eldritch Warlord: It probably is what EvilDuck said with the increased viewers or that everything that Yahtzee said about Halo 3 was correct but he says many things wrong with MGS4, oh deer i'm a jackass!! NOOOO!! Okay, no more arguing randomly! I'm clean.

But you've already unleased hell!! Kidding, but I do think you're wrong. I won't go into that but I posted a number of observations that are evidence for Yahtzee's bias against Halo and maybe popular games in general in the comments thread for Halo 3.

Evilducks:

I think it's do to the increased viewership of ZP. Had Halo 3 come out last week I think the thread would easily be this long.

You're probably right, right now I'm beating myself up for not noticing that. It probably had something to do with it being 2 AM when I posted that.

Bulletinmybrain:

MGS4 has atleast a half way believeable story. In halo 3 the master chief can fall through an ATMOSPHERE(Thats a huge distance) And not die from say heat, reentry, I dunno hitting the ground in a big metal suit? He gets up yet a few bullets kill him? WTF?! MGS series is atleast trying to fix some of its earlier kiddy mistakes and atleast it half way wraps up all the plot lines and characters.

Now I'm part of the problem but whatever, no one's fixing it.

If you had played Halo 3 then you probably would have noticed that when the controls are first given to you there is a large metal object of Forerunner design in a small crater right in front of you. Master Chief rode this down to avoid most of the friction heat. Also, his energy shield can intensified (at the cost of restricting movement) and projected away from the body to create a potent cushion. To add protection the suit has a layer of ballistic gel which dissipates kinetic energy and the armor can be "locked up" to prevent extreme trauma to the limbs. It does make sense, it just doesn't blatantly explain every detail.

Jumplion:

Actually, tommorow on Wednsday there's going to be an update for the PS3 that allows players to earn Trophys. I'm not sure what games exactly will have those (Super Stardust HD will be the first) but i am totaly going to be a trophy whore.

I knew, and I've already interpreted it as an expected continuation of Sony's business strategy (in the video game market) which is to copy popular things and maybe improve them slightly. I'm not bashing them for it, it's obviously worked so far, but it certainly won't make me respect them. To be honest I've never liked Sony and, unless they seriously alter their strategy, probably never will. Even if I eventually do get a ps3 and love numerous games on it.

On a lighter note, why would I switch to collecting trophies when I have an impressive horde of achievements already? ;)

EDIT:

Bulletinmybrain:
There was no book you had to read to figure out why the hell did he just come flying out the sky [Konami] didn't make you have to buy a FUCKING BOOK.

The Halo novels and graphic novels are expansions of the story. One who cares about the story will read them, one only casually interested can get a basic understanding by just playing the games. And to show how uniformed you are I will tell you that there is nothing yet that actually explains why the hell he just came flying out the sky but you can assume from the ending of Halo 2 that he jumped off the Forerunner Dreadnought to escape it.

You're entire post seems like Halo bashing for the sake of Halo bashing and to "proove" that MGS is better. I don't care much what you believe and I don't see what you hope to gain by trying to convince people that you're right in your chosen fashion. What you should do is present facts or concurring opinions from respectable sources, or at the very least try to be entertaining.

I hope the amount of these "everyone go fucking insane" threads lowers, I mean, he's complaining about MGS4 not welcoming newcomers, he's complaining about having to press triangle once to go into first person, and he played it on the easiest difficulty and said "it suckz and erryone is stupid!" - and now we have another 1,000 post thread - obviously this review is just a "get it out of the way and then review it so my 'fans' which I really hate, can shut the fuck up" kind of review.

When did we take Yahtzee seriously? WHEN? He makes some good points, and he uses humor, but he's not a serious reviewer, he's just here to make us laugh and make jokes about the game and there we go, that's it - he'll say if liked it or hated it and then wait till next week.

Remember, Yahtzee isn't God, he's just a normal guy, AND THAT'S WHY WE LIKE HIM, he's a normal guy who makes fun of games and uses humor to make a point, but overall he's just as bitchy and whiny as a fanboy is, and most of his complaints are just there to make his reviews longer, but if they make you laugh then you shouldn't care.

ElArabDeMagnifico:
I hope the amount of these "everyone go fucking insane" threads lowers, I mean, he's complaining about MGS4 not welcoming newcomers, he's complaining about having to press triangle once to go into first person, and he played it on the easiest difficulty and said "it suckz and erryone is stupid!" - and now we have another 1,000 post thread - obviously this review is just a "get it out of the way and then review it so my 'fans' which I really hate, can shut the fuck up" kind of review.

