I still say REX's Rail Gun is a fictional weapon that would be totally practical. Rail Guns are actually consistently being worked on nowadays in military R&D.
Criticize the mechs if you want, but the Rail Gun is legit. Also the Arsenal Gears are basically submarines.
I think he was referring to a mobile nuclear launch platform, which the submarines do far more efficiently than an easily detected, slow land-based mech. The fact that a rail gun was part of the launching system was secondary to the idea that it was purpose built to deliver nuclear payloads.
I think it's a situation where Kojima just came up with "walking tank" because it was 1987 and he was only 24 and writing a dumb computer game, but then he was kind of stuck with it because, hey, the series is named after it, so he was stuck making excuses or sidestepping it for the rest of the series.
Basically this. When we were younger, my school friends and I would rack our brains trying to come up with some way to justify the existence of giant military robots (gundams at the time) that wouldn't be outclassed by simple tanks, hoverboats, or ships. Why? Because giant robots are fucking awesome! But the reality is that they're wildly impractical, would break down constantly due to the complexity, and have tons of exposed weak links that more self contained tanks/ships wouldn't suffer from. At a certain point, if you want to have awesome mechs stomping around in your story, you have to hand wave some of those impracticalities and just run with it, which is what Metal Gear does.
Its totally possible to criticize something and enjoy it. Its not binary Amazing/Garbage thing.
I've been a big critic of Metal Gear's narrative stylings for years now. But it also looks like this has the richest, most intuitive game design in the series. I can handle another terrible Kojima-penned story with characters who talk like aliens about THEMES and retcons that make me roll my eyes if the game design is on point.
This made me realize one of the larger issues I have with his storytelling, which is that Kojima often puts whatever
THEME he's going for above all else, often to the complete expense of a cohesive
NARRATIVE.
You can look at his stories in hindsight and dissect them, separating their constituent parts and analyzing each piece to unravel the thematic message he was trying to convey, but the experience you get from playing (or watching) them in realtime often leaves you scratching your head wondering who the hell let it through the editing room. I'm talking about the kind of weird connections, character actions/motivations, deus ex machina moments, etc. that made people blurt out "what the fuck?" during games like MGS2 and 4.
Characters are often repurposed, with personalities drastically altered to fit the thematic idea he's going for, connections drawn across timelines and titles that feel contrived and don't appear to make much sense, and player character experiences that are frequently unsatisfactory or leave the player feeling ambivalent toward the game they just finished - all of it done to fit the statement he's trying to make at that time.
Now stepping back and looking back on the stories with some distance, dissecting things after the fact and can reveal some genuinely cool and interesting ideas (like everyone's loved, then hated, then loved again MGS2), but Kojima rarely seems to be able to craft a narrative that remains consistent to itself and the history of the fictional world it inhabits, while both being fully enjoyable in the moment and still playing to the thematic idea he wants to illustrate.
To be totally clear, I like what he tries to communicate with his games, and how he tries to get the player to reflect on their own actions and expectations, but I do feel it's still completely valid to criticize his frequently jumbled and confused narrative storytelling.
If you're a Metal Gear Solid fan, you may appreciate the following perspective -
Regarding Venom Snake being The Medic, who is manipulated to believe he's Big Boss, but who also represents the player:
How loyal are you to Big Boss?
Would you have sacrificed your life to save his?
The Medic was to Big Boss what Big Boss was to The Boss.
In retrospect, what was the most heroic deed Big Boss did in his life?
I would argue he falls short of being a true hero in comparison to the Medic, who put his life on the line to save the life of a 'Legend'.
Without the Medic's heroics, Outer Heaven would have been nothing but a dream. The Medic also helped prevent WW3.
This is what I'm talking about above. The theme and concepts at play here are cool and thought provoking in retrospect, but the narrative - the way they're presented - could have been done more artfully. There are ways that this first bolded part (about the Medic being to Big Boss what Naked Snake was to The Boss) could have been shown to or played by the player (even in a tutorial or introductory part of the game establishing a friendly, competitive mentor-like relationship). As it stands right now, I have no real clear picture as to who the Medic was or how deep their relationship ran aside from some cursory background flavor text/audio tapes - he's such a non-character that his existence is easily forgotten without knowing that he's a deus ex machina linchpin later in the story.
Also, I'm not finished with the game yet, but did the Medic actually make that choice? I was under the impression Zero made it
for him with Kaz and Ocelot agreeing to keep up the charade, which removes any heroic aspect.