About a year ago, after receiving tons of recommendations and seen many memes, I decided to watch JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure. While I found it difficult to be impressed the first 10 episodes, it started to peak my interest after getting into part two, even further with part three and finally my interest evolved into love for this series at part four. The reason I believe that it took me, and many others, a little time to warm up to the series, lays in the work philosophy of JoJo’s Bizarre Adventures’ creator & mangaka: Hirohiko Araki

Araki is a mangaka that highly values curiosity, he also fully takes the advantage of splitting the series into different parts: everyone having its own themes, style, characters, location to give it some variety, but also giving it opportunity to improve aspects criticized in earlier parts. For example: while part 3 had a great villain and main hero, its side characters weren’t as well developed; which is why they got much more attention in part 4. Thus we have a series that can improve more subtly and yet not disappoint readers whom for instance were perfectly fine with all aspects of a certain part.

And the reason I’m writing this essay is to focus on an aspect that Araki, in my opinion, improved massively in part 4: its villain, Yoshikage Kira.

While earlier villains, Dio and Kars, weren’t intimidating but functioned well as antagonist in their respective narrative…Yoshikage Kira stands on his own. What makes Kira such unique design compared to earlier villains is that while e.g. Dio wishes to conquer the world, Kira just wants to live a peaceful life and has no wish to stand out. On the outside he just seems to be a regular working man and a fine citizen: however, in secrecy he murders women and starts developing romantic attachments to their hands.

Because of that we have a different villain, one not driven by ambitions, revenge or lust for power, but simply by lust for murder while wanting to stay anonymous. And that is, in my opinion, a much more terrifying evil. This character has been discussed before, however, I wished to dwell deeper into the rabbit hole and discuss the evil of Yoshikage Kira from a more comparative, critical level. Because of Kira, I decided to read a report on the banality of evil.

Eichmann in Jerusalem: a report on the banality of Evil

Jerusalem, in 1962, the political theorist and philosopher Hannah Arendt was covering the trial of Adolf Eichmann for The New Yorker (Arendt, 1963). Eichmann was the one in charge of the mass deportations of jews to the ghettos and various concentration and extermination camps: Treblinka, Sobibor Auschwitz and many more. During the trial, he admitted that he was responsible for the transportations, yet he claimed that he wasn’t guilty of the deaths of millions of people or the hand of the “Final Solution”; “guilty to god, but not the law” (Arendt, 1963, page 24). He was simply a man carrying out orders and following the model of being a good citizen. A dozen of psychiatrists assured the court and everyone else in the room that he was “normal”, “At least more normal than I am after examining him”, one of the psychiatrists claimed (Arendt, 1963, page 29).

Moreover, there wasn’t any sign of a hate for jews or any form of anti-Semitism. In other words, there wasn’t a sign of him actually doing it for either a personal reason or a quest for power. However, as mentioned earlier, despite admitting that he was in charge of an essential part of the Holocaust, he denied being guilty of murdering millions of people. He tried to argue his way out of his death sentence by referring to Immanuel Kant’s Categorical imperative, saying that his actions were just to “follows the rules of the country as each man should” (Arendt, 1963, page 138). Not only is this an incredibly wrong interpretation of the moral philosophy but also a naive way of running away from the responsibility of his crimes, which the court rightfully called out. When his first method didn’t work, he tried to get away with a sort of martyrdom; uttering clichés to make it out that his life didn’t turn out the way he intended: “I don’t know, everything was like a terrible curse. What I wished, needed and planned to do, destiny stood in my way” (Arendt, 1963, page 55). However, the court found him guilty of his crimes and he was executed by hanging.

The case of Adolf Eichmann was probably best remembered by Hannah Arendt’s famous words: 

“For when I speak of the banality of evil, I do so only on the strictly factual level, pointing to a phenomenon which stared one in the face at the trial. Eichmann was not Iago and not Macbeth, and nothing would have been farther from his mind than to determine with Richard III ‘to prove a villain’ Expect for an extraordinary diligence in looking out for his personal advancement, he had no motives at all. He merely, to put the matter colloquially, never realized what he was doing. It was sheer thoughtlessness, something by no means identical with stupidity, that predisposed him to become one of the greatest criminals of that period” (Arendt, 1963, Page 287 – 288).

Kira and Eichmann aren’t the same

Before continuing, I just want to make clear that this essay is in no way trying to claim that Yoshikage Kira and Adolf Eichmann are the same. One is a fictional character from an over the top series, and one was a very real person responsible for millions of deaths. You can also discuss that they had different backgrounds and were raised in different ways. Most importantly, what motivates them differs greatly: while Eichmann gladly followed orders and wished to make a “career” of his line of work, Kira was driven by lust while also wanted to stay anonymous. One gladly stayed in the spotlight, while the other one built his life around not being seen or standing out from the crowd.

Also, even if Adolf Eichmann denies being guilty of murder… it IS technically correct that he himself didn’t directly murder anyone during his time in the Nazi-regime. Yoshikage Kira, on the other hand, murdered all of his victims first hand; he wasn’t merely part of a group or system that performed all the killings. With that said: while their personalities are different, there are connections to make.

Banality: a category of evil

While re-watching JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure Part 4 and reading trough “The Banality of Evil”, I couldn’t help to notice that there were some similarities between Kira and Eichmann.

Lack of direct ambition:  None of these personalities had an actual ambition that made them do the immoral things they did. One could make the argument that Eichmann’s ambition was to make a career, however, I don’t see a career in a cause you don’t fully believe in as something ambitious: I would rather call it opportunistic. When reading about Eichmann’s life you can’t help to get the feeling that it was a combination of coincidence and simply taking several opportunities that got him in the position he had during the Holocaust. Not the hard work and idealism seen in most villains or tyrants in history. Kira takes it further by not even pursuing a career or even standing out from the crowd: His whole life he tries to makes his existence as anonymous as possible by avoiding getting the highest grades and awards during his time in school, while also avoiding to develop any close relationships with colleagues.

Even if they act differently, both of them have a lack of direct ambition. Instead they filled that empty space with something more practical like lust or a career.  

Lack of hate: While both Eichmann and Kira made horrible things that brought much anger and sorrow for a lot of people, they themselves weren’t driven by revenge or a general hate for their victims. Eichmann made it clear several times that he never hated jews; On the contrary, he claimed to have “private reasons” to not hate the jews (Arendt, page 30), and thus his choice of career wasn’t driven by a personal vendetta or revenge. It’s the same for Yoshikage Kira: he targeted specifically women but it wasn’t because he expressively hated them or had a bad history with them; it was simply because he was attracted to hands and didn’t have a way to preserve them. One could even make the argument that if he could preserve a hand, he wouldn’t need to continue to kill women, and therefore save himself a lot of trouble (more on disdain for trouble later on). It would, of course, still be an evil act; however, at least not as systematic.

