Metal Gear Solid: Will The Franchise Be Solid Without Hideo Kojima?

     This month we have gotten an official confirmation that game developer and producer Hideo Kojima and Konami are splitting up. If you've been somewhere in space for the past year or have been an employee of Konami the writing on the wall has been huge. We got the message that Kojima was planning on moving away from Konami for a while. It was apparent in interviews, the cancellation of Silent Hills, Metal Gear Solid V, both The Phantom Pain and Ground Zeros being Kojima's last titles, Kojima shutting down his studio, and let's not forget an New York Times journalist pretty much spilling the details.
      So apparently Kojima and Konami have already moved on to better things. Kojima is starting a new independent studio with Guillermo Del Toro and Sony and Konami is already staring the ball rolling by looking for a new director for the next Metal Gear Solid game. The problem is can Konami find someone to do the series justice. Can they even find someone who will make the games just as good as Kojima?
      If you are new to the Metal Gear Solid series, you need to know one thing. It is Kojima's child. It is his artist masterpiece. With Kojima's departure you have people worried or whether the series can go on or at least be as good without Kojima being a part of the project.

      Ironically they have done something like this in the past. Konami had made a American only sequel to one of the Metal Gear games in 1990, Snake's Revenge. Kojima had absolutely no involvement in making the game. A matter of fact he didn't even know about it until a developer working on the game told him about it. The game didn't fair well as the company made it by completely taking out everything that worked with the first game and just mad a generic shooter, pretty much like Contra, except not good. Luckily this made Kojima to make a true sequel, Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake for the MSX2 computer.

     I would like to believe that Konami had learned their lesson since then, considering the fact that they made sure Kojima has been involved in every Metal Gear title since then, and this would be the exact time to show it. Will they pull it off? It is a possibility they could or it's a possibility that they won't. One thing is sure is that whatever director they go with it will be tricky and they will have their work cut out for them. Again, it is hard to imagine the series without  Kojima being involved. It's almost like Nintendo without Shigeru Miyamoto or Wes Craven without the Nightmare series. For one thing, we will know that the series will be different. Hopefully it will not be that different. Hopefully a good different.

Characters We Probably Won't See As DLC in Super Smash Bros... Maybe

     It's December which could mean only one thing, no not Christmas, the Super Smash Bros themed Nintendo Direct is almost here. Nintendo announced that for the month of December, there will be a Nintendo Direct dedicated to Super Smash Bros. We could be treated to new characters or new stages for upcoming DLC. Since the recent announcement of Cloud Strife from Final Fantasy VII being added to the roster, you could almost add any popular character to the list, that's ever been on a Nintendo console or handheld, almost. While these characters might be cool to be added, they most likely won't. Goku and Shreik need not apply.


King K. Rool

 

If you don't know King K. Rool was the main antagonist for the Donkey Kong country series as well as Donkey Kong 64. He would torment the Kong family by stealing DK's bananas in the first game and would later on kidnap DK and Diddy in the later sequels. In Donkey Kong 64 he even went so far as to threaten to blow up Donkey Kong's home DK Island. When Rare was purchased by Microsoft that was the last we've seen of K. Rool and his Kremling klan, I mean clan, as the more recent Donkey Kong games moved on to more enemies that DK had to defeat. So, when Smash Bros was released for the 3DS, we were treated with seeing some familiar characters returning, the Kremlings in Smash Run. With the inclusion with Kremlings, it would seem more likely that their ruler would be making a long deserved comeback since Donkey Kong 64, right. Well he did, as a costume for the Mii brawler. Since K. Rool's appearance had been reduced to a costume, it is most likely that he might not be added.

Crash Bandicoot


Yes, the former Sony mascot has been in a couple Nintendo titles. Crash and Mario had an intense rivalry during the late 90s and early millennium as both of them adventured into 3D for the PlayStation and Nintendo 64. His inclusion would have been huge as their rivalry during those times almost as big as Sonic's who is in the game. As with all things popular they become unpopular and the Crash series fizzled out with lower sales. We haven't seen Crash in anything since his last game in 2010 so we most likely won't see him in Smash either.

