Zero Punctuation: Metal Gear Solid 4

apmpnmdslkbk

New member
Jun 30, 2008
360
0
0
Reveiw was funny as hell (which shouldnt be funny but oh well). After watching this reveiw/critisism/thingy I thought that the story couldnt be that confusing but after 3 hours of my (metel gear obsesed) friend blathering on about the game I shot myself in the foot and am currently regreting ever trying to proove u wrong inside of a hospital on my laptop.
 

ihitterdal

New member
Jun 30, 2008
11
0
0
This review, as always, was fucking hilarious. But there was one thing I noticed: the reference to AS. I found it funny, but it fit more into ADD/ADHD. Anyways, I agree: games with too much story and not enough game just get boring within an hour or less.
 

Johnn Johnston

New member
May 4, 2008
2,519
0
0
Look, I understood fully the plot of Ocean's Eleven and the plot of The Matrix.

MGS4's plotline made my brain bleed ever so slightly.
 

Jumplion

New member
Mar 10, 2008
7,873
0
0
Indigo_Dingo said:
He's claiming that its nonsensical, as did Yahtzee. I'm showing that its really quite simple if you think about it for 20 seconds.
It was mainly directed to Tempdu0 guy whatever. Infact, you just cleared up even more things for me about the plot :D thanks.
 

Evilducks

New member
Sep 20, 2007
62
0
0
Tempdude0, I think you've unfortunately fallen into the trap of arguing on the internet. It's funny because you realize it's happening but refuse to let it go. You know your arguments are coherent and well reasoned. You know your principal antagonist is cherry picking which comments she wants to respond to and even in those cases fails to actually respond to them in a method which is understandable. She frequently says things she apparently doesn't mean because she is applying definitions to words which do not hold up.

As far as I can tell Terra is arguing that, aside from bad grammar, no work of fiction is 'bad' writing. You may not like it, but it isn't bad. In fact, her poor use of diction is surprising to me because I would swear here favorite literary work is a dictionary. I can think of no books in existence that would be more 'dry' and full of 'fluff' than that one.
 

Donstheman

New member
May 8, 2008
37
0
0
Story line is over complicated. Thats it, it could have been simplier, but instead they went for something nuttier than a squirel turd.
 

Jumplion

New member
Mar 10, 2008
7,873
0
0
Evilducks said:
Tempdude0, I think you've unfortunately fallen into the trap of arguing on the internet. It's funny because you realize it's happening but refuse to let it go. You know your arguments are coherent and well reasoned. You know your principal antagonist is cherry picking which comments she wants to respond to and even in those cases fails to actually respond to them in a method which is understandable. She frequently says things she apparently doesn't mean because she is applying definitions to words which do not hold up.

As far as I can tell Terra is arguing that, aside from bad grammar, no work of fiction is 'bad' writing. You may not like it, but it isn't bad. In fact, her poor use of diction is surprising to me because I would swear here favorite literary work is a dictionary. I can think of no books in existence that would be more 'dry' and full of 'fluff' than that one.
As my friend says (but i forgot to mention):

"Arguing over the internet is just like participating in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard."

A wise man.
 

Evilducks

New member
Sep 20, 2007
62
0
0
Jumplion said:
As my friend says (but i forgot to mention):

"Arguing over the internet is just like participating in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard."

A wise man.
I like this better:
http://xkcd.com/386/
 

GlenRice41

New member
Jun 26, 2008
19
0
0
Donstheman said:
Story line is over complicated. Thats it, it could have been simplier, but instead they went for something nuttier than a squirel turd.
Like Yahtzee said you had to be a fan and had played the other games to get the story, I am a fan as I said and I enjoyed the storyline. Going to MGS1 (gasp im delving into the past) the story was set in 2005 or 2003 not exactly sure on the date and the game released in 98 it is somewhat futuristic and some parts are crazy that i completely agree (like in MGS2 flying un-man'd gun copters....6-7 years into the future they have gun copters that suddenly can depict good guys from bad!?)But they kept it simple in terms of who the bad guys are and who you gotta kill. (your objective: destroy metal gear!!!) Liquid=trying to enslave human race so Liquid=Bad.


