At least ZOE2 is better than Unreal Championship 2.
Printable View
At least ZOE2 is better than Unreal Championship 2.
And my point (and g0zen's, Im sure) is that wrapping a few levels around a bad design concept doesnt automatically turn that concept into a good one or even one that shouldnt be changed. Its still bad, and a developer's attempt to rectify it should be praised.Quote:
My point isn't that it's good gun combat--I don't think it's bad, though. My point is that the game is designed around the controls that are there--in Twin Snakes, they took the exact same levels and enemy placement and threw in things that make the game easier.
Except the gun combat in MGS--as well as the camera in MGS3--is not bad. It perfectly serves its purpose to get you through the game. Both the shooting of MGS and the camera of MGS3 are vital parts of the game design, and every part of the game is designed around them--change these parts and you're throwing a wrench into a finely tuned engine.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Asking for a good camera or a first person mode that is actually usable isnt a ridiculous request. What is so funny is that people have the exact same complaints with MGS3 that you had about Ninja Gaiden yet you totally dismiss those who complain about MGS3 while claiming your crazed rants on NG are gospel. You know, there are people who got through NG just fine and would say the exact same stuff about that game's camera that you are saying about MGS3's. Just because you fought through MGS3's camera or MGS1's shitty gun combat doesnt mean its adequate. Think about it. Im sure there's someone out there that got through Pryzm The Dark Unicon, Bruce Lee for Xbox, or Universal Theme Park Adventure.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
The difference between you and Kojima is that Kojima is actually humble enough to acknowledge flaws in his games and works to correct them while you are a lunatic Kojima fanboy (really, we're talking Zidane747 levels here) who refuses to admit that this guy can fuck up on occasion.
Ninja Gaiden's camera problems aren't a matter of setting a rule in the game to encourage players to play the game a certain way. There's such thing as a genuinely bad camera, and Ninja Gaiden has it.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
The difference between Kojima and me is that Kojima makes games that cost millions of dollars to make and is pressured to make the money back. Putting the third person camera into MGS3 is definitely not an admittal that Snake Eater's camera is flawed--it's a bargain with the idiots that don't understand the game.Quote:
The difference between you and Kojima is that Kojima is actually humble enough to acknowledge flaws in his games and works to correct them while you are a lunatic Kojima fanboy (really, we're talking Zidane747 levels here) who refuses to admit that this guy can fuck up on occasion.
Shitty cameras make a game harder! More games should have shitty cameras! It was intentional! Kojima is a genius! I wonder if he got my letters...
And changing the camera in the NG Hurricane Pack is a bargain with idiots that dont understand that game - like you.Quote:
The difference between Kojima and me is that Kojima makes games that cost millions of dollars to make and is pressured to make the money back. Putting the third person camera into MGS3 is definitely not an admittal that Snake Eater's camera is flawed--it's a bargain with the idiots that don't understand the game.
It really does work both ways.
I believe Ive made my points.
Life is a one way street DiffX, when will you realize this?
LOL!
I had no problem with Ninja Gaiden at all, but I hated the camera in MGS3.
I'm glad they're manning up and fixing their mistakes, but I wish the trade in value was more than $10 =(
If they manage to keep the framerate consistent, this can only help the game by letting me actually see more than 3 inches in front of Snake's nose.
You haven't been paying attention, have you?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dave
They didn't fix the camera at all, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
No, it really doesn't because you're totally misconstruing the argument. So what, because I think MGS3's camera works exactly as it's made to then there's no such thing as a bad camera? Ninja Gaiden's camera is actually dysfunctional--it gets caught on shit, doesn't respond properly when you move across the room, often doesn't show you anything two feet behind you (including the enemy that's in mid-air rolling to attack you). MGS3's camera works because the game is designed with the camera--the camera is a vital part of the design. You couldn't just throw the MGS3 camera into Ninja Gaiden and make it work. Ninja Gaiden's gameplay is totally different--the focus isn't to get through levels while avoiding hazards. The focus of Ninja Gaiden is combat. If MGS3's focus was combat then the camera definitely would fail. But with a focus on tactical, puzzle-like movement, MGS3's camera serves the part perfectly by showing you exactly the things the level designers intend for you to see.Quote:
It really does work both ways.