Distance: This aspect covers two areas. First off is a form of “existential distance”: both Eichmann and Kira, although fully aware of their actions, try to distance themselves from the implications of their actions almost to make it more acceptable. Kira for instance sees the murders as a form of “dating”: he goes out on dates with the hands, buys them gifts, talks to them about everyday life and it’s also implied there are sexual elements in the so called relationships. When the hands start to decay, he simply “breaks up” with them to find another “partner”.

Eichmann not only made it out like he was simply doing his job like a good citizen: he even went as far as to try to use Immanuel Kant’s moral philosophy to justify his actions, and thus distance himself from the thought that he deliberately made the choice to follow those orders. Both, in their own way, tried to in some way downplay the evil part of their actions to make it more “normal”.

Secondly there is a more physical distance: when both are about to get caught for their actions, they both flee from their homes and go into hiding with new identities. There are of course villains, with ambitions, that go into hiding after being discovered, but often later continue their ambition, but with a different strategy. Eichmann and Kira on the other hand try to really get in their new identities and stop with their actions to hide themselves. Kira was the one who most wanted to escape into his new identity, as he puts it himself: “I don’t need any intense joy, but I didn’t want any deep despair either. My goal was to live a peaceful life, like a plant”. Eichmann seemed on the other hand to miss the old days: now having to work at a Mercedes factory (Arendt, page 238). He must’ve felt it used to be a much more dull life as he was caught bragging about his former achievements and what a career he made in Nazi-Germany (ironically, both he and Kira were caught just because of their bragging).  

Disdain for trouble: the title of this section might sound off, since there isn’t a single villain (or hero) that wants trouble in their quest or ambition. However, while most villains understand that complication comes with the territory when dealing with for example world domination: both Kira and Eichmann seemed to want to avoid trouble at all costs and simply continue with their lives. Yoshikage Kira especially makes it clear that he wishes to continue on with his life in his infamous monologue (Länka). Adolf Eichmann does not give us a monologue, however when reading The banality of Evil it is clear that he simply wished to continue with his tasks in peace and that, from the previously mentioned quote from the trial; he almost felt destiny was against him, talking more like a blue collar worker not happy with the extra work rather than admitting to be a big part of the Holocaust machinery. Good or evil, people driven by an ambition usually accept that there will be complications and extra work. Both Kira and Eichmann are in comparison almost allergic to trouble and simply wanted to live by their routines and sleep well during the night.

After making these connections to Kira and Eichmann, you can’t help to feel that two completely different personalities share a similar form of evil. When we usually discuss evil characters or villains, we mostly think of someone that acts morally wrong to achieve a selfish goal: conquer the world, gain wealth, gain power, spread chaos for personal enjoyment and so forth. There are also, of course, more morally complex antagonists, which have well-meaning goals, but don’t hesitate to make evil actions: sacrificing friends to form a peaceful kingdom, bringing anarchy to a society to bring absolute equality for all, or cook and sell drugs to make money for their family. All of these examples represent what I would call a more “active” evil: whatever motivates them to act evil, they all aim to make a change and make those decision to break away from their everyday life. From these characters perspective: to achieve their goals they must makes these morally wrong decisions. One could make the argument that they are “forced” to do evil acts to reach their goals (at least the morally complex villains). They are aware that it won’t be an easy life, but accept it to either make their life better, or to carry out a grand mission. In short: They take a grand leap of faith and take actions to create something more in life.

Yoshikage Kira and Adolf Eichmann in other words represent a more passive form of evil, a unimaginative and banal evil. They aren’t striving to make grand change, but have decided to make their evil acts a routine for every day in their lives. Even they themselves admit that the evil they do, they don’t have to: no one or nothing is forcing them to do it; rather, they do it gladly for their own comfort. No ideals, no grand plan and in no way to change the world for the better or worse: they simply want to continue hurting people while staying in a banal existence. The lives of people around them are simply means to achieve short term goals that never last.  

The spectrum of motivation

For a long time I believed that an interesting villain is always someone that brings a grand change and is driven by motives that you can in some way sympathize with. Like Colonel Kurtz from Apocalypse Now: he deserted from the US army because he finally saw the meaninglessness of the Vietnam War, and thus gathered a rouge unit to make their own meaning of this bloody conflict. Although his anarchistic tendencies bring great harm to people around, he is simply seeing the nihilistic nature of politics in war and tries to make a point to both the capitalists and communists. How else will they get the attention of our protagonist, who will rise up and not only challenge their strengths, but also their world views? After all: antagonist comes from the greek word antagonistēs, which means “opponent”, “competitor” or “rival”.

With that said: While Yoshikage Kira made me realize there are more ways to make villains interesting in popular media, Hannah Arendt’s coverage of Adolf Eichmanns trial made me see that there is one active and one banal evil. The active more visible and damaging, while the banal is less visible but much more frightening. It isn’t simply about if it’s an idealistic conviction or not, motivation itself is a spectrum. Kira proved to me that a villain doesn’t need an idealistic justification to become interesting: when we get to see his everyday life, we see the life of a regular working man that just happens to enjoy murder.

I have for a long time known that motivation makes a character stick with most of the audience: however, Kira proved that motivation can even be a banal daily routine as long as you write in details and give us a relatable villain. While reading about Adolf Eichmann, I realized why I found Kira so fascinating: Because that’s when I realized there is an evil that is much more real and closer to our lives. Both Kira and Eichmann are simply trying to deal with their daily life problems…even if it means to murder. We rarely meet visible and active villains like Dio, Darth Vader or Sepiroth, but we hear about the passive and banal evil personalities in the news, like Ted Bundy, that had a simple everyday life yet caused so much grief for so many people. Yoshikage Kiras powers are pure fantasy and unrealistic, but his evil is incredibly real and is happening every day; that is the frightening aspect of the banality of evil: Being evil because you can.

The art of writing another form of evil

I love active and idealistic villains in video games, manga, movies etc. The speech that Gene delivers to his soldiers is a haunting yet correct prediction of what kind of lives awaits for soldiers after the Cold War. Judge Frollos religious conviction and will to hunt down the romani in Paris is terrifying and also fascinating. Finally Griffiths relentless will to achieve his ambitions are first inspiring, and then chocking when you understand how far he is willing to go. All of these villains really grab me, at least from a more aesthetic or theatrical perspective, as they portray a grand fantasy of how far humanity will go in terms of immoral actions. At most, they make us reflect on our ideals and how we should relate to them: should they cross the moral boundaries? Or is there a limit we should always impose on our thoughts of actions?

Moreover, Yoshikage Kiras banal evil is more terrifying on a more existential level. It is obvious that he acts immorally, but on the outside he is just a person wishing to continue with his life without any obstacles, like the rest of us. And just like Adolf Eichmann, he lacks a direct ambition, hateful drive, he keeps a distance to his actions, and has an almost allergic relation to trouble in his everyday life: some of the ingredients of the banality of evil.

