Seems like it is wrong to want things now, huh?
I never said that. Don't put words in my mouth.
My (much repeated, but never refuted) point is that the disappointment if not having gotten what you wanted is making you knee-jurkingly judge the ending extremely negatively, despite not even having played the game. To the point even that you'll post a simplified picture that ignores every other implication that the twist makes.
The changes in the story are a fact that I don't like now and I will not like tomorrow.
Which part of "you can't be 100% sure of how you'll feel about something a decade from now due to the simple fact that you constantly change as a human being and will form different tastes and opinions constantly" don't you understand? You can't claim what you're claiming, not even about your wife let alone a mere video game.
Also, and I can't fucking believe I have to reiterate this, but: YOU HAVEN'T PLAYED THE GAME YET. You haven't established a connection with your avatar and you haven't felt the reveal through that same bond, among many elements that factor into your emotional and intellectual response about the twist.
You're so angry disappointed about not being to play with your waifu Big Boss that you're flat-out guaranteeing someone on the internet whom you've never met, that you'll be FOREVER disappointed about this big reveal. You know, despite events like MGS2 and the reevaluation by the fan base years later, proving how such things change.
You're still reacting emotionally to such a huge extent that you're making promises you can't even keep. It's
very pathetic.
there's a lot that make less sense now because the picture we had of BB is now different and weaker.
A lot has changed, but it still all makes sense, just in a different context. Don't say things that are blatantly not true.
It's not about emotions, who am I, David Cage? It's not about enjoyment either, I can enjoy to be played like a fiddle. What I don't like is a man overwriting what he did in the past years.
Well, you definitely seem to put as much thought in your posts as Cage does in his storylines, so yeah, who knows?
In all seriousness: it's also about emotions. And it's also about enjoyment. It's about all of these things. And you haven't experienced a lot of these things because you spend your weekend watching someone else play it and then read about it on a forum.
There is nothing wrong with retconning stuff. The act of retconning itself is neutral.
AGAIN: what you don't like is WHAT has been retconned, which is surprisingly little. A lot of new context has been added, but bar the mythos of Big Boss, most elements have stayed the same.
I express myself with the english I know and I'm replying pretty quickly. My choice of words probably is not the best but I need to deliver the message somehow.
You don't have to reply quickly. Feel free to take your time. I rather wait a day for a reply that has been worded properly than one that has been jumbled together rapidly.
In the end, all I can work off of, are your words, not your intentions.
To repeat the concept: when you try to explain supernatural with science, something you cannot do, you'll inevitably fall in bad writing and ridiculous explanations.
The first bold bit is bullshit in the very definition of both the supernatural and empirical science (in the end, "magic is just advanced science we haven't explained yet") plus Kojima did a pretty decent job giving semi-scientific explanations to supernatural phenomena. If you look at our history, people made up gods simply because they couldn't explain shit yet.
The latter bold bit is just an assumption/opinion, and I hate it when people pass that up as facts. Kojima might not be the best writer, but don't you dare even suggest for one second that it's straight-up impossible to write scifi like that (supernatural explained emperically) properly.
It's better to simply believe in the supernatural, blah blah blah
It isn't. Not necessarily. Stop acting like your opinion is how the series should've been done.
You keep proving my point: that you're butthurt because Kojima didn't take the series in the direction you wanted it to. You're also proving that your emotional response is clouding any form of trying to understand what Kojima did instead, as you have now proven again and again.
This is where we disagree and I'm hoping you can understand how important it is: I really care about the existing canon.
Like I've said time and time ago: I know you do. For some strange reason, you care about a tight canon more than you do about concepts like subversion.
Let's say it's a matter of principle.
It's not a matter of principle. Mainly because no one forced that principle on you except yourself.
There's the gamer and then the almost-30 years MGS fan, I'd like both to be satisfied with everytime.
You literally said earlier that you understand how bad it is to try to please everyone.
It's a good thing that Kojima didn't try to cater to the very specific fan who gets a massive boner if a dozen games that weren't even meant to be made as a series somehow flow perfectly narratively. Again: consistent canon is not a goal, it's a means to an end. Kojima knows this.
MGS3 did it very well. didn't it? Everything made perfect sense!
