Support NeoGAF

[Screaming Meat]

You are honestly the first person I've come across that feels so strongly about MGS2 actually explaining this point. Pretty much everyone else, myself included, were left wanting an answer and expected it in a sequel.

To me a simple possession explanation is pretty boring tbh compared to what was presented in MGS4 that actually makes sense for Ocelot's character.

Although I was happy with the Evil Dead-esque insanity of Liquid's arm possessing Ocelot in MGS2, we got an elaboration on why this was possible that made sense in the context of the series and with Ocelot's character:

Spoiler

We found out in MGS3 that he's the son of The Sorrow

. That's more than enough of an explanation for me.

Much like most of MGS4's narrative, the

Spoiler

doppleganger explanation

simply wasn't necessary.

 

[SolVanderlyn]

Wait. What!? I played through the whole Zero series twice and I don't remember reading anything about what happened between Classic and X. Can you elaborate?

Oops, let me clarify. I meant that there wasn't a blank spot between X -> Zero the same way there was between Classic -> X. Sorry for getting your hopes up.

 

[Severance]

Metal Gear Solid 2 is interesting. I absolutely love the game and the story on its own, but it did feel like Kojima wrote himself into a corner. MGS4 was quite disappointing to me because of it. I definitely do not think Kojima wrote plot points like the Patriots or Liquid Ocelot with an endgame in mind. Part of what made Snake Eater so fantastic and IMO the best in the series was the fact that it was a prequel and Kojima knew what it was leading up to with the MGS games already written and released. MGS4 felt like a convoluted mess with serious pacing issues. It felt like Kojima wanted out for good.

 

[Haruka]

What? The whole premise of Aria of Sorrow was getting out of the roadblock the nonexisting 1999 game would have put the franchise into. Not to talk about all the gaps in the pre-reboot timeline that had to be filled.
You can say that the franchise's story was in an exciting turning point, just like Metroid with Fusion.
They just decided that they didn't want to continue but it wasn't certainly putting themselves into a corner story wise.

Maybe I just underestimate IGA and whoever else may been responsible for the writing, but a post-Aria/Dawn narrative seems like a thing that would quietly be ignored in favor of more bland Belmont vs Dracula narratives, because it would require more creative storytelling, similar to the situation with going beyond Metroid Fusion, I guess. Aria was already very original of course but I don't think there was much of a plan to go beyond that, judging from statements made by IGA. They could always be lazy, and be like: "Soma is Dracula now.", and then just carry on like usual, but that would be stupid.

 

[Simbabbad]

This post is not only ignorant, but also condescending [...]

So no, stop that bullshit.

And this one is overreacting, over the top aggressive and good for the asylum. Zelda, StarFox and Metroid having a clear, consistent, laid out, global narrative? Nintendo not being a "gameplay first" company? Sure.

I can't imagine giving a damn about continuity across Nintendo games.

This. Some "fans" are scary people.

And it is odd how Samus never really seemed like a bounty hunter... at all.

You also never see Captain Falcon bounty hunting, Han Solo smuggling, or Mario plumbing.

 

[gypsygib]

I think the MGS Solid Snake series after 4. Only way they where able to fix it was go back and use Big Boss instead. Why the duck would you make your main protagonist rapidly age and basically kill him off.

MGS is dead regardless. Kojima off the series. So, the MGS4 ending was actually perfect.

Mind you, I would have loved for them to have modern games showing how Solid Snake became the legendary soldier prior to his MGS1 (coming out of retirement) debut. And more stuff with Liquid, who I feel was probably the most interesting villain, would have been really interesting as well.

 

[Dame]

Metal Gear Solid is technically the poster child of this.

.

I've been a fan for a while. Can you please let me know either here, or in a message, the character contradictions or plot holes, if you happen to know them.
there is much i've yet to piece in the bigger tableau of the franchise, like why both The Joy and Ocelot played pesudo double agents wanting both snakes to succeed, yet trying to kill him along the way. Many thanks in advance.

 

[Boss Doggie]

I think it's because people are too hung up on the idea of a game where Samus fights generic infantry.

Dudes with assault rifles wouldn't be able to fight Samus. The Feds would have to bring new shit to the table and that's what makes the concept interesting.

We've already seen the Federation's first attempt at an anti-Samus killbot and it was one of the coolest monsters in the entire series:

What if that guy was just the tip of the iceberg?

