[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by EvoG

This is where I stop talking to someone like you. You clearly misunderstood the intent of my last post and IMMEDIATELY became defensive and retaliated, resorting to attacking my character and intelligence, when I meant no malice.

Whatever man, 25 years old and you still behave like this..bravo.

Regardless of how you attempt to turn the tables, the truth is, you did attempt to attack me in your post. That's very clear. You tried to soften the blow by acting as if you were making an honest inquiry, but you fooled no one. It is you that has been acting immature. You have failed to counter any of my points whatsoever. All you have done is tell me I'm wrong, without explaining why.

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by CrimsonBlue

Are we talking about MGS3 or the Metal Gear Solid series in general? Because, I must admit, MGS3 has much less sci/fi elements in it than for example MGS1 and 2. Both MGS1 and 2 are sci/fi action/stealth games. MGS3 is more of an action game with fantasy elements, set in a fictional past.

I also think you're mixing up the genres. A game can be a sci/fi action game. The Sci/fi explains the settings, the theme of the game. While the action part explains the gameplay.

Metal Gear Solid 1/2

Genre: Action/stealth, Theme: Sci/Fi

Shortened, it's a sci/fi action/stealth game.

Metal Gear Solid 3

Genre: Action/stealth, Theme: Cold War/Historical Sci/Fi, Fantasy

You know what I mean by now...

Crimson, thank you for writing a post that makes sense and for defending your views in an intelligent manner. The thing is, I already agree with you for the most part. The MGS series has elements of sci/fi, and some of those elements are even better defined as fantasy in my view. The MGS games are a collection of many genres. I simply think they are best defined as action or drama or even fantasy is a distinct possibility. But not sci/fi. Not for me. I respect your opinion though. The problem here is the other people who can't accept a dissenting opinion and decide to explode and attack the person who disagrees.

[mag]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

If you read what is being said you will see that I'm the one coming at this from a stance that is critically unbiased. I'm making solid points.

Where?

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Ok I'll make it easy on you. Why don't you explain how the Metal Gear Solid games are science fiction when the villains have nothing to do with science (even fictional science), and EVERYTHING to do with fantasy, comic books, anime, etc.

For one thing, as I've already stated, the comic books and anime you're referring to ARE science fiction. Fantasy, too, is often viewed, most liberally as a subdivision of science fiction, but is at the very least a relative of science fiction. Fantasy is distinguished from science fiction more by an overall look and feel than anything else--a look and feel that Metal Gear Solid is distinctly lacking.

So how is Metal Gear Solid a science fiction story? Let's see.

Robots? Check.
Genetic engineering? Check.
Clones? Check.
Set in the future? Check.
Alternative history? Check.

Those are all pretty standard scifi elements.

Or we can look at specific definitions of science fiction. Wikipedia provides the most commonly used definition:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

In defining the scope of the science fiction genre, we speak of the effect of science or technology, or both, upon society or persons

Well, what do you know? That's what pretty much ALL of Metal Gear Solid is about.

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Alternatively, the society might be ordinary and human, but the individual man or woman might be an unusual person (for example, a mutant or a telepath) who responds exceptionally to otherwise ordinary events.

Again, this is exactly what we have in Metal Gear Solid--an extraordinary individual (in this case, Snake) in an otherwise ordinary society very similar to our own.

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

The society and persons in the story may be ordinary, but faced with bizarre circumstances such as the invention of teleportation, or the discovery of a new chemical element with unusual properties (such as "Cavorite" in The First Men In The Moon).

Same thing here. The society is otherwise ordinary, but it faces with the consequences of an unusual technology. In this case it happens to be Metal Gears rather than teleportation.

Just because the story is unrealistic doesn't mean it's not science fiction. The kind of time travel described by H.G. Wells is also unrealistic, but I don't know of anyone who would say that The Time Machine isn't a science fiction story.

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

So they're better defined as fantasy. Exactly.

No. They're better defined as soft science fiction. Which is why they have that name.

mag

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by mag

For one thing, as I've already stated, the comic books and anime you're referring to ARE science fiction. Fantasy, too, is often viewed, most liberally as a subdivision of science fiction, but is at the very least a relative of science fiction. Fantasy is distinguished from science fiction more by an overall look and feel than anything else--a look and feel that Metal Gear Solid is distinctly lacking.

