My altered view of MGS4 now that I've beaten it.

[sieanr]

DTG said:

rocketpig said:

DTG said:

sieanr said:

rocketpig said:
Yes, I found that bit about Johnny very annoying.

Personally, I think MGS should end with 4 unless they want to do prequels. We saw Snake's story, end it there. That's what we cared about.

It would be like Lucas trying to transition Shia Lebouf into the main role of the Indiana Jones series. Indy dies with Harrison. Let it go. It was a good run, we all had a good time, now go develop a new idea.

When he crapped his pants at the beginning I knew I was going hate him, and that initial instinct was right.

Another scene I couldn't stand was Otacon crying over Naomi through the Mark 3. Not only was the writing terrible, but the voice acting was ridiculous. And the fact that he was crying over her through a computer display struck me as pathetic.

The_vagabond7 said:

Alright, to clarify, I have beaten MGS 1/2 and gotten about half way through MGS3. I am a fan of the series, I just don't feel the need to suck a dick because it's attached to Kojima.

 

MGS fans are among the most pretentious of all Videogame fans because kojima throws in something that resembles philosophy. It's like talking to those kids in school that listen to really really crappy music and claim you're just stupid because you don't "get it". I get it alright, I'm just not impressed.

I agree with just about all of this.

I generally like the series, but there is plenty about it that I can't stand. One of those things is the fanbase who gushes over the story. I can only imagine that these people do so because they haven't experienced great films or novels. Take, for example, the guy in this thread who claimed MGS has a better story that great works of literature or oscar films. I actually feel kinda sorry for him.

Overall I'd probably rate MGS3 as the best in the franchise, followed by MGS1 then MGS4 and 2.

 

Actually I'm a huge movie fan and have watched hundreds upon hundreds of films from various countries and in various genres. Not a single film however has ever matched MGS2 in terms of depth of it's story. MGS4 is similar except for the horrible Hollywood inspired ending. The reasons films cannot match MGS is because they have a two hour runtime and so the focus is on action and pacing without the time to indulge in philosophical dialogue as MGS games do. They cannot go as in-depth with their storytelling and do not afford the time to divulge details.

DTG, you really need to respond to my Apocalypse Now post... I know how you love to dance around "interactive media" and terms like that but if you really believe in MGS so strongly, you should be able to take on Coppola without a problem.

Honestly, I doubt you've even watched the movie so you won't even understand how heavily Kojima ripped the personalities from the film. Please, for the love of God, watch Redux.

If you come back and tell me that somehow MGS2 or 4 is more powerful, just say it and we'll be done with this conversation.

Yes, I have seen Apocalypse now though I'm not sure if it was the Redux version. However most of the dialogue minus the one with the French only lasted a couple of minutes until they moved on to the next scene. Like I said, name me a movie with a 1 hour scene similar to MGS2's devoted soley to the exploration of philosophical themes. The last 10 minutes of 2001 was extremely subtle and so I really can't consider it on level with MGS which lays it's philosophy out to you in words. School books and the education system rely directly on words and concise explanations to impart knowledge, if text books began being subtle implications of things they would be mostly useless in education. It's the most effective way of presenting knowledge and teaching someone.

 

Bad art is the being told what the artist thinks. Good art grabs you by the shoulders and sticks you in the artists shoes.

Thats my take on things. Effective art isn't about being told something, but instead being given a different perspective, being made to question your own views and most of all understanding why the artist believes something. This is the reason why being told up front is such an ineffective way to get a point across - it doesn't involve the listener/viewer. Active interpretation is required of good art because it forces you to think and its this thinking that is key to the experience. From this a good artist can make you question just about anything or change your perspective on the whole world. But I'd say the most powerful aspect of art is how it can reveal an artist reasoning. Instead of just explaining why an artist is against something like fascism, a good artist can create a piece that leads you to conclude fascism is bad. Sure, you could just explain that point, but its so much more effective when you draw a person in and they can follow along to the same conclusion. Even if you don't agree with the result, you'll atleast have an understanding of the thoughts and logic leading up to such a claim, and thats something that is far deeper than anything words could communicate.

I'd like to expand this more but I'm short on time. Simply put I think art is the highest form of communication because it can say so many things words cannot - and thats why MGS fails; it relies on an inferior means of communication.