The whole meta aspect to it, the manipulation of the player through Raiden, everything pertaining to Solid Snake's ascension into becoming a heroic ideal, the entire A.I. reveal at the end, it's not something you can do with a novel, a film or a tv show. Raiden's entire arc only makes sense within the confines of an interactive medium such as video games.
Mathew fricking sucks, Bunnyhop's video on Sons of Liberty is easily one of the best ones. I would also recommend these:
From Bunnyhop's video on MGS2: >Despite the game's mind-boggling post-modern plot, there isn't much of it reflected in the minutiae of its gameplay. >Up until you run through Arsenal in the very end, its story about misinformation and misleading expectations is primarily delivered through cutscenes and not gameplay.
He argues that the change-up from stealth gameplay to pure action near the end complements Raiden's rejection of control.
But most Metal Gear games have this change-up. So it could just as easily be argued that this was done to ape the format of MGS1.
>So it could just as easily be argued that this was done to ape the format of MGS1.
Having 1's structure is a thematic point in 2, it apes it for a reason, not because it wants to give you more of the same.
it weaves post-modern literary tropes well into the narrative and gameplay
one such example is the disconnection between the main character (Raiden) and the player
I suggest you focus on that
still if you're pressed for time, you can always look up other people's essays on the game:
https://www.deltaheadtranslation.com/MGS2/DOTM1.htm
https://www.tannerhiggin.com/research/mgs.pdf
It doesn't.
And the gameplay of MGS2 has nothing to do with misinformation / critical thinking.
The closest it gets is letting the player write Raiden's name.
If the player writes their own name, it becomes clearer that Raiden is (You).
(You) are getting peed on by Kojima, (You) are getting felt up by the president.
And so their is hope that (You) will notice that this game is a deliberately cringy retread of MGS1 - made to send a message.
Of course, the player could just write POOPYPOOPYBUMHOLE as Raiden's name, and this aspect would be lost...
I mean, you're not in control when the speech is given in MGS2 either.
I was just using an unsubtle example for the sake of argument.
[...]
There are people that idolise and self-insert as action-heroes like Rambo.
I agree that the video game medium makes self-insertion easier because you can control the character.
I don't believe this heightened the impact of MGS2's "warning" - because it was done in a cutscene.
I lost control of the character and it was just Raiden getting talked to while I watched.
He said things and reacted to things in ways that I wouldn't.
The only difference I see between this and my film example is subtlety - and this can be overcome.
>I mean, you're not in control when the speech is given in MGS2 either.
but you do have control.
You have the option to hit Triangle and skip that bullshit
There's no reason why it couldn't be done in the middle of the film.
Maybe the villain is close to getting caught and he tries convincing the viewer to turn the film off.
The protagonist intervenes and reassures the viewer, and the villain uses this opportunity to escape.
Because it uses its gameplay to tell the story. If you are watching a movie or listen to music or observe a picture, it feels like something if the art resonates with you. MGS2 conveys the feelings within its story through gameplay. Making it into a movie would lose this crucial bit of information. MGS2 also relies on you finishing MGS1 first and cannot be fully experienced as a standalone game.
>Because it uses its gameplay to tell the story.
How? >MGS2 also relies on you finishing MGS1 first and cannot be fully experienced as a standalone game.
Nothing to do with the video game medium. A movie sequel could do the same thing.
Because it is you the player reliving the glory days of Shadow Moses idealized as a legendary tale, but you the player are just a mere puppet for the selection for societal sanity, the S3 plan put into motion by the AI. The end sequence is your subjective irrational experience of being in control and losing it against the AI's rational arguments.
Could this not be done in a film?
Like a sequel to Rambo, but Sylvester dies at the start and you watch a hopelessly inept Rick Moranis instead.
Later it's revealed that the movie is on a set and the director gives the same "context" speech to Moranis.
Camera pans to Moranis' POV, and the director is staring at us (the viewers) giving this speech.
I mean, you're not in control when the speech is given in MGS2 either.
I was just using an unsubtle example for the sake of argument.