Banjo-Kazooie


If you were a kid in the early 00s and didn't have Banjo-Kazooie for the N64, your parents didn't love you. Banjo-Kazooie were characters in their own game during Rare's golden era of making games for the N64. Them being added like a lot of the characters here would be just for nostalgia reason, which are justifiable. They had a ton of games that made for Nintendo before Microsoft bought Rare. For that reason, they are most likely not going to be added unless Microsoft wants to loosen their grip and loan them out for a while?

Heihachi Mishima


Unlike the other characters listed, Heihachi, and other Tekken characters were actually considered to appear in Smash Bros, but due to software limitations during the developing stages for Smash Bros on the 3DS, as well as Masahiro Sakurai not know what to do for a movelist, Heihachi was dropped. That's probably why we got Ryu instead. Sakurai did give him a nod by making him a costume for the Mii fighter instead.

Ridley


OMG, he is not going to be in the game as a playable character. Give it up!

This Is A Linkle/Female Link Post

     A while back we were introduced to a "new" character for the up and coming Hyrule Warriors Legends game for the Nintendo 3DS, Linkle. Up until Linkle's debut she was just a concept art for the Hyrule Warrriors game. She was believed and written to be a female version of Link, the protagonist of the Legend of Zelda series. Now that she's an offical character in the game, Linkle is more of her own established character instead of being the female version of Link. This isn't more about Linkle's, but what she represented before she was made a full fledged character.
    Linkle represented an interesting ideal that whether the protagonist Link in the Zelda could be female. If you are new to the Zelda series the games and the Hyrule timeline spans across years with a new a different incarnation of the main characters Lunk and Princess Zelda. In almost each game you have a different Link and Zelda. This was introduced to the game Skyward Sword where Zelda was the reincarnation of the goddess Hylia and at the end of game both Link and Zelda's souls were destined to be reincarnated whenever Hyrule is in trouble. Linkle leads to a interesting theory that there could be a female incarnation of the

legendary hero. 

     It was a rumor that around Linkle's discovery as a concept art for Hyrule Warriors that the incarnation of Link that would be introduced in the upcoming Zelda Wii U game could possibly be a woman. The question is if Nintendo decided to switch the character of Link, and possibly Zelda, would it be a good decision?

     If Link was a woman in a possible Zelda game, it would be in fact good. Story wise, it would be interesting. It has never been said that the spirit of the hero has to be passed down to a male incarnation. It could add more to the Zelda mythology of the spirit of the hero being passed down to one person to another. It would be great as it would breathe new life to the supposed characters. It would be interested to see a Prince Zel and a female Link interact with the threat that could affect Hyrule.

     It could be important as it could symbolize what the character Link is suppose to be. Link is suppose to represent the link between him and the player. It is apparent that more women are playing video games as a hobby. It would be good for a girl who is new to not only video games, but new to the Zelda series to be able to play as a character that represents her.

What do you think about having a female Link in a Zelda game?

10 Weirdest Video Game Costumes Ever

Let's face it. Some outfits and costumes characters wear in video games are awesome. Some of are inspired to dress up as them this Halloween. When designing these costumes, designers can't do no wrong in making video game characters look totally cool, right? Wrong.

Dairy Bastard (God of War)


If you played God of War, you'd know that it is a very violent and brutal game. You're violently attacking cyclops and Greek gods apart in a quest for revenge. Kratos is a badass. You don't want to mess with him, maybe dressed up as a cow? In this costume, Kratos' blades of chaos are replaced with milk jugs of death? He also has unlimited magic and collects twice the amount of orbs, but his strength is reduced in half. Challenge of the Gods.

Nintendo Outfits (Tekken Tag Tournament 2: Wii U Edition)

You know what's worst than getting your ass kicked by Heihachi? Getting your ass kicked by Heihachi in a Mario costume. These costumes come with the Tekken Tag Tournament for the Wii U which not only your favorite Tekken characters dressed up as Nintendo characters, but it comes with power-ups like Mega Mushrooms which adds a little more strategy to fights, and a little comedy.

Alien Zack (Dead or Alive 5)


Fighting games sometimes offer fun costumes for character to fight in or just to see how . Nothing more fun and outrageous than Zack's alien costume. Zack gets two set of this costume offered as DLC. Zack as a character himself isn't new to outrageous costumes.

