Metal Gear Solid V (PS3/360/PS4/XBO/Maybe PC) - Extended 9 minute E3 trailer

I'm fucking foaming at the mouth for this shit.

I've played 1-4, having recently played 2 and 3 when they released on Vita.

I'm currently playing PW on my Vita and holy shit!!!! I love it. Someone Fulton system me out of work! Quick!

I'm really hoping for a PC version.
 
What part of science fiction / fantasy is hard to understand?

What part about that sci-fi/fantasy undercutting some of the drama is hard to understand? You don't exactly have to be a dick about it.

the very first boss you fight in metal gear 2 is a space ninja

I understand that; I lampshaded my own point about how the very title of the series is based around an unrealistic mech that launches nukes. I know what kind of game series we're talking about. I just think it goes a little too far in places and makes it a little goofy.

And I like these games!

I hate how this forum treats one-liners like legitimate ways to deconstruct entire arguments.
 
Every time I watch the trailer, I think, "Poor Kaz...Good thing Liquid put him out of his misery."

Making Kaz so prominant in Peace Walker is probably my favourite bit of timeline fuckery that Kojima has done. Makes the Liquid reveal in MGS1 so much more of a more powerful moment when you realise he's killed your ultimate Bro.
 
Making Kaz so prominant in Peace Walker is probably my favourite bit of timeline fuckery that Kojima has done. Makes the Liquid reveal in MGS1 so much more of a more powerful moment when you realise he's killed your ultimate Bro.

Well to make that kind of reaction happen Kojima would have to do more to establish Kaz's relationship with Solid Snack.
 
Well to make that kind of reaction happen Kojima would have to do more to establish Kaz's relationship with Solid Snack.

Sorry, I meant to say it makes the reaction more powerful for the player themselves, rather than Snake. Solid Snake might not have been there to remember it, but I'll never forget the hours of awesome briefing files with Miller in Peace Walker.
 
The problem all stems from the fact that MGS2 was never supposed to have a sequel.
Kojima didn't have anything in mind for a sequel after Metal Gear Solid either.

if he truly believes each MGS game will be his last thenn= why in the FUCK does he always end with such major cliffhangers that can only build up to another game?
"Because cliffhangers are awesome!"
 
Actually, the only sequels that Kojima planned for ahead of time are MGS2 and MGSV. (MGSV started pre-production basically around the same time as Peace Walker.) MGS4 could be counted as a planned sequel if you considered it a sequel to Portable Ops, which some people do, but that's dumb.

edit: also, the reason there are cliffhangers is so that whoever worked on MGS after Kojima would have a jumping off point. No MGS game has ever been meant to be the last MGS, only Kojima's last MGS. You'll notice that the only game in the series without any major cliffhangers is MGS4, and that's ironically the only game that has gotten a really good sequel that Kojima had very little to do with in Rising. Maybe he really should quit it with the cliffhangers.
 
Actually, the only sequels that Kojima planned for ahead of time are MGS2 and MGSV. (MGSV started pre-production basically around the same time as Peace Walker.) MGS4 could be counted as a planned sequel if you considered it a sequel to Portable Ops, which some people do, but that's dumb.

edit: also, the reason there are cliffhangers is so that whoever worked on MGS after Kojima would have a jumping off point. No MGS game has ever been meant to be the last MGS, only Kojima's last MGS. You'll notice that the only game in the series without any major cliffhangers is MGS4, and that's ironically the only game that has gotten a really good sequel that Kojima had very little to do with in Rising. Maybe he really should quit it with the cliffhangers.

I have no problem with the cliff hangers its that they are so specific, they often scream a direct sequel is happening and will deal with "X."

If MGS2 was never supposed to have a sequel then don't end it with a big cliff hanger about The Patriots.

EDIT:
Also I wanna bring this up again why is Big Boss smoking what looks to be some sort of electric cigar?
 
I have no problem with the cliff hangers its that they are so specific, they often scream a direct sequel is happening and will deal with "X."

If MGS2 was never supposed to have a sequel then don't end it with a big cliff hanger about The Patriots.

EDIT:
Also I wanna bring this up again why is Big Boss smoking what looks to be some sort of electric cigar?

Haha. Unless someone here is working on the game, we have no idea.
 
Needs more shrapnel horn.

9079324335_e4474c1aeb_o.gif

I just now noticed the horn for the first time! I thought the horn was that little shrapnel under it and wondered what the big deal about it was. Yes, the big horn looks awful.
 
