About that Metal Gear Solid 2 analysis on insert credit

D

Date of Lies

Banned
This might have been already posted.

Che Space mentioned something about an article regarding "postmodernism", "Metal Gear Solid 2" and "Tim Rogers" (whoever that is) in a MGS3 thread, anyway, it struck me as something interesting so I googled it up.

http://www.insertcredit.com/features/dreaming2/index.html

I've never been to that site, but it looks as though Kobun Head is a staff member there, or something warm anyway...

What do you think of this view of Metal Gear Solid 2's story? I played MGS2 before playing the original MGS, also, I played it around a year ago, so I went into the game without any hype or any knowledge of the first game. Actually, I got the game for free, or else I might never have played it. It was weird, but I liked it, there was definitively some appeal in the story. I replayed it again about a month ago and I feel like playing it one more time before playing MGS3.

This is the thing: it isn't great, but MGS2 is the only japanese game I have ever replied (twice) for the story.


Read the article.
 
I thought the basis of the MGS2 story was actually very good, but it could have been told better and with less talking. I actually like Kojima's awkward charm in storytelling, but it was a but too much at times. The whole censorship of information == evolution of genes was a neat idea. Yeah, I've read that article (it's very old), and it's nice, the spaztic writing style actually fits the subject, I thought.
 
I thought the MGS2 storyline was an overloaded and overly convoluted DISASTER, which occasionally, though rarely, had its merits.
 
I understood the plot on my first run through on one night, the only time it did not make sense was when Col. Campbell was telling me to turn the PS2 off at 3am in the morning.

Was as hyped as anyone when MGS2 was first shown off at E3, heck I still have that DVD trailer. Personally I don't see why everyone puts hate on the story's execution, it was simple yet complex to understand.. if you didn't get it the first time, you were either;

a) skipping cut-scenes/codec conversations.
or
b) too busy jerking off over Fortune for why, I will never understand.

As for Tim Rogers and the JunkerHQ's articles are concerned, they are spot-on.
 
Mooreberg said:
I haven't read this but it's very long so it has to be true!
Click to expand...

coincidentally also the reasoning many of insert credit's fans share.
 
Metal Gear Solid 2 is like a peice of modern art. One person can look at the painting and say "what a complex, emotional style!" while another person can say "all he did was throw shit on the wall"
 
While flawed, I have to applaud Kojima for pushing the envelope in terms of story. The only reason people bitch about the story is because probably more than half the game is spent on the codec screen. The story IS flawed (see backstab-o-rama in the final act), but people would still complain less about it if it were told in a more suiting matter for a videogame.

I certainly hope Kojima has overcome that large hurdle in MGS3.
 
MGS3 has jetpacks.

In the '60s.

Not quite sure what you mean by hurdle, but I'm guessing he didn't make it over.
 
Jetpacks in the 60s, at least in the universe MG/MGS has presented is totally in the realm of believability. The hurdle I was referring to has more to do with the reliance on 'shocking' plot twists.
 
I understood the storyline to MGS2 it was moreso the spoiled premise for boss fights, maybe I was just too obsessed with ZOE still but I would have much prefered the boss fight with all the RAY units from inside the cockpit of a RAY and then just as you take care of the last one, solidus shows up with his big gun and doc ock tenticles and rips the top off the unit , shoots ou t it's legs and you fight atop arsenal gear as it rushes towards manhattan , with a time limit which upon running out would involve arsenal smashing over a few buildings. I would have liked the storyline to have a back and forth thing with Raiden and Snake so you could play what snake did , AFTER you meet up with him. Mostly though I would have prefered a reason other then "becuase he is the final enemy" to take on solidus at the games conclusion. The story had somethign good with the child soldier backstory but got too involved with breaking the 4th wall to dwell on it as much as it should have.
 
You are still carrying her egg only because I have yet to answer your email. . .but you shall recieve an answer. I swear! By the living cells inside of your precious love-egg. . .I SWEAR!
 
My big problem is that you could have cut a full third to a half of the plot dialogue and still had the complete plot and all of its intricate points fully fleshed out.

That and the fact that the Big Shell SUCKED as a playing environment. Hard.
 
Serafitia said:
The only flaw that MGS2 had was that it was not succinct. That is all.
Click to expand...

Oh it had lots more. Man did that game (scenario, story, characters, level design, boss battles) fucking DIE after the tanker segment.
 