MGS3 was a copout in that regard as Kojima abandoned the Solid Snake saga to start a completely new storyline. He didn't have to fit that game in between other games; he could almost do whatever the fuck he wanted.
TPP doesn't have the luxury.
I can't believe you can't see that and are honestly trying to use Snake Eater as an example of "how to do it properly". If anything, TPP does a better job of fitting in relatively well into the canon AND doing such a twist, considering how tight it had to fit into the exact middle of the series.
It wouldn't be that hard with MGSV, either.
Get out.
Random example (it's silly, but just to get the idea):
Oh, don't you dare. Don't you dare criticize the twist for being, amongst one thing, silly, only to then try to show us how it's supposed to be done with the disclaimer that it's, indeed, silly.
If it's so easily done (spoiler alert: it isn't) your "example" would not have been "silly".
Your example is much worse than Kojima's effort, because: 1) it'd make Big Boss cartoonishly evil, instead of humanly evil, and nothing in the games has hinted at him being such a cunt that he'd kill his double in such a cold manner, 2) it doesn't destroy the Big Boss mythos like the reveal does, and thusly says very little about how legends are made or thought of, and 3) one of the interesting things about Kojima's reveal is how it makes us look at MG1 and 2 completely differently, without having to go back and change those games. Your example doesn't have anything nearly as interesting as that. Your example just turns a beloved character into a 2D killer, right after revealing that he used a double.
There's no grace in it, whereas Big Boss' gratitude in Kojima's twist means that he acknowledges his own weakness.
Just saying, there's still a lot that I don't like of this fake ending but it's better than having 2 Big Bosses, one in OH and the other in ZL.
It really isn't.
Better than having Ocelot hypnotize himself to forget about the real Big Boss
Except that ties into Guns of the Patriots, so it actually works on more levels.
It's not a retcon. It doesn't change MG1. You can play MG1 and everything will be the same, you just know more now. The context has changed, but it has not been retconned.
You sure?
Very much so.
Aye, I agree a lot but.. you know what I'm going to say, right? I'm very open to this stuff as I'm very interested to see how this medium can differentiate itself from the others. I'm not very open to retcons, but you've established that. Keep it in mind because it's all about this, nothing else. I remember I even
mentioned MGS3 ending as the very prime example of what can be achieved with game.
So what you're saying is you're open to change, unless something has to change that you don't want to have changed (like retcons)?
That's not how being open about something works. It's like saying "I'm not a racist! I love every race!" and then saying "... except Jews, of course" the moment tries to introduce you to a Jewish friend.
I played enough games to know when something works out, at least trust me on this.
Logical fallacy.
The amount of video games you have played says nothing about the validity of your arguments.
Said that, all you say is very correct, I love it: interaction is the key to link a player and the character and can be used for more powerful communication with the players. But the things I mentioned are necessary as well (using gameplay, I'm against cutscenes). We wouldn't care about Ellie if she didn't stick with us all the time, very close, while reading bad jokes from a book. We wouldn't be linked to Naked Snake if we didn't take care of him in the jungle, but at the same time we couldn't understand his feelings if it wasn't for cutscenes and codec conversations.
Very true.
But you've essentially agreed with what I said about how gameplay/interaction is the most important of all those things, right?
Because in that case you've just proven that you can't judge the twist properly seeing as how you HAVEN'T INTERACTED WITH THE GAME YET. You only saw the cutscenes.
Doesn't matter, Venom and Fox are both person that lost something.
Wait, what the fuck? Have you read nothing I just said?
It DOES matter! You just admitted yourself that gameplay is the most important element in creating a bond between you and your interactive avatar, and now you're trying to tell me that it doesn't matter that Gray Fox isn't playable?
OF COURSE it is! He's not even the avatar; it's a completely different kind of connection! He's not playable; he's a side character, FFS.
I understand what you say with "play the game first" but the premise is not there.
What premise are you referring to?
It's more about the game itself playing you rather than BB himself.
No, it's
also about the game playing you. It does that whilst giving you crucial information on BB's character.
It's quite smart.
Oh, I see. Don't reply then, I'm not worth your time.
You really aren't.
But I do somehow hope that you (and others that might read this) might exit this discussion a wiser man.