You are never in control of Rambo or Rick. You didn't experience the First Blood, Rambo did. Your proposition would be self-contained to a movie script but MGS2 steps out of its medium to speak to the player directly and warn him or her about the dangers of the future. MGS1 was all about the proliferation and dangers of nuclear weapons and it went over people's heads because Rex is so cool and dude cyborg ninja, mental man reads my memory card and makes my controller move on the floor durrrr so MGS2 takes every aspect of what is so badass and sweeps your legs to be more direct while still being a video game.
There are people that idolise and self-insert as action-heroes like Rambo.
I agree that the video game medium makes self-insertion easier because you can control the character.
I don't believe this heightened the impact of MGS2's "warning" - because it was done in a cutscene.
I lost control of the character and it was just Raiden getting talked to while I watched.
He said things and reacted to things in ways that I wouldn't.
The only difference I see between this and my film example is subtlety - and this can be overcome.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Would the message work better if you could make your own character or if Raiden was more of a blank slate like Artyom from Metro?
3 months ago
Anonymous
probably.
It would also make the Solid Snake Simulation twist feel a bit better
3 months ago
Anonymous
Other anon that replied wasn't me.
I'll just say, I never said the message wasn't effective, just that I think it could be delivered in film.
Not sure if a blank slate character would be more effective. Just think that some of the self-insertion magic is lost when you cut away to a menu-style FMV and my character is talking on his own.
But if we entertain that idea... Here's a new argument.
There are some people that likely NEVER resonated with Raiden, and would certainly not self-insert with him at all. He is just their play-thing. It might have made the message even less effective being a game. You cut away from gameplay (which the player might have been enjoying), and have to listen to this guy whinge. Some players will skip. Some will lose attention. And others will take it in, and reject it - because who is this dweeb? He's not me. "OH NO! I'M IN A SIMULATION! MISINFORMATION IS GOING TO DESTROY SOCIETY!" shut up nerd!
3 months ago
Anonymous
MGSV did that but most people don’t care much for Venom
3 months ago
Anonymous
V's was a narrative mess.
3 months ago
Anonymous
It is not self-insertion. It is literally you. Turn the console off now. You are playing a video game about a guy who is playing a video game called the S3. The game tells you that the S3 plan is Solid Snake Simulation, and then Selection for Societal Sanity, but it is ultimately you and you alone.
Would the message work better if you could make your own character or if Raiden was more of a blank slate like Artyom from Metro?
No because in the final act Raiden rejects the player and Solid Snake delivers a speech about your own governance when you were betrayed and completely lost. You, not Raiden. By that time you should grow up from idolizing Solid Snake while acknowledging the truth of his message.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Well its a shame they didnt pull the venom snake in that game cause the message would have worked instead of an oc twink that feels like more gray fox 2 but gayer in looks than his own thing
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Turn the console off now
The quote is literally "Raiden, turn the game console off right now!"
You are never in control of Rambo or Rick. You didn't experience the First Blood, Rambo did. Your proposition would be self-contained to a movie script but MGS2 steps out of its medium to speak to the player directly and warn him or her about the dangers of the future. MGS1 was all about the proliferation and dangers of nuclear weapons and it went over people's heads because Rex is so cool and dude cyborg ninja, mental man reads my memory card and makes my controller move on the floor durrrr so MGS2 takes every aspect of what is so badass and sweeps your legs to be more direct while still being a video game.
MGS2 is still great, but I agree it’s too much of a movie game. The issue is that the unique aspect of games vs movies as a medium is interactivity, but all the messaging of MGS2 is on rails. You’d need outcomes that vary with your actions to make it be something only games can do. Is it more immersive as a game? Surely. But you could do the same sort of messaging in a movie through simple things like framing a shot to mislead the player at what they should be looking at, using angles or music that would make the viewer misunderstand what just happened.
Fission Mailed could just be false credits.
Now I’m thinking of Killer Party. It’s a not very good 80’s horror movie, but it opens, then turns out to be a movie that people are watching in a drivethrough, then the drivethrough scene turns out to be a musical number; then that turns out to be a music video the characters of the actual movie are watching on TV. It’s pretty boring after that outside of the finale, though.
Ehh if you didn't know that you can use explosives to make him get out of the water faster, the fight could drag on a bit. I liked it when he froze you with the light reflection and your allies commenting on it.