Fortune? Vamp? Olga at the end? Shut up. I wish you were a zombie, that'd be the only way in which my beliefs would allow me to utterly destroy or kill you.

Don't take anything I say to heart, I'm a little tired. But yeah, come the hell on.
 
The only boss fight that was even remotely entertaining or clever was the first one. I liked how you could use the flapping drapes to help out, or how surprisingly challenging it was to shoot out the light when she turned them on you. The whole fight was just well thought out, if a bit repetitive and drawn out. To be followed up by that STUPID AS HELL skating fat bastard. Worst boss fight ever. Or near enough in this type of game. The lightning gun chick was kinda interesting too, but Vamp was an utter exercise in tedium.
 
The first boss fight was very entertaining. Yet we got to play that part out months before the games release :D

The tanker scenario was pure brilliance. Snake/Otagon/Ocelot's presance of course made it kick ass.

I never understood the ending so this will do me well in time for Snake Eaters release as I have no desire to play MGS2 over again.

Still props to Kojima and Konami for MGS2.. First time ive ever cried in a videogame.

Emma's Death
 
Mejilan said:
The only boss fight that was even remotely entertaining or clever was the first one. I liked how you could use the flapping drapes to help out, or how surprisingly challenging it was to shoot out the light when she turned them on you. The whole fight was just well thought out, if a bit repetitive and drawn out. To be followed up by that STUPID AS HELL skating fat bastard. Worst boss fight ever. Or near enough in this type of game. The lightning gun chick was kinda interesting too, but Vamp was an utter exercise in tedium.
Click to expand...

Not just an IMO, but an IMHO! ;p

Besides, I began my first post in this thread with an "I thought..."
 
I enjoyed it. It was an interesting attempt at tackling postmodernism in a game with a bit of a manga-ish flair on the side.

Only "Liquid's arm" left me bothered. THAT was a terrible idea and came off as the chance for a cameo and nothing more. The rest was suprisingly solid, whether people took the time to figure it out or not.

MGS2 is one of my favorite games this gen, even though it is WIDELY hated.
 
that article's alternately insightful and silly. i'd remembered it as being purely silly. it's a very selective reading -- mgs2 is of course postmodern and referential and metafictive, but it also wants sincerely and uncritically to be a bad american action movie and a sci-fi manga and an undergraduate term paper.

and i don't think postmodern fictions are entirely exempt from the criteria by which we judge fiction generally. when raiden becomes a symbol or a stand-in for the gamer, he loses his identity and apparent autonomy as a character. the criticisms of the final fantasy set might be unsophisticated, but they aren't quite irrelevant.

the idea of fictions as dreams or empty rooms is very good and very observant, though. really gets at the way in which mgs differs from more conventional game worlds. it isn't as ordered or chosen. there is a dream logic to it. though dreams are unlikely to contain detailed psuedo-technical explanations of pretend weaponry. or indeed unassimilated lectures on memes and information flow.

i dunno. i think tarantino is a more useful reference point than murakami. kill bill is of course postmodern. it's self-aware, polyglot, and nonlinear. it's obsessively referential. it's at least as concerned with the interplay of cultures and styles as characters and plots. but no one bothers calling kill bill postmodern. postmodernism isn't the central fact of kill bill. its nonlinearity isn't really a critique of linear narratives. kill bill's defining qualities are its voracious assimilation of styles, its sheer visual energy and invention, and its weird pathos. its apolitical, infectious love for "low" culture. kojima isn't there yet -- his pretentions are perhaps getting in the way -- but perhaps that's where he's going.

mgs2 strikes me as a postmodern narrative and a conventional narrative jostling for attention. and not in a conscious, overarchingly postmodern way, but in a "kojima isn't quite in command of his talents" way. the friction this generates can be fascinating, but it can also be deeply alienating. look at the way the ending tries (and fails) to tie the narrative's wild strands into a sentimental bow. and look at the way this post just trails off all of a sudden rather than
 
MGS3 has jetpacks.

In the '60s.