So how is Metal Gear Solid a science fiction story? Let's see.

Robots? Check.
Genetic engineering? Check.
Clones? Check.
Set in the future? Check.
Alternative history? Check.

Those are all pretty standard scifi elements.

Uh, mag are you disagreeing with me or are you on my side? I can't figure you out. Go back to several of my original posts in this thread. I specifically say that the Metal Gear Solid series has sci/fi elements. Thanks Captain Obvious for this waste of space.

All of your Wikipedia definitions are fine too, even though several of those elements exist in stories that are very much not science fiction. But for the most part, those are the elements I refer to when I say that Metal Gear Solid has sci/fi elements. What was the point of this post?

Originally Posted by mag

No. They're better defined as soft science fiction. Which is why they have that name.

When attempting to see Metal Gear Solid as any kind of science fiction, soft or otherwise, one can't help but run into fantastic elements that are more at home in fantasy. Not only that, but vast amounts of the story are simply about character, or man at war. Alienation, etc. The sci/fi elements come and go with each epidode. Some have more, some have less. Metal Gear Solid 3 was actually set in the past, not the future, and as CrimsonBlue said, it has fewer sci/fi elements.

Still, even in the episodes that have the most elements of sci/fi, we've got these comic book villains that demean true science fiction in my view. If they were just enemies we saw for a few moments before killing them, that would be different. But these villains are always a major part of the story, and they don't fit into any form of science fiction that I can consider true science fiction.

[mag]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

What was the point of this post?

Funny, I was starting to wonder the same thing about your posts. Why are you even arguing this? You've even admitted yourself that MGS has science fiction elements. But then you go into this ridiculous tangent about how if it was being categorized by a bookstore, it would be considered action, even though this has absolutely nothing to do with what we were talking about. Really, what's the point you're trying to make?

I think you know full well that MGS is science fiction. It's something that's easily recognizable by anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the genre. I think the only reason you've chosen to argue the point is to confuse the issue. You are a Bush supporter, after all. And that's how Republicans debate. You don't necessarily have to "win" the debate. If you can just muddy the argument enough to bring it to a standstill, for you that's a victory.

You want to distract people away from the fact that you charged Kojima with being an unoriginal hack with no specific points to support the claim other than a few minor, irrelevent quibbles. So you instead launch into an idiotic debate about whether or not MGS is science fiction because it doesn't meet your fanboyish definition of what scifi is. Now people forget that you called Kojima a hack without anything to back it up. Now you even get to play the hero. "Oh, poor me. Look at how these mean men are attacking me just because I said something completely assinine."

I've already shown you why Metal Gear Solid is science fiction, in much more depth than I should ever have to for any rational human being. If you want to continue being wrong, that's your decision. But I'm not going to continue debating the point with you. If you want to return to talking about Metal Gear Solid instead of hashing out some ridiculous fanboy debate on the nature of science fiction, I'll be all ears.

mag

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by mag

Funny, I was starting to wonder the same thing about your posts. Why are you even arguing this? You've even admitted yourself that MGS has science fiction elements. But then you go into this ridiculous tangent about how if it was being categorized by a bookstore, it would be considered action, even though this has absolutely nothing to do with what we were talking about. Really, what's the point you're trying to make?

I think you know full well that MGS is science fiction. It's something that's easily recognizable by anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the genre. I think the only reason you've chosen to argue the point is to confuse the issue. You are a Bush supporter, after all. And that's how Republicans debate. You don't necessarily have to "win" the debate. If you can just muddy the argument enough to bring it to a standstill, for you that's a victory.

You want to distract people away from the fact that you charged Kojima with being an unoriginal hack with no specific points to support the claim other than a few minor, irrelevent quibbles. So you instead launch into an idiotic debate about whether or not MGS is science fiction because it doesn't meet your fanboyish definition of what scifi is. Now people forget that you called Kojima a hack without anything to back it up. Now you even get to play the hero. "Oh, poor me. Look at how these mean men are attacking me just because I said something completely assinine."