I am certain that there are more villains out there that have similar traits, if anything I hope so since this kind of evil shows an incredible opportunity to write more existential villains. I even believe, with the right writing and right setting, that a banal villain could even make you question your own banal existence: make you wonder if in the long run you are harming someone and if you do, are you willing to give it up or simply mask your whole life to continue this trite everyday life. Both villains and heroes work best when they become a form of reflection of our ambitions and dreams. But what if they become a reflection of our everyday life?

References

Arendt, Hannah. 1963. Eichmann in Jerusalem – a report on the banality of evil. 4^th Edition. Gothenburg: Daidalos AB.

Recently I realized I’ve been too hard on myself, after for so long believing I’ve been too lazy or undisciplined to actually do something of value. All I could’ve think of were project that never started/never finished or why haven’t gotten farther in my life. Could only think of what could’ve been, instead of what is and what it actually means

However, one night before falling asleep I started to think: if I could meet my 19-year old self, what would I tell him? Suddenly I started to think of several things, many things I don’t want to forget. I’ve said many times “memories makes us who we are”, but what does it makes us if we can’t even remember the most precious memories that give us strength? So I decided to share with you this open letter to my 19-years old-self: partly since it will help me make it easier to remember but also for all of you who also can’t help to feel powerless at night. If this open letter can at least help ONE of you in any way, would means so much for me.

Without further ado, let’s begin.

Hello Rikard!

If you meet me in the street, you wouldn’t recognize me. Sure we have similar voice, same height and the same face…but other than that, there is not that much we would have in common. First off we have different outward appearance: different body language, different hair and also completely different clothing style. If only the differences would stop there, but they don’t. You would notice I’m a humorous person, gladly look you in the eyes when we talk, got more confidence when I speak, plenty of interests and also can’t help to make weird inside jokes that you only get by hanging out with me.

Would you believe if I told you: that I’m what you will become 10 years from now?

You probably don’t believe me, but you don’t need to right now. The important thing is that I want to share with you what things you will do in later on in your life. 10 years is a long time, you have used that time for more things than you could imagine and you will grow so much.

To begin with, do you remember how many times people called you dumb and even a teacher said you wouldn’t make it in life? You for a long time would believe them. How wrong they were. In 10 years you have studied in two universities, gotten a bachelor degree from both of them: one in game design and the other one in European studies. In both instances you had to read a lot of philosophy to write the essays/thesis and if you only had more money you would more than gladly study more. You’re 18, doubting yourself so much…but right now you can’t wait to read and learn more, because you have a thirst of learning not everyone has! Heck, often you find yourself reading Kierkegaard/Thoreu (you will know them in due time) on the bus…does that sound like a dumb person to you?

Right now, you have developed agoraphobia because of the anxiety. You are afraid of crowds, having presentations, taking the bus/train/plane and go on stage. You feel weak and worthless for not being able to do many things required to achieve your dreams. And I’m not going to lie: it will stay with you for a while. There will be nights you cry, presentations you will fear, buses you avoid and life just seems scarier. But you will face your fears time and time again…and now you can’t wait to get up on stage and show everyone who you are. You travel whenever you got the time and money, you even faced your fear of flying going to Ireland and right now you can’t wait to fly to Japan! Yes, there is still things you are afraid of…but overcoming that incredible obstacle shows how strong you are. Right now: you can’t wait to conquer the other fears in your life!

As you’re reading this, you’re probably thinking “how could anything I’ve read be possible? I can’t do anything”. Once again I must be honest: your weak self-confidence is still a bit of an issue, as there are so many projects you want to do and you can’t help to hesitate: “what if I can’t do it?”. Trust me: you have done so much and even if your confidence could be stronger…it is incredibly stronger than it was before. There are a lot of moments were you outdone yourself, here are a few: one semester you wrote a thesis while studying at another university (the thesis was a smash success!), you took the role as an organizer and NAILED it (it was your first time), you learned to sew and your first costume was a 18^th century military uniform (You probably wondering why the heck you would start sewing, I’ll tell you later!). And it gets better. Even if you are struggling with starting projects because you’re worrying it might fail: slowly things are changing. Because recently you started a project that has grabbed the attention of several people all over Sweden, many are curious how it will turn out and can’t wait for you to finish it. Best of all: even if this project might not turn out perfect, you still wanna go trough with this to the end and are so excited to finish it. Because you have learned that the biggest price isn’t the audience number or critical praise: but to actually create something that grows with you and changes you to something you didn’t even know existed. Who knows what projects awaits in the future, either way you are more excited in life than ever!

But the best thing of all…you won’t experience all of this alone. I know you feel lonely right now Rikard, you got few friends and none of them make you comfortable. But now, you’re surrounded by many…MANY incredible people that enrich your life in so many ways. They have helped you through tough times, helped you on your projects, helped you grow and supported you…not like your old “friends”. You will learn so much from them all, because they come from so many places. Iceland, Ireland, USA, Norway, Finland, Denmark…and that is not all of the countries they come from. And even in Sweden they all come from different groups, giving you plenty of perspectives on life and thus saving you from a boring, monotone, life. Even 10 years later, you sometimes think “Do I even deserve these wonderful people?”. One of the best feelings is to make them smile, laugh and happy because they deserve it and much more. They have given you one of the most valuable things in life: memories. And more will come.

I’m not going to lie, there have also been some dark times to…to deny this would be an atrocious sin. Your anxiety will never go away and you know your confidence, even if it is much better, will never soar like it does for many other people. As long as there are successful people, you can’t help to compare yourself to them. This is another reason I’m writing this to you: to tell you, and remind me, something important. No one else have your memories, no one else have gone through exactly what you have, no one else smiles the way you do, no one looks into the future the same way you do. You got your own history, one the be incredibly proud of. You are Rikard, and you should be so proud of it.

Better end this letter now, got to stop procrastinating and finish my projects. Got so much more to learn!

Take care of yourself
//love, a 29 year old nerdy dork.

PS. Tack för att du finns

"I wanna see mountains again, mountains Gandalf!"

This might be almost three weeks late, but considering how important my experiences in Iceland have been to my creativity...I felt it was important to share with you what happened on that beautiful island. Not only did it give me wonderful memories but it was also a revival.

About a year ago, Midgard 2018 was announced. It was going to be Iceland’s first all-inclusive convention. When I heard about it I couldn’t help but to be get interested, I have for a long time wanted to see Iceland, and also it would be a once in a life time experience to attend a the first convention in a country that has until now only had smaller nerd-related events. I finally decided when a good friend of mine also wanted to go AND I got a place to stay in Reykjavik: Midgard 2018 would be the first con in a long time I would go to as an attendee!

