There is far more depth in MGSV's narrative than Sup Forums want to let on

There is far more depth in MGSV's narrative than Sup Forums want to let on.

I really do think it is a case of "2deep4u" in the same ways that MGS2 was on it's release, and the more people start objectively look into the grand picture on what MGSV was trying to convey, the more people are starting to come around to it.

There's no doubt that there are objective issues with the game, but I do think it rivals the rest in the series. Multiple playthroughs and paying attention to key themes (Parasites, identity, loss, and manipulation) present throughout gives a clearer picture on the events not only within its own narrative, but how it juxtapose and challenges the themes within it's own franchise. Players expected / wanted to see a story where the charismatic hero Big Boss goes through shady events and eventually has a mental breakdown, turning him into the war starved tyrant in MG and MG2, because a complete psychological shift is the only way we can justify Big Boss acting in that way. But we didn't get that. We got something far more revealing.

Big Boss betrayed The Boss' ideals, but most of all, betrayed the players who worshiped him. Your anger at the ending of MGSV and how it handled Big Boss was completely intentional. The man you wanted to idolize betrayed your expectations of him. Those expectations, which made up the entity of Venom Snake himself. Venom Snake was the memetic ideal of what someone THINKS Big Boss would act like, a hero worship and our obsessive need to see the hero "live long enough to see him become the bad guy". But our expectations of the hero was never met, and even more sobering, puts Big Boss' entire legacy separate from the man itself. The illusion is thus shattered, leading us to question what was everything leading up to this for?

Venom chose to live in his hero worship of Big Boss, but at this point, the player disconnects himself from Venom Snake the moment he "drives the demon out of him" . He is no longer a representation of us, but a living, disconnected embodiment of our previous worship to the legacy of Big Boss.

Sup Forums was right that Venom Snake was suppose to represent the player controlling him, but so wasn't the betrayal of what WE expected the turnout of Big Boss to be. In the end, Big Boss was simply a parasite who used Venom as a platform for the rhetoric and expectations that was expected of Big Boss himself.

Difference is that MGS2 was actually finished.

Phantom Pain, yo. But yes, there are blatant plot holes.

>Your anger at the ending of MGSV and how it handled Big Boss was completely intentional.
But I completely was happy for Big Boss at the end of the game, though.

Am I just stupid for reacting different, or am I one of his dumb Zanzibarites?

You shouldn't be happy at all. Big Boss, the man who wanted to make a place where soldiers wouldn't be taken advantage of, ended up completely taking advantage of a solider to carry his burden with him so he could fill the shoes of his own legacy.

No, you're just Ocelot. Who will glorify everything Bibo ever does.

MGS2 is also a game about taking back your own identity, while MGSV is a game about losing it.

and MGS2 was also made by Hideo Kojima, whereas MGSV was made by Konami.

>Bibo

>Difference is that MGS2 was actually finished.

and yet ended with questions that were not answered until MGS4

...

>Bibo

Would be an effective point if the base game wasn't awful.

>Difference is that MGS2 was actually finished.

lol no. MGS 2 left you with the biggest blue balls in gaming.

>There is far more depth in MGSV's narrative than Sup Forums want to let on.

>listening to Sup Forums.
>ever.

most people still haven't realized that Ocelot did the same thing for Liquid, Venom did for BB. Only Venom did it for the eyes of the world. Ocelot did it for the "eyes" of the patriots

This isn't funny anymore. Stop.

Base game wasn't amazing, but isn't as bad as people try to make it seem. Ignoring a lot of the fluff side content, you can focus on the mandatory missions, and the game feels fine.

>Would be an effective point if the base game wasn't awful.

awful meaning utter perfection.

Hey guys, the real Bibo is in this thread right now, let's all ask him something

>dude just ignore the majority of the game's content lmao
Awful post. Even just focusing on the main missions makes for an awful experience, you're still playing some weird milsim calling itself Metal Gear.

Why is BB so handsome tho

I remember when MGSIV came out shortly after the PS3 launched... and it also felt incomplete.

Later on Kojima made a statement that instead of taking the game X steps further they were limited to X-2 due to hardware restrictions.

Regardless of the Konami fiasco and the absence of one of the game's key writers - I still think that the Kojimbles Studio has a hard time executing on their delusions of grandeur the video game. The bigger budgets and international notoriety has made Kojimbo a much less grounded creator.

If side content is optional, and plays no bearing on actually progressing in the main narrative, why subject yourself to it? Just play the main missions. There are plenty in there that are great, too.

Like I said in the first post, there are objective issues with the game, but the narrative isn't even half as bad as detractor's of MGSV want to let on if you have honestly understood how Metal Gear handles it's narrative as a whole.