Sorry, I meant to say it makes the reaction more powerful for the player themselves, rather than Snake. Solid Snake might not have been there to remember it, but I'll never forget the hours of awesome briefing files with Miller in Peace Walker.

I loved the briefing files too with Miller. It really established and built on their relationship and also gave more infor on their motivations for MSF. Pretty solid.

Also I wanna bring this up again why is Big Boss smoking what looks to be some sort of electric cigar?

I think maybe Huey developed it or something on behalf of Snake. Or maybe Huey suggested it to Snake. Or Strangelove got pissed off with the smoking and suggested that Snake uses Huey's latest electric cigar. Maybe Huey is like Q from James Bond.
 
I really want to replay the whole series but I want to play the HD versions and it seems like a waste to pay $35-$40 for MGS HD Collection when the $50 MGS Legacy Collection is coming out.
 
It's the delivery of an inhibitor that stops the body from moving/expelling the shrapnel from his brain and causing further damage.

I like your enthusiasm, but it's probably just an electronic cigar. I doubt they would go through the trouble to make a vaporizer solution when he could just take a pill.
 
Found this EXTREMELY interesting:

HowardSkullface-1.jpg


I was really intrigued by this so I actually read it. This is so crazy. Some real gems in here.

The old, old vow had been made again--the Negroes and the Mohammedans, banded together, should drive the white men into the sea.

This man, whose education and craft transcend anything I ever met with, is simply the leader and instigator of a world-wide movement such as the world has never seen before. He plots, in a word, the overthrow of the white races! "His ultimate aim is a black empire, with himself as emperor of the world! And to that end he has banded together in one monstrous conspiracy the black, the brown and the yellow.

A great throng of people stood, sat and squatted, close-packed on the roof--and without exception they were Negroes!
 
Short answer?


White knights and perpetual victims have nothing better to get outraged at right now.


You two seriously don't see why some people specifically don't want to feel like they are being treated like 13-year old teenage boys who get their dick stroked by the inclusion of blatantly pandering character design? The trailer composition and montage of Quiet's introduction is basically textbook male gaze -> ass first, tits second, face final.

Neither are you able to see how some people think the believability and coherence of the game's intended drama and theme are being dragged down (although this is nothing new in Kojima-Land) by completely non-functional and purposeless clothing?

Sure, we might end up with a codec conversation in which Drebin's Great-Great-Grandfather's Ghost tell us the sad backstory of how Quiet had to eat, sleep, and shit in a bikini when she was a child in her local sandbox, but my money is on that whatever fictional reasons for the choice of clothing we will get, are going to be completely insufficient in establishing believability and coherence for why anyone in a military setting would prance around in a bikini and teared pants in the middle of the desert.

Hopefully you two see the flaws of the design and the way it's being presented so far.
 
There should be more uproar over Liquid Snake not wearing a shirt in the Alaskan winter, and Vulcan Raven too.

No good reason they don't wear shirts, shameful Kojima, shameful.
 
You two seriously don't see why some people specifically don't want to feel like they are being treated like 13-year old teenage boys who get their dick stroked by the inclusion of blatantly pandering character design? The trailer composition and montage of Quiet's introduction is basically textbook male gaze -> ass first, tits second, face final.

If thats the way you see it, go ahead. But that is no matter of fact. WHO GIVES A SHIT? It is entertainment. Sex appeal is entertaining, whether you think its proper or not. Since when has being a game developer become this politically proper mindfield where if you want to have fun with some aspect or creative liberty with a character you designed, you get people like you crying. Let's make all women dress conservatively because otherwise they're pandering to adolescents. Lighten up!

Neither are you able to see how some people think the believability and coherence of the game's intended drama and theme are being dragged down (although this is nothing new in Kojima-Land) by completely non-functional and purposeless clothing?

Kojima may be taking a serious approach with this game, but this is still the goofy old Metal Gear we all love. We have a russian cowboy CIA double agent, a man with an eye patch and horn building up an army on his own time and one manning a military base, bipedal mechs and enhanced AI in the early 70s, and dude running around in the Alaskan blizzard half naked carrying a Gatling gun that you subsequently kill with multiple remote controlled missles. A half naked mute sniper is relatively tame.

Hopefully you two see the flaws of the design and the way it's being presented so far.

What flaws? That she is half naked and that you don't like it? I think she looks cool and attractive with some kickass eyeshadow skin stuff. Besides, I can't really remember a shitty female character in MG sans MGS4 Meryl.
 
The ridiculousness of Quiet's outfit extends a bit beyond stylization because it is inherently designed for sex appeal. Liquid and Raven looked cool. Even Sniper Wolf, with her unbuttoned shirt and sexualized character design, looked like she fit the setting and the "cool" aesthetic of Foxhound.