Better than the ones in MGS1. The boss CHARACTERS in MGS1 are great but the fights suck ass. And then in MGS3 the fights are great but the boss characters are trash, same thing repeats in MGS4
The MGS3 Cobra bosses could have used a bit more background/personalization but their fights were cool. My favourite fight still remains Volgin, for that sick ass OST https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPR-yCy_0vA
I just started playing these games recently and I don't get how pepole go on about this series bossfights being epic when there's usually only 1 or 2 great bossfights in the games while the rest of them range from okay to bad
Bosses had personality and were memorable characters, on top of having a fun gimmick to them. This was long before the time of SotC tier quality bosses or what From Soft's best bosses gave us in the past decade. While not mechanically difficult or particularly challenging, they serve as memorable events in and of itself, and that's what so many fans like about them.
I actually kind of liked that one. Very much a git gud moment. The one I disliked was Fatman since he moved way too fast and I couldn’t knock him over with my gun. I eventually settled for using mines and praying that he eventually run over one.
I don’t like MGS2, I think Mary Rose or just Rose? I don’t remember… is one of the worst characters written in anything. Between MGS1 and MGS3, collectively, MGS2 has the worst boss fights, the tanker level doesn’t make sense writing wise, the marines should have been ready for the russians coming in, I didn’t really buy into the Otacon and his sister aspect of the story, the president sexually assaulting Raiden was cringe. But the metal gear fight was cool and the Solidus snake fight at the end is the greatest boss fight ever, no exaggeration.
MGS2 in general is inferior to 1 even if it does some interesting things.
I hate having to run around the big shell and freeze bombs. Who thought that was a good idea.
>MGS2 in general is inferior to 1 even if it does some interesting things.
It's better on all fronts, except in the boss fights. Visuals, gameplay and level design is vastly superior, as is the script.
Most of that is because it was developed for stronger hardware that could do more.
I disagree that the script in two is in any way better than 1. Raiden as a character in 2 is too limited.
>Raiden as a character in 2 is too limited.
He definitely is not, he is the very heart of the game and the best part of 2.
>superior hardware
No shit, doesn't change the fact it was superior to 1 in that regard and that it was a serious technical achievement on PS2 in its own right. People tend to forget just what a giant step forward Sons of Liberty was as a game, especially as one of the defining titles of its generation on the PS2 console.
I theorize that it was a virtual reality simulation. Reason why is there were no people wandering in NYC and then they suddenly appear, to say that you are now in reality. It’s like that Total Recall movie, where you’re given a fake history to boot, Raiden’s back story as a child soldier is fake
Play Half-Life instead. It does a way better job of using the medium.
Though it's less of the story itself (mostly) and more of the storytelling itself. It uses the fps genre to tell a basic plot and it does it well.
Metagaming and the studying the nature of enforced reanactment. The game makes the point that people will literally repeat the same actions even if it's artificial. By the end regardless of how we felt about the playthrough we have to acknowledged that some of us were lured into playing up to the end.
The whole point of MGS 2 that you weren't get any more sequels, that the series was done and that you should move on from it, but then Snake Eater - a very fan pleasing and all too conventional prequel happened - Kojima got death threats and we got IV, the worst out of them all, mired in overexplaining everything and rendering the point of SoL mute in hindsight. Vidya fans that want more for the sake of more are a plague and they took P.T. away from us...
Snake Eater's gameplay is great and it is a pretty good game in its own right, but I find it somewhat disappointing in how all too conventional of a follow-up it was, and how apologetic in certain aspects it was, especially with mocking Raiden's character to appease all the Snake fanboys. 3 is notable, but 2 is brilliant and a unicorn, a daring sequel such as we haven't seen since. Nothing short of career suicide if you take into account that MGS was a blockbuster franchise.
It's funny to see how this flys over the head of so many fans ive seen plenty of metal gear fans hope that mgs3 remake is successful enough to remake the 1st game and bring the series back or want kojima to go back to making stealth games akin to metal gear despite him being beyond sick working on the games for decades
Fans never change, they would all run their favorite IPs into the ground, rather than being satisfied with a one and done sort of ordeal. Just look at people still asking for a sequel to BB or Sekiro, forgetting Miyazaki's msg in DaS 3's DLC.