When did we take Yahtzee seriously? WHEN? He makes some good points, and he uses humor, but he's not a serious reviewer, he's just here to make us laugh and make jokes about the game and there we go, that's it - he'll say if liked it or hated it and then wait till next week.

Remember, Yahtzee isn't God, he's just a normal guy, AND THAT'S WHY WE LIKE HIM, he's a normal guy who makes fun of games and uses humor to make a point, but overall he's just as bitchy and whiny as a fanboy is, and most of his complaints are just there to make his reviews longer, but if they make you laugh then you shouldn't care.

I find he gives more honest opinions of games than most enthusiast press outlets. He points out flaws, points out things done well, gives a personal opinion of the game in an entertaining manner. What about this is not a serious "review"?

Jumplion:

1. Ha, you actually replied to that? It wasn't even directed to you.

2. All Indigo_Dingo is doing is providing a simpler version of everyone's arguments, everyone else is trying to put some iceing on the cake.

3. Of course you are going to reply to anyone who answers you becase
A) You think they are wrong
B) You didn't read their posts clear enough
and
C) You reply to their relpys by doing the exact same thing that they are doing, which is replying with completely irrelivant answers (which i admit, they are giving you more relivant answers then you are right now)

I'm not a hater (though i wouldn't be surprised if you replied to THAT) but your answers are the most irrelivant. Most of the examples are Indigo_Dingo proving you wrong.

One more thing, why are you even trying to defend yourself? If you havn't even played the game you can't make assumptions because people who HAVE played the game will prove you wrong. Tell me, i know you said you've played the game from your friends copy, but tell me did you play the whole game with all the cutscenes paying close attention and maybe looking at the MGS Database after a while?

I can not see what you are trying to defend here, you have nothing to defend. Infact the more you defend your point or what ever it is you're defending, the more you're going to get burned and the more you will either try or succesfully burn others (as i do admit, some of your arguments are slightly valid if only slightly)

I'm done with you, DO NOT reply to this because i will most likely not reply back anyway (that's a lie, I probably would 3:)

1) So, it's directed at the magical invisible clone of myself. Right then.

2) A simple version. You mean a "concise" version, and even then that statement wouldn't be accurate. He's citing things from the story and going into detail on why they prove his point. Everyone else was "Don't understand, it's not that hard, Kojima moves in mysterious ways DURR HURR HURR."

3) Uh, I just admitted that Indigo_Dingo was correct, thereby invalidating the first two points. As for the last, my points are irrelevant in what way? Show me where I go off on a tangent that isn't related to something the previous poster brought up. I dare you to.

Of course you're not a hater, your reading comprehension just sucks.

I watched the game be played you dope, that's why I haven't commented on the gameplay aspects. I even said so a few posts back. It's hard to talk about borked controls or bad response time or whatever when my bulk of knowledge is just seeing the game be played. It allows me to comment on the pacing of the game, the cutscenes, and essentially everything but the controls.

I'm sorry you're not able to follow my writing. I wish I could impart upon you an ounce of reading comprehension with which to follow what I write. Others manage to do it. In fact, even some of the people arguing against my viewpoint understand my writing. Once again, YOUR lack of understanding in no way detracts from the validity of my previous statements.

To Bulletinmybrain, yeah, they wanted you to buy a book. The MGS series required you to own no less than four games. I wouldn't use something like that as a basis of any argument anyway.

Indigo_Dingo:
The games main plot can be summarised in a few paragraphs, if you want to edit out the crucial details and understanding, yes. However, we need to also consider all the subplots and character revelataions.

And where is an example of this unneccesary dialogue? You actually need to give examples. I can think of one (UND PRECISELY VON) example of meaningless dialogue, the one where Snake and Otacon were trying to figure out why Liqid would be going to Shadow Moses if he needed to get an unrestricted Nuke. I had figured out before them that Ocelot was planning to use REX to launch part of its Nuclear stockpile at JD, and went along with their thirty second road to understanding. Thats 30 seconds.

Plus, I think you might be once again misinterpreting the artistic nature. The juxtaposition of grim and bloody warfare with boring expositions is supposed to reflect the harsh nature of the battlefield, and the frankly boring things that get fought over upon them. Least thats my interpretation.

The problem there is that "artistic nature" goes only so far. While you put forward an interesting theory, that doesn't make the dialogue any less dry. In a game/book/movie/and even artwork, the statment being made can only go so far without the piece pulling some of the weight. Unless of course you're attempting to relate MGS 4 to conceptual art, in which case I think your head should explode from even bringing that shit up. Even so, I'll try to run with it, IF THAT IS WHERE YOU'RE GOING, of course. If not, ignore everything from the "head exploding" part onward. Conceptual art is "...the idea or concept is the most important aspect of the work. When an artist uses a conceptual form of art, it means that all of the planning and decisions are made beforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair. The idea becomes a machine that makes the art." I despise this with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns as it's an excuse to say "You just don't get it."...Okay, that was more of an "off tangent" that I've been accused of doing before, but I hate Conceptual art with a blinding passion.