Mzo wins.
First of all, that's bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrAnDX105
Second of all, when he's up against a half retardQuote:
Originally Posted by BrAnDX105
I know full blown retards have the strength of 10 men, does the same go for half retards?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dave
No, 5 men. Duh.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrAnDX105
Yes, there is such a thing as a bad camera, and MGS3 had it. I didn't have any trouble playing with it, but I'm not going to deny that the top-down has outlived its usefulness. Almost every MGS3 review I've read says the game's biggest fault is that it relies on certain mechanics that have become dated. I'm certain they're talking specifically about the camera. Goddamn those fucking gamers giving Kojima suggestions on how to improve his products. How dare they, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
You keep saying that, but it's not. I did most of my real work in the 1st person perspective. When I had to wrestle with the camera to keep a patrolling guard on screen, I wasn't thinking about how great an innovation in game design that was. Did it make it harder? Sure, but for all the wrong reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
Puzzle-like? Maybe back in the Soliton RADAR days when it was all about keeping in guards' blind spots and moving through hallways, but MGS3 not anywhere near puzzle like. It's about using camo and strategy, that's it. Changing the camera in no way destroys this. All it does is let me see my immediate surroundings without having to switch to the 1st person mode constantly.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
MarkRyan, if you want incredibly hard games that don't change at all from one installment to the to the next, I suggest you go here and join the world's most pathetic cult.
I get what you're saying, in that the levels inside MGS3 were developed to work with that specific camera and vice versa; so using a different camera might "break" the maps. But I think Kojima is accomplished enough to make a camera "compatible" with the maps to not "break" them, but add a new dimension to the gameplay.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
I mean, if you played Twin Snakes without playing the original, you would see no problem in the difficulty; you only see it as easier or "less pure" because you are looking at Twin Snakes RELATIVE to the original and you are placing weight on the way the original was. You're saying that the original is the right way, the way MGS is supposed to be; and since Twin Snakes is different it's inferior. When really, the original and Twin Snakes are just two different ways of presenting the same scenario and game. Twin Snakes wouldn't be any easier if you sucked at FPSes.
Why do that to English? What did it ever do to you? :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Do You Like Erotic?
There you have it, from the man himself. He doesn't say anything about doing it to lower the difficulty, or that it breaks the level design.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hideo Kojima Boomtown Interview
Kojima's answer to that question sounds like MGS3's lack of a 3D camera is a bargain with the idiots that played MGS1 and MGS2 and cant deal with change. ^__^Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
MGS3 camera blows, and all the MGS too... glad that Kojima isn't as stuborn as others
I might not be able to overcome the language barrier, but at least I'm smart enough to figure out a simple, fun, and effective way to make use of the MGS3 camera as it is, no matter how I want to play the game. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by AstroBlue
Anyway, like I said, the new camera is by no means a bad thing, as MarkRyan is trying to claim, but you're still shitty at games if you can't understand MGS3's camera and how to be successful with it.
Better camera = better game. Thank you Kojima.
http://newgrounds.com/portal/view/239227
Cr..crab battle!
OLIOLIOLIOOOOOOO!!!
I beat Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden, and Battletoads, but I'm shitty at games =*(Quote:
Originally Posted by Do You Like Erotic?
Sucks to be me.
STOP SAYING THAT!Quote:
Originally Posted by TrialSword
I was just about to post this. I dunno why, but this is friggen hilarious at 1 AM.
Battletoads?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
Fuck, I'm impressed. That cunt General Slaughter always downs my last life :(
The camera never bothered me in any of the MGS games, but as long as Kojima keeps up the crazy stories and attention to detail, I am sold. A new camera kicked Resident Evil 4 up a notch, it might be what the Metal Gear series needs.
i feel Metal Gear absolutely CANNOT stay in its current state for the next gen. like you stated RE has already been given a once over and its time for this series to dot he same. at the very least it needs to work more like the Splinter Cell games.Quote:
Originally Posted by animegirl
I beat those games too... well... I beat Battletoads vs Double Dragon anyway :) And yeah, you are :-*Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
YAWN, come back when you beat a REAL game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Do You Like Erotic?