------------------------SPOILER ALERT!!!!-----------------------------------------------

Also on a side note I think another bonkers part was the fact Solid Snake goes into a ROOM FULL OF MICROWAVES and miraculously even though his entire body is getting thrashed his face escapes the room with nothing on it. I mean come on!!! it was the most exposed part of his body!!! even his eyeball thingy went boom!

So in short i think some parts of the storyline are understandable and enjoyable and some parts are out there and kinda flawed. I think it is because I was a fan from MGS1 made it easier for me to throw out the koooky parts of the story and just love the game and story.

Also I apologize to anyone reading my post cause that's just the way my mind works, I think in bits and pieces that jump back n forth between points just try and bare with me.
 

Jumplion

New member
Mar 10, 2008
7,873
0
0
Evilducks said:
Jumplion said:
As my friend says (but i forgot to mention):

"Arguing over the internet is just like participating in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard."

A wise man.
I like this better:
http://xkcd.com/386/
That sortof fits into the "Arguing over the internet is just like participating in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard." because he's still arguing over the internet...whatever, it's still annoying when someone is wrong on the internet.
 

GlenRice41

New member
Jun 26, 2008
19
0
0
Jumplion said:
Evilducks said:
Jumplion said:
As my friend says (but i forgot to mention):

"Arguing over the internet is just like participating in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard."

A wise man.
I like this better:
http://xkcd.com/386/
That sortof fits into the "Arguing over the internet is just like participating in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard." because he's still arguing over the internet...whatever, it's still annoying when someone is wrong on the internet.

But... you just argued with some1 arguing over the internet.....so isn't that arguing over the internet?!?!?
 

Jumplion

New member
Mar 10, 2008
7,873
0
0
GlenRice41 said:
Jumplion said:
Evilducks said:
Jumplion said:
As my friend says (but i forgot to mention):

"Arguing over the internet is just like participating in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard."

A wise man.
I like this better:
http://xkcd.com/386/
That sortof fits into the "Arguing over the internet is just like participating in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard." because he's still arguing over the internet...whatever, it's still annoying when someone is wrong on the internet.

But... you just argued with some1 arguing over the internet.....so isn't that arguing over the internet?!?!?
No, i'm proving a point <.>;....
 

VeryOblivious

New member
Dec 2, 2007
65
0
0
Tempdude0 said:
The problem there is that the boss isn't inside your head when you're doing these things. If he were, those plans would be revealed. There aren't many ways to hide what you're doing when someone can see what you're thinking.
Just in case you didn't know, Rose and her son didn't have nanomachines. This is easily deducible as the A.I's don't know the relation of John (the son) and Raiden. Aplying this simple limitation in the example I showed, the obtained information from the boss's cameras are limited to the position, amount and quality of the cameras... Just like the nanomachines. Come on, this is very simple. You don't understand? That's because you don't wanna understand it or don't wanna lose the argument.

Tempdude0 said:
Even assuming they can only get a "feel" for what's going on, we have biological "tells" that would give most people away.
What that has to do with anything?

Tempdude0 said:
Don't ask me why the child was so important, but for some reason it was since his wife felt the need to hide it from the patriots.
Maybe because it was HER SON?

Tempdude0 said:
As for liquid, he was working for the patriots...Well, liquid Ocelot was...Wait, I'm getting confused here.
Simple. Ocelot was working for the patriots, even though he had other agenda. He made all that "Liquid Ocelot" thing to deceive the A.I's, and make them believe he was Liquid, in order to force them to use Solid Snake as their counterattack measure. Making a checkmate, ignoring the success of Solid, Ocelot will win.

Tempdude0 said:
Snake was railing against the patriots, so helping him would help them how?
He wasn't railing against the patriots. He was railing against Liquid. The most obvious thing in the game, geez.