Leaving Scandinavia and arriving in this colder, but so beautiful, country was amazing: Reykjavik was beautiful, the country side was Skyrim and Middle Earth rolled into one, the hot springs were wonderful….and I haven’t even scratched the surface of what the country has to offer! Two days filled with sightseeing and photoshoots even made me forget that there was a convention…ironically, since it was just for that convention we decided to go!

Two dorks, climbing a mountain!

The first day of Midgard, we simply relaxed and looked around at the con: it was small, but organized! For a first con they sure had several interesting guest and artists, amongst them was Brian Muir: a sculptor that has worked with the Star Wars franschise, creating Darth Vaders costume (from Ralph McQuarrie’s design). We walked around, looking at what the artists had to offer and even attended one of the lectures. Then we finished the day early, decided to take it easy and get ready for tomorrow: then it was time to cosplay!

We even got goodie bags!

The final-day of Midgard we went with our cosplays: Fabian went with his Pettsson and Findus cosplay, I went with Avatar Kyoshi. And here…I’m going to be honest: I was nervous, maybe even scared, when I started on my make-up. There are several reasons to that: it was long ago since I last wore this costume so I felt rusty putting on the make-up. Even if I like this costume I couldn’t help but to look at all the small details I wasn’t happy with. Nowadays I’m more used to working and not cosplaying at conventions but of course….I was joining the cosplay competition. Signing up for it was actually not my idea, one of the organizers just suggested it since it would be more fun if more cosplayers joined. I was hesitant as this cosplay wasn’t really competition material, but I gave in when they said “it’s just for fun”. Now the day had come. Putting it on first made me uneasy.However: it all changed when I got it all on.

Walking around the con felt great, it felt so nice to take on the role of an amazing character and be in the middle of geeky environment. Then came everyone that wanted to take pictures and looked in awe….it had been too long since someone complimented me for a costume at a con. Everytime I couldn’t help but to crack a smile and compliment back in SOME way! Then came the competition. Just going back-stage to see everyone’s amazing cosplays was fun, to talk and to get excited and nervous together made it better…then I got out on the stage.

4 years had passed since I competed with a cosplay, 2 of those years I had a cosplay depression and just wasn’t happy with what I created. Sure, the depression ended when I learned to appreciate cosplay as art, and also when I learned what killed my love for making cosplays: but now finally…I was on stage again. Walking out, people were cheering and I struck two poses. I felt excitement and was so happy to be up there, I’ve missed the stage so much and even if the stage was far from Sweden: I felt at home. But it wasn’t enough for me, I decided to get closer to the audience and started to wave my hands, telling them to cheer for me more. “Louder” I thought, “louder, it’s been TOO long!”. And they cheered higher. I struck two more poses, and then got off….feeling like a thousand splendid suns.

Afterwards more people came up and gave me compliments, telling me I should win or that I was their favorite. I was smiling like an idiot. After 15 minutes, they announced the winners: I didn’t even place. People told me it was not right, but I didn’t care.

Since, I did actually win. I got to get up on stage and get people to smile. I was proven wrong: my costume was actually competition material, since I had fun.

Afterwards we had to get back to get some sleep, we had to take an early flight the next day. I had trouble sleeping since I was so excited…it didn’t get easier when Fabian (who was a judge for the competition) told me that Brian Muir sat next to him as a fellow judge. Apparently he gave me a 9 out of 10. I was stunned…one of the creators of Darth Vader’s costume liked my cosplay and stage presence? And I was so hard on myself before the competition. It’s incredible how one can think so low on oneself, when other look and just smile at you.

On an early bus back to the airport, filled with people either half or completely asleep…while I was looking out the window, I was thinking about what this unexpected journey has given me. With a warm feeling in my heart, a tear going down my cheek…I smiled.

One day, I will return

Introduction – What the franchise meant to me

Growing up with social problems, video games were an escapism from anxiety and helped me cope with loneliness. Many franchises meant a lot to me, mostly from Nintendo as the Super Mario, Legend of Zelda and Metroid games have all given me wonderful memories. I grew up with the Nintendo entertainment system, Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64.... However, there were one franchise that made me buy a Playstation 2 instead of a Nintendo Gamecube: Metal Gear Solid.

"Kept you waiting, huh?"

When I was first introduced to the games, I was intrigued by the cut scenes and the graphics...and in time I slowly fell in love with the characters, the soundtrack and of course: the story of each game. The introduction of Metal Gear Solid, The twist of Metal Gear Solid 2, the emotional ending to Metal Gear Solid 3 and the satisfying conclusion of the MGS-saga in Metal Gear Solid 4 will probably never leave me and it became one of my inspirations to either become a game designer or story developer one day. Over the years, other games would inspire me: like Shadow of the Colossus or Pokémon, However Metal Gear Solid still had a special place in my heart and whenever news of a new installment of the franchise were unveiled: I was always excited!

Then, I played the two latest games: Peace Walker and Phantom Pain. I was curios as to how these prequels (or sequels to prequels) would serve the franchise, since I considering Portable ops a satisfying conclusion to the arc of Big Boss, and a good segway to Metal Gear Solid 4; so I wondered what more there was to explore about the man which would set motion to future events of the series. I first played Peace Walker...and honestly was pretty much disappointed but ignored it as I thought the game served as an intro to Ground Zero/Phantom Pain. Then I got my hands on the next games, and once again I was disappointed. By all means: the gameplay and presentation (at least in Phantom Pain) were amazing so you couldn't call it "a bad game"...but for a long time I still felt there was alot missing, things earlier games had that these games didn't. After some reflection, re-reading books on storytelling and even watching video essays on popular films, I finally got what was missing for me and decided to write this essay. With the help of Christopher Voglers work "The Writer's Journey" (1998) and "Creating Emotion in Games" (2003) by David Freeman , I'm going to present the flaws of the narrative. I have two main issues with the later prequels: characters and plot. I'm going to start with characters, since there is a lot of ground to cover in this subject and it is important to deal with it before we begin with the plot.

Part 1: The characters

Hideo Kojima did an amazing job creating so many memorable and well written characters. They have followed us as interesting side characters, intimidating bosses or intriguing villains that have all played a big part in the character arc of both Solid Snake and Naked Snake.

Of course not all characters have to play a big part in the Hero's Journey, however if your movie/book/game doesn't have any characters that play their part in a grand narrative...you're simply wasting them, and worst of all making the story less interesting. That's why we need to discuss Peace Walker and Phantom Pain: How do the characters interact with Snake? What traits do they have? What role do they play in the narrative?

The side characters – The importance of archetypes

In "Writers Journey" (1998), Christopher Vogler discusses several archetypes that are present in narratives. The most common and useful include:

Hero: often the protagonist, the one that will bring change, etc.

Mentor: the one that teaches or gives a gift to the hero in different ways.

Threshold guardian: the first obstacle for the hero, to test their resolve.

Herald: the one coming with the call of change or who motivates the hero.