I've already shown you why Metal Gear Solid is science fiction, in much more depth than I should ever have to for any rational human being. If you want to continue being wrong, that's your decision. But I'm not going to continue debating the point with you. If you want to return to talking about Metal Gear Solid instead of hashing out some ridiculous fanboy debate on the nature of science fiction, I'll be all ears.

mag

Uh, what? It was you that distracted us. Not me. Poor mag, go back and look at the evidence (and if you don't know what evidence is, go look it up in a dictionary). I was comparing Metal Gear Solid to Splinter Cell early on (to illustrate how I thought that team does a better job than Kojima in the stealth genre), and I said:

"The atmosphere is more realistic and the things that happen in SC are much closer to life than the far fetched "intrigue" of MGS."

You replied with:

"I don't see why that matters at all. MGS is a scifi story. It's not a military documentary. It's not supposed to be realistic."

So I said:

"Sci/fi it isn't though. Not in my opinion."

And you immaturely responded with:

"I'm sorry, but that's just stupid."


That's how this all started. Now, I know the way you "debate" and I understand that facts, reason, and evidence mean nothing to you. But if you're going to accuse me of this:

Originally Posted by mag

You want to distract people away from the fact that you charged Kojima with being an unoriginal hack with no specific points to support the claim other than a few minor, irrelevent quibbles. So you instead launch into an idiotic debate about whether or not MGS is science fiction because it doesn't meet your fanboyish definition of what scifi is. Now people forget that you called Kojima a hack without anything to back it up. Now you even get to play the hero. "Oh, poor me. Look at how these mean men are attacking me just because I said something completely assinine."

Then it would surely help your cause if it wasn't you that changed the subject to this sci/fi discussion. I was on topic and if you wish I'll gladly go back and discuss reasons why Hideo Kojima is a hack and a wannabe. I thought you wanted to discuss other issues because you changed the subject, and I played along. But, for the last time, your accusation is completely absurd and one need only travel back a page or two in this thread to see that.

I have never tried to confuse the issue. I have honestly explained why I don't believe Metal Gear Solid is science fiction. You have yet to defend the villains in the game. You have yet to explain to me how they fit more into science fiction, soft or otherwise, better than they fit into fantasy. Because they are certainly fantastic, and certainly NOT scientific even in the most liberal use of the words "soft and fictional". As my buddy from San Diego said in my current signature (see below), you must be defending a character that deflects missiles during the ending with just the power of her soul. If that's not fantasy, then I don't know what is.

But, in the end, I understand. I do. I understand you mag. I understand why you tried to make this debate my fault with your silly, insane accusations which were far too easy to prove wrong (perhaps you should have read through the thread again before posting?). It's because you have no ground to stand on. You can't prove me wrong. You simply believe that there are enough sci/fi elements in the Metal Gear Solid stories to make them science fiction. I do not. And you can't stand that. You want so very much for your opinion to be fact, but it just isn't. I understand man. I feel for you.

Oh and by the way, don't accuse me of being a Bush supporter. I never supported Bush, with my vote or anything else. At the time I did prefer him (quite strongly) to the other guy for various reasons, but I'm no Bush fan.

[EvoG]

Don't bother mag, he's just goading you into a ridiculous argument, showing his clear immaturity (oh, remember, that I tried to cleverly deduce just that in my "veiled" comment. Who's captain obvious now?) ...little does he know its even more telling, admitting to being 25. Perhaps my so-called veiled comment was even more devious than he thought...

Anyway, he's clearly not played MGS3, at least not through any major portion of it, and I even doubt he played 2 and perhaps barely a portion of 1, only to opine ignorantly on what his "friends" tell him about the games. Note his newly minted sig.


Funny, little did you know that you indeed wouldn't make friends, not because of your opinion on MGS, but rather your personality. Good call chief.


Oh and for mag's sake and sanity, it was you, genius, that decided to start discussing the merits of MGS being sci-fi based on one innocuous comment mag made...here let me help (for clarity adding what you briefed above):

Page 1

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

The atmosphere is more realistic and the things that happen in SC are much closer to life than the far fetched "intrigue" of MGS. Not that I mind far fetched, I just happen to like both.

Page 2

Originally Posted by mag

I don't see why that matters at all. MGS is a scifi story. It's not a military documentary. It's not supposed to be realistic.

Page 2

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Is that why Kojima uses real places, historical events, etc. in his stories? It's like a hybrid between a comic book and realism. I don't mind that either. Sci/fi it isn't though. Not in my opinion. The villains are pure comic book.