Not quite sure what you mean by hurdle, but I'm guessing he didn't make it over.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, what's so weird about jetpacks in the '60s? I mean, technically, they were as possible then, as they are today (that's to say - they were possible) It's not like we came up with any magnificently higher quality propulsion systems in the meantime, or built some incredibly more precise gyroscopes. Hell, even if we did, what we had back then was perfectly sufficient for the purpose. Besides, ever watched any James Bond movies? Was technology used there always possible for it's time? Does anyone care? :P
 
drohne said:
that article's alternately insightful and silly. i'd remembered it as being purely silly. it's a very selective reading -- mgs2 is of course postmodern and referential and metafictive, but it also wants sincerely and uncritically to be a bad american action movie and a sci-fi manga and an undergraduate term paper.

and i don't think postmodern fictions are entirely exempt from the criteria by which we judge fiction generally. when raiden becomes a symbol or a stand-in for the gamer, he loses his identity and apparent autonomy as a character. the criticisms of the final fantasy set might be unsophisticated, but they aren't quite irrelevant.
Click to expand...

this basically sums up my thoughts on MGS2.

yeah, it's obviously postmodern. but does that make it good? the game was postmodern narrative tackled by a game nerd. which is why i found it ironic that tim rogers pats himself on the back in his epilogue when he writes that kojima compliments him on catching all of his references and says he (tim) would make a great game designer.

and i'm disappointed nobody has actually been talking about tim roger's article. :P
 
Marconelly said:
Hmmm, what's so weird about jetpacks in the '60s? I mean, technically, they were as possible then, as they are today (that's to say - they were possible) It's not like we came up with any magnificently higher quality propulsion systems in the meantime, or built some incredibly more precise gyroscopes. Hell, even if we did, what we had back then was perfectly sufficient for the purpose. Besides, ever watched any James Bond movies? Was technology used there always possible for it's time? Does anyone care? :P
Click to expand...

Actually, I read something that stated that all the inventions in James Bond were technically possible, the creators make it a point for the inventions to be feasible.

The thing that bothered me the most in MGS2 was Fortune. Her whole character design is so completely flawed in itself. She says wants to but she can't die, "Can you give me death?", bullets can't hit her, but she COULD have killed herself in about 1000 different ways, "They call her Fortune because the bullets seem to sway away from her in battle" and then she puts on this extremely self-absorbed speach about her misery. Plus, she plays absolutely no role in the game, other than a super short boss fight.

Liquid's arm was just pretty bad too though.

EDIT: Yeah, I read that "Kojima thinks I'm cool...I feel so special" part at the end of the article and laughed to myself. His writting is also a bit bleh.
 
Video Games themselves are inherently post modern. >:(

MGS wasnt the first to do anything other than try to turn a defined medium into something else (and unfortunately influenced a bunch of other jackasses to do it also)
 
Oh yeah, I forget to say, I didn't like the article at all. "Let me get high and write." Damned sodomizing hippies. >:|
 
"Metal Gear Solid 2 is highly illogical."

well no shit....clones, VR, you die them get better, your found out leave th room and they forget about you, they take a dead arm from a clone put the whole arm on a guy who only lost his hand and the guy it belonged to who was long dead take over the other guys body, Jeusu Christ the Vampire, Cyber Ninjas...I mean shit your gonna be uber anal about how illogic the game is and not mention any of that.

Quoting the Matrix, Using FFX as an example of "the most classy RPG", Taping Yoko Ono to his wall, not understaing Patriot Games, Kojima playing Pokemon and how many he has!?! Is this artical a joke? I stopped reading it half way through cuase it just sounds like one long ass babble about nothing. Ironically like most of the conversations in MGS1/2

MGS3 has jetpacks.

In the '60s.

Not quite sure what you mean by hurdle, but I'm guessing he didn't make it over.
Click to expand...

A one man takes down a small army thats armed with a nucular poweredand armed transforming mech (which apprenly exsisted in the 60s whit the jet packs), he's then cloned, and his "son"...the one with the shit end of the DNA stick who just happend to look and sound like him a takes down small heavly armed forts and armys 3 times, including his twin Clone (that looks or sounds nothing like him) and jet packs in the 60's is unbelevable...not to mention it's a videogame.
 
Actually, I read something that stated that all the inventions in James Bond were technically possible, the creators make it a point for the inventions to be feasible.
Click to expand...
Wow. I'd love to read that, as some of the things in JB are simply not physically possible (like Jaws being able to chew and cut the thick steel cable in one of the scenes)
 
dark10x said:
I enjoyed it. It was an interesting attempt at tackling postmodernism in a game with a bit of a manga-ish flair on the side.