It's possible to manage the different views in game to see what you need to see, but it's hardly intuitive or optimal, and there are many times when you're (or at least I was, maybe I just play these games "wrong") on the go and want to see just a couple inches ahead of Snake. The radar always helped me at these times, and I always assumed it was introduced to make it easier to deal with a shitty camera. Now they took it away, and I had every problem I always imagined I would: running and being spotted by an enemy I didn't even know was there, despite him being mere inches away from Snake screen-wise. Maybe if the overhead view were more zoomed out, a la MG, MGS1, or if there were more behind the shoulder moments and a radar like in MGS2... it's like a hybrid of the two to make the worst possible. Close up overhead with no radar.
I think the best example here is to juxtapose MGS1's Vulcan Raven encounter with the fire guy in MGS3. For me, one was an enjoyable cat and mouse game, the other frustrating torture.
Note that I beat MGS3 in a weekend's worth of playing, so it's not like I suck and can't play, I'm just saying this is what made me not like the game as much as the great story and events made me want to like it.
When I tried to play it, I found myself using the first person mode, moving a few inches, using the camera again, and so forth. This, to my primitive brain at least, implies that the game would be a lot better if it had a behind-the-back or first-person camera all the time. But then again, what do I know, Im not a strategy guide writer for IGN.
OMFG MZO YOU ARE A MORON, THE CAMERA IS THERE TO MAKE THE GAME AWESOME, THE CAMERA SUCKS ON PURPOSE BECAUSE IT'S PART OF THE GAMEPLAY, THEY COULD HAVE MADE A BETTER CAMERA IF THEY WANTED TO, LOL, YOU SUCK, FIRST PERSON VIEW RUINS THE GAME, AND IF ANYTHING THE FACT THAT THE CAMERA IS SO FAR ZOOMED OUT MAKES THE GAME WORSE, THE CAMERA SHOULD ONLY SHOW YOU SNAKES SHOULDERS BECAUSE THEN YOU DONT KNOW WHATS AROUND HIM AND THATS THE POINT, KOJIMA IS A GENIUS THOUGH SO I'M SURE HE'LL GET IT RIGHT FOR MGS4, I LOVE KOJIMA AND I HATE YOU
I knew what you meant from the start Mzo, and I agreed with you 75%. I say 75% because I agree with you completely that the game, with the new camera, can only be better. I agree that when you run around in MGS3, you'll definitely get caught by an enemy that you failed to detect. But what I don't agree with you on is that there's something flawed or wrong with the way that the game's current camera is set up. So once again, the camera can DEFINITELY benefit from improvement, but it is not fucked up or even slightly flawed in its current state.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
I say this because yeah, the you should definitely be able to play the game however you want, and yeah, there is no such thing as a 'wrong' way to play the game, however, there is a right and a wrong way to use the camera in the game.
You have to remember, Metal Gear is, and always has been an over-the-head perspective sneaking game. By the very definition of the game, running is supposed to be a surefire way to get yourself spotted.
Next, if you pace your way through the game by being able to judge when it's the wisest time for you to use which moving speed or type you should use, then both the camera, and the audio interface in the game serve to provide you with cues as to who and what is where. The map itself has several 'safe spots' that are designed for you to take cover and look around them, as the camera pans to a 3rd person perspective on these items on the screen (walls, rocks, etc.).
Voices, the several devices that Snake can use. He comes from the start with about 5 radars, and I know that you know about this, but I'm not sure you know exactly how effective they are and how dramatically they alter the gameplay. There are devices that are equivalent to the original MGS radar anyway, so you should be able to know where enemies are, even if you want to run, by using these devices effectively. Your body's energy recharges the battery automatically when you aren't using the device.
Sorry MZO, I know you don't want to, and I know you just want to run, but you DO need to slow down and look if your aim is to sneak and not be detected by enemies before you can get the drop on them or know their location or pattern. You need to crawl, and you need to use first person view for all of this shit.
What I'm saying is, the game itself is altered by the style that you want to play it in. That's why it's hard to kill Snake in this game. If you want to rambo through it, and run, then you sacrifice your stealth and your ability to defeat enemies with silence and precision. If you want to sneak through it, you sacrifice your ability to Shotgun your way through piles of enemies and watch them dance around from the WP Grenades at your liesure.
