gargantual said:
EternallyBored said:
gargantual said:
Kopikatsu said:
TheMigrantSoldier said:
shrekfan246 said:
Seriously, is this really going to be the next big nontroversy the gaming community latches on to? Murder is a pretty damn sensitive topic too, and yet people never seem to have a problem with the mass murdering that almost every game has you do throughout its running time.
It could be worse. The Quiet outfit controversy could be reignited with the release of Phantom Pain. And with the appearance of child soldiers...
Maybe. Although Kojima has said that there is a reason for Quiet's outfit and that the detractors will feel bad about themselves once they learn what that reason is.
Whether that's true or not remains to be seen, but even in this case, it's mostly people who haven't even played the game complaining about the content. So eh.
*Rubs hands together*
I can't wait to go. "OHH! IN YO FACE MOTHAFUCKAS! IN YO FAAACE!" When the truth hits em and they go 'oh. I see.'
and then do a dance in front of all the naysayers like " It Hurts doesn't it? It hurts. Truth buuurrnns doesn't it?"
Or, the people criticizing Quiet will say "that still makes no fucking sense" or "That explanation doesn't justify anything". Kojima has said crap like that in the past and it has never caused all of his critics to just shut up, many have seen his explanations, and still said "that's fucking stupid and doesn't justify anything".
I can guarantee you that no explanation for Quiet's clothing is going to completely stifle criticism, especially the meta criticism surrounding rumors like Kojima designing her outfit to make her more attractive to cosplay or sell figurines of. Because that criticism hinges on the metanarrative, so no ingame justification can ever work, because it will always be poisoned by the perception of that explanation still just being an excuse to dress up a female sniper in a bikini.
So yeah, don't save that little dance too long, because I don't think you're going to get the chance to use it very much.
Meh. That's just denial. If a person's slightly wrong they wouldn't just volunteer it. Poker faces remember, but I've got some friends that do say, if Kojima gives context like Eva, then they'll eat their words, I told them you're on. It'll be more for myself anyways.
The game industry may need more titles in the future that more systemize adult mundanity and demonstrate social responsibility, but to harp on Hideo Kojima for not being THE ONE to contribute to the paradigm shift makes me roll my eyes.
This 'art by committee' voice 'if you're not with us, you're against us or against social progress' is nauseating. If it's not ok for one gamer, they gotta impose the and its not OK for anyone who doesn't mind it either. I'm tell these guys. "I know it's controversial, I've known it for over 14 years now. enough with the 'Captain Obvious' moments." right?
then I add " look 'crusaders'. Debauchery in popular entertainment hasn't changed since the 70's. The only thing that's going to change is you. The only reason your Kojima's and Tarantino's ease up on some content is because of globalization. Outside of that, if a director's cut exists. People will still demand any suggested 'filth' in all its full context and fictional glory,. If it's in story context and there's a market for it then its as valid as any other entertainment."
Calling any dissent "denial" seems like a case of denial from your end, there very well will be people who will see Kojima's explanation and genuinely not see the justification as adequate, just as there are those that still effectively argue against similar statements in Kojima's past games.
Look, I like the Metal Gear series, but Kojima is no Tarantino, he tries to be edgy and deep, and sometimes he succeeds, but he often fails miserably as well. The "art by committee" criticism is a copout defense of any sort of criticism against how a movie or work may effectively use a scene or controversial subject. It's a false equivalency that tries to paint all criticism of tone, use, and effectiveness of a controversial subject, to attempts to censor or silence a subject. It is perfectly possible to criticize the use of Rape or the character of Quiet in Metal Gear without trying to change or influence the work as a whole, I have yet to see anyone in this thread calling for a boycott, or demanding that Kojima is obligated or required to change the content or scene within the game. Your appeal to artistic freedom is wholly unwarranted in this scenario, and trying to paint all critique and conversation as an attempt at imposition is intellectually dishonest from your end.
Your final paragraph is a nice sentiment, but wholly pointless, some people finding things attractive and entertaining no matter the context or controversy is perfectly fine, it is not, however, an effective defense against the criticism of the piece to begin with. Just because a segment of the audience will always demand more, does not protect the work from others who may find fault with that work.
In the end, your friends may have found Eva's context satisfactory, others still found that context to be a contrived or typically unsatisfactory explanation, the same thing happened with the BB corps in MGS 4, and in that case, I can tell you that the criticism against them did not continue just out of denial, you cannot justify a metanarrative critique with a simple in-universe only explanation, and then shrug off continued discussion as merely "denial".
Your original post lacked the context of you referring to your friends, in which case, feel free to gloat a little if they come back to you and say they were wrong, just don't expect whatever justification Kojima comes up with to satisfy everyone on the internet, you'll find that there will be those that will likely take apart that justification and see it as unsatisfactory, asinine, half-assed, or pandering, and it won't be denial that drives those beliefs.