Eh, it's not like Samus will stop fighting aliens when she goes against the Feds. But yeah, would be interesting to see shit like a killbot that mimicked Samus's capabilities.

And this one is overreacting, over the top aggressive and good for the asylum. Zelda, StarFox and Metroid having a clear, consistent, laid out, global narrative? Nintendo not being a "gameplay first" company? Sure.

Yes they have, especially Metroid and Star Fox. And focusing on gameplay doesn't automatically mean you will forego the rest, which is hilarious because Nintendo is capable and able to do a good story and gameplay. Hell you make it sound like they make "deep, complicated stories" when all that's needed really is just a straightforward narrative.

And I'm glad your post only talks about the "emotion" of the post rather than the points. Says much.

I like how you paint "fans" when at the same time it's them who usually don't care for such things.

 

[Vibranium]

Ace Attorney.

Boy, that timeskip didn't treat Phoenix well.

Not really. I want to see him finally get together with Maya though, Capcom are once again toying with fans. Him and Edgey are single men in their mid thirties, and the fanart community make it even worse.

 

[Skux]

Yeap, Asassin's Creed. They stretched out what should have been a climactic modern story with Brotherhood and then Revelations. It lost all impact and meaning, and the end was completely nonsensical.

The modern day story has never recovered.

 

[Ascenion]

Got to vote for Mass Effect. It's a hell of a thing to write an ending so bad you can never go back to the original setting of the series. Unless it's a prequel or occurs during the trilogy there can never be another game in the Milky Way. They fucked up that badly all to give players a choice they never had to begin with. Contrary to the belief I see a lot, Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 end the same way regardless of your choices in relation to story progression and canon.

Spoiler

Saren and Sovereign are defeated and you die ultimately, then you defeat the collectors and cut ties with Cerberus

. Bam end of story. Yes there are variations in ME2 but they aren't canon (not counting DLC).....they picked canon for the previous 2 games but not 3. I've no idea why they decided differently this one time.

 

[Narroo]

The Megmaman X Series is an interesting example. It's been repeated a 100 times but:

The series was originally supposed to end with X5, which wrapped most points up nicely, while leaving openings for a possible spin-off. The team that made it went on to other projects, such as Megaman Zero.

But, then Capcom had some other people make X6, which messed everything up. Then, X7 which pretty much ignored most of the foreshadowing and plot of X4-X6 (Isoc, where are you?!) and practically rebooted the story, while X8 continued this while also "Killing off for real" Sigma (but how do you kill off SIgma "for real" with a back stab when he's an immortal virus that keeps coming back?!)

Meanwhile, Megaman Zero tried to cope with the extended X-series before finally giving up. The entire continuity of the plot is a mess and it'll probably never be fixed given the series lack of earning potential and the exits from Capcom.

 

[redcrayon]

I don't think Zelda's timelines even matter when every game is pretty much self-contained. Even when it's the same Link on a rare occasion (Zelda 1-2, OOT-MM), the game doesn't do much to highlight it.

I mean, the timelines are really rough and bend to whatever they think might make a cool game, with few links between them, it's not like there's a specific plan as to why the Spirit Tracks were laid down etc. I've always just imagined 'The Legend of Zelda' as referring to the archeotypes of The Hero, The Princess, The Wizard, The Sage etc that seem to be reborn in Hyrule every few thousand years or whatever.

Ultimately I think it's imagining as a fairytale within a fairytale kingdom, retold again and again over different generations and interpretations of it, is pretty flexible.

Where a game directly has more of a clear narrative progression between titles, particularly where they are numbered sequels following the same characters through a short timeframe, it's clearly more important.

 

[entremet]

Most definitely. Surprised this wasn't the first example.

Series should have kept it simple. STARS and Umbrella should have been kept as the main protagonistic and antagonistic force, that's an iconic conflict. Killing them both and replacing them with a revolving door of dummy corporations and offshoot organizations (BSAA, TriCell, TerraSave, Il Veltro, the Federal Bioterrorism Commision, the Edonian Liberation Army, etc. etc. etc. jesus christ) has really made it hard to keep up with or care about the central conflict anymore.

But stars is just a police unit. Too small scale to take on umbrella.

 

[Sami+]

Assassin's Creed is the worst. Went from a great story to filler trash because it's not allowed to have a satisfying conclusion thanks to $$$.

 

[Toxi]

I think it's because people are too hung up on the idea of a game where Samus fights generic infantry.