Quiet is also a prime example of over-sexualization in character design. It really does pander to a certain type of crowd, and a type of crowd that is particularly low-brow. This is MGS, sure. This is nothing new. There are posters of Japanese idols inside of lockers and MGS3 Eva is the very definition of sex appeal. I think the problem some people find is that Quiet is (supposedly - though who really knows) a serious character with a serious thematic background and a serious purpose with which sex appeal has nothing to do with. Also, it is far more exaggerated in her design than in Wolf's of Eva's, both of which were part of the characters themselves. That's just my two cents, though.
 
The personal is political. The way things are represented in popular culture has a direct effect on the population consuming that material (whether that be films, television, video games, advertising, books, etc). People can learn and become conditioned by the media they are exposed to, that's why something like a rape culture develops, that's why some men don't think it's rape unless the women verbally objects and fights back. If they never see the media or popular culture talk about it any other way, they're going to internalize that perspective.

Maybe you just think everything we say is just a bunch of bullshit and anyone who gets upset over this is just an idiot. But I would hope you at least realize how dismissive and insulting that is to say that anyone who complains about issues of female representation in the media are crybabies and that our feelings should never be validated. Try to have some empathy or compassion for people on the other side for once, try to at least understand where we're coming from rather than dismissing our opinions entirely. I challenge you to have an open enough mind to learn about why so many people get angry about this, clearly there's something going on here if people like us keep popping up.

Here is a 13 minute TED talk about sexual objectification from Caroline Heldman and why its so damaging and problematic; about why you should give a shit. Can you take at least 13 minutes to try to be open to the other side? Can you give me that, at the very least?

And here's an excerpt from an article series she wrote about sexual objectification, I really recommend following the link because she includes a ton of hyperlinks within which link to studies and research like "Effects of exposure to sex-stereotyped video game characters on tolerance of sexual harassment" . ED: Hyperlinks copied over.

Sexual objectification is nothing new, but this latest era is characterized by greater exposure to advertising and increased sexual explicitness in advertising [PDF], magazines, television shows, movies [PDF], video games, music videos, television news, and “reality” television.

In a culture with widespread sexual objectification, women (especially) tend to view themselves as objects of desire for others. This internalized sexual objectification has been linked to problems with mental health (clinical depression, “habitual body monitoring”), eating disorders, body shame, self-worth and life satisfaction, cognitive functioning, motor functioning, sexual dysfunction [PDF], access to leadership [PDF] and political efficacy [PDF]. Women of all ethnicities internalize objectification, as do men to a far lesser extent.

Beyond the internal effects, sexually objectified women are dehumanized by others and seen as less competent and less worthy of empathy by both men and women. Furthermore, exposure to images of sexually objectified women causes male viewers to be more tolerant of sexual harassment and rape myths. Add to this the countless hours that some girls/women spend primping to garner heterosexual male attention, and the erasure of middle-aged and elderly women who have little value in a society that places women’s primary value on their sexualized bodies.

Theorists [PDF] have contributed to understanding the harm of objectification culture by pointing out the difference between sexy and sexual. If one thinks of the subject/object dichotomy that dominates Western culture, subjects act and objects are acted upon. Subjects are sexual, while objects are sexy.

Pop culture sells women and girls a hurtful fiction that their value lies in how sexy they appear to others; they learn at a very young age that their sexuality is for others. At the same time, sexuality is stigmatized in women but encouraged in men. We learn that men want and women want-to-be-wanted. The yardstick for women’s value (sexiness) automatically puts them in a subordinate societal position, regardless of how well they otherwise measure up. Perfectly sexy women are perfectly subordinate.

The documentary Miss Representation has received considerable mainstream attention, one indicator that the public is now recognizing the damaging effects of sexual objectification of women.

Widespread sexual objectification in U.S. popular culture creates a toxic environment for girls and women.
 
The personal is political. The way things are represented in popular culture has a direct effect on the population consuming that material (whether that be films, television, video games, advertising, books, etc). People can learn and become conditioned by the media they are exposed to, that's why something like a rape culture develops, that's why some men don't think it's rape unless the women verbally objects and fights back. If they never see the media or popular culture talk about it any other way, they're going to internalize that perspective.

The bolded sounds like a problem society has to deal with, and shouldn't restrict a Japanese game designer who wants his fictional character to show some skin.