It's give and take. You can't have your cake and eat it to. So yeah, if you want to run through the game, you're gonna get hit by enemies, but you're going to survive it because you can't kill Snake in this game. You can't have your cake and eat it too though. At this point, you can't have the benefits of stealth along with the power of Commando. Kojima, however understands your feelings, and it still trying to give that to you, but it won't completely solve the problems of undetected enemies hitting you. Some people will still have a problem with the new camera, and not everybody is going to be satisfied either way.
So in summation; the game's camera can definitely be improved, but there's nothing wrong with it. You're not playing the game wrong, but you *are* using the camera wrong or missing the point of the way that the camera was implimented and the other immersive aspects of the game that aren't visual were implimented as well.
As for The Fury, once again, if you use the ques and the tools, and if you see what's around you (like the barrels that deal him like 40% damage in one hit), then you can beat him just as fast and as excitingly as Vulcan Raven. It's really all about understanding the environments that the game makes use of.
I think the new FP camra will creat a whole new experience with Snake Eater. Most of the time in the game your sneaking on the ground switching back and forth from 3rd person to first person anyway. It's no different than being able to play the game in different styles like in MGS2. You had the option to play in original MGS or the new MGS2 style. Neither messed up the experience.
Don't capitalize every letter of my name, pls. That's weird!
Those are good points, though. I generally don't have the patience for MG games. If I'm ever spotted, I opt for suicide instead of waiting out the timer, I think that's fucking terrible. They should add a "restart if spotted" option for people like me.
I tried that in MGS3 and noticed that Snake is built like a small tank and refuses to die, so I just shotgunned my way out every time I was spotted. Hooray!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
In MGS2 there is an option for this.
GOID Mode (Game Over If Discovered) it's in Sons of Liberty and Twin Snakes. I'm sure about Snake Eater though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
There isn't one per se in MGS3, but in European Extreme, the game is over when you're discovered.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Why the title "European extrem" though?Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Undaunted
It's a difficulty setting only availble in the PAL version of the game for the moment. It will be added in Subsistence along with all the other European extras (Duel Mode, Demo Theater and more Ape Escape missions).Quote:
Originally Posted by Zerohero
So being lazy and not bothering to read all 24 pages of this thread:
Has this game been announced for xbox?
There's 32 pages, and Subsistence has probably only been mentioned on the last 2 or 3. Anyway, no, there has been no mention of an Xbox version.
Ah thanks, I also found this depressing article:
http://xbox.ign.com/articles/616/616794p1.html
Seems like I will have to borrow a PS2 when MGS3-Subsistence comes out.Quote:
Originally Posted by IGN
Okay, why the hell did IGN deemed the lack of an Xbox version of MGS3 as a newsworthy story to report. Anyone with half a brain would've figured it out and it's not like Konami was obligated to do an Xbox version in the first place (the only reason why they did Substance for the Xbox was due to a contractual obligation Konami had with Microsoft to provide a Metal Gear title for the Xbox).Quote:
Originally Posted by dakidski
Not to mention Kojima himself already stated that an Xbox version would've taken time away from their scheluded.
http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager....=1&cId=3140852
For me it's only 24 pages, because I have the highest amount of posts per page setting in my user cp.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
For me its 48 pages. Take that !!!!
That's the besy way to view TNL, baby!Quote:
Originally Posted by Korly
I really don't see the big deal about MGS3: Subsistence coming out for X-Box because:Quote:
Originally Posted by IGN
E3 2005: MGS3 No Show on Xbox
Konami's schedule does not include an Xbox version, now or in the near future.
May 18, 2005 - With all of the hubbub surrounding the PlayStation 3 version of Metal Gear Solid 4, and the introduction of Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence "completing" the trilogy, no one seemed to mind that one of last year's great PS2 games, Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater, was no where to be found on Xbox.
1) It'll probably look better on PS2 (again).
2) Most of us have played it already. I'm sure you guys can imagine playing the same damn game but with a different camera angle.