Page 2

Originally Posted by mag

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. Scifi stories often use real places, historical events, etc. By that definition, Star Trek, The Terminator, Back to the Future, Independence Day, The X-Files--none of these are science fiction. That's absurd. And comic books, by the way, are often science fiction too. Comic books are a medium, not a genre. The comic book villains you're talking about are from scifi stories written for comic books.

You continued by offering your nitpickings of how MGS is not sci-fi and it escalated from there. You couldn't leave well enough alone...immature or not, it was stupid but nonetheless you started us down that track.

...but more importantly...

...Your intial comment was how Kojima was a hack, and where the pseudo-intellectualism comes in, is where you begin to spout comparisons to other directors/movies and this LIST of 20 instances where he is supposedly ripping them off, but never once mentioned anything specifically ABOUT MGS and its extreme state of being haXorzd, stating your opinion as some sort of fact. But wait, then you said "because all my friends said so as well". It MUST be true, Kojima MUST be hack if your cabal of haters said so!

Then, as I tried to maintain some modicum of coherence to your initial post, I commented on the emotional impact of the story, the ONE MAIN point of contention you had with Kojima and him being a hack, and boom, you tell me that merely has to do with plot and not gameplay, when in fact we were NOT talking about gameplay, but rather his storytelling ability. That, and you even SAID you had no problem with his gameplay:

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

It just bothers me that he gets so much credit for being some sort of storytelling genius through the medium of gaming, when everything he does is unoriginal. Oh well, like I said, the games are fun for the most part...

...so then you say in another thread after that...

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Seeing as how it's a game, the gameplay is my primary interest. The storylines of the Splinter Cell games are much simpler, but that doesn't bother me. The atmosphere is more realistic and the things that happen in SC are much closer to life than the far fetched "intrigue" of MGS. Not that I mind far fetched, I just happen to like both.

Which then lead us to the sci-fi arguments noted above. BTW, MGS is about robotics and genetics...the science part of the fiction.

I even went so far to counter your arguments about his choice of camera control and design by stating a new version was coming early next year, and you chose to ignore it TWICE because it wasn't convenient for your case.

Anyway, if its gameplay you're all about, WHO THE F*%K CARES then about Kojima being touted as a great designer??! The games are fun, AS YOU SAID.


Hmmmm, someone is nucking futs here.







Note: I wrote this standing in solidarity with mag, and not for myself...this was for you brother. Hehe...


Cheers

[mag]

Originally Posted by EvoG

Note: I wrote this standing in solidarity with mag, and not for myself...this was for you brother. Hehe...

Thanks, EvoG. Couldn't have said it better myself.

mag

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by EvoG

Don't bother mag, he's just goading you into a ridiculous argument, showing his clear immaturity (oh, remember, that I tried to cleverly deduce just that in my "veiled" comment. Who's captain obvious now?) ...little does he know its even more telling, admitting to being 25. Perhaps my so-called veiled comment was even more devious than he thought...

And you call me immature. How funny. Keep it up, I actually like to laugh at stuff like this, ask mag.

Originally Posted by EvoG

Anyway, he's clearly not played MGS3, at least not through any major portion of it, and I even doubt he played 2 and perhaps barely a portion of 1, only to opine ignorantly on what his "friends" tell him about the games. Note his newly minted sig.

Excuse me. I've played every major Kojima game (except Zone of the Enders) to completion. The Metal Gear games on NES were some of my favorites when I was young. I had Snatcher for Sega CD. I imported Policenauts from Japan. In fact, I actually imported Metal Gear Solid when I was eighteen just because I couldn't wait an extra month for the U.S. version! Then I bought the U.S. version and played it through as well.

Metal Gear Solid 2 was one of the first major releases on the PS2 that I was excited about. I played it all the way through. The reason I mention my friends is because they actually talked me into buying MGS3. I wasn't going to originally. I didn't even play it and beat it until January of this year right after I finished Resident Evil 4. But, as I said, it would be in my Top 10 of last year as far as when it was released.

Originally Posted by EvoG

Funny, little did you know that you indeed wouldn't make friends, not because of your opinion on MGS, but rather your personality. Good call chief.

Nope. It was my opinions that have you and mag in an uproar. Try as you may to deny it.

