Kikosemmek said:
The story involves the background that you mentioned as well as character interactions and any minor plot the game makes its business. I can, for example, point out that The Happening had a great concept, just like MGS does, but awkward dialogue and unreal, unappealing character interactions always reminded the viewers that it was a movie they're watching; a bad movie, at that. I hold the same feelings toward MGS, because the premise of the game in and of itself is nothing I can judge badly. It's the never-ending convolution and plot holes that did the story in. The dialogue is cheesy. I'll point out a scene from MGS4 where Snake is on a bike with some lady, both of them being chased by soldiers. She embarks on a fucking monologue while petting the bike before deciding to drive and escape death. That's just retarded. Things like these permeate MGS. You'll have to admit- being ridiculous is quite the meme in MGS. Remember that in MGS1 there were two alternate endings? One of which had Meryl die. The other had Otacon kick the bucket. So, why are they both alive in MGS4? Let me guess: nanomachines. No, no, it's played out.
I'll be honest, it was really hard to follow sometimes, but it wasn't impossible. Perhaps because after playing the game I had read a plot synopsis, and then the "ahhhhh cool" moment had kicked in at that moment. The voice acting wasn't too bad for me, I mean it wouldn't compare to say... okay I can' quite think of a game with great voice acting right now, but it wasn't terrible like say Army of Two (I should really stop ripping into that game).
I disagree. I've seen many games deliver great stories. Try the Baldur's Gate, Max Payne and Half-Life series. They all involve heavy storytelling (you might disagree about Half-Life but I believe that it plays like a movie). The characters should change their outlook because they're constantly taking orders to do something or other as their worldview is changed by Hideo Kojima with every little twist and turn. Sooner or later, a man would trust no one, and pretty much stop caring. That is how Kojima did my interest in. The story just became pointlessly convoluted and so it was pointless to keep up with it. It was clutter.
Well Snake is a genetic clone, so he is essentially a programed soldier. Not that I agree with it, and though his character is not what you would call 'likable', it's not completely unsurprising that he was the way he was. But you're right, the story could have been told better. Kojima had great concepts but they weren't executed as well as it should have. It's disappointing because I interpret the game in a different way to how it was told, a world reliant on a system is a great idea. I've been doing social studies, history and literature for years now, and as an academic i can appreciate the idea. The world has become heavily bureaucratic and mechanical, and I would delve further into it, but I really couldn't begin to explain it. If you enjoy plots in games, take a look at Legacy of Kain. Truly the pinnacle of story telling in almost any medium.
I have to apologize for being unclear. I wasn't criticizing the fact that he didn't plan ahead. I'm criticizing the fact that he blatantly said that he makes up the story as he goes along irrespective to plot integrity or cohesion. As it seems to me, he's trolling his fans. He knows he doesn't give two shits about the story.
MGS was his pet, I'm sure he was more conscious of the story than that. He didn't state that he didn't care about story cohesion, but rather he made it up as he went and this probably lead to plot holes and inconsistency at times. Look I'm not a MGS fan, and I know it's not the perfect game, I wouldn't even say it was an awesome game, but I feel that it was quite good. I honestly feel that it came out WAY to early for it's own good. Despite how long in production it was, it could have used for some more touch ups in terms of game play and story. I agree with most of what you say to a certain degree, but I'll just say I've played way worse games, and it doesn't deserve either the praise nor the criticism it gets. It's about a bit more above half way from what everyone says.
I disagree. Watch There Will Be Blood or The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Both of these are recent pictures with great storytelling. I agree with you about modern art, but I have to say that not all up and coming visual artists today are modernists.
There will be blood i have yet to watch, Curious Case was exceptional. Modern artists are pretentious, and a bunch of outright cocky bastards with no aesthetic appreciation. I don't mind powerful messages, and I can appreciate subtle irony but I'm acquainted with many practicing artists and they have a condescending view towards classical artist. They call it "boring", and I just feel like grabbing their twisted heap of metal on display and jamming down their throats. I love art that have both aesthetic and meaning. There is always a conflict between high and low culture. Many people don't consider low culture art at all because it wasn't produced with the intention of making a statement or pissing people off. And it's this modernist view I hold in contempt. And post modernism is simply the re-appropriation of older works, and it is meant to challenge the old. Some of it is quite profound, others are just insulting. But I've ranted on long enough. Good talk.