Tofu (Resident Evil 2)


When playing Resident Evil 2, you get to play a parody of The Fourth Survivor minigame called The Tofu Survivor where all the players of HUNK are all replaced with tofu. You get this by unlocking The Fourth Survivor and clear the Leon A/Claire B storyline 3 times with an A ranking. The tofu costumes reappear in Darkside Chronicles where the zombies are replaced with tofu.

Donut Drake (Uncharted)


The objective of a master thief is to get your pockets fat by stealing whatever you can. Apparently Drake heard otherwise. You get to play a much fatter version of Drake in Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, Uncharted 2: Among Thieves and Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception. You get this skin by .

Evil Panda (Onimusha)

Onimusha is a game where you play a badass warrior. Nothing says badass like a evil panda suit. You get this by collecting 10 Flourites and ending the game.

Princess Heart (Silent Hill 3)


Silent Hill is a scary game made by a Japanese development team. Sometimes Japanese culture can rub off. Princess Heart costume Heather gets to play that is seems straight out of some magical girl anime or something. It even comes with a cute transformation sequence. It's more than just a skin. Heather can use the sexy beam to kill monsters that will try to harm her.

Rainbow Kuma (Street Fighter x Tekken)


This outfit is based off of R. Mika from the Street Fighter Alpha series that Kuma can wear. It's a nice spin not only because of Kuma's moves, but it's also a nice reference to another Street Fighter character, Zangief who Mika not only met and fought with a few time, but also Zangief was known to wrestle bears in his meantime.

Cheerleader Riptor (Killer Instinct)

When Rare rebooted the Killer Instinct franchise it offered some retro costumes as DLC. You get to play as Jago and Orchid in their classic costumes from the original games. You also get this. Nothing says spirit like a raptor in a cheerleader outfit. It seems appropriate since Riptor is a female. I wonder if someone at Rare is a Raptors fan.

Street Fighter Animal Costumes (Street Fighter 4 Ultra)

Again, when developers come up with DLC they tend to make things fun and sometimes outrageous. These costumes are nothing but. I admit these are kinda cool but their weird nonetheless. It's especially funny to see Makoto as a chipmunk and Hikan as a octopus.

What are some weird video game costumes have you encountered?

Goosebumps: Does It Suck?

I haven't done a review in a while, so over the weekend, I went out to see Goosebumps. For those who are new to Goosebumps or who wasn't born in the 90s, Goosebumps was children's horror book series penned by R.L. Stine. The books were scary. Really scary. The books launched a ton of spin-off book series like the Give Yourself Goosebumps books, which were almost as scary since you choose how the story goes, and a TV series, which was just as scary as the books. The books generated a ton or sales and money for R.L Stine and has stuck with a lot of people either as nostalgia or as we're still getting nightmares about evil lawn gnomes. Which is more than an apparent reason why there is finally a movie based off of the books and series, right? At first hearing that there would be a movie, I had two things run into my head. First excitement. I loved reading the books and watching the TV series growing up as a child so it's no shocker I would be stoked for this. Another thing was the notion of whether they would do justice to the series. To many of us, Goosebumps is in a part of of childhood memories. We grew up on this. We would like to see if things were done in a faithful way. Was it? Was it cool, of did it suck?

Story

Let's start off with story. The whole premise of the Goosebumps movie was that all of the monsters in R.L Stine's books are real due to him creating them with his super imagination.They are all unleashed on the town and it's up to him and a bunch of teenagers, who let the monsters out in the first place, to put them back before they ruin the town. The whole plot of the movie is almost like Jumanji for the millennials or better yet a nice little spin on the intro of the TV series. The pacing of the movie is a bit odd. The first half which introduces characters and set up their traits is a bit slow and it does lag on a bit. When the exciting stuff happens in the second half when the monsters are out and the protagonists have to go after them it's quick. I mean really quick. The first half felt longer than the second half. Also, what bummed me out were that there were some famous Goosebumps monsters that reduced to just cameo appearances, some that were used for promo. As many books Stine made you would've figured out that they would featured more than the ones they chose. One example was that they could've shown more of the monsters going on a rampage on the town and one of my favorites, the Haunted Mask, could've been that character making mischief attack people as the run from the chaos kinda like Gremlins. On a positive side there are some Easter eggs in the film. See if you can find them.