3) I don't see much incentive for the team to do it seeing as how it'll sell better on PS2 (again). I hate and detest the double dip bullshit but I'm still a sucker for it when it has better features. I think when it comes to doing that bullshit practice that should've been in the first game, at least make it a greatest hits title like VF4 Evolution.
Why would you say that? The Xbox version of MGS2 had slowdown whenever there was rain on the screen, (which was like, the first ten minutes of the game) but other than that it looked equal to, or in some cases, superior to the PS2 version.Quote:
Originally Posted by Will
I'd rather have a steady framerate for those first 10 minutes. It didn't even really look that much better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Korly
Plus the controller is also better suited so the PS2 version wins anyway.
I thought it controlled fine on the Xbox. Especially movement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Will
I played through both, it was definitely one of the few games that was better on the PS2 than the Xbox.
It was playable, sure, but I would rather (and do) own the PS2 version instead of the Xbox one.
And I don't think too many people love the Xbox more than I do.
I never noticed any framerate problems on MGS2:Substance (PAL). Perhaps they tweaked it for us picky europeans...
It never looks better on Xbox than PS2 (I own the Xbox version), and has slowdown in more places than just the beginning. And yeah, the PS2 controller is definitely more suited for the game--all four shoulder buttons come into play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Korly
I think the biggest disappointment about no Xbox version is that the online would be so much better on LIVE. As it stands, on the PS2 it'll probably be like SOCOM in that it'll be filled with the most vile scum in the galaxy.
I was about to argue that all online gamers are vile scum, but you're right--SOCOM players are a very special breed of vile scum. Probably the worst I've ever experienced.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Finally, we can all agree on something.
I played MGS2 on PC in a resolution well beyond PS2 or Xbox with a framerate at least as good as their best while using a PS2 controller. All of you played inferior versions so STFU. (Granted, that also means the 2x2 pixel textures they used for the ears looked especially pathetic next to the crisp clean faces in cutscenes, but hey.)
Of course, that brings me to the question of whether or not this is coming to PC like the last two enhanced previous series entries (sans TS). I imagine it will although it's probably going to take long enough that once again no more than five people will even notice.Well you clearly proved that point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Will
They need to speed up getting this version out so that it can drop in price for me to finally pick up and play. Considering how much I love this series I feel rather wierd about not having touched MGS3 even once yet.
It's already down to $20 at EB I think. But shame on you for waiting--Snake Eater was last year's best game.Quote:
Originally Posted by MechDeus
I know, but MGS3:S was announced with a better camera so I lost any desire to pick up the original. Since I don't own it yet, why get the inferior version?
'Cause it's $20? And out now? And the standard Snake Eater camera works perfectly as-is.Quote:
Originally Posted by MechDeus
So true, it was my first experience playing online with a console actually when I found this truth out. I made one mistake ( I was a nub for crying out loud) and I got voted off. It was not even a bad mistake I just got shot down. I was still learning the flow of the game etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
Stop, just stop.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
That's nice. There's a better version, coming, and it too will be $20 at some point. I'll also be picking up Ninja Gaiden Black and that's not out yet either.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
Yeah, I traded in Ninja Gaiden and MGS3 because I needed credit to get GTA: SA on the Xbox because I traded in my PS2 one to get Jade Empire. It's a vicious cycle I tell's ya. Doesn't mean I won't be first in line for Subsistence and NG Black though.
So, I played through this game again, and I still fucking love it.
Once is enough for me for now. Awsome game though.
Taking the opportunity that this thread has been bumped, Konami has issued a press release covering the Online Mode in Subsistence.
http://www.konami.co.jp/en/news/topi...818/index.html
In addition, the Kojima Productions has been updated with new trailers for Subsistence (and Acid 2, if you care about that.)
http://www.konami.jp/gs/kojima_pro/english/mgs3sub.html
Apparently, you can now play as Raikov and Ocelot in Online Mode. I'm not much of an online player, but I might get my PS2 connected just for this.
Same here. This looks like the game that will finally motivate me to get my PS2 online.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Undaunted
After beating 3, I went to the site and watched those today, the multiplayer looks awesome.
what's the US release date on MGS3 sub?