Indigo_Dingo:
I really shouldn't, but...
The reason they showed an aged to Snake was as a metaphor for Snakes ways and rules of battle were becoming outdated and obsolete, replaced by "modern warfare".

And that's how most of the metaphors should have gone. Kojima tends to neglect the visual aspects of the medium he works in. Had he managed to convey his "messages" whatever they may be, in a more subtle way I doubt people would be taking as many issues with the game. The problem is that he takes the "Beat the audience upside the head" approach. Some people may enjoy it, but it doesn't make him Chaucer.

ElArabDeMagnifico:
I hope the amount of these "everyone go fucking insane" threads lowers, I mean, he's complaining about MGS4 not welcoming newcomers, he's complaining about having to press triangle once to go into first person, and he played it on the easiest difficulty and said "it suckz and everryone is stupid!" - and now we have another 1,000 post thread - obviously this review is just a "get it out of the way and then review it so my 'fans' which I really hate, can shut the fuck up" kind of review.

When did we take Yahtzee seriously? WHEN? He makes some good points, and he uses humor, but he's not a serious reviewer, he's just here to make us laugh and make jokes about the game and there we go, that's it - he'll say if liked it or hated it and then wait till next week.

Remember, Yahtzee isn't God, he's just a normal guy, AND THAT'S WHY WE LIKE HIM, he's a normal guy who makes fun of games and uses humor to make a point, but overall he's just as bitchy and whiny as a fanboy is, and most of his complaints are just there to make his reviews longer, but if they make you laugh then you shouldn't care.

Why do his complaints have to be there just to make his reviews longer? Can they not just be actual issues with the game? Hell, In many ways I find his reviews to be more accurate than those of other "reviewers" Sure, I may not always agree with him but I can't really discount most of the issues he brings up.

Tempdude0:

Jumplion:

1. Ha, you actually replied to that? It wasn't even directed to you.

2. All Indigo_Dingo is doing is providing a simpler version of everyone's arguments, everyone else is trying to put some iceing on the cake.

3. Of course you are going to reply to anyone who answers you becase
A) You think they are wrong
B) You didn't read their posts clear enough
and
C) You reply to their relpys by doing the exact same thing that they are doing, which is replying with completely irrelivant answers (which i admit, they are giving you more relivant answers then you are right now)

I'm not a hater (though i wouldn't be surprised if you replied to THAT) but your answers are the most irrelivant. Most of the examples are Indigo_Dingo proving you wrong.

One more thing, why are you even trying to defend yourself? If you havn't even played the game you can't make assumptions because people who HAVE played the game will prove you wrong. Tell me, i know you said you've played the game from your friends copy, but tell me did you play the whole game with all the cutscenes paying close attention and maybe looking at the MGS Database after a while?

I can not see what you are trying to defend here, you have nothing to defend. Infact the more you defend your point or what ever it is you're defending, the more you're going to get burned and the more you will either try or succesfully burn others (as i do admit, some of your arguments are slightly valid if only slightly)

I'm done with you, DO NOT reply to this because i will most likely not reply back anyway (that's a lie, I probably would 3:)

1) So, it's directed at the magical invisible clone of myself. Right then.

2) A simple version. You mean a "concise" version, and even then that statement wouldn't be accurate. He's citing things from the story and going into detail on why they prove his point. Everyone else was "Don't understand, it's not that hard, Kojima moves in mysterious ways DURR HURR HURR."

3) Uh, I just admitted that Indigo_Dingo was correct, thereby invalidating the first two points. As for the last, my points are irrelevant in what way? Show me where I go off on a tangent that isn't related to something the previous poster brought up. I dare you to.

Of course you're not a hater, your reading comprehension just sucks.

I watched the game be played you dope, that's why I haven't commented on the gameplay aspects. I even said so a few posts back. It's hard to talk about borked controls or bad response time or whatever when my bulk of knowledge is just seeing the game be played. It allows me to comment on the pacing of the game, the cutscenes, and essentially everything but the controls.

I'm sorry you're not able to follow my writing. I wish I could impart upon you an ounce of reading comprehension with which to follow what I write. Others manage to do it. In fact, even some of the people arguing against my viewpoint understand my writing. Once again, YOUR lack of understanding in no way detracts from the validity of my previous statements.