Tempdude0 said:
People may attempt to deceive them and circumvent their setup. The patriots have a way into these peoples head. Why not just use it willy nilly on anyone even tangentially related to their operations, or anyone of importance for that matter?
Break their own rules to make it all boring? You sure know how to criticize the writing.

Tempdude0 said:
I've said the plot goes convoluted for a while. Check a few posts back. You probably missed it with all that reading you weren't doing. Seeing as I've only said "convoluted" as opposed to "overly convoluted" I guess that particular misunderstanding goes down as my bad.
You didn't catch my drift. I exposed that the "over-convoluted and confusing plot" to be rather simple.

Tempdude0 said:
Alright then mister picky, SELF hypnosis than. Better? Sheesh.
Picky me? You gotta be kidding me. And you must really use quotes, I can't connect that "correction" on anything I've said. Self hypnosis? When?

Tempdude0 said:
Fine, in order. As a young man he worked as a GRUE Major (MGS 3) but at the end was revealed to be working for the KGB as ADAM, but under the DCI (that'd be the Director of the CIA) Later, he worked with Foxhound terrorists (The thing I referred to as a mercenary group. Splitting hairs, but still not quite right on my part.) and at the end he is revealed to be in league with Solidus, the other evil clone. Now sporting liquid snakes arm (after losing it to the cyborg ninja) he slowly begins to be taken over the personality of liquid snake prompting the change to Liquid Ocelot. A possible explanation being his parentage. Finally, it is revealed to all be in act as Ocelot is in actuality working for Big Boss (MGS 4) There, a blow by blow.
My point wasn't order, my point is that you mixed up several stages of Ocelot's whole life into a single bad explained stage, ignoring the most simple objective in his life. He, as his mother, remained loyal to the end.

Tempdude0 said:
As for the ninja, again, I may be mixing up two different ones. Lets ignore that. However, there was a ninja from N.A.S.A. Look it up.
You may want to show me something about it, although I don't think how this could be any relevant.

Tempdude0 said:
To the language comment, the problem one person had was that perhaps people involved in this couldn't come to an agreement on what certain words meant. Since I was working from the dictionary, there was no interpretation needed for my speech. I was in no way saying my word choice lent objectivity to my arguments. That's just silly. At least read what I'm writing please.
Based in your own speech, I stated that your arguments weren't objective. Then you replied that you were objective because you were using the dictionary. Who's not reading?

Tempdude0 said:
The examples may make it tedious, but aside from pointing out similar flaws in similar works, what would you have me do to prove my point? Would you like me to just spout off that I R RITE! without backing it up?
Arguments do not need examples. They're only an addition as you have said. If your examples instead of helping, distract, then they're not good examples at all.
 

Jumplion

New member
Mar 10, 2008
7,873
0
0
Like I said:

"Arguing over the internet is just like participating in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard."

Just drop it everyone who is arguing against Tempdude0. Though i must admit, it's fun watching you all completely annihilate Tempdude0 through his own writing which he claims is well written and clean.

Hmmm, i'm torn between stopping you all or letting you continue. What to do, what to do...
 

error17

New member
Dec 21, 2007
10
0
0
Yahtzee needs to lie down a bit, get back into making them... funny...

Wasn't laughing this time around as much as the first dozen of vids.

Yes Im a MGS4 fan, but yahtzee didnt speak about the good things did he?
 

GlenRice41

New member
Jun 26, 2008
19
0
0
Jumplion said:
GlenRice41 said:
Jumplion said:
Evilducks said:
Jumplion said:
As my friend says (but i forgot to mention):

"Arguing over the internet is just like participating in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard."

A wise man.
I like this better:
http://xkcd.com/386/
That sortof fits into the "Arguing over the internet is just like participating in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard." because he's still arguing over the internet...whatever, it's still annoying when someone is wrong on the internet.

But... you just argued with some1 arguing over the internet.....so isn't that arguing over the internet?!?!?
No, i'm proving a point <.>;....
Don't try to get me to respond to start an over the internet argument with me!!! its not happinin Mr. lol!!!