N7's forum posts

#1 Posted by N7 (4016 posts) -

@bceagles128: I got like $130. I was going to buy the collectors edition but they were sold out, so I just got the regular edition. Also when we traded everything in we put it in my uncle's name so he'd get the 50 billion or so points. Turns out when I pre-ordered the game the clerk put it in his name instead of mine. He realized this, went to another Gamestop and took the money out when Batman came out.

#2 Posted by N7 (4016 posts) -

Wow you guys. I got all the way to Gamestop in the next state because we recently moved from there. I pre-ordered the game(on PS4) by selling my PS3 and all my games months ago. I had to make sure I could afford it.

Get there, take the reciept to the guy and he looks at it, scans it into the computer and... it was canceled? Turns out my uncle canceled my pre-order and then bought Batman with the money I had on it. Without telling me. They said there was nothing they could do.

So I was not only robbed by fucking family, but I don't get MGSV as well. I don't think I could have ever seen this happening.

Hope you guys enjoy the game, because I am certainly causing a shitstorm tomorrow.

#3 Posted by N7 (4016 posts) -
#4 Posted by N7 (4016 posts) -
  1. The Final Countdown
  2. The Final Countdown
  3. The Final Countdown
  4. The Final Countdown
  5. The Final Countdown
  6. The Final Countdown
  7. The Final Countdown
  8. The Final Countdown


#5 Posted by N7 (4016 posts) -


#6 Posted by N7 (4016 posts) -

I liked them all. Top 2 are Winter Soldier and Iron Man 3.

One, all of the fight scenes in The Winter Soldier were fucking awesome. Two, seeing Tony Stark gun down a bunch of dudes with a custom made nail gun was the shit.

I mean yeah, sure, I've only seen each Marvel movie once, aside from seeing The Avengers like 5 times but still, I prefer those two.

#8 Posted by N7 (4016 posts) -

I love Kojima. He's one of the few, maybe only game director that can inspire discussions like this. Also seems like lots of folks miss out on the little things because they focus mostly on the goofy, silly stuff and long monologues. Here's a couple articles about the cultural stuff he injects into the games.



Since the second article is longer than expected, I only read the first one. Quite a good read.

Some people seem to take what Kojima does at face value. Like some people cannot comprehend that he has any idea what he's doing. It's disappointing, really.

If there's anything about his design decisions, it's that they run deep. The fact that MGS2 is still being analyzed and lauded over to this day says a lot.

#9 Posted by N7 (4016 posts) -

@jman240 said:

@liquidprince: I get the point, I still have a right to have a problem with the Frogs because he doesn't use them to make a commentary of any kind. It also doesn't mean I don't have a problem with faceless fodder characters who are male being gunned down. I do, and I've made that point many times to the ire of people who think the way you're suggesting I think. I didn't find that particular piece of info necessary in the context of a discussion largely focused on how Kojima treats women or in the context of discussing two female factions within the game, but apparently it was. That comment was made more to sum up my attitude towards the B&B squad from the point of being objectified than it was to make any real statement about the Frogs.

But you know, thanks for jumping to a conclusion and at least partially implying that I'm backwards and incapable of more nuanced thought.

I mean... Does he need to make a commentary? MGS4 had a swath of problems, but pretty much every "enemy character" in that game was a commentary of the NPC's taking over.

The argument was made that they were created just for Snake to gun them down. I would argue that it being a stealth game meant to be played stealthily and nonleathally, they weren't created to be gunned down at all.

The point of there being 500 fucking guns in MGS4 was to appeal to the lowest common denominator. So that the people who wanted to run and gun, or the people that didn't even care that it was a stealth game could have the largest selection of weapons to cut people down with. The Frog's were the games first instance of a heavily difficult situation where you would probably need to kill them. Guns are the solution to a problem. The game is telling you non-stop "Hey, why not just kill these people? Why not just walk through it?" because look at all the options at your disposal. You don't have to, which makes working through it using non-lethal means such a rewarding process.

The entire game is a commentary. Especially a commentary on video games. Just because the Frog's aren't made special, even if they sorta already are, doesn't mean they don't have a purpose.

As for The Beauty and the Beast unit, I don't understand how they are objectified at all.

#10 Posted by N7 (4016 posts) -

@mfjubes said:
@n7 said:
@liquidprince said:

All of this stems from the Wests warped view on sexuality as existing in a space that is more taboo then graphic violence. I remember George R.R Martin said that he could write the most detailed and over the top description of a sword going through someones neck and beheading them, and it would not even trigger a blink in most readers, but the moment he goes into the same amount of detail with a penis entering a vagina, the world loses their shit. Naomi not wearing a bra? Probably wouldn't even trigger as something important in the minds of most Japanese. It's sexy sure, but is it this whole big thing that we have seemed to have made it? Not really. It is what it is. Japanese have very different sensibilities when it comes to sexuality.