Originally Posted by EvoG

Oh and for mag's sake and sanity, it was you, genius, that decided to start discussing the merits of MGS being sci-fi based on one innocuous comment mag made...here let me help (for clarity adding what you briefed above):

You continued by offering your nitpickings of how MGS is not sci-fi and it escalated from there. You couldn't leave well enough alone...immature or not, it was stupid but nonetheless you started us down that track.

No, he called me stupid because I didn't share his opinion. That's why it started down this track. Obviously you are biased because you despise my opinions as much as mag does. But it's very clear here that mag said the stories were sci/fi, I replied, "Not in my opinion." He then said I was stupid. Should I just walk away from that? Grin and bear it? No, I'll defend myself on paper, a PC screen, or in person. That's just the way I am. So yes indeed, he started it when he called my opinion stupid.

Originally Posted by EvoG

...Your intial comment was how Kojima was a hack, and where the pseudo-intellectualism comes in, is where you begin to spout comparisons to other directors/movies and this LIST of 20 instances where he is supposedly ripping them off, but never once mentioned anything specifically ABOUT MGS and its extreme state of being haXorzd, stating your opinion as some sort of fact. But wait, then you said "because all my friends said so as well". It MUST be true, Kojima MUST be hack if your cabal of haters said so!

Well I wrote the list up seven years ago. That's not exactly a small issue. I've moved twice since then, changed computers, changed screennames, etc. I couldn't cut and paste it for your viewing pleasure. Off the top of my head I can go into a few things:

1) The female sniper in MGS, I believe her name was Sniper Wolf, she asks Snake to give her her rifle. She can't die without it. That scene was taken directly out of Kurosawa's Yojimbo.

2) There's a scene in a restroom between Snake and Meryl (I can't believe I remember this...) where they discuss who really wins in war. The dialogue and the things that are said make it clear this scene was taken from Kurosawa's Seven Samurai.

3) The entry into the compound in MGS uses practically the same exact style and idea (and is "shot" using similar angles and editing) used in The Rock. Speaking of Michael Bay, he seems to have had great influence on Kojima even though he's one of Hollywood's worst directors. Kojima uses a lot of Bay's favorite, cheesy, music video shots like the "characters walking in slow motion toward the camera" bullshit. An instant sign of a Jerry Bruckheimer/Michael Bay piece.

4) The method of cloaking in MGS used by the Ninja is clearly a rip off visually of Predator.

5) Snake was inspired by Snake Plisken from John Carpenter's Escape From New York. The voice, the attitude, and even the look are strikingly...the same. No originality there at all.

6) There are numerous similarities to Die Hard, from the vent shafts to the look of Liquid Snake who might as well be named "Karl".

7) The jeep chase at the end has been done in countless movies. It's a favorite of those that go straight to video.

8) The torture sequences in both MGS and MGS3 are right out of Lethal Weapon in terms of style, devices (electrocution, hanging the wrists, etc.). There are others certainly, but I doubt Kojima went much further back...he seems like more of a "rip off of a rip off" kind of guy.

9) Just look at Snatcher. Many people consider it to be Kojima's greatest achievement, but the plot is directly from Blade Runner, and the design of the robots is straight out of The Terminator.

The problem isn't one or two or even three of these things...it's that he steals from everywhere. I don't expect everything to be original or fresh, but almost everything Kojima does is borrowed from someone else.

I will say one thing in Kojima's defense. He doesn't try to hide it. In an interview in a Playstation magazine in the late 90's there's a picture of him in his office and you can see a Predator figure in the background. Then for his favorite directors he lists Kurosawa and McTiernan (Die Hard, Predator). He also admitted that he took Snake from Escape to New York. So, these aren't coincidences, but the fact that it's so blatantly obvious is what turns me off. I like creators that have their own style.

Originally Posted by EvoG

Then, as I tried to maintain some modicum of coherence to your initial post, I commented on the emotional impact of the story, the ONE MAIN point of contention you had with Kojima and him being a hack, and boom, you tell me that merely has to do with plot and not gameplay, when in fact we were NOT talking about gameplay, but rather his storytelling ability. That, and you even SAID you had no problem with his gameplay:

No, at this point I was comparing the gameplay of Splinter Cell and Metal Gear Solid. One has more of a focus on gameplay, the other more on movie sequences. The gameplay in MGS is fine, but not as good as Splinter Cell in my view. I was just surprised that you said the ending of MGS3 was better than anything in Splinter Cell. Splinter Cell doesn't go for the big, epic Hollywood ending. At the same time, I said you have a right to your opinion and you do.