Oh the irony, you complaining about MGS with bad writing and I apparantly can comprehend your own works of writing. You must totaly be a bad writer [/sarcasam]

I don't feel like defending my points that probably changed a couple of pages ago (I think this was quoted in page 25) as I really have nothing to defend. You're entitled to your opinion but why are you so determined to prove that your opinion (or more accurately Yahtzee's) is fact when it is clearly not.

I would prefer you do not reply to this, but even if you do i'm not going to reply so it would be a waste of both bandwidth and your time.

I've only ever played the NES Metal Gear games (good) and Metal Gear Solid 2 (eh), and I came away with the feeling that if they cut out certain points in the story. It's kind of like someone did the M. Night twists, but just added them in random parts over and over in each story or sub-story. Did we really need to go from MGS2's mission being a terrorist attack to a terrorist attack being committed by terrorists who think they're terrorists but are actually led by a guy leading a training exercise being led by a guy who wants to overthrow the government? Can't it just be a terrorist attack to overthrow the government? And what the hill did La Le Lu Le Lo (or whatever) have to do with anything? Whoever he is, he apparently had nothing to do with anything, but all of the characters freak out whenever you mention him, and it just seems to be a distraction.

Also, I don't complain about length of cutscenes. I'm fine with a long one as long as they don't slow down the game, outstage the gameplay, or get unnecessarily wordy, but MGS2 broke all of those. All I do is walk down a hallway shooting tranquilizer darts, then get to see my character pull off awesome combat moves against like twelve enemies in a ten-minute cutscene. Why can't I pull off those cool combat moves? All I do is end up walking down hallways shoot tranq darts, then having to fight a boss battle with the world's worst control schemes (can't I just press a button to draw a gun, then aim down the sights or fire? Why hold down a ton of buttons and press one button to fire, losing my aim if I let anything go?). It feels like many of the scenes can be done in a third of the time, while being just as well-said and well-developed as the original dialogue. Also, Japanese developers need to stop the whole "you think he's dead, then he shows up and dies again, but still is/maybe alive," thing. That got old by the end of the NES era.

I was fine with MGS2 as a $40 purchase. It was pretty polished and I saw it to the end, but I honestly don't see the praise it gets as a game, but understand why it's hailed as more of a story-oriented experience. If you sum up the main ideas and plot points, then it's a lot of great ideas, just put through the wrong paces, is all. I think Kojima needs to learn a little bit of subtlety, instead of just blurting out a plot twist every time you enter a new room.

Jumplion:

Tempdude0:

Jumplion:

1. Ha, you actually replied to that? It wasn't even directed to you.

2. All Indigo_Dingo is doing is providing a simpler version of everyone's arguments, everyone else is trying to put some iceing on the cake.

3. Of course you are going to reply to anyone who answers you becase
A) You think they are wrong
B) You didn't read their posts clear enough
and
C) You reply to their relpys by doing the exact same thing that they are doing, which is replying with completely irrelivant answers (which i admit, they are giving you more relivant answers then you are right now)

I'm not a hater (though i wouldn't be surprised if you replied to THAT) but your answers are the most irrelivant. Most of the examples are Indigo_Dingo proving you wrong.

One more thing, why are you even trying to defend yourself? If you havn't even played the game you can't make assumptions because people who HAVE played the game will prove you wrong. Tell me, i know you said you've played the game from your friends copy, but tell me did you play the whole game with all the cutscenes paying close attention and maybe looking at the MGS Database after a while?

I can not see what you are trying to defend here, you have nothing to defend. Infact the more you defend your point or what ever it is you're defending, the more you're going to get burned and the more you will either try or succesfully burn others (as i do admit, some of your arguments are slightly valid if only slightly)

I'm done with you, DO NOT reply to this because i will most likely not reply back anyway (that's a lie, I probably would 3:)

1) So, it's directed at the magical invisible clone of myself. Right then.

2) A simple version. You mean a "concise" version, and even then that statement wouldn't be accurate. He's citing things from the story and going into detail on why they prove his point. Everyone else was "Don't understand, it's not that hard, Kojima moves in mysterious ways DURR HURR HURR."

3) Uh, I just admitted that Indigo_Dingo was correct, thereby invalidating the first two points. As for the last, my points are irrelevant in what way? Show me where I go off on a tangent that isn't related to something the previous poster brought up. I dare you to.

Of course you're not a hater, your reading comprehension just sucks.

I watched the game be played you dope, that's why I haven't commented on the gameplay aspects. I even said so a few posts back. It's hard to talk about borked controls or bad response time or whatever when my bulk of knowledge is just seeing the game be played. It allows me to comment on the pacing of the game, the cutscenes, and essentially everything but the controls.