Dudes with assault rifles wouldn't be able to fight Samus. The Feds would have to bring new shit to the table and that's what makes the concept interesting.

We've already seen the Federation's first attempt at an anti-Samus killbot and it was one of the coolest monsters in the entire series:

What if that guy was just the tip of the iceberg?

Admittedly, this was always my biggest concern with a post-Fusion game; outside of a few exceptions like the Nightmare, the Federation just isn't very interesting visually or conceptually. Having them as the enemies feels like a step back unless the game designers do what you're suggesting and focus on the crazy shit they would have to bring out to fight Samus.

Also, fuck Other M for ruining Nightmare.

And this one is overreacting, over the top aggressive and good for the asylum. Zelda, StarFox and Metroid having a clear, consistent, laid out, global narrative? Nintendo not being a "gameplay first" company? Sure.

Metroid has a pretty consistent narrative and timeline, with lots of references to the events of past and future games (For example, Super Metroid recounting the ending of Metroid 2 in its intro). It's not airtight, but it's certainly a lot more clear and straightforward than something like Zelda.

 

[LaserHawk]

I think Metroid can still be saved:

Option 1: Pick up after Fusion. Samus is on the run from the Galactic Federation, both for betraying them by destroying their metroid lab, AND for technically being the last metroid. She eventually has to take them on and fights her way into their headquarters from below the ground.

Option 2: Choose virtually ANY time period in Samus' adult life and have it be about her work as a bounty hunter. What jobs does she do when she's not fighting the space pirates? What other criminals does she apprehend? We can still call the game "Metroid" even though there are no metroids. I don't care who thinks otherwise.

Notice I didn't even bring up the idea of tacking an unnecessary Prime sequel after Prime 3, which so many people think needs to happen.

 

[Toxi]

I think Metroid can still be saved:

Option 1: Pick up after Fusion. Samus is on the run from the Galactic Federation, both for betraying them by destroying their metroid lab, AND for technically being the last metroid. She eventually has to take them on and fights her way into their headquarters from below the ground.

Samus is no longer part Metroid at the end of Fusion, which is why she can use the Ice Beam.

Q: In Metroid Fusion, it seems to have established that "Samus can't use the Ice Beam because she has inherited the nature of the Metroids", but why at the very end is she unconcerned when she regains the ice beam?

Sakamoto: When she absorbed the core of the SAX (the perfect condition of Samus), she basically reconstituted her genetic condition. She didn't recover the physical damage of her amputated suit, but she did recover her genetic condition.

 

[SargerusBR]

Resident Evil?

Yep, the first thing that came to my mind.

 

[Cathcart]

And this is why you get shit like "why does this game feel the same". And it also shows how limited you have in Nintendo games even.

You make it sound like stories in Nintendo games are "epic soap opera feels". No they are not. They are simple stories that can have a cohesive, point A to point B style of narrative. Shit like that doesn't even intrude in gameplay at all, so I have no idea why people get defensive towards Nintendo when approached by that.

And as I said, plenty of Nintendo games do follow a narrative.

Of course they have a narrative. I'm not saying Nintendo doesn't tell stories, I'm saying whats important is each individual game just needs to be a good story on its own. They don't have to connect. I enjoyed OoT. I enjoyed Wind Waker. It wouldn't bother me at all if something in WW "broke continuity" with OoT as long as each game stands on its own as something interesting to play.

I have no idea where you get that I think Nintendo games are "epic soap opera feels," whatever that means. I am quite sure I would never use that phrase. I said Nintendo stories are simple archetypes that allow them to make the games they want to make.

It's almost like you're mad that you agree with me.

 

[LaserHawk]

Samus is no longer part Metroid at the end of Fusion, which is why she can use the Ice Beam.

Oh, that's true.... Well, the Galactic Federation still has reasons to chase her.

 

[Nightbird]

You know, funny thing. The Pokemon main line games are very light and basic in story, yet somehow they can manage to make a perfect timeline, without at odds with each other, and even make winks and nudges here and there.

This is the perfect opportunity to pull out this:

Wich was the official Pokémon Timeline before the Release of Omega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire.
After the release, the Story in ORAS reveals that (Spoiler!)

Spoiler

the 6th Gen Games (X/Y, ORAS) take actually place in an whole different Dimension than the previous 5 Generations, wich means we have two different Timelines

 

[Dr. Buni]

Star Fox is anything but cornered. They could easily make a prequel not unlike FFVII did with Crisis Core where you play as the original SF team with James McCloud leading alongside Peppy and Pigma culminating in Pigma's betrayal and James' demise while Peppy escapes. This game writes itself!


