hot  /  reviews  /  videos  /  cblogs  /  qposts


kmax's blog

6:48 PM on 03.30.2013

Are Kojima and Hayter trolling?

I was thinking prior of Haytor-gate of writing a piece on a whole other subject, but ever since the reveal that David Hayter, the iconic voice actor for Snake, had been dropped, I just had to change course.

I was, like many of you guys, also very taken by surprise when it was revealed that Hayter had been dropped from MGS V. I watched the GDC presentation and was in awe of what Kojima Productions had crafted, but was at the same time, I was startled by the fact that there was a complete new voice in the trailer, one that wasnít Hayterís at all. Not long after the reveal, Hayter came out on twitter and revealed indirectly that he had been dropped from the franchise.

To me, this really came as a shock. I consider Metal Gear Solid to be the absolute best game of all time, and having been a fan ever since its release in 1998, it was inconceivable to even imagine Snake without David Hayter. Snake IS David Hayter. The man has served as the character in 7 games for over 15 years. Heís a massive fan of the game, having played them all, and is deeply rooted within the franchise. He even took a pay cut at one point in order to bring in the other actors when doing Twin Snakes (A remake of MGS).

Thatís dedication.

As you could imagine, outrage broke out, with polarizing opinions on the decision. Some welcomed the decision, while others were understandably distraught over the fact that their icon had been dropped. Not long after, Kojima did an interview with Geoff Keighley back at Gametrailers, clarifying the reason why he made the decision that he did. He said that he wanted to reinvent the series, by bringing in a new VA for the role (Kiefer Sutherland is the suspect).

Had Kojima gone mad? The more I thought about it all, the more I started to read between the lines here.

The conclusion Iíve come up with is that this is in fact a big ruse by Kojima, and David Hayterís totally in on it.

Kojimaís no stranger to generating buzz and controversy, and is known to troll a great deal when he announces his games. From the MGS 2 fiasco, right down to the presentation of the relation between Ground Zeroes and The Phantom Pain, he always keeps us guessing, and surprise us when we least expect it. Hereís what he had to say in an interview with Edge earlier this month :

"I do think itís important to leave hints, but, in a sense, I think itís important to mislead people with hints because I think if somethingís too predictable then itís no longer fun," Kojima said. "I think that's the problem with many Hollywood sequels; you get exactly what you expect."

"But what I want to do, is make people look forward to a game by watching the trailers and say "'Hey, that looks great.' But then, when they actually play it, they have this sort of epiphany where they realise 'Oh, so thatís what that was,'" he added. "And it all kind of comes together and clicks in their head. I think that's very important that you leave some sense of discovery for the player."

Everything weíve seen so far has been carefully planned by Kojima. Down to every detail.
After people figured out that The Phantom Pain was in fact MGS V only an hour after its premiere at the VGAís, I believe that Haytor-gate is Kojimaís redemption.

Let me explain. So far, weíve seen gameplay for both Ground Zeroes and The Phantom Pain. Kojima got a lot criticism for supposedly dropping Hayter, but at the same time keeping the Japanese VA, Akio Otsuka still playing as Snake. Double standards, much?

However, what we take for granted here is that weíve only heard Otsuka in Ground Zeroes. We havenít really seen a Japanese verison of The Phantom Pain. Weíre just assuming that heís Snake in The Phantom Pain as well, when in fact, that hasnít been confirmed at all.

So, what we got was Ground Zeroes in Japanese, while The Phantom Pain was in English. Coincedence, or pre-planned?

Kojima needs to differentiate between the voices of Big Boss and Solid Snake at some point, as both characters will meet each other sooner rather than later. As we all know, both Hayter and Otsuka have been playing both characters to this point, except for in Metal Gear Solid 4 where they only played as Solid Snake (Big Boss was played by Richard Doyle).

So while it might be true that Hayterís been replaced to a certain degree, it doesnít mean that heís been replaced from the whole game. Whatís more likely is that theyíre going with another voice actor for Big Boss in The Phantom Pain, which would in fact make sense. Having David Hayter play Snake in Ground Zeroes, and Richard Doyle in The Phantom Pain would be the best outcome, as it would be consistent with what weíve seen so far.

Big Boss in MGS 4, played by Richard Doyle.

Earlier this month, Hayter posted a poll on twitter, asking people how theyíd feel if he
werenít involved in the new Metal Gear. During the presentation at the GDC of the Phantom Pain, he pretty much stated that he was dropped from the game, and has been rather active with remarks pertaining that on his twitter ever since. Kind of strange, considering that this is what he said after the announcment at the VGAís back in December:

@DavidBHayter so what was your take on The Phantom Pain trailer?Ē It made my arm hurt.

Another suspicious thing is that if you visit David Hayterís official website, he has posted a rather cryptic video, with the message ĒTHE END?Ē at the end. Check it out:

Might that short clip allude to the fact that Hayterís passing on the role of Big Boss after Ground Zeroes? We know that Big Boss is going to have an accident at the end of Ground Zeroes, since heís in a coma between both parts in MGS V, so it would really be the perfect time to make the transition.