I also don't see the correlation between your rape culture and Quiet's outfit. You're attacking the wrong thing here. The problems with the way men and women see themselves via fictional characters is remedied by education. Educate people on "rape culture" or whatever through school or just genuine upbringing, but condemning any sort of sex appeal in a video game for the sake of political or personal reasons isn't fixing anything it's just limiting the person making the game. Would you be satisfied if every female character showed no skin?

Maybe you just think everything we say is just a bunch of bullshit and anyone who gets upset over this is just an idiot.

No, no, no, of course not. I really do get it. Female objectification is a huge issue but condemning sex and sex appeal is going about it the wrong way. Both are natural aspects of humanity, however, and shouldn't or I should say can't just be thrown away for the sake of political correctness.

I challenge you to have an open enough mind to learn about why so many people get angry about this, clearly there's something going on here if people like us keep popping up.

I'm not trying to dismiss what you're doing, but I think this is a case of being really preemptive. There are so many issues with female representation in games that you start barking at minuscule things like this that are really a non-issue.
 
Here is a 13 minute TED talk about sexual objectification from Caroline Heldman and why its so damaging and problematic; about why you should give a shit. Can you take at least 13 minutes to try to be open to the other side? Can you give me that, at the very least?

So that's a no, you don't want to hear about the issue from an expert in a more academic setting, you've got your side staked out and see no reason to explore beyond it. Big surprise that you stopped quoting my post as soon as I mentioned the Ted Talk and gave an excerpt from an article. God forbid I ask you step out of your comfort zone for 10 minutes rather than just off-handily dismiss everything. I might have been able to walk away from that kind of refusal but then you had to go and take it a step farther and straw-man me.

I also don't see the correlation between your rape culture and Quiet's outfit. You're attacking the wrong thing here. The problems with the way men and women see themselves via fictional characters is remedied by education. Educate people on "rape culture" or whatever through school or just genuine upbringing, but condemning any sort of sex appeal in a video game for the sake of political or personal reasons isn't fixing anything it's just limiting the person making the game. Would you be satisfied if every female character showed no skin?

I used rape culture as one example of a way in which popular culture and the media can affect individual behavior and then gave you completely different material on how sexual objectification affects us through the same pathways. And yet for some reason you decided that meant I was arguing that Quiet was in a bikini and therefore rape culture. Do you even bother reading what people write or have you become so permanently defensive that you can't actually respond to the substance of posts and are content to just trot out all the old straw-men like 'you just want censorship over the media'. Do you have any thoughts on the actual video or article I shared or just whatever you imagined I'm talking about?

No, no, no, of course not. I really do get it. Female objectification is a huge issue but condemning sex and sex appeal is going about it the wrong way. Both are natural aspects of humanity, however, and shouldn't or I should say can't just be thrown away for the sake of political correctness.

In a culture with widespread sexual objectification, women (especially) tend to view themselves as objects of desire for others. This internalized sexual objectification has been linked to problems with mental health (clinical depression, “habitual body monitoring”), eating disorders, body shame, self-worth and life satisfaction, cognitive functioning, motor functioning, sexual dysfunction [PDF], access to leadership [PDF] and political efficacy [PDF]. Women of all ethnicities internalize objectification, as do men to a far lesser extent.

Yeah, you're totally right. All of the above is either a "natural" aspect of humanity or purely a matter of political correctness, there's no real, actual harm generated by sexual objectification that we might want to try to fix.

I'm not trying to dismiss what you're doing, but I think this is a case of being really preemptive. There are so many issues with female representation in games that you start barking at minuscule things like this that are really a non-issue.

Oh I get it, you're not dismissing the point I'm making, you're just saying it's a miniscule non-issue that's not important. For gods sake, if that's not dismissing the point I don't know what is.

WHO GIVES A SHIT? It is entertainment. Sex appeal is entertaining, whether you think its proper or not. Since when has being a game developer become this politically proper mindfield where if you want to have fun with some aspect or creative liberty with a character you designed, you get people like you crying. Let's make all women dress conservatively because otherwise they're pandering to adolescents. Lighten up!

Oh wait, yes I do, because you just did it in your previous post in a much more insulting fashion. Thanks for clearing that up, I might have missed it.

The bolded sounds like a problem society has to deal with, and shouldn't restrict a Japanese game designer who wants his fictional character to show some skin.

So sexual objectification of females in popular culture and the media is a severe problem facing society (which is just a collection of individuals by the way, remember when I said the personal is political), but we can't actually ask those individuals, groups, and corporations in charge of creating media or informing the popular culture to examine their behavior and think about changing it? Cause that kind of sounds like society trying to deal with the problem. What exactly is so wrong about people arguing for things like more female or minority leads in television and film? No one is arguing for complete government controlled censorship, I just don't see what you're so up in arms about. On a related note however, I'm extremely curious to hear what your thoughts are on affirmative action.