Shape shifter: the one bringing doubt and suspense to a story.

Trickster: the troublemaker/clownish sidekick bringing humor to the story.

Shadow: the one bringing a challenge to the hero.

Ally: allies/friends helping the hero on their journey.

Here we can easily point out characters from earlier games in the franchise: Snake as the hero, Campbell as a mentor, EVA as the shape shifter, Liquid as the shadow, Otacon as the ally, Big Boss as the shape shifter and even Ocealot works as a threshold guardian. Often these archetypes are combined to make the characters even more interesting, but it only works if the combination serves a purpose for the story. This is where I will bring one of the best examples the franchise has offered us: The Boss. The Boss first serves as a mentor, guiding the player trough the basic game mechanics and even teaches Snake that it's important to be loyal to oneself, as a foreshadow of what would come. However, then she shape shift, and betrays Snake, to becomes the shadow that not only hurts him emotionally, but also forces him to fight her to save the world. Yet again....she shape shifts and it turns out that she was all along an ally, that not only saved the world, but helped Snake realize the faults in the government he works for. To just combine archetypes for the sake of it would ruin a character, however Kojima created a character with several archetypes; that each in their way helped the story become more intriguing, emotional and memorable. I could go on with other characters from earlier installments, but now it's time to discuss the side characters of the two latest prequels.

Peace Walker, in my opinion, lacks character archetypes that are portrayed interestingly. Closest thing would be Paz and Zadornov, as they both work as allies, shape shifters and shadows as the story progress. However, they don't appear in the game that much and sadly both of them lack enough character traits to make them interesting (more on "traits" later on). Moreover the focus of the plot seems to be more between Big Boss and the AI of The Boss, which in my opinion sounds great on paper...but was a wasted potential. The AI only share fragments of the characteristics of The Boss, and don't even connect with him. There is simply no chemistry to make me invest in the story (frankly, even Boss seems to be as disappointed as I am that the mentor/mother-figure he loved is just a computer now). Other than that, the rest of the characters may be archetypes needed in a good story but they aren't used that well: Hot Coldman serves only as a shadow, Chico is merely an ally, Huey is also just an ally,  Cecile is simply an ally...and so forth. Some play their part in a bigger role, others simply show up and are never seen again; thus making them completely pointless for the story. I'm not going to act like there weren't any pointless characters in the earlier installments, but they at least didn't take up that much space and/or got in the way of making us invested in the story. So in conclusion: the side character of Peace Walker, is a major disappointment.

Phantom Pain, to be fair, is an improvement when it comes to character design and actually made me more invested in the story. First of all: we get to see familiar faces as we met an older Ocelot, which in turn is not only an ally but also works as an mentor for Venom Snake...in the after credits they even throw in a moment that makes him a shape shifter. Kazuhira also shows up, also as a mentor, an ally and a shape shifter. Even Huey finally gets a more interesting mix, while being a ally, a shape shifter and a shadow. But sadly, from there on I was only disappointed. The femme fatale sniper, Quiet, may be an ally and a shape shifter but sadly she seems to be more of an eye candy than purposely created to push the story further in a interesting direction. Sure her shape shifting plays a part, but could as well been made by someone else, as she has a lack of connection with Venom Snake to make her part essential to the story. Code talker, again, had potential as a mentor and an ally, but played little part in the story other than exposition. He didn't bring any emotion to the story. And sadly...other than that the fact there aren't any side characters even worth mentioning, the ones who are left only play their archetype and ad nothing more to the table.

I have now presented archetypes and concluded that the lack of good archetypes/potential mixes is one of the things bringing down the characters of Peace Walker and Phantom Pain. However that isn't the only thing bringing down the characters, as while we discuss the villains of the franchise we need to discuss character traits and how to use them.

The villains – The importance of traits

In his book, "Creating emotion in games" (2003), David Freeman discusses in one chapter the importance of making characters interesting and making them more than what their archetype is. To make a major NPC interesting, he creates something called a "character diamond" (Freeman, 2003, page 46). He explains further that it's always good to try to give your character at least four different traits, one for each corner of the diamond. A example of a diamond would look something like this:

These traits work as major facets of the characters personality and guides his/her actions plus how they speak, except for appropriate emotions depending on the situation (Example: being betrayed makes him/her angry, even if the anger is not one of the core traits). It's important to see this diamond as a form of blueprint for the character, since these traits are in fact what make a character interesting! Also important to note: That a major NPC can have 3 or 5 traits to be interesting, but no less (it makes them one dimensional) or more (makes them too complex). Just remember: the traits must govern how the character sees the world, how she/he thinks, speaks and acts.

If we look at all of the earlier Metal Gear Solid games, there are a bunch of bosses with distinct personalities and traits. Let's look at one of the classic bosses from the franchise: Psycho Mantis.

How would his potential character diamond look like? Something like this:

1. Telepathic (can read minds, move objects with his mind)
2. Sadistic (couldn't help to toy with Meryl before the fight)
3. Breaks the fourth wall (Checking memory card, knows there is a controller)
4. Burdened with a tragic past (his father hated him, village burned down)

If we were to discuss a villain from the same game, we would have to look at Liquid Snake's traits:

1. High level of intelligence (speaks several languages, has incredible knowledge of genetics)
2. War veteran (Served in the Gulf War, so he got plenty of experience)
3. Aware of his mortality (seeks the genes of Big Boss to improve his own genes and wants a cure to "fox-die")
4. Follows his "genetic identity" (aka, he believes he can be nothing but a soldier and a succesor to Big Boss).

Not only are these traits used properly as we see them whenever Liquid confronts Snake, but they are also traits that can be shown in many different ways (which Kojima does successfully in several moments in the game). Another good example of a villain would be if we look into Gene, the villain of Portable Ops:

1. Underwent experiments (enhanced speed, strength and charisma)
2. Manipulative (only cares about his ambition, makes soldier kills each other for show)
3. Misanthropic (looks down on human life, only sees the world/humankind for its violent tendencies)
4. Ambitious (wants to create a nation for/by soldiers, to control history)

I could go on with more characters from earlier games in the franchise, but you get my point. Now it's time to discuss the traits of some of the bosses and villains of Peace Walker and Phantom Pain.

Peace Walker, first of all, has a lack of human bosses: tanks, metal gear, shagohod, Helicopters etc can't have traits and makes no connection with the player. Considering the bosses in earlier games, this is a huge let down as every game before had several memorable characters Snake fought. However there are villains we can discuss; Hot Coldman for instance, has a diamond like this:

1. Cunning (as he was involved in plans that came to be Snake Eater)
2. Believes in nuclear deterrence (Believes that only with nukes, there can be peace)
3. Devoted to his project (willing to harm/kill those that stand in his way)

This character sure has potential and his two first traits could've been explored more throughout the game, but sadly we barely see Hot Coldman most of the game. His character could've gained more with some more clashes with the protagonists’ ideals (more in this later when I discuss "polarity"). As we said earlier, a character with only 3 traits can be interesting but sadly those 3 traits are not used properly in this narrative.