Only "Liquid's arm" left me bothered. THAT was a terrible idea and came off as the chance for a cameo and nothing more. The rest was suprisingly solid, whether people took the time to figure it out or not.
Click to expand...

The arm was definitely a bit out of left field, but as bizarre as it was I was more inclined to think that Kojima had some explanation for it that we just don't get to find out this time around. Like with the ending bit involving the patriots, you're not supposed to take the simplest answer at face value, because it doesn't make any sense.

The thing that bothered me the most in MGS2 was Fortune. Her whole character design is so completely flawed in itself. She says wants to but she can't die, "Can you give me death?", bullets can't hit her, but she COULD have killed herself in about 1000 different ways, "They call her Fortune because the bullets seem to sway away from her in battle" and then she puts on this extremely self-absorbed speach about her misery. Plus, she plays absolutely no role in the game, other than a super short boss fight.
Click to expand...

Her behaviour seemed to make sense to me. Mothers who lose their children can definitely become self-destructive, but don't confuse that with suicidal. Often the act of suicide can require a whole new level of thinking to do, and with Fortune pouring her sorrow into elite military training, her outlet became the odds of battle. It's the sort of "villain logic" that's not so uncommon - if nobody can kill you, then kill everybody.

I agree that she really should have been present for more of the gameplay, though. As character designs go she was far too cool to waste on a 3 minute 'dodge the railgun' event.

In any case, I think the levels of praise and criticism for the game were good. A lesser game would have gotten away with one or the other and then be forgotten. For me, MGS2 was my game of the year pick for 2001 (and Substance in 2003) but I can see where others would think less of the game.
 
Wow, first off, a thread about an article that's actually getting some discussion and isn't just getting mindlessly ripped apart just because of it's ties to Insert Credit? I'm impressed. With the exception of certain folks here (well, just one really) there's some good talk going on here. But back to IC real quick...

I've written for the site and all I can say is that I like the site, but it's certainly not for everyone... even myself. Such as the aforementioned MSG2 article. But it's one of those, "I guess someone has to do it" type of deals. Games are now mainstream, so the whole intellectualization of the subject is to be expected. But I would like to know why IC gets so much hate. Yeah they have their opinions, and it may seem dumb to most, but they never put anyone else down (at least not that I'm aware of). Also, why so much hate for Tim Rogers? I also have to admit, his style of writing is not my cup of tea, but it's different, and I'm not going to hate anyone who has a different stance. But does he have a strong personality or something? I've never met the guy...

Also, for the record, I go to the IC mostly for the obscure Japanese gaming news. Where else could I have found about stuff like ABA Games?

Back to the game itself, I think I enjoyed the whole postmodernism of the MGS going back to part 1. It's almost like the Watchmen (one of the best comic books ever) of video games, not in terms of quality, but in the sense that it never forgets that it's a video game and uses the conventions of the medium, and the player's knowledge of it, to it's advantage. In that sense, I think part 1 pulled those tricks off better than part 2.
 
Serafitia said:
Before I permantly leave this thread, I just want to commend Wasa on an excellent post. Wasabi, I commend you. Bow, so I can do the knighing thing with my high-frequency blade that vibrates at high frequencies. Here's an analysis that's tons better: http://junkerhq.net/MGS2/index.html
Click to expand...
:D

And Holy Ass Farts! I just noticed that article goes on for 5 Pages....that and I really should check for typos in my posts.
 
aerodynamik said:
The comparison he draws between Kojima and Murakami is an absolute fuck-up, and an offensive one at it.
Click to expand...

yeah, it didn't sit well with me either. drohne hit it more on the head when he cited tarantino and kill bill.
 
I think without the crazy antagonists in this game, Vamp, Fortune, and Fat Bastard or whatever his name, the plot can seem real if you really think about it from a political view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GmanLives: Metal Gear Solid 5 Is Almost A Masterpiece
Opinion Analysis Trailer 
43
3K
MandingoMcThickens replied
Metal Gear Solid Delta Opening Intro Cinematic
2
90
1K
Liopleurodon replied
Metal Gear Solid Δ: Snake Eater - Gameplay Trailer
2 3
115
1K
Killer8 replied
Metal Gear Solid Delta: Snake Eater: Special Guest.... Bomberman Trailer
3
124
Danny Dudekisser replied
Metal Gear Solid Δ: Snake Eater will have two camera modes
18
266
HRK69 replied
Top Bottom