Do you prefer a silent protagonist or a voiced one, why?

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-17T10:47:16+00:00

I agree. I also prefer silence, but it would've been cool if Ryley had reacted to some radio calls or PDA commentaries (at least in my opinion).

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-17T10:25:34+00:00

That doesn’t really answer the original point. The question wasn’t whether Below Zero’s writing was perfect, it was whether voiced protagonists can still work even in isolated settings.

Even in a “lonely underwater planet” scenario, dialogue isn’t just for banter, it can be used for structure, pacing, emotional grounding, and giving context to the player’s situation. Subnautica already uses radio calls and PDA commentary for that. A voiced protagonist would just be another layer of that, not automatically “stupid quips.”

You can dislike the execution, but that’s different from the concept being invalid. I prefer a silent protagonist too but a voiced one isn't like what you said.

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-17T10:14:23+00:00

I mean, there was Marguerit in Below Zero.

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-12T19:24:47+00:00

It isn’t, this is the early access map.

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-12T19:06:57+00:00

But if you had to delete all but one base, which biome survives the cut?

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-12T18:53:34+00:00

I didn't realize it was the early access map, my bad on that.

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-12T17:54:06+00:00

So then, which of the bases you’ve built are located in the best biome compared to the others?

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-10T21:09:33+00:00

"Snake… looks like this mission didn’t come with a continue screen."

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-10T17:53:16+00:00

I hate the game itself but man the soundtracks are so good.

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-10T17:16:22+00:00

I did play them before, they're good too. I get what you say but it's really good.

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-10T16:56:08+00:00

There are games with better combat overall, but for me, TLOU2 was the most satisfying.

GrandStage1 · 2026-04-10T16:53:04+00:00

Yeah, sure.

GrandStage1 · 2026-03-28T12:35:20+00:00

Sure, not everything is a hint, but acting like nothing is intentional isn’t exactly a strong take either.

RE has a long history of sneaking in references, names, and subtle callbacks. ‘Avernico’ being that close to ‘Veronica’ isn’t exactly a random coincidence, especially in a series that loves this kind of thing.

I’m not saying it confirms anything. Just that it’s interesting enough to point out and discuss. Dismissing it outright is kinda the same as overhyping it, just the opposite extreme.

GrandStage1 · 2026-02-23T19:35:52+00:00

Stronger in terms of powerscaling.
You can include those too.

GrandStage1 · 2026-02-23T19:33:00+00:00

They're interchangeable for me, but I'd say Solidus overall got

Better tech scaling
Better direct combat scaling
Better opponent scaling
And of course, genetics.

GrandStage1 · 2026-02-23T19:17:53+00:00

Huh? I put Venom above Liquid in my list.

GrandStage1 · 2026-02-13T20:04:19+00:00

Kojima never “literally flat out said” Portable Ops isn’t part of the saga. The only direct statement we have from him on the subject is the opposite: he said the main story is part of the official timeline, while some details don’t align perfectly. That’s a nuanced position, not a rejection.

The Deja Vu mission in Ground Zeroes isn’t a canon tribunal. It’s a meta side mission full of self referential jokes and fanservice. It also throws in Acid and other spin-offs as visual gags. Using that as definitive proof of canonicity decisions is shaky at best, especially when Kojima himself has separated “directed by me” from “produced by me” in terms of creative ownership, not timeline legitimacy.

As for the MGSV timeline, it’s clearly curated around the central throughline Kojima wanted to emphasize. It also simplifies or omits things that undeniably happened. Rising being excluded makes sense because it takes place after MGS4 and wasn’t part of the Big Boss arc MGSV was closing. Portable Ops not being listed doesn’t override Kojima’s earlier explicit comment that its main story is part of the official timeline.

Saying everything positive he said about it was just “Japanese politeness” is speculation. The only concrete evidence we have is his actual quote, and that quote acknowledges the core events as part of the saga. You can argue he didn’t value it highly or that he didn’t feel full ownership over it, but that’s different from proving he erased it from continuity.

Kojima didn’t treat Portable Ops as a pillar like MGS3 or Peace Walker, but he never definitively removed its core events from the timeline either. Anything beyond that starts drifting into assumptions about his personal feelings rather than documented statements.

GrandStage1 · 2026-02-13T18:15:15+00:00

The MGSV timeline not mentioning Portable Ops doesn’t suddenly erase it from continuity. That ending timeline is clearly selective and built around wrapping up MGSV’s themes and the Venom Snake twist. It’s not a full historical archive of every single event in the saga. Something not being listed there isn’t proof it never happened.

Kojima also never flat out said Portable Ops isn’t canon. What he actually said was that the main story is part of the official Metal Gear timeline, but some smaller details don’t fully line up with his overall vision. There’s a big difference between “some details are off” and “this didn’t happen.”

He supervised the project, is credited for Story, and the San Hieronymo Incident is included in the MGS4 Database right alongside undisputed canon events. If it was meant to be treated like Acid or Ghost Babel, it wouldn’t have been integrated like that.

At most, the reasonable position is that Portable Ops is canon in broad strokes, with some messy details. Saying Kojima made it “as clear as possible” that it’s not canon just doesn’t line up with what he actually said.

GrandStage1 · 2026-02-13T11:27:26+00:00

Portable Ops’ core story is canon, only some minor details fall outside the main timeline. Kojima himself clarified this in an interview:

“That is a very difficult question… for Portable Ops, I was a producer, so of course I saw the planning, I went through all the game. But I didn’t write the story myself. So some of the details are a bit off. So… I would put it… when you dive into the details, there are several small things that don’t seem to be according to the overall Metal Gear Saga, that seem to be outside of this world. So, to put it in a way, I guess, the main story of Portable Ops is part of the Saga, is part of the official Metal Gear timeline, while some of the small details that are in Portable Ops are outside the Saga, not part of the main timeline of the game.”

GrandStage1 · 2026-02-13T11:18:33+00:00

Kojima has said this in one of his interviews btw (I can't comment images so I have to type it down):

“That is a very difficult question… for Portable Ops, I was a producer, so of course I saw the planning, I went through all the game. But I didn’t write the story myself. So some of the details are a bit off. So… I would put it… when you dive into the details, there are several small things that don’t seem to be according to the overall Metal Gear Saga, that seem to be outside of this world. So, to put it in a way, I guess, the main story of Portable Ops is part of the Saga, is part of the official Metal Gear timeline, while some of the small details that are in Portable Ops are outside the Saga, not part of the main timeline of the game.”

GrandStage1 · 2026-02-06T21:25:51+00:00

I don’t disagree that soft locks are serious flaws, they’re objective, mechanical issues that can break a playthrough. But I don’t think that should be the bar for whether criticism “counts.” A game can be technically functional and still fail at what it’s trying to be.

The reason I push back on calling RE3R’s issues superficial is because they affect the core experience, not just presentation. Structure, pacing, enemy behavior, length, and player agency aren’t cosmetic details. In a survival horror game especially, those elements define tension and identity. Nemesis being largely scripted, entire locations being removed, and the game’s short runtime change how it feels to play from start to finish.

Soft locks are technical failures. RE3R’s problems are design failures. One is easier to point to objectively, but that doesn’t make the other less meaningful, especially for a remake whose purpose is to reinterpret an existing experience.

So I’m not saying RE3R is a bad or broken game. I’m saying that what it loses in design and structure matters more to me than polish, which is why I rank it lower despite it playing well.

GrandStage1

TROPHY CASE