A big part of the reason why MGS3 is the worst selling installment in the franchise is because of the backlash after MGS2. Your one liner replies devoid of any self analysis speek volumes of how deeply you think through your own responses.

what i dont understand is how fanboys need to change the argument to what is better when it started out as do you think MGS$ is a slower paced game then GOW........not do you think its a better game.....some kids

 Bullshit. Video games do not require a storyline to be amazing. Wii Sports will be the game that defines this generation, and it has nothing resembling a story in it. Your arrogance on this subject is so obnoxious I really can't keep quiet anymore. Tetris, Super Mario Bros, Contra, and a host of other games that launched the industry have no story what-so-ever and are not "mindless entertainment." Tetris has you constantly thinking, analyzing, and problem solving in order to get the desired effects. Thinking as many moves ahead as you can in order to not lose at quicker and quicker paces.

 To go the classical route pulls it more in my favor as well. Would you call Chess mindless entertainment? What about Go? I would highly doubt it. A good game of poker requires more of you mind than 90% of the philosophy books I have ever read and it can't have a story.

 This absurd elitist notion that games most have a huge epic story to be worth-while seriously sickens me. To look down on a master work of art just because it doesn't have all the qualities you think the artist should have included is nothing short of hypocritical given what you have said. An artists vision should not be compromised by anything at all. Sometimes that does not require, or even involve a story though. Maybe he is just trying to get you to think quickly and solve a puzzle. Perhaps he is trying to get you to think through the persons shoes and imagine what you would do in the exact same scenario. Maybe he is just trying to create a world that is amazing to be a part of like some of the greatest authors ever have done (hai2u Tolkein, Rowling, and Adams).

 Get off your high horse and try to actually argue your point rather than look down your nose at the inferior games out there that can't possible measure up to what you think a game should be. You want to argue that MGS4 is the pinnacle of cinematic storylines, well thats fine. Whatever. I have never managed to finish the first one, so I doubt I will ever play the fourth enough to be able to disagree. To claim that every artist should adhere to your concept of what a game is while simultaneously saying no artist should compromise his vision is contradictory at best though. This debate will never remain civil from what I've seen, but you can at least not throw fuel on the fire.

Thanks dude, you made me replying yet again to him redundant.

 You can still do a one line zinger to try and rile him up more rather than actually making a coherant point if you want to. My long rant is no substitute for pure flame bait designed to keep MGS4 fans continue to reply to your obvious trolling.

 This is nothing, you should check out my thread.

http://vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=31038

I'm not comparing it to a Hollywood film (which is a pretty vague over genralization of anything made in Hollywood I might add).  I think the story has issues within it's own genre of story telling (comic book, anime). 

Here's a tiny example of how the script is flawed.  Throughout the game, everything is explained to Snake as though he has no previous knowledge of the world around him.  If snake is supposed to be some kind of War hero, and unless he's has been living under a rock all this time (chessy pun intended), why doesn't he know about these things.  Point is, the writer obviously needs to convey this information to the player, but has neglected to consider the fact that Snake should already know this stuff.  A good writer whould have included these details in a way that shows Snake knows about them, even has a deep knowlege of them from his experiences.

Here's another example-  throughout the dialog, characters take turns talking back and forth without ever interupting each other (it's very unrealistic, unnatural, and is a sign of an inexperienced movie director/screne writer).  I could go on and on...

Read my previous posts and you know I think what kojima has done is note worthy and that Cliff, as a spokes person for the industry, has no right to be publicly bad mouthing his creation.  But his story telling, even as a comic/anime, is no where near as good as other stories about similar things. 

As a gamer, I would have prefered a Metal Gear with two more chapters or so and half the cut scences with the same info in them? But that's just me.

“Metal Gear Solid is our example of the game we’re not doing. Passive entertainment is on its way out.”

I don't know if he said anything else, so I'll share my thoughts on this quote only.

Metal Gear Solid is a great example of a piece of passive entertainment. Actually, I cannot think of any better in the gaming industry today. The story requires no input from the player whatsoever. All you can do is zoom and move the camera about in the cutscenes. There are no dialog choices. There is no chance to develop snake as a character on your own. Basically, you're fed a story with no chance of interaction.

From what I've seen, read, and heard about the game it's just like playing a movie. Movies are passive entertainment.

Most games today are passive in this aspect. You are handed the experience, the story. You do not have to create it yourself. I would argue that Gears Of War is probably a very passive game too, but I think it relies less on parts without input from the player.

Moving away from this are games like Guitar Hero and Wii sports, that are all about the gaming experience. There's no story, and the experience is created by the player playing the game. Online games are most often also more about interaction and players creating their own experiences than them being fed these by developers.

All of this does not mean that Metal Gear Solid is a bad game. It only refers to the way it plays and the level of interaction between the player and the game. This means, as I understand it, that the quote above in no way should be read as cliffy saying that Metal Gear Solid 4 is a bad. Instead, try to read it as "We want to make a game where the player is always in control".

Moving on to the second part of that quote: "Passive entertainment is on its way out"

*points at the Wii, singstar, the sims, Guitar Hero, World of Warcraft...*

Gaming is changing, there's no denying that. The huge success of the new casual games is largely due to the fact that they are truly interactive. The players input creates the experience. The Singleplayer Adventure is slowly dying, passive gaming is on its way out.

I understand everything in there... because it's directly spells out everything in very simple terms... and it's all stuff that's run of the mill already talkied about stuff. There is no new or huge insight in any of that.

The fact that you actually attribute those ideas to Kojima is thoroughly laughable in the same way someone might write a few lines from plato and give the person plagerizing it the credit.

Seriously, for a real game with actual philosphical meaning... try out Killer 7. You can get it on PS2. Though admitdly the controlling is better on the cube. Though you like MGS so awkward battle controls shouldn't be too much an issue. That is a truley deep and philosophical game... that someone actually has to THINK about to get. Rather then just have everythign spelled out for you as if you were reading a philosphy for dummies book.

Also... Kobe Bryant doesn't prioritze 3 point shooting in basketball. My friend james does. Kobe Bryant could still beat my friend James in a 3pt contest.

If all you want is Tetris and Pong, then play those games.  Other people want more variety.

MGS4 is fanservice in the same way that Brawl is.  So what?  You should provide a good service to fans of the previous games when you are concluding a story, shouldn't you?

Also, you might want to stop attacking MGS4's gameplay, at least in this thread, because it was a lot more solid and varied than Gears...not to mention the gameplay elements in total are longer than Gears is.