Not many. It talks about various topics like miltary interventionism, supersoldiers, free will and all that good stuff in length, but you need to either sit and listen or skip them. Which isnt unique to MGS2. Its the kind of game that will throw out philosophically questions at you then in the next scene you slip on seagull poop or overhear a guy almost shitting himself.
MG1 would entertain these kinds of things by having your main source for information and order start purposefully giving you instructions that will kill you or set you in a difficult position. Only by going against what you are being told can you proceed. MGS2 you always go where people tell you to or you wont finish the game.
It's a game about games.
How could books hope to tell stories about video games if video games aren't real?
They would never be able to.
That is the real cold hard truth.
Please reply fast guys I need a 250 word essay on this and it's due in a couple hours
Watch all of these.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQHEs6MQYKIt70cKFLk344a_VcC_eoVR5
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLQHEs6MQYKIux097tKuf9MpcsKUM_P-xB
The whole meta aspect to it, the manipulation of the player through Raiden, everything pertaining to Solid Snake's ascension into becoming a heroic ideal, the entire A.I. reveal at the end, it's not something you can do with a novel, a film or a tv show. Raiden's entire arc only makes sense within the confines of an interactive medium such as video games.
Mathew fricking sucks, Bunnyhop's video on Sons of Liberty is easily one of the best ones. I would also recommend these:
?feature=shared
From Bunnyhop's video on MGS2:
>Despite the game's mind-boggling post-modern plot, there isn't much of it reflected in the minutiae of its gameplay.
>Up until you run through Arsenal in the very end, its story about misinformation and misleading expectations is primarily delivered through cutscenes and not gameplay.
He argues that the change-up from stealth gameplay to pure action near the end complements Raiden's rejection of control.
But most Metal Gear games have this change-up. So it could just as easily be argued that this was done to ape the format of MGS1.
>So it could just as easily be argued that this was done to ape the format of MGS1.
Having 1's structure is a thematic point in 2, it apes it for a reason, not because it wants to give you more of the same.
Sorry, that i wanted to actualy talk about videogames instead of seething about trannies or shilling AI.
>I need a 250 word essay on this and it's due in a couple hours
In couple of hours? You're fricked!
250 words is a paragraph, are you in first grade?
word requirements are so fricking stupid. I can't think of something more poisonous to someone's developing intellect.
it weaves post-modern literary tropes well into the narrative and gameplay
one such example is the disconnection between the main character (Raiden) and the player
I suggest you focus on that
still if you're pressed for time, you can always look up other people's essays on the game:
https://www.deltaheadtranslation.com/MGS2/DOTM1.htm
https://www.tannerhiggin.com/research/mgs.pdf
put simply only a video game can get away with forcing you through 9 hours of someone's diatribe
Have you never read a book?
It doesn't.
And the gameplay of MGS2 has nothing to do with misinformation / critical thinking.
The closest it gets is letting the player write Raiden's name.
If the player writes their own name, it becomes clearer that Raiden is (You).
(You) are getting peed on by Kojima, (You) are getting felt up by the president.
And so their is hope that (You) will notice that this game is a deliberately cringy retread of MGS1 - made to send a message.
Of course, the player could just write POOPYPOOPYBUMHOLE as Raiden's name, and this aspect would be lost...
>The closest it gets is letting the player write Raiden's name.
and MGS2 gays think this is super deep
It was kino.
not really
>I mean, you're not in control when the speech is given in MGS2 either.
but you do have control.
You have the option to hit Triangle and skip that bullshit
>mfw the AI started talking at the end
>You have the option to hit Triangle and skip that bullshit
Hey! Just like my DVD player!
I put "Jack" as Raiden's name because that is my name and when what's-her-name said it i freaked the frick out
That's a cool coincidence.
It should be obvious if you play it and treat raiden as a surrogate for the player.
I didn't play it in a few years so i wanted to refresh my memory.
>50 words essay due tomorrow
it's over
There was the part where it tells you turn off the console. No other medium can do it. It's truly unique, a milestone in storytelling as a whole.
>No other medium can do it.
A movie could tell you to turn it off.
But not middle of the film just credits joke
There's no reason why it couldn't be done in the middle of the film.