So in the end, is this a cunningly planned ruse, or do we take it all at face value and accept the fact that Hayter is gone from the franchise? If we look closely at the history and the information that have been presented at hand, I think that we can deduce that at the end of the day, there is valid suspicion to believe that some serious trolling is going on here.   read

8:14 AM on 03.23.2013

What goes up, must come down

There have been literally dozens of players in the console industry, all of whom that have ferociously been competing with each other by producing cutting edge technology and creating great games to the benefit and enjoyment of us consumers. Many console makers have existed during the rather limited time period that the gaming industry has existed in. Some, have fallen into the abyss of oblivion, while a few remain, fighting the fight to this day. Times evolve, and so do the expectations. We want better, and we want more like never before.

Trends change, and with more important focus on the interactive experience, games are more epic in scale, while the mainstream market has become more important like never before. After the success of the IPhone and Facebook, social gaming has been a market that has shaped and pushed the gaming industry into a position where many are uncertain of its future. The economical climate has gotten tougher; it's not as easy to make money like it once was. With the next generation upon us, we've witnessed various different strategies utilised by console manufactures, all of whom have been carefully constructed to appease and excite the general consumer.

With the PlayStation 4, Sony has decided to keep the hardcore consumer in focus while also trying to have a stronger emphasis on the social experience this time around. With the PS3 still producing and bringing forward quality games and exclusives this late in the day, it's no question that Sony has stepped up their game to not only defend their own position, but they've also shown that they believe in the AAA-industry, even though it's an market that is bleeding its shares to the rapid growth of social games.

Microsoft has been rather quiet at the end of the cycle, having had a bigger emphasis on the social experience these last few years - and by going by the leaks and information we've seen so far, the Nextbox isn't really going to get the same focus gaming wise, like its predecessor once did back in its hay day. It's been a while since I've been genuinely excited about an Xbox title. Microsoft has been soul searching, and I don't think I'm far off in saying that there are many of us who are really curious if they still believe in their hardcore fan base like they once did. It'll be very interesting to see their vision with the Nextbox.

Last, but certainly not least by any means, is the Japanese video game company that literally brought back the gaming industry back from its knees back in the 80's. Nintendo showed the world that games were still were relevant back then, and not some fad that would fade away to obscurity. Japanese video game companies were kings back in the day - with stiff competition from Sega, Nintendo managed to produce legendary games, state of the art consoles, and the best selling handheld of all time, paving the way for the industry forward. With the home friendly environment in mind, Nintendo proved themselves to be a force to be reckoned with, helping establish an industry that today has passed even the likes of the music and movie industry. Not bad for a company that was originally founded as a card company.

With the rapid growth of the gaming industry in the late 80's and early 90's, it brought other companies attention to take the industry seriously and enter the gaming space, one of whom being Sony, introducing the PlayStation in 94. Nintendo managed to stay in the console war, moving from the Super Nintendo to the highly acclaimed N64. With a strong lineup of games with their new console, Nintendo managed to craft some of the most popular and recognized games of all time.

After enjoying masive success with the N64, despite the tough competition from Sony, it was time for the introduction of their new console, the GameCube. During this period, Sony released the PlayStation 2 while Microsoft decided to enter the console war with the introduction of the Xbox. Nintendo had for the first time come to terms with the grim realities of brutal competition. The GameCube failed to grasp the market share in the same fashion that its successful predecessor once managed to do. With the hardcore market in focus, the competition meant that many game developers would focus to put their third party titles on other consoles. Nintendoís winning formula would be tested for the first time, as its appeal was perceived as too family oriented by the evolving market.

With publishers literally bleeding money, many decided to pull the plug midway through production, while others decided to put some of their games that were meant to be exclusives on other consoles as well, porting them over to competitors (Resident Evil 4 being a primary example). Things wasnít exactly smooth sailing for Nintendo. While this would be the first time that the company faced major problems in the console space, it would certainly not be the last.

With the flop of the GameCube, Nintendo was scrambling to figure out a way how to make the once successful strategy they relied on to work properly again, just like it once did. Only a year after the introduction of GameCube, Nintendo installed a new president to lead the company. Satoru Iwata took the role to continue to lead the Japanese flagship with the same vision to glory that once made them successful. Nintendo would continue their quest towards success with the introduction of Nintendo DS. While it initially had a tough start, the DS would become the best selling video game console of all time, with over 157 million units sold to date.

However, it wasnít until 2005 when the tides would turn for Nintendo. With the next generation cycle around the corner, Nintendo would present their latest console. What was initially known by its prototype name Nintendo Revolution, would become what we know it as today: the Wii. Nintendo acknowledged with the failure of the GameCube that there was no point in competing power wise against the other consoles, focusing instead on the loyal Nintendo fan base and the mainstream market, the latter of which would prove to be a goldmine.