Originally Posted by EvoG

Which then lead us to the sci-fi arguments noted above. BTW, MGS is about robotics and genetics...the science part of the fiction.

I even went so far to counter your arguments about his choice of camera control and design by stating a new version was coming early next year, and you chose to ignore it TWICE because it wasn't convenient for your case.

It's also about soldiers, countries, war, humanity. It's also about silly villains that are in no way the "science" part of anything. Hornet men, vampires, people who deflect missiles with their souls, and dead people who show up as ghosts and haunt you in a boss fight of sorts. As for ignoring you twice, it is you who ignored me. I said much earlier, "As for the updated MGS3, I'll have to try it sometime." I already knew about this version coming out anyway. The camera part sounds very cool because yes, that is one of my main gameplay complaints.

Originally Posted by EvoG

Anyway, if its gameplay you're all about, WHO THE F*%K CARES then about Kojima being touted as a great designer??! The games are fun, AS YOU SAID.

The games are fun, yes. But I do like the Splinter Cell games better. I don't really think Kojima is a "great" designer.

this Is Serious ****ing Business!

[mag]

Oh, that's hilarious. Now that we finally see what your specific complaints are, two pages later, they're even more ridiculous than I anticipated. "OMG!!!! MGS and lethal wepon both have torture!!! MGS totly ripped them off!!1! hideo is t3h hack lolol!!!" Tell me, did you come up with these yourself, or did you just take them off of some fanboy's Geocities site?

But the best part is this little nugget:

Originally Posted by Once a Villain

Obviously you are biased because you despise my opinions as much as mag does.

Aaaawww. You poor baby. It must be so hard having people actually think for themselves instead of just believing everything you tell them. And that cross looks damn good on you too.

Thanks for the laugh, Villain.

mag

[EvoG]

Fine, just to be civil and back on point; isn't it fair to say that one can find similarities in any movie FROM any other movie in the history of movies? Nothing you mentioned is so specific that it would be considered 'ripping off'. I mean come on, the Predator cloaking? How else would one do 'cloaking'? Thats reaching a bit to support an argument. I mean venting? Torture scene from LW? Come on...

Perhaps any sci fi tv show that has a P90 in it is ripping off SG-1? Or wait, is SG-1 ripping off something else I can't quite recall?

When a movie comes out, direct to tape thats about a robot disguised as a human that travels from the future to the present to kill the leader of a resistance group that in the future fights the robots, well thats rather specific...THATS a ripoff.

A game about a biker gang that gets framed and tries to help set things right by helping the deceased owner of a motorcycle manufacturer...ripoff.

A game where the scene begins in a bar and everyone is having a good time...not a ripoff...a scene where the main guy jumps a gorge on a ramp, perhaps fine line, but not a real 'ripoff'.

Context is very important, and in truth, an original idea is very hard to come by these days. Its how you use concepts and 'other ideas' TOGETHER in a cohesive and consistent manner to tell a good story...thats where the originality comes in.

When there is a gratuitous attempt to use a very specific element, even if it doesn't fit into what you're creating(or especially if it doesn't fit), for the SOLE purpose of benefiting from the original elements successes...ripoff.

[CrimsonBlue]

He is a great GAME designer. He knows the fine line between realism and fun. He knows how to capture the players. He knows what makes a game good and what makes it bad. He likes to use a lot of cutscenes, and some are bothered by it while others arent. He likes to have fun with the characters in the game, especially the badguys, but also the hero. The MGS games have comedy, drama, action, fantasy, sci/fi, parody, thriller, philosophy etc etc. These are all elements that he succesfully put together to make a great game. That's why he's a great game designer.

And you said you liked Splinter Cell because it was more realistic and was more down to earth, and then you bashed MGS series for not being the same. But the MGS games have never been about realism. It has certain realistic elements, yes, but that's just a small portion of the whole cake. The Splinter Cell series strives to be as realistic as possible, but MGS strives to be as much fun as possible while telling a decent story.