Maybe the villain is close to getting caught and he tries convincing the viewer to turn the film off.
The protagonist intervenes and reassures the viewer, and the villain uses this opportunity to escape.
>it was revolutionary
>it's a literal reference to MG1
Why are MGS2 gays like this? Why didn't they play the other games in the series?
Because it uses its gameplay to tell the story. If you are watching a movie or listen to music or observe a picture, it feels like something if the art resonates with you. MGS2 conveys the feelings within its story through gameplay. Making it into a movie would lose this crucial bit of information. MGS2 also relies on you finishing MGS1 first and cannot be fully experienced as a standalone game.
>Because it uses its gameplay to tell the story.
How?
>MGS2 also relies on you finishing MGS1 first and cannot be fully experienced as a standalone game.
Nothing to do with the video game medium. A movie sequel could do the same thing.
Because it is you the player reliving the glory days of Shadow Moses idealized as a legendary tale, but you the player are just a mere puppet for the selection for societal sanity, the S3 plan put into motion by the AI. The end sequence is your subjective irrational experience of being in control and losing it against the AI's rational arguments.
Could this not be done in a film?
Like a sequel to Rambo, but Sylvester dies at the start and you watch a hopelessly inept Rick Moranis instead.
Later it's revealed that the movie is on a set and the director gives the same "context" speech to Moranis.
Camera pans to Moranis' POV, and the director is staring at us (the viewers) giving this speech.
>Camera pans to Moranis' POV
It doesn't work as well when you're not in control of the character. You could do this, but it would be really contrived.
I mean, you're not in control when the speech is given in MGS2 either.
I was just using an unsubtle example for the sake of argument.
There are people that idolise and self-insert as action-heroes like Rambo.
I agree that the video game medium makes self-insertion easier because you can control the character.
I don't believe this heightened the impact of MGS2's "warning" - because it was done in a cutscene.
I lost control of the character and it was just Raiden getting talked to while I watched.
He said things and reacted to things in ways that I wouldn't.
The only difference I see between this and my film example is subtlety - and this can be overcome.
Would the message work better if you could make your own character or if Raiden was more of a blank slate like Artyom from Metro?
probably.
It would also make the Solid Snake Simulation twist feel a bit better
Other anon that replied wasn't me.
I'll just say, I never said the message wasn't effective, just that I think it could be delivered in film.
Not sure if a blank slate character would be more effective. Just think that some of the self-insertion magic is lost when you cut away to a menu-style FMV and my character is talking on his own.
But if we entertain that idea... Here's a new argument.
There are some people that likely NEVER resonated with Raiden, and would certainly not self-insert with him at all. He is just their play-thing. It might have made the message even less effective being a game. You cut away from gameplay (which the player might have been enjoying), and have to listen to this guy whinge. Some players will skip. Some will lose attention. And others will take it in, and reject it - because who is this dweeb? He's not me. "OH NO! I'M IN A SIMULATION! MISINFORMATION IS GOING TO DESTROY SOCIETY!" shut up nerd!
MGSV did that but most people don’t care much for Venom
V's was a narrative mess.
It is not self-insertion. It is literally you. Turn the console off now. You are playing a video game about a guy who is playing a video game called the S3. The game tells you that the S3 plan is Solid Snake Simulation, and then Selection for Societal Sanity, but it is ultimately you and you alone.
No because in the final act Raiden rejects the player and Solid Snake delivers a speech about your own governance when you were betrayed and completely lost. You, not Raiden. By that time you should grow up from idolizing Solid Snake while acknowledging the truth of his message.
Well its a shame they didnt pull the venom snake in that game cause the message would have worked instead of an oc twink that feels like more gray fox 2 but gayer in looks than his own thing
>Turn the console off now
The quote is literally "Raiden, turn the game console off right now!"
You are never in control of Rambo or Rick. You didn't experience the First Blood, Rambo did. Your proposition would be self-contained to a movie script but MGS2 steps out of its medium to speak to the player directly and warn him or her about the dangers of the future. MGS1 was all about the proliferation and dangers of nuclear weapons and it went over people's heads because Rex is so cool and dude cyborg ninja, mental man reads my memory card and makes my controller move on the floor durrrr so MGS2 takes every aspect of what is so badass and sweeps your legs to be more direct while still being a video game.