While Sony and Microsoft were fighting for the market share in an overly saturated market, Nintendo saw an opportunity to seize the living rooms of families outside the gaming sphere, aiming for a wider demographic. With a combination of successful vision, and simply being in the right place at the right time, the Wii became an instant hit upon its launch in 2006, far outselling itís competition by a large margin. In fact, according to the NDP, in the first half of 2007 in the United States alone, the Wii sold more units than the PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360 - combined.

deal with it

With the overly success of the Wii, Nintendo had successfully regained its position as the leading player in the industry. Many publishers that once snubbed Nintendo came back with their tail between their legs, all wanting a piece of the action that Nintendo was bringing. After the financial crisis, Nintendo felt the full force of its effect in 2009, wiping out over half of itís stock value from its peak in 2007. With the introduction of DSi, Nintendo managed to recoup some itís shares with strong sales worldwide, seeing a nice boost in 2010 and 2011.

However, ever since then, things have been bleak. After the Wii had run its course, and with a lot of speculation and rumours going about a Wii HD coming out, Nintendo announced their brand new console, the Wii U. After going through a tough period thanks to the economic climate and the evolving digital market, Nintendo decided to create a console that wouldnít alienate the hardcore market. Many was confused initially, as Nintendo were coy on specifically stating that the Wii U was a next generation console. I remember when I saw the presentation that my initial reaction was that the Wii U was a new controller, but to my suprise, it really was a complete new system.

Nedless to say, the Wii U flopped, and here we are today.

Nintendo's ride through the years

But why did it flop? Why are Nintendo back in the same situation they once were in, and what should they do?

The reasons are far and between, but Iíll go through a round of things I believe really went wrong for Nintendo. With the financial crisis plummeting the value within the gaming industry, we began see the rise of social media. With the likes of Apple making its launch with the IPhone, and Facebook on the rise, social gaming began to shrink the market that Nintendo was so dependant on. Casual gamers moved from the Wii to their phones and devices, and Nintendo was left standing. With Nintendo hurt, Sony and Microsoft began to take notice by applying heat to take what was left of the market Nintendo helped to establish, as well as secure its own casual space.

With the introduction of Kinect, Microsoft focused to drift away from its hardcore market and focus more on the mainstream experience. Sony likewise introduced the Move, but instead focused on maintaining to grasp hold of the hardcore market that it had been doing ever since its inception.

With the casual gamer abandoning Nintendo, and its competitors holding on to its own casual gamers, Nintendo had to do something. Left scrambling yet again, Nintendo had a tough choice to make. With consumers demanding more from games, both performance wise and gaming wise, Nintendo couldnít rely on the games they were producing on alone. They had to somehow take market share from the other two - but how would they do that? Nintendo and the hardcore market have been alienating each other for so long that they were practically living in parallel universes, so Nintendo really had an incredibly difficult challenge to face, but they had to gamble it up.

They did this by launching the Wii U early. With talks about the next generation of consoles, Nintendo decided that it would seal up market share before the PS4 and Nextbox had any time to gain momentum. Unfortunately for Nintendo, the message they tried to send out was confusing, and didnít really make any sense for the consumer. ĒWho exactly was this console for? Ē, I remembered asking myself. It feels like Nintendo had no sense of direction, that they wanted, but they couldnít. Mixing in hardcore elements with the mainstream elements Nintendo are famous for didnít make any sense at all.

The biggest mistake Nintendo did with the Wii U is to underestimate the hardcore market. The hardcore gamers are a loyal bunch, and are the expert market when it comes to what makes quality games. They canít be swayed with a half-assed attempts to seduce them, it just doesnít work that way. This is an entirely different beast from the mainstream market. Nintendo needs to be genuine with themselves and realise that if they want to compete in the hardcore market, they need to appease the hardcore gamer.

They need to become more edgy, and step out of their comfort zone by changing. That means more power and more content, to really stick out against the competition that is already in place. Itís a tough decision they are going to have to make going forward, but it is a vital one if they want to compete against the likes of Sony and Microsoft.

If they arenít willing to take that big leap forward, then unfortunately, they will need to reconsider their position. The positive thing for Nintendo is that they have such financial stability that they arenít at the point where they have to do a Sega, so they have time on their side to try to make sense of things, but the clock is counting. With Sony and Microsoft coming out with the 8th generation of consoles coming out later this year, and with the weak sales from the Wii U, the console could be rendered obsolete before it even had a chance to make an impact.

Nintendo needs to be honest with themselves and decide on the direction they want to go on, and really commit to the choice that they are ultimately are going have to make.

Anything other than that will be, most likely, the end of the ride.


Back to Top

We follow moms on   Facebook  and   Twitter
  Light Theme      Dark Theme
Pssst. Konami Code + Enter!
You may remix stuff our site under creative commons w/@
- Destructoid means family. Living the dream, since 2006 -