| JackHandy said: Kojima's games are brilliant because they are to gaming what Hemingway's novels are to literature. He utilized the iceberg theory, whereby there's the main, easily-digestible (and quite good in its own right) story and game and also things happening underneath which reflect the game's real story. And while some might disagree with that sub-level stuff, it's hard to deny its brilliance... especially considering how deep and thought-provoking the subject matter is. Of course, again, the risk you run is a lot of people walking away wondering, what was that? But as an artist myself, I think it was worth it. After all, those first MGS titles are some of the highest-reviewed, and critically-acclaimed games of all time. Oh, and they also sold well. |
As a video game person in general Kojima is super famous, perhaps the most recognisable name in the industry. In that Hemingway is doing him a disservice. Kojima is more like the Shakespeare of video games.
But as a writer in particular, Kojima is not even comparable to somebody like J K Rowling, or Dan Brown, let alone some actual master. This is where we disagree hard and the thread might get really interesting.
I think you are talking in particular about mgs. So what are the surface level and real stories in mgs? And how are they good? (I liked mgs4 fine, but I have not played enough mgs to be able to really judge the whole series. Still I am going to clearly argue against so that you can clearly argue for.)
The amount of clones and alternate versions of your main character is inversely proportional to the quality of the story. Makes it feel like a dime novel.
As a general rule, the plot should spend more time happening than being explained.
There are some very heavy themes in mgs. But I would argue it is not only about the themes but also how you communicate them. And that is lacking.
The sweaty hot female doctor in part 4 is sexy, yes, but charcters like that would have no place in any serious novel or movie. And that she hooks up with Otacon - that is satisfying and funny, but not good in any profound way above teenage boy wish fulfillment.
And it is not just her. The fat guy in rollerskates comes to mind. And the vampire. And Drebin with his pet monkey. There is a curcuis of odd ball characters that I have a very hard time with.
As far as I can tell, Meryl seemed like a somewhat interesting if underdeveloped character in part 1. But in part 4, when she wears a wedding dress (marrying a man she seemed barely interested beforehand, don't get me started on the ridiculous proposal scene) and her father shows up the schmalz and corniness is off the charts. As is the case with Raidens family reunion. As is the case with Otacon and the girl crying in front of the sunset. As is the case with many moments of the series.
The game says war has changed, that everybody is just fighting proxy wars. And so the game heavily tackles the theme of the absolut meaninglessness of war. But what we get are still big hero moments of our main characters fighting the good fight. These are the good guys. A way to clear distinction for a game about war. (I know it tries some gray area stuff, but fails in my regard.) Snake insists that he is no hero. But he is the one who saves the day and the world. The games big themes are in opposition to the happenings and writing that better suit a corny edgy action movie than anything approaching thoughtfullness.