MGS2 is still great, but I agree it’s too much of a movie game. The issue is that the unique aspect of games vs movies as a medium is interactivity, but all the messaging of MGS2 is on rails. You’d need outcomes that vary with your actions to make it be something only games can do. Is it more immersive as a game? Surely. But you could do the same sort of messaging in a movie through simple things like framing a shot to mislead the player at what they should be looking at, using angles or music that would make the viewer misunderstand what just happened.
Fission Mailed could just be false credits.
Now I’m thinking of Killer Party. It’s a not very good 80’s horror movie, but it opens, then turns out to be a movie that people are watching in a drivethrough, then the drivethrough scene turns out to be a musical number; then that turns out to be a music video the characters of the actual movie are watching on TV. It’s pretty boring after that outside of the finale, though.
it is too wordy and needs editing.
no way would someone sit through that much plot exposition in a movie.
For me, it's the fact that the bossfights in MGS2 suck
Rose singlehandedly ruins this game for me
I'll be willing to give it a more in-depth shot when I buy the Master Collection though
I liked the vamp fight.
his fight felt like an annoying gimmick because I wound up using explosives everywhere because it felt like it was the only way to harm him
Ehh if you didn't know that you can use explosives to make him get out of the water faster, the fight could drag on a bit. I liked it when he froze you with the light reflection and your allies commenting on it.
Best fight is probably Fatman i guess
Better than the ones in MGS1. The boss CHARACTERS in MGS1 are great but the fights suck ass. And then in MGS3 the fights are great but the boss characters are trash, same thing repeats in MGS4
The MGS3 Cobra bosses could have used a bit more background/personalization but their fights were cool. My favourite fight still remains Volgin, for that sick ass OST https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPR-yCy_0vA
What do you mean? Fat Man, Vamp, Harrier were kino. Katana duel with the president atop of destroyed Manhattan is just too based for this world.
>Katana duel with the president atop of destroyed Manhattan is just too based for this world.
shame about the crappy sword controls and the game throwing you into two sections where the sword was useless, Shootout with Snake and the RAYs
The sword was usefull against the non sexy frogs soldiers cause some wear katanas that deflects shots
>Katana duel with the president atop of destroyed Manhattan is just too based for this world
Not with those ass controls
>Rose singlehandedly ruins this game for me
Filtered.
The final fight was amazing tho
I just started playing these games recently and I don't get how pepole go on about this series bossfights being epic when there's usually only 1 or 2 great bossfights in the games while the rest of them range from okay to bad
Because bossfights in other games are often even worse.
Bosses had personality and were memorable characters, on top of having a fun gimmick to them. This was long before the time of SotC tier quality bosses or what From Soft's best bosses gave us in the past decade. While not mechanically difficult or particularly challenging, they serve as memorable events in and of itself, and that's what so many fans like about them.
I enjoyed most of the bosses, only one that sucked was the wave defence against all the RAYS on top of Arsenal.
I actually kind of liked that one. Very much a git gud moment. The one I disliked was Fatman since he moved way too fast and I couldn’t knock him over with my gun. I eventually settled for using mines and praying that he eventually run over one.
Imagine some guy in the screen say turn off the film thats it
I'm actually pissed that I never got a true ranking in mgs2
It does not, unfortunately.
But Nier Automata and Death Stranding do.
Game was too advanced for its time:
I don’t like MGS2, I think Mary Rose or just Rose? I don’t remember… is one of the worst characters written in anything. Between MGS1 and MGS3, collectively, MGS2 has the worst boss fights, the tanker level doesn’t make sense writing wise, the marines should have been ready for the russians coming in, I didn’t really buy into the Otacon and his sister aspect of the story, the president sexually assaulting Raiden was cringe. But the metal gear fight was cool and the Solidus snake fight at the end is the greatest boss fight ever, no exaggeration.
MGS2 in general is inferior to 1 even if it does some interesting things.
I hate having to run around the big shell and freeze bombs. Who thought that was a good idea.
>MGS2 in general is inferior to 1 even if it does some interesting things.