I was shocked when I played through Ground Zeroes, but not for the same reasons as everyone else. Hearing that Paz had gotten raped was incredibly uncomfortable and made me feel real bad for her, but the part that seemed really difficult to watch was the surgery and stitching on her stomach. The idea that she had been tortured and implanted with a bomb was far more painful of a thought. The difference being sex as a means of torture versus physical mutilation. Both are obviously terrible, but the idea of her stomach being torn open and multiple bombs being shoved inside her was extremely cringe worthy.

Maybe I'm wrong, and someone tell me if I am, but I find it problematic that Paz being raped is always brought up as the "issue". When I played Ground Zeroes, I never thought it would be as big of a deal as it was considering Chico, a child, was violently molested as well. Paz, or rather her real name, Pacifica Ocean is like fucking 30. I thought the big deal coming from the reaction to the dark themes was the fact that they weren't just willing to go to rape, they were willing to go to child rape.

But people barely bring that up.

It's a game about a rogue band of militants building a giant base filled with soldiers stolen from the battlefield to go toe to toe with the U.S. of A. with giant robits and nukes. It's going to get nitty to the gritty of showing what a real battlefield looks like, narrative and mechanically. And for once, it's not going to shy away from the dark shit. The really, really, dark shit. And, in my opinion, it shouldn't shy away from it. No one else is tackling these issues. You'd think people would want to see more people going outside of the box.

Rape happens everywhere. The real world, TV, movies, music, books, and yet with video games people react like it's this thing that you can't do. Like people can't look past the act of rape as a tool for telling a story in the same way they can murder or other sorts of graphic violence. That people can look at all that other nastiness and go "Well yeah it's a war game" but when it comes to rape, it has to be... tasteful, or tactful, or whatever word we're skirting around. But rape is never tasteful. It's never tactful. It's sad. And terrible. And horrible.

I mean, personally, I don't want to see rape in the same way I don't want to see little kids getting shot in the face. But if that's what they are going to do to tell their story, then I'm going to roll with it and check it out all the same.

Life is violence, violence is life. Peace is a dream, reality is a knife.


Chico being forced to rape Paz is equally problematic. Nobody would dispute that. It's the same incident though - so often it gets referred to in shorthand, I suppose.

Now, this is like the fourth time somebody has given the "well rape is terrible! and war is terrible! this is a game that exposes these terrible things! don't you SEE!?" Guys. Guys. Please, pleeeeeeeeeeeeease read what I have already typed, or what others have said about it. You're framing MGS as a Serious Work that has Serious Things to say about rape and war. This is what you do when confronted with a Serious Work that has Serious Things in it: You examine it. You assess its relevance to culture, because that's what art does: it reflects the culture it represents. You, @n7, are playing the culture critic as well: you are saying that this work of art, Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes, shines a light on the brutality and needlessness of rape and its role in war. That's your thesis. Then when people like me come in and decide to meet you halfway and engage this work of art as a Serious Work, like you do, I'm taking a look at the way it portrays sexual assault against children, against women and my thesis is that it does not illuminate these concepts well, and in fact it's deeply problematic, for reasons I have specifically detailed elsewhere in this thread, not because I'm a prude who can't handle any depictions of rape/violence and lack the nuance to tell the difference.

If you are offended by my characterization of MGS as a Serious Work, and if you believe it is a Fun Silly Game that still has Serious Things in it: This is not the kind of game that should be dealing in Serious Things such as rape, especially in the infantile way it depicts it, for reasons I have specifically detailed elsewhere in this thread.

It's easy to see what is going on here: you feel when somebody like me comes along and says "Kojima's understanding of sexual assault is infantile and appalling." you (the MGS fan) suddenly ascribe this criticism to you personally: you take it as me calling you infantile and appalling. This is not true. You are not infantile and appalling for liking Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes even though that game has problems. I really enjoyed playing MGSV:GZ for the most part, and I look forward to playing TPP. But as a culture critic who does worry about the kind of problematic messages MGS propagates, these are things I will keep an eye out for, and things I will be discussing with others, maybe even you.

So please, pleeeeeeease, stop talking down to me as if I don't get that Kojima is tacking taboo subjects. I get it. I very get it.

I mean, no offense bro, but I was with you until the end there. Nobody is talking down to you, especially not me. I didn't even really reply to you, I replied to LiquidPrince's post about what George R.R. Martin said about sex and violence.

I mean, If I had to say anything, I'd say your assessment of MGSV is unfair. Unless you are saying Ground Zeroes has no right to tackle subjects like rape, I think I disagree on the principle that they had an idea and executed on it. It might not have been satisfactory but it served a purpose. But if you are saying that The Phantom Pain has no right to tackle these themes, then I definitely disagree as we haven't even played the game.

On that other bit there, I'm not taking anything personally. People can say what they want about the games. Right or wrong, analysis and opinion are unique and offer interesting new perspectives, so I welcome them.