This is why I enjoy MGS more than Splinter Cell. I'm not after realism in games like this. I bought the first Splinter Cell on the Xbox... because it was supposed be a MGS beater. In my eyes, it wasn't, because it didn't have any of the elements that I loved in the MGS series. I loved the game at first. I was really blinded by the fantastic graphics. Played the game pretty until the end. The slow FPS style control killed it for me, the slow gameplay when they had put sequences where I had to be quick. The controls were designed for sneaking around, so when they turned the game into an all-out action game, I had a really difficult time. I gave up in the end.

Then I got Splinter Cell 2: Pandora Tomorrow. Played it a bit, got bored of it. Same old same old. Then came Chaos Theory. Wow. Still the same game as the first one, but by now the magic had gone. Graphics didn't impress me anymore, gameplay was dry and simply slow and uninvolving. We basically got three incredibly identical games - give or take a few features. This could've been forgiven had the games actually been involving. They just don't grab me anymore. They feel like a Tom Clancy game. Too much politics, slow and boring gameplay, too little emotion. The three Metal Gear Solid games are all very different. Not because of change of gameplay, but because every game is connected through three very different stories. They are presented in a way you only find in the most epic and most emotional hollywood movies. They are exactly what I want a game like this to be.

[Once A Villain]

Guys, I specifically said, "The problem isn't one or two or even three of these things...it's that he steals from everywhere. I don't expect everything to be original or fresh, but almost everything Kojima does is borrowed from someone else." Those were just 9 simple examples off the top of my head (my old, much more thorough list from 1998 is God knows where, probably on my old 266 MHz computer in the attic).

His games are, for me, like a rehash of everything that's been done before. That doesn't mean the games can't be fun. I've already said they're fun. But Kojima doesn't have any original ideas. If you think he does, that's fine. But if you look at Kojima's influences and the style he uses and the lengthy dialogue scenes where the writing and ideas are obviously from other sources (which happen to be films that I know Kojima loves), it is abundantly clear that he's no artist, he's simply doing things that other creators have done before. He has no original style, no original thoughts, no original voice. He's "by the numbers" in my view. Period.

By the way Crimson, again, I respect what you've said. You have proven to be above the level of some of the others on this thread. Thanks. Oh, and actually, EvoG, your response was thoughtful and mature as well, thank you too. I guess only mag resorted to childish antics, but I'm used to that from him.

[mag]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

I guess only mag resorted to childish antics, but I'm used to that from him.

"Childish antics?" That insult's been used before. Why do you have to be such a hack? Can't you come up with anything original?

mag

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by mag

"Childish antics?" That insult's been used before. Why do you have to be such a hack? Can't you come up with anything original?

mag

mag, why don't you defend all of my points instead of the most obvious one? Or are you incapable? Besides, on that particular point (the Lethal Weapon torture thing) did I not say there are plenty of other torture scenes in movies but he got the idea from Lethal Weapon since he seems like a "rip off of a rip off" kind of guy. In fairness, it was more MGS3 where I was reminded of Lethal Weapon. The style, the shots, etc. It immediately hit me in the face like a punch from Joe Louis. The problem is that his style so resembles those he's emulating at the time. It's not just the idea or the fact that someone is hanging and being tortured.

Still, having said that, where is your defense for the other stuff I mentioned (and there are more, damn it I wish I could remember them all)? I'm not sure how many times I must repeat myself... He's not a hack for using one or two or three of these things... He's a hack because he uses so damn many and they're so damn obvious.

[mag]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

Still, having said that, where is your defense for the other stuff I mentioned (and there are more, damn it I wish I could remember them all)? I'm not sure how many times I must repeat myself... He's not a hack for using one or two or three of these things... He's a hack because he uses so damn many and they're so damn obvious.

There's not much to defend. I'm not making fun of you for one or two of your points being assinine. I'm making fun of you because they're ALL assinine. Every single one. I mean, come on. The cloak looks like Predator? Because it's not like that's what a cloaking device looks like in every single movie with a cloak ever made. What the **** is a cloak supposed to look like? Kojima is a hack because his game includes jeeps? It's like I'm talking to a twelve year old AOLer.

Honestly, when I was reading your list, all I could think of was the person who told me that Peter Jackson named him movie The Two Towers because of 9/11.

mag

[gillyruless]

Will you two settle down? You need to save your strengths for the next presidential election. I will start a thread for your benefit on the eve of next presidential debate.