And one final note, why don't you think we should care about what a Japanese developer does? Did you forget that Japan has its own society and culture and that women live there too? Are you aware of the systemic gender issues facing Japan and the impact that has on women in the labor force and their collapsing birth rate? We live in a globalized world where media is transnational. Problems related to sex and gender don't just stop at the border and neither should we.
 
Brawndo I get where you're coming from and agree with most of what you're saying, but I feel like MGS as a franchise should get if not a free pass then at least the benefit of the doubt, considering that MGS2 is arguably the only really legitimate example of male sexual objectification and female gaze in the history of games as a medium. (edit: maybe El Shaddai, but this is highly debatable.) I've seen a lot written about this within Tumblr's feminist community, about how MGS2 basically introduced millions of men to that uncomfortable feeling for the first time. Whether it was meant as a criticism of contemporary games or if Kojima really did just want a main character that was more appealing to women I don't know, but either way it deserves being mentioned.

I've also seen the MGS franchise derided by other Tumblr feminists, who... well, haven't actually played any of the games. This is because the series absolutely looks like a mish-mash of japanese fanservice and hyper-masculine dude-shooting to people who haven't played it in the same way that Drive looks like a Fast & Furious clone if you're just going off the trailers for it. Notice how huge Metal Gear's section is on TV Trope's Never Trust a Trailer, it's something the whole series is infamous for so you absolutely can't believe anything you see in the trailers for the game or even anything that comes straight from Kojima's mouth.

The only time sexual objectification has really been problematic in the series was with MGS4's bosses, (which there is still a lot to be said about) but every possible kind of fanservice was so prevalent in MGS4 that I can't help but see it as intentional. I'm not saying Quiet won't be a problematic character, I'm just saying you at least wait until you play the game (or watch the cutscenes on youtube!) before you call it out.

As for sexual objectification of women in games as a whole, or any other cultural issues that the medium (or any medium) has, I think the best thing you can do about it is to lead by example and make games without those elements. We're all either already developers or trying to become developers here, right? Don't become an intron of history, pass your memes onto the next generation!
 
Quiet won't be that quiet after all:

"Sharing the trailer one more time over here just in case. I'm doing the 3D capture, mo-cap, facial capture and voice of the female sniper character named "Quiet"."

Maybe she will talk but after the torture she won't talk anymore.
 
Holy cow. Have you all seen this? (I'm guessing yes.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tb1WhDdto08

The footwork and research these two is incredible, so I highly, highly reccomend checking these videos out to all MGS fans out there. It's very interesting!

TgOQazI.png


DTlkASv.png


7CbZfCi.png


5fwmXdS.png


fWSU0ry.png


Not even halfway through yet. I was pretty sure the whole "Gray Fox is Big Boss" theory was crazy until I started seeing this. This paired with the strange camera and dialogue stuff in the Ground Zeroes trailer, plus Ishmael in the Phantom Pain trailer is starting to come together.

EDIT: Will update with more interesting info.

-Snake's eyepatch isn't as it seems - in the trailer you can see Snake making some sort of gesture towards the eyepatch, and a clicking sound can be heard right after; this goes along with Ocelot's line about getting familiar with binoculars; there is also a small blue light on Snake's hand when he does this gesture at his eyepatch; he also never equips binoculars to zoom in on enemies in the trailer

JVmMD2T.png


OpH2uc0.png


-Gray Fox murdered innocent civilians in the Rhodesian Civil War of 1979[/B (for example, Naomi Hunter's parents)], just as Punished Snake seems to murder innocents held in a prison in the trailer

7gxVlXi.png


-Gray Fox's alias in MGS1, "Deepthroat" was used for the anonymous source in the Watergate scandal, and

uxIFigE.png


-"In Africa...They're building a weapon to surpass Metal Gear. Big Boss meets Gray Fox's sister, Naomi, in Africa during the 1980's, and returns them both to the States. Gray Fox returns to fight the war in Africa after.


SIDE NOT ABOUT ELI/LIQUID:

Interesting points about how the word "cursed" is used to describe Eli, while Liquid uses that exact word to describe his fate in MGS (Twin Snakes; not sure if it's the same phrase in MGS1 ((PS1)) )

"In the Middle East, we don't hunt Foxes, we hunt Jackals."

HHkHQ8L.png
 
Top Bottom