11/14/2005
1 Day before my birthday. FUCK YES.
thanks.
so i pretty much skipped this generation of consoles... got burnt out after sega left the console game (i know, bite me in advance)
but i recently picked up a ps2 while i was working and living out of town and was bored out of my mind. it's great i'll be able to play though mgs 2 and 3, for a decent price.
Skip 2 and go to 3. In fact, forget there was a 2 alltogether.
You are still a good person.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chux
I assume MGS3:S is going to be a GH title when it gets released right (or, at least the $20 price mark since MGS3 is there already)? I skipped out on getting MGS3 when it first dropped but with all the crazy shit they seem to have added into Substinance I feel compelled to pick it up this time around.
Word. I just really felt compelled to play it again after I went to a panel about it at Otakon, got it on Sunday, but Tuesday morning I had finished it, I think I might be able to beat it again before I return it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy
I am so looking forward to MGS3:S. That is all.
It better fucking be $20.Quote:
Originally Posted by cka
I dunno, I could justify $30 for multiplayer alone, the descriptions of the games sound fucking HAWT.
Do this and you'll miss one of the best games this generation. MGS2 is an excellent video game.Quote:
Originally Posted by MVS
If you worked anywhere but IGN, you'd get fired for that stupidity. Congrats on your promotion.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
Oh, then perhaps you could tell me where the game fails in gameplay, because I couldn't find a single problem with it. The story is whack and not all will like it, but the game itself is undeniably awesome.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
I dunno, 2 had good gameplay, and graphics for it's time, and while convoluted, I could still follow it. It's not a masterpiece at all, but it's fun.
Better yet, play the Zone of Enders MGS2 demo and you'll have played the only good part of that game.
MGS2: Substance is definitely worth a buy, just don't expect the story to make much sense at the end. I always like to replay through all the Metal Gears to get a bigger feel of the scope of story they're telling.
MGS4 is going to be nuts just based on MGS2's ending but it looks like a mix of both 1 and 2. MGS3 plays it much safer with the story and has a more sensical classic type of storytelling in that it doesn't try to mindfuck you that much. The game play is very good and improved on MGS and MGS2's because it's based on a different kind of survival and hiding as well as the fun and deeply satisfying boss battles. The CQC fighting techniques are also a blast and welcome addition.
I just wish they stopped re-releasing games. It's an ugly trend I hope goes away unless they make the newer version a GH reduced price point.
I need Scissors 61!
Yeah, seriously. The plot goes pretty insane at the end, but MarkRyan is right. Jesus, I can't believe I just typed that. Anyway, the gameplay stays solid (sorry) all the way through, and there is nothing about this game so damning that it wouldn't be worth playing.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
TURN OFF THE CONSOLE, YOU'VE BEEN PLAYING FOR TOO LONG.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chux
The fact that I was playing with it loud as shit, surround, and at like 3am, since like 10pm, really freaked me out, that being said, I'm gonna rent MGS2 and beat the shit out of that bama too.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
In conclusion. It's some sort of Cave Demon.
CRA... CRAB BATTLE!! OLIOLIOLIOOOOOOOO
It's not the gameplay itself. It's Raiden, the annoying codec bitch, and the horrid story.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
MGS3's story was primarily there to explain the gaps in MGS2, playing both negates a lot of the wtf of Solid 2.
Granted, the "I live on through this arm!" will never die for random silliness that had no decent explanation at the time, but at least it's not retarded now.
If there was an explanation for that in MGS3, I missed it. It's still retarded shit to me.
I think he's talking about all of the Ocelot Triple Crossing/Backstory.
Ocelot is the son of quite possibly the most powerful mystic ever alive, one of the reasons he was taken in by the Patriots was because the potential of his mind was incredible thanks to that connection. He has yet to have any idea that he holds that kind of power and it would seem that the Patriots never trained him in any manner in order to draw it out, but his latent abilities manifested when they arranged for the limb of another to be grafted onto his body. This is also why he has the voice of Liquid when channeling his spirit, which makes absolutely no sense from a scientific viewpoint but works from a spiritual side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
Not to mention his name is salsa sharkska shamma lamma ding dong.
That alone is why he is a king among men. I'm going to name my child that in hopes that he too can rise to such greatness.
Why not name your kid Sepheroth
I was hoping for his middle name to be Naruto.
Maybe even One Piece.