Phantom Pain suffers from the same problems: even if Quiet shows up as a boss, she's the only character that acts as a boss, since the other "bosses" are once again either elite soldiers or vehicles/robots. But how would Quiets diamond look like? Something like this:

1. Barely talks (hence the name, plus whenever she speaks it spreads a lethal virus)
2. Skilled sniper
3. photosynthetic (gets her energy by absorbing sunlight and drink rain trough her skin)

The photosynthetic aspect sounds more interesting on paper than it actually is, since they compare her powers to another boss called "The End", that was also photosynthetic. But by comparing her to an old man that is heavily clothed, it becomes very clear that the most interesting trait she has is used solely as fan-service, and other than that they never mention that trait again. Besides, The End was interesting because the photosynthetic part was just a small detail. His whole diamond is:

1. Over 100 years old (an age which brings experience, skill and wisdom)
2. Skilled sniper (called "the father of sniping")
3. Photosynthetic
4. Connected to the nature (could control and speak with the forest)

Not only are all of these traits very interesting on their own, they also make great combinations with each other and are used fully in the boss fight...making it one of the most memorable fights in the MGS-franchise! With the right combinations, even a simple trait as "skilled sniper" can become MUCH more interesting. Anyways, let's get back to Phantom Pain and finish this chapter off by discussing Skull face and his traits:

1. Skilled assassin (managed to kill historical leaders and make it look like natural causes)
2. Brilliant strategist (lures Venom Snake again and again into his traps)
3. Victim of war (allied bombing gave him his hideous scars and seeks revenge for his loss of cultural identity from occupation)

These traits are in fact interesting, the last one specifically serves as a motivation for his goals to end English culture to dominate most of human civilization, and thus reverting different cultures to their original languages. This makes him into a villain with both philosophical and cultural ideals, something you rarely see! But sadly, the first trait is only used as back story, and once again we don't see enough of him to see his ideals work against that of Venom Snakes ideals. There is a lot to talk about in his back story but we don't see him take enough action to make him interesting as a main villain. I will give you this: he would've been a really good side character, maybe even on the level of Revolver Ocelot! But not interesting enough to be the antagonist.

As you can see, the two latest games offer little in the character department even if there are some small exceptions like Skull Face. Yet we're far from done as there is one more major thing left to discuss: the stories these games offer us.

Part 2: The story

As you noticed in the earlier chapter, I mentioned that traits are only as good as you allow them to be and it requires a good story/narrative to make the most of them. For example: it would not be interesting to see a killer clown (1. psychopathic, 2. Skilled juggler, 3. tragic back story and 4. Immortal) in a game set in WW4, on a battlefield on the moon, as the traits serve little purpose in the setting and will not do much in working with other characters. And how does a story about WW4 affect this killer clown, what will happen after all the challenges? Is there any polarity to make things more interesting? It's time to discuss how the components of a good story have played out in the earlier games of the franchise and how they add up in the two later prequels.

Character Arc


According to Christopher Vogler, a character arc is a term used to describe the gradual stages of change in a character (The Writer’s Journey, page 205). There is one important thing a good story is supposed to bring: change. What would Star Wars be if Luke didn't get in touch with the force? What would Blade Runner be if Deckard didn't understand the authenticity of replicant life? Sure, it would probably still be entertaining in a visual or action-packed way, but not as interesting or even important to us, since whenever a character goes through an important/rough/epic ordeal...there is bound to be change. That is, if the story is done well.

Sure, I'm not going to act like the earlier games executed Snake's character arc perfectly as there could be more stages of development. Video games do have a long way to go when it comes to storytelling. However, you could definitely identify a character arc in the earlier MGS games!

Metal Gear Solid 3 for an example: we first get to know Naked Snake as a skilled yet politically naive soldier who believes his country works for what is the greater good. He shows great loyalty to his superiors. Through the course of the game he starts to question the government as he's ordered to kill his mentor/mother figure, The Boss. In the end he succeeds in his mission, and with it becomes Big Boss, but gets to learn how she only died because she stayed loyal to a government that simply didn't value her life after all the sacrifices she had done in the past.

Metal Gear Solid Portable Ops takes another step in Big Boss' character arc: still questioning his government, Big Boss retired but is pulled into a terrorist conflict that could launch the world into a nuclear war. During the course of the game, he takes control of his own military unit and fights, not only for the world, but also his brothers in arms. He learns that, once again, his government has tried to use this terrorist conflict for their own purposes and gets the offer to join them. This time, he finally learns that his loyalty doesn't have to be with any world government, instead he decides to be loyal to himself and not live the life his old mentor did.

(These two examples were important to make, since these stories make for excellent examples of how to use polarity in your story. More on that soon)

Polarity

According to Vogler, a story needs a single theme (a spine) to unite it all into a coherent work (The Writer’s Journey, page 315). However it also needs a two-ness, a dimension of duality to create and make room for potential progression/action. There are several examples: a simple one would be if the hero wants to save the world there must be someone who wants to destroy it. A more complex one discusses different positions in the society, like the underdog Rocky gets the chance to fight the heavy weight champion Apollo Creed. It's not by any means necessary to have two polarities struggle against each other to make a good story, but many times it has helped to make a story more interesting. You can find polarity in the earlier Metal Gear Solid titles, especially in the two first prequels!

Metal Gear Solid 3: Naked Snake and the Boss serve as polarities in many ways. To name two examples: one is a tired veteran that has started to question her loyalties while the other wouldn't dare to question his government and one has been named "the mother of our special forces" while the other is a product of her legacy. Although these examples may not be the most interesting, they sure serve as passable polarities and helps makes the story more interesting.

Portable Ops probably even brings an even more interesting polarity between Big Boss and Gene: one is an authorian leader while the other is a more democratic leader. Why this single example makes it more interesting than the polarities of the earlier game, is that we truly explore this throughout out the game: While Big Boss cares for his comrades and gets recruits with his idealistic charisma, Gene uses his enhanced abilities to gather troops to his cause...and he gladly kills them to obtain his goals or to simply demonstrate his power. Gene even presents his plans of creating a nation for soldiers and gives Big Boss an offer to join his cause....with Boss refusing, citing that Gene has "phony ideals", and believes an nation for soldiers should give more freedom and respect to its recruits. Thanks to the polarity and how it's used, the character arc of Big Boss becomes much more interesting and the plot itself serves as an explanation of how he later would make such a mark on history and get so many followers (more on this later on in the chapter "Purpose").

And now we come to the later prequel games.