I'm sorry you're not able to follow my writing. I wish I could impart upon you an ounce of reading comprehension with which to follow what I write. Others manage to do it. In fact, even some of the people arguing against my viewpoint understand my writing. Once again, YOUR lack of understanding in no way detracts from the validity of my previous statements.

Oh the irony, you complaining about MGS with bad writing and I apparantly can comprehend your own works of writing. You must totaly be a bad writer [/sarcasam]

I don't feel like defending my points that probably changed a couple of pages ago (I think this was quoted in page 25) as I really have nothing to defend. You're entitled to your opinion but why are you so determined to prove that your opinion (or more accurately Yahtzee's) is fact when it is clearly not.

I would prefer you do not reply to this, but even if you do i'm not going to reply so it would be a waste of both bandwidth and your time.

My free time is pretty much worthless, hence the "free", so it's kind of hard to waste. That said, awaaaaay we go.

That first sentence doesn't even make sense. I mean, I guess you're saying you comprehend both bad writing and my own and as a result the two are comparable. The issue here is that you DON'T comprehend my writing you twat. I know it's hard for you, but I'm pretty sure you can make SOME kind of snide comment without resorting to moon logic.

It's hard to defend something without being halfway intelligent, and you change your points between pages? What, can't you even get what you're arguing straight? I even quoted your point for ease of reading. Though you did get the "nothing to defend" part correct.

I'm only determined to prove my point because almost everyone I'm arguing against is being a cockwit. I even GAVE YOU PEOPLE A VALID ARGUMENT WITH WHICH TO WORK and it was ignored. I did half the work for you and you still can't be arsed to fill in the blanks and make a reasonable argument, hence my incessant responding.

Oh, and you skipped every single point I made...even the numbered ones. GO YOU!

Pastey Old Greg:
I've only ever played the NES Metal Gear games (good) and Metal Gear Solid 2 (eh), and I came away with the feeling that if they cut out certain points in the story. It's kind of like someone did the M. Night twists, but just added them in random parts over and over in each story or sub-story. Did we really need to go from MGS2's mission being a terrorist attack to a terrorist attack being committed by terrorists who think they're terrorists but are actually led by a guy leading a training exercise being led by a guy who wants to overthrow the government? Can't it just be a terrorist attack to overthrow the government? And what the hill did La Le Lu Le Lo (or whatever) have to do with anything? Whoever he is, he apparently had nothing to do with anything, but all of the characters freak out whenever you mention him, and it just seems to be a distraction.

Also, I don't complain about length of cutscenes. I'm fine with a long one as long as they don't slow down the game, outstage the gameplay, or get unnecessarily wordy, but MGS2 broke all of those. All I do is walk down a hallway shooting tranquilizer darts, then get to see my character pull off awesome combat moves against like twelve enemies in a ten-minute cutscene. Why can't I pull off those cool combat moves? All I do is end up walking down hallways shoot tranq darts, then having to fight a boss battle with the world's worst control schemes (can't I just press a button to draw a gun, then aim down the sights or fire? Why hold down a ton of buttons and press one button to fire, losing my aim if I let anything go?). It feels like many of the scenes can be done in a third of the time, while being just as well-said and well-developed as the original dialogue. Also, Japanese developers need to stop the whole "you think he's dead, then he shows up and dies again, but still is/maybe alive," thing. That got old by the end of the NES era.

I was fine with MGS2 as a $40 purchase. It was pretty polished and I saw it to the end, but I honestly don't see the praise it gets as a game, but understand why it's hailed as more of a story-oriented experience. If you sum up the main ideas and plot points, then it's a lot of great ideas, just put through the wrong paces, is all. I think Kojima needs to learn a little bit of subtlety, instead of just blurting out a plot twist every time you enter a new room.

The La Le Lu Le Lo are the Patriots. Let's just leave it at that. If you're interested in more information about the La Le Lu Le Lo, just look it up. Trust me, it's better than having anyone here explain it.

Though the "Alive, Dead, Alive" whack a mole CAN be well done, I agree that Kojima goes a tad overboard with all the "Alive, Dead, working for dude A but really B but in actuality C, Dead, Alive, Working for D...etc."

Honestly, I don't even really disagree with the "Alive, Dead, etc..." I just wanted to toss in my two cents while I was replying to Jumptheshark up there.

And can I ask people to please stop comparing this thread and the SSBB thread to Halo 3 thread? The two are completely different. He called Halo 3 average, while he called the formers shit and said that only fanboys would buy them. If you want an actual comparison on the other two consoles to the Halo 3 thread, look at the Super Mario Galaxy and Uncharted threads.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 . . . 31 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here