It's better on all fronts, except in the boss fights. Visuals, gameplay and level design is vastly superior, as is the script.
Most of that is because it was developed for stronger hardware that could do more.
I disagree that the script in two is in any way better than 1. Raiden as a character in 2 is too limited.
>Raiden as a character in 2 is too limited.
He definitely is not, he is the very heart of the game and the best part of 2.
>superior hardware
No shit, doesn't change the fact it was superior to 1 in that regard and that it was a serious technical achievement on PS2 in its own right. People tend to forget just what a giant step forward Sons of Liberty was as a game, especially as one of the defining titles of its generation on the PS2 console.
I theorize that it was a virtual reality simulation. Reason why is there were no people wandering in NYC and then they suddenly appear, to say that you are now in reality. It’s like that Total Recall movie, where you’re given a fake history to boot, Raiden’s back story as a child soldier is fake
>I theorize that it was a virtual reality simulation
Bad reading.
>Raiden’s back story as a child soldier is fake
So what's his actual back story?
Play Half-Life instead. It does a way better job of using the medium.
Though it's less of the story itself (mostly) and more of the storytelling itself. It uses the fps genre to tell a basic plot and it does it well.
>MGS 2 thread
>dude go play Half-Life
Piss off, wanker.
everyone is a whiny pussy in 2. the characters and their dialogue are just worse than 1
Metagaming and the studying the nature of enforced reanactment. The game makes the point that people will literally repeat the same actions even if it's artificial. By the end regardless of how we felt about the playthrough we have to acknowledged that some of us were lured into playing up to the end.
I remember really hating 2 when I played it, maybe I should replay it after 1 this weekend.
Do it.
>ACTUAL MGS3 literally never
I will never not be angry.
What are you talking about?
I want a direct sequel to mgs2, not a silly spinoff or whatever the frick 4 was.
The whole point of MGS 2 that you weren't get any more sequels, that the series was done and that you should move on from it, but then Snake Eater - a very fan pleasing and all too conventional prequel happened - Kojima got death threats and we got IV, the worst out of them all, mired in overexplaining everything and rendering the point of SoL mute in hindsight. Vidya fans that want more for the sake of more are a plague and they took P.T. away from us...
2, 3, and 4 were fun though. I watch the movie version of them every other year.
Snake Eater's gameplay is great and it is a pretty good game in its own right, but I find it somewhat disappointing in how all too conventional of a follow-up it was, and how apologetic in certain aspects it was, especially with mocking Raiden's character to appease all the Snake fanboys. 3 is notable, but 2 is brilliant and a unicorn, a daring sequel such as we haven't seen since. Nothing short of career suicide if you take into account that MGS was a blockbuster franchise.
It's funny to see how this flys over the head of so many fans ive seen plenty of metal gear fans hope that mgs3 remake is successful enough to remake the 1st game and bring the series back or want kojima to go back to making stealth games akin to metal gear despite him being beyond sick working on the games for decades
Fans never change, they would all run their favorite IPs into the ground, rather than being satisfied with a one and done sort of ordeal. Just look at people still asking for a sequel to BB or Sekiro, forgetting Miyazaki's msg in DaS 3's DLC.
But Kojima is making a new “stealth-action” game because of fan demand. It’s code named Physint.
Not many. It talks about various topics like miltary interventionism, supersoldiers, free will and all that good stuff in length, but you need to either sit and listen or skip them. Which isnt unique to MGS2. Its the kind of game that will throw out philosophically questions at you then in the next scene you slip on seagull poop or overhear a guy almost shitting himself.
MG1 would entertain these kinds of things by having your main source for information and order start purposefully giving you instructions that will kill you or set you in a difficult position. Only by going against what you are being told can you proceed. MGS2 you always go where people tell you to or you wont finish the game.
hows the master collecvtion on pc with a ps4 controller?
THE definitive way to play MGS after installing some mods, check pcgamingwiki
tthx anon <3
in what way does gouache tell a story that onlt gouache can tell
>la li lu le lo
>writes a game about the illuminati
Yeah this is highly pretentious
It's a game about games.
How could books hope to tell stories about video games if video games aren't real?
They would never be able to.
That is the real cold hard truth.