How do you think MGS3's storyline fares to MGS2?
Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 5:05 pm
Spoilers seem likely in this kind of discussion. I felt prompted to bring it up based on a debate over on GameFAQs, as well as the comments from one of those board's regulars, a piece of shit that goes by the name of Lionhart. I'd like to hear fellow Junker member's opinions on the matter, knowing that you're all pretty fair-minded towards these kinds of discussions. So did any of you really think MGS3's storyline was dumbed down in contrast to MGS2? This seems to be the most constant criticism from fans who believe Kojima was somehow simplifying the franchise's roots after MGS2's convoluted narrative was met with much disdain.
I for one am not so impressed by the endless ramblings of political and technical jargon he managed to squeeze into the game, and am more impressed by his ability to string together a cohesive narrative. For that I don't think Kojima can top MGS1, as it still retains its pitch-perfect mixture of both gameplay and storytelling. It remains suspensefully paced throughout and never feels as uneven as either MGS2 or 3 often do.
However, I still appreciate and enjoy both of those game's qualities despite their flaws, and in the case of MGS3, I admire how close Kojima came to duplicating MGS1's formula. He didn't simply dumb down everything that was met with criticism in MGS2, as much as he tried to pace the storyline so that there were fewer loose ends and less unnecessary side-stories, and so the game's conclusion wouldn't just be a jumble of absurd plot twists that only truly make sense when they've been broken down by fanatics online (no offense to you, Artemio).
Admittedly, MGS3 is a much smaller story than MGS2, revolving around fewer characters and a more tangible premise, but no one should be led to believe the story is any way simplified in contrast to the sprawling narratives this franchise is best known for. I do think the main fault of MGS3's storyline is that nothing really comes together until those final few moments of the game, which means a lot of earlier scenes are somewhat slow and uninteresting, as well as fairly pointless to the story's conclusion when you consider all the characters and situations Kojima lingers on don't make much of a difference overall. But then, that isn't so much of a stretch from MGS2.
Now the game doesn't try as hard to tax the player's brain with that final revelation that puts everything before it into perspective. It asks that you be more emotionally involved in the characters and situations, which may be difficult for some people. Is this any reason to believe the game is simplified? I suppose for some it is. But being told in a very obvious nod to the real world that I've just been playing a simulation all along isn't something that gets me all hysterical either.
Anyway, I value other's opinions in this discussion more than my own.
I for one am not so impressed by the endless ramblings of political and technical jargon he managed to squeeze into the game, and am more impressed by his ability to string together a cohesive narrative. For that I don't think Kojima can top MGS1, as it still retains its pitch-perfect mixture of both gameplay and storytelling. It remains suspensefully paced throughout and never feels as uneven as either MGS2 or 3 often do.
However, I still appreciate and enjoy both of those game's qualities despite their flaws, and in the case of MGS3, I admire how close Kojima came to duplicating MGS1's formula. He didn't simply dumb down everything that was met with criticism in MGS2, as much as he tried to pace the storyline so that there were fewer loose ends and less unnecessary side-stories, and so the game's conclusion wouldn't just be a jumble of absurd plot twists that only truly make sense when they've been broken down by fanatics online (no offense to you, Artemio).
Admittedly, MGS3 is a much smaller story than MGS2, revolving around fewer characters and a more tangible premise, but no one should be led to believe the story is any way simplified in contrast to the sprawling narratives this franchise is best known for. I do think the main fault of MGS3's storyline is that nothing really comes together until those final few moments of the game, which means a lot of earlier scenes are somewhat slow and uninteresting, as well as fairly pointless to the story's conclusion when you consider all the characters and situations Kojima lingers on don't make much of a difference overall. But then, that isn't so much of a stretch from MGS2.
Now the game doesn't try as hard to tax the player's brain with that final revelation that puts everything before it into perspective. It asks that you be more emotionally involved in the characters and situations, which may be difficult for some people. Is this any reason to believe the game is simplified? I suppose for some it is. But being told in a very obvious nod to the real world that I've just been playing a simulation all along isn't something that gets me all hysterical either.
Anyway, I value other's opinions in this discussion more than my own.