And as for Metroid, yes. I do think they're cornered. Especially after the abysmal Other M which puts them in a very uncomfortable position of "now what?". For me the choice is only one of two: they either continue while ignoring Other M completely (unlikely) or reboot the franchise (more likely). Either way I hair want a new Metroid that doesn't betray Samus' character. I'm not asking for much.

A Metroid reboot is not likely at all.

 

[Terrell]

Metroid is probably one of the better examples. Between Prime, Fusion and Other M, they were pulling Samus in WAY too many directions and jumping around the timeline way too much, while none of them really seemed grounded in the series' sci-fi horror aesthetic (Fusion makes a great attempt at it, though, and some would argue Prime succeeded, but I can't say I agree with that).

Assassin's Creed also seems pretty damn lost, at this point. As does Resident Evil. Between the Capcom-canon movies and the franchise's direction after 4, it's so far off the rails that it may never recover.

The Zelda timeline argument, while potentially valid, was fairly well managed until ALBW happened. I can't fault one mis-step.

 

[Battlesmurf]

Came here to say pretty much the few things that got said already.

When I was a young buck, I loved Metal Gear and the like. I moved on to Metal Gear solid- I loved 1, appreciated and grew to love 2, really enjoyed 3. The story bounced all of over the place. 4 just went a bit too far, found myself not enjoying it anymore- though the gameplay itself was good, the story was so odd that it felt like it was taking away from the joy that I got from previous games storylines.

Assassins creed did something similar. Felt like it would have been a superb trilogy, but for some reason they kept going and I don't think the modern day stuff will get resolved. it was such a cool concept to me at the time that I almost found myself trying to finish the "assassin" part to see what happens in the real world part.

 

[Boss Doggie]

This is the perfect opportunity to pull out this:

Wich was the official Pokémon Timeline before the Release of Omega Ruby/Alpha Sapphire.
After the release, the Story in ORAS reveals that (Spoiler!)

Spoiler

the 6th Gen Games (X/Y, ORAS) take actually place in an whole different Dimension than the previous 5 Generations, wich means we have two different Timelines

A clarification on this.

The pokemon timeline is still linear. Zinia's shtick is just speculation and is never actually considered canon. She never outright said it, and her dialog simply implies that "it could be a possibility".

 

[Spoit]

I would love someone at Ubisoft to explain to me how tying the present day AC plot into the 2012 doomsday prophecies was a good idea.

They must have known that this was a franchise they wanted to keep going indefinitely, so to have all that stuff with Juno and the first civilisation be about preventing the apocalypse in 2012 strikes me as one of the dumbest plot decisions I've ever come across.

So Desmond stopped the end of the world. He used the apple and heeded the warnings delivered through the ages to his ancestors. Oh, and he died for his troubles. Great story, can we make it into a movie. Everyone will love it.

Also, now fucking what. Clearly, no one knows, because the series has been floundering ever since.

It's not irrevocably broke, they just need to take their cues from Deus Ex and focus on there actually being a secret war between the templars and the assassins, rather than it being about finding magic macguffins.

Of course, the real problem is them trying to decide if they want to even have a modern plotline in the first place

 

[Pandy]

The Halo series.

It use to be about a badass space marine killing aliens that invaded his planets, but that ended in 3 when Chief saved the world and blew up the big bad guy. Now it's all about ancient human/alien races, prophecies, being the chosen one, working with the aliens, working against the humans. Beats me what was going on in Halo 4, apparently you have to read the books to understand it properly.

This was the example I was going to post.

At the end of the day, it's a problem that generally only arises when video games actually have proper conclusions to their stories (Halo 3) instead of ending weakly with a set-up for a sequel (see Halo 2.) So, ironically, I think it's generally a good problem to have, as it means you did a half decent job of completing a narrative arc in the previous game(s.)

Rather than messing up what has gone before, the problem is better solved by using the same core game mechanics to tell new stories with new IP, or at least telling the story of other characters in the same universe.

 

[Son Of Sparda]

Devil May Cry 2 has fucked up DMC's storyline for good.

 

[Magic Mushroom]

Uncharted

3 touched on the strained relationship between Nate and Elena because of his escapades and it seems like they're going over that again in 4.

This is hardly a corner.