Comedy

As I stated earlier, Goosebumps stories were scary. People had nightmares about them. So what do you do when you have some of the scariest books of kid literature ever? You make a comedy out of them. I think you can say that the Goosebumps movie is a form of satire on the series. It pokes of its self. The monsters were portrayed in a sort of comical form as you would think they would be in the books. Overall, there were some jokes that worked and some that didn't and were forced. An example was all the scenes with the main protagonist's (Zach Cooper played by Dylan Minnette) mom played by Amy Ryan. They did try to do the cool mom thing but they couldn't. Perhaps they should watch Amy Poeler in Mean Girls and see how it's done. Jack Black is standard Jack Black, weird fat guy that does something funny once in a while, like in almost every film he's in. Take that as you may. The highlight of the film's comedy was Ryan Lee. He basically stole every scene he was in and was gold.


Final Verdict

Goosebumps was alright for what it was overall, a kids movie. It was good, but it could've been great. Some jokes were great, some could've been better. They had a lot of material to work with and utilized than the stuff they used. Despite that it was sorta enjoyable. Audience beware, you're in for a okay scare. It gets a 3 out of 5.

Pulling the Plug on the PlayStation Vita's Successor Part 2: Should Sony Quit Handheld?

     If you haven't read my post last week, number one, shame on you here's a link and number two I'll give you a brief explanation if you're too lazy to click, again shame on you! It was recently announced that Sony will not be making a successor to the PlayStation Vita. In the last post I gave reasons why the decision was obvious. To keep it short, it all came down to sales, lack of quality games and exclusives, and basically Sony sweeping it under the rug. Yes, Sony is done with making handheld console and games, but should they?  Welcome to part 2.
     Again, the Vita turned out to be a huge bust, but if they wanted, Sony could've tried again with the next system. If you want to look at Sony not giving up and do a successor to the Vita, you can look at it from Sony's rival Nintendo. Nintendo has had its list of failures as well as successes. You can't forget the Virtual Boy which was the company's biggest failure to date. The Wii U and 3DS even started out badly. Both suffered lack of sales compared to their predecessors and a good line of games to play at the start. It wasn't until Nintendo decided to launch a series of campaigns to help turn things around and boost sales did just that. There have been a increase of sales of sales for the Wii U and 3DS in the past year.

     But let's look at things from a realistic view. Sadly there is no place for Sony in the handheld market anymore. Nintendo still dominates the handheld market. Mobile gaming is on the rise. Sony, sadly has become a relic. From a techonlogical stance, there isn't anything Sony can do to keep up. They did try to do something with touch screen technology but it ended up looking and feeling awkward. It is obvious that Sony has decided to focus on other things as well. Again like Nintendo, they could;ve turned things around of they wanted to, but the truth was and is that they didn't and they saw it as pointless to do so and move on.

What are your thoughts on the subject. Should Sony make another handheld system?

Pulling the Plug on the PlayStation Vita's Successor Part 1: Why The Vita Failed

Handheld Gaming. It was and, in some ways due to mobile gaming, is a huge thing. I, myself prefer playing handheld games compared to games on console for the sole purpose that I can go anywhere. From anyplace in the city to anyplace in the house, I can play games. We have come a long way from when the Game Boy came out where we had to play an 8-bit game on a tiny screen, IN PROPER LIGHTING to systems like the Vita with amazing graphics and in 3D like the Nintendo 3DS. It's amazing to see how things can go in the future, except with the Vita...
     If you haven't heard, over the weekend it has been announced that there will be no successor to the PlayStation Vita. As shocking as it seems, not really, there are reasons why it probably wasn't a hard decision as to why Sony decided to pull the plug on making another PlayStation handheld.
     Let's start with the most important, sales. Sales is the huge factor as to why we will not have a successor. When the Vita first came out, it sold over 325,000 units in Japan, which was ok, but sales started to slump in the following weeks. Overall, in the first quarter, February 2012, it has sold 1.2 million units worldwide and over 2 million in software, compared to the PSP's 2.2 million in 2007, but most importantly short compared to the Nintendo 3DS' 3.61 million in its first quarter. Sales continued to go down for the Vita after its first year. As of now, it has sold approximately 4 million from its launch to December 2014 compared to its rival the 3DS' 53 million (17 million in 2014) and its predecessor the PSP's 80 million.
      The second is the probably the second most important, games. The Vita did not have a strong library of games to play. They didn't have