Peace Walker, has no polarity worth mentioning. There is no clash on polarizing ideologies or characters that are connected/similar but have turned out in two different ways....as Hot Coldmans ideology barely has any impact on Big Boss' character arc and there aren't any similarities between them that make us question what makes them alike. Again, there could've been some polarity worth mentioning between Boss and Big Boss (Man/machine) but again: AI Boss is just shoved sideways most of the plot. It's plain and simple: one wants to nuke the world, while our hero doesn't (which doesn't make sense as he later on would threaten the world with nukes). We have seen this before in the Metal Gear Saga, but at least there was something more to the story of each game (identity, loyalty, leadership etc).

Phantom Pain, does actually have SOME polarity thanks to Skull Face. As both Skull Face and "Big Boss" (I know, I'll get to it) are highly skilled soldiers that have affected the course of history incredibly. But while one of them has been hailed as a legendary soldier and inspired soldiers all over the world, the other has stayed in the shadows and only been known to his superiors/grunts. In other words: in some ways, you could argue Skull Face is an underdog, and in other narratives he could've been the hero (like Rocky). However, 2 things stop this polarity from becoming interesting:
1. As mentioned before, there is a lack of interaction between these two characters
2. ..."Big Boss" is actually Venom Snake, an impostor revealed at the end, making the polarity in theory non existing.

It isn't easy to create an interesting polarity that matches the theme of the story. However, one should still try go beyond "destroyer and savior of the world" since polarity is a great way to properly explore themes or craft excellent character arcs. Speaking of themes, time to discuss how the earlier games used settings with the story’s theme!

Setting and themes

To make the themes fit better with the story, one should consider using the right setting to make the themes more relevant to the protagonist. Look at Blade Runner for an example: one of the themes in this movie is examining humanity. Therefore, setting a story in the future where technology has come to great lengths to create artificial life, makes the question "what makes one human" more interesting. Sure we could set it in today’s society or in a fantasy environment; however it's still more interesting to see how our own technology will, in the future, make humans look more into themselves. Will we hate it? Will we change? Let the audience think about it (because dear god, more movies need to make us think).

Metal Gear Solid 3 deals with themes of loyalty, a soldier’s duty and how politics’ changing nature means that there will never be such a thing as an "eternal enemy". These themes fits very well with the Cold War: an era defined by drastic political change, soldiers sacrificed and forgotten in covert ops, a world split in two and how many scientists, soldiers and civilians betray their countries and defect. In other words: a whole world in a long and dramatic identity crisis....and Big Boss gets to experience it on a personal level.

Most of these themes are carried over to Portable Ops, but this time it's set during the later stages of the Cold War: a time when America and the Soviet tried to slow down the arms race; people would see that the cold war would not last much longer but also wonder what awaits them if the war actually ends. In other words, a new era was about to begin and the conflict between Big Boss and Gene serve as a form of allegory of this new beginning: no longer would one choose between "east" or "west", but follow a new and true calling. Hence the themes and the setting play of each other very well.

Peace Walker, honestly, uses its setting pretty well. It does incorporate the theme of nuclear deterrence and mentions how ironically nuclear warheads are in fact the reason the world is at "peace" in the Cold War. There are discussions between the characters of how this rivalry between the US and the USSR affect even small countries, like Nicaragua, and in some ways likens the effect Big Boss has on the local guerilla with Che Guevara. The only problem I actually have with the games themes and setting is that it should've been used before the setting and themes of Portable Ops. It feels messy to have a game discussing the end of the Cold War and how it would affect the soldiers, then to have the next game discuss nuclear deterrence and the effects the foreign politics the super power has on the third world. If it were switched around, I would actually say Peace Walker used its themes and setting very well!

Phantom Pain, however, never mentions or discusses the setting or uses it to explore the themes of the story. In fact, could’ve might as well have been played after the Cold War and would still look pretty much the same. There are soviet soldiers present, but it was never discussed how they affect the local population, or how the soldiers themselves see their future in Afghanistan. It could might as well have been soldiers of the Mujahedeen or any other tribal militia. Same thing applies when Big Boss goes to South America and Africa: no actual discussions are presented about the actual settings; they are just simply road blocks to progress the story. Even Skull Face's goals doesn't necessarily fit the Cold War...in fact, it would probably be more interesting to see him tackle native languages and nationality after the Cold War, since it was then nationalism flourished, and once again different ethnic groups would struggle for dominance. In short, the setting is there....but never properly used.

And before we go to the final part of "Plot", I must address: it's not needed to fully use the setting to make a good story. However once you made a game that did so; you are more or less obliged to continue to do so with its sequels.

And now for the last part, "purpose"

Purpose

This is the main reason I decided to write this essay. This is for me the primary reason that the later prequel games of the franchise are the weakest from a story perspective.

I remember way back, when I listened to Doug Walkers review of Star Wars Episode 2:the attack of the Clones. After going through the flaws of the film, he finishes of with mentioning something his brother said: "What's the point of this film and the last one?", in which he meant that you could might as well skip Episode 1 and 2 to go directly to Episode 3 to understand the backstory of Darth Vader and even how the Emperor took control of the whole galaxy. The two first episodes simply had no purpose to the actual story, they only brought up small details that we could've picked up with Episode 3.

It was then that I realized the same thing goes for the Metal Gear Solid Franchise: the story of Big Boss could've...no, should have ended with Portable Ops.

Since the story of Metal Gear Solid 3 has the purpose of telling us from where the legendary soldier Big Boss came from, where he got his skills and what made him start questioning the government he fought for so long; It even bring more light to the origins of the illuminati-esque organization called "The Philosophers" and what their goals were. While Portable Ops even play a bigger part: the origins of Foxhound comes to light, we finally understand what makes Big Boss completely break of from his government and where he got the funds that laid the foundations of "Outer Heaven". We finally get to meet Frank Jaeger and we get to witness the end of the Philosophers and the beginning of The Patriots. Both of these prequels gave us the most important parts of Big Boss' past and the rest was explained in Metal Gear Solid 4.

Peace Walker and Phantom Pain are on the other hand redundant story wise. We  know why Big Boss would break from any form of organization/government, we already know how he could create his nation of soldiers, we already know he and Zero would stay rivals until death....there is, in other words, nothing of importance presented in these prequels. Closest thing would be the Venom Snake-twist, which in my opinion we could do without. So to completely understand Big Boss' origin, his character arc and how he founded Outer Heaven, you just need to play the two first prequels.

One would probably think "So it's in other words fan service...but isn't that a good thing?", which I would reply: yes, it's clearly meant to be fan service for the MGS-fandom...but sadly it's not good fan service. Proper fan service would've given us something that longtime fans of the franchise would enjoy; I will later on present better examples of fan service in the chapter "What it could've been".

So this is it, nothing more to write about? Nope, got time for the last stretch.

Part 3: Other topics and Conclusion

I have now covered characters and story, but still, I can't finish of this essay like this. Not only because it would be an abrupt ending (like Phantom Pain had), but I feel like there are some other details and disclaimers left to mention to make sure there aren't any misunderstandings!