I did enjoy most of MOS games but as a Sci-Fi fan, it's hard for me to classify the stories within the games as sci-fi. Definitely nor hard sci-fi.

[mag]

Originally Posted by gillyruless

Will you two settle down? You need to save your strengths for the next presidential election. I will start a thread for your benefit on the eve of next presidential debate.

The next presidential election is three years away. What am I going to mock Villain about until then?

Hell, even the midterm elections aren't for another year.

Originally Posted by gillyruless

I did enjoy most of MOS games but as a Sci-Fi fan, it's hard for me to classify the stories within the games as sci-fi. Definitely nor hard sci-fi.

I think it's obvious that they're not hard scifi (you can tell because the stories are good ). But still, it's a game set in the future about clones, artificial intelligences, and giant robots. If that's not science fiction, I don't know what is.

mag

[Once A Villain]

Originally Posted by mag

There's not much to defend. I'm not making fun of you for one or two of your points being assinine. I'm making fun of you because they're ALL assinine. Every single one. I mean, come on. The cloak looks like Predator? Because it's not like that's what a cloaking device looks like in every single movie with a cloak ever made. What the **** is a cloak supposed to look like? Kojima is a hack because his game includes jeeps? It's like I'm talking to a twelve year old AOLer.

Honestly, when I was reading your list, all I could think of was the person who told me that Peter Jackson named him movie The Two Towers because of 9/11.

The cloak looks almost exactly like Predator. Cloaking effects in movies are generally just completely invisible, or you see the outline of the being's shape, like a bubble, but clear inside. Predator has these interior ripples, lines, whatever you want to call them. It was just an effect that made Predator different in 1987. It's a visual image that sticks in one's head. Ninja uses a similar style of cloaking. Visually it's very close.

You want to tell me that when you saw Ninja cloak and run around you didn't immediately think of Predator? If not, then you aren't as bright or observant as you think you are. Even Kojima knows where he got the idea. As he said, McTiernan is one of his favorite filmmakers (I have no idea why, but that's just the case), and he had a Predator figure on his desk as he designed MGS.

What about the way he stylistically emulates Michael Bay constantly (and Bay isn't even a good filmmaker)? What about the scenes I mentioned (and believe me, there are more), where the very dialogue, ideas, action, etc. are extraordinarily similar to other specific scenes from other specific films. I suppose now you're going to tell me that Solid Snake and Snake Plisken aren't similar at all, even though Kojima has admitted that's where Snake came from, and the two characters are almost identical.

Plus, I didn't say Kojima is a hack for using jeeps in his movie. It's the way he uses the jeeps in the final chase scene, are you completely obtuse? The big chase scene down the tunnel where I recall, at least in the Japanese version, Liquid comes flying up behind him screaming, "SNAAAAAKE!!!!" I'm sorry, but I thought I was in an 80's action movie or a 90's straight to video film. It was just...cheesy. And it was cheesy in every movie that did it before Kojima did.

I suppose you'll never understand. You're like a woman that keeps going back to the guy that isn't good for her. She can be told what the guy's flaws are, but she won't acknowledge them, or if she does, she overlooks them. In this case, overlooking Kojima's flaws is fine, if you like him that much. But to deny them when even Kojima would readily admit his influences (probably not all of them since that would take up an entire notebook titled "The Kojima Style"), is just sad.

Originally Posted by gillyruless

Will you two settle down? You need to save your strengths for the next presidential election. I will start a thread for your benefit on the eve of next presidential debate.

I did enjoy most of MOS games but as a Sci-Fi fan, it's hard for me to classify the stories within the games as sci-fi. Definitely nor hard sci-fi.

Yes, definitely not hard, and not even soft as far as I'm concerned. As I've mentioned (and no one has argued) where is the soft science fiction, where is any science fiction, in the villains? I'll quote myself again: "Hornet men, vampires, people who deflect missiles with their souls, and dead people who show up as ghosts and haunt you in a boss fight of sorts." Or Psycho Mantis, wow that was really scientific. No. It was super-****ing-natural.

As for the next election gilly, it pains me to say it, but at this point, who knows if mag and I will be on opposing sides?