Storytelling – cassette tapes and why they should be banned

"But Stendhal! There is more to the characters than you have written in this essay! If you go into the pause menu and play the cassette tapes you learn more of them!"

Yes, that is actually correct! You get more character traits and more back story if you take your time and listen to the endless amount of cassette tapes. That's why you play a game right? To pause the gameplay, click through all the cassettes to get some exposition and extra details on the characters and the setting of the world?! ...I would not agree.

I remember when I played Final Fantasy XIII, and was so incredibly disappointed that I actually had to pause the game and read up some of the history of the world to actually understand what happened after just a couple of minutes of story. 

Two games, one flaw

Look at earlier Final Fantasy games, like Final Fantasy IX: sure there was exposition but it was in game, there were events and incidents the player had to go through that gave us insight of the worlds and societies that exists, and most of all: the story took it's time to discuss deeper themes until we got to know the characters properly, like any great narrative has (Lord of the Rings, for instance). If the story writers of Final Fantasy XIII insisted to put so much text in the game, they could have as well written a book instead of designing a game.

So; even if there would be details in the cassette tapes that makes the setting more relevant or characters more interesting...it is a grave error to the storytelling in video games if I have to interrupt the gameplay to actually understand what the game wants to say. Correct story design should make use of the gameplay to tell the story.

An example to follow

What it could've been

I mentioned earlier that if the later prequels are meant to be seen as fan service, they could've been done better.

I believe one thing they could've done: have one or two games where the focus of the story is not on Big Boss. His most important character arc and backstory has already been explored, and even if there would be more to learn, it wouldn't be necessary to make him the protagonist of the game. A side character, like mentor or ally, perhaps, but not main character. "But if not Big Boss, who?".

One idea would be if the game was still a tactical espionage game as Peace Walker/Phantom Pain; in other words, same gameplay and same interface, but instead of Big Boss going into these missions, it's one of the most loyal soldiers that ever served under him: Frank Jaeger, aka Grey Fox

Not only does he have interesting traits, but he is also biogenetically enhanced and skilled so he would work well as a power fantasy protagonist. Moreover it would be interesting to see his character arc: how did this soldier, with lack of any identity or sense of belonging in this world, come to be so close to Big Boss that he would betray his closest friend, Solid Snake? This also opens up so many paths story wise: we finally get to see firsthand how he would adopt Naomi as his sister after killing her parents, how his battle style differs from when he becomes a cyborg in the early 2005, his first encounter with Solid Snake....just one of these things could work well for a game! And what about side missions, how about he gets to meet future members of Foxhound on the battlefield, like Sniper Wolf? Or what if Sniper Wolf is a playable character...or a main character in the sequel?

I could go on, but what I'm trying to say is that at the end of Portable Ops: Big Boss had nothing more of interest, his backstory was finished. If Kojima focused on a character connected to Big Boss, it could've become something more interesting.

And now, it's time to wrap up this essay.

Conclusion: Hideo Kojima

Phew, it's been a long read...hasn't it? Sure, there were a lot of negative things as I had to make an honest and critical study of the two later games. From a storytelling standpoint...they aren't simply that good. If you enjoyed the games, keep enjoying them and don't let me take that from you! I wanted to present why I didn't enjoy Peace Walker/Phantom Pain as much as the earlier games. I still love the Metal Gear Solid Franchise and have a tremendous respect for Hideo Kojima.

Might sound weird to say after writing a 6 000+ essay critically reviewing his two latest works in the franchise, but here are my two reason this particular game designer is still an inspiration to me:

1. Konami: Hideo Kojima knew himself that one day, he would run out of ideas and wouldn't be able to keep the story and characters as fresh as in the first games. That's why he actually tried to leave the franchise behind and get into new projects. In fact, at first, Metal Gear Solid 3 was supposedto be his last game.  However, he agreed to also work on Metal Gear Solid 4 because his fans begged him to (some even sent death threats!). This he agreed to do as he could finally tie the knot and end the story for Solid Snake, which he did brilliantly. That was supposed to be the end of his involvement with Metal Gear Solid. However Konami wanted the franchise to continue and he was forced to continue to work on Peace Walker and Phantom Pain. You recall how I discussed that Peace Walker/Phantom Pain were kind of similar to Star Wars Episode I/II, that the story served little purpose? Well, here the main difference is that not only are the games stories more competent, but also Kojima, unlike Lucas, had to make the story under pressure and didn't want to be any part of it to begin with. George Lucas on the other hand...had all the motivation, resources, tons of Yes-men etc., and STILL made two widely criticized movies. One cannot help to still admire that Kojima could make the products he did under the circumstances. Any other game designer might have given us games barely playable! Even if they don't hold up to the earlier games, there were at least some characters, ideas and designs that had something going for it. Therefore, I still hold lots of respect for this game designer and can't wait to see what games he will cook up next.

2. The franchise itself: Whenever I talked about the flaws of Peace Walker/Phantom Pain, I kept on going back to the brilliance of the earlier entries of the franchise. How memorable the characters were, how the stories made a much bigger impact on you, how the settings were used exceptionally...I always came back to those games and realized more and more how well made they are. Sure, the storytelling is dated and now new games like The Last of US’s gives us better examples how games can tell stories in a more pleasant way. But writing this essay made me realize what a big leap forward Metal Gear Solid took story design back in the day, how it inspired so many game designers (including me) to make games and to create stories and worlds that no one has experienced before. I could write another essay that mentions all the reasons this franchise is amazing and has struck a chord with millions of gamers all over the world, I could discuss anything: the themes, the characters, the mechanical designs, the philosophies, the story and even the movies that inspired every detail of the games! However, I don't think that's going to happen. First of all, it would be much longer than this essay, and it would take too much time to write, considering I got other essays to write and cosplaying to do. Second of all...or most of all: many of you that have read this essay already know how amazing this franchise is, maybe even been affected by it. I can then imagine you already have an impression worth writing about, bring your own perspective to it all! Heck, maybe even write an essay to respond to this essay? Or maybe an entirely independent essay that talks about the graphical aspects, and how they inspired you? Or all the movie references film buffs would love? To anyone of you that wants to give us your perspective, new perspectives...please, do it. I don't think it's enough to just buy the games to truly enjoy them: I think we should analyze them, discuss them and make something out of the enjoyment you've felt!

Some write texts of what they enjoy while others make costumes...I do both!

Creating something is the best way to, not only show your love or passion, but to also broaden our horizon for others whether it is trough with ideas, memories or inspiration. Hideo Kojima did it for me, and very likely for all of you reading this essay. 

Reference list

Vogler, C. (1998). The Writer’s Journey: Mythic Structure for Writers. Third Edition. Michigan: Sheridan Books

Freeman, D. (2003). Creating Emotion in Games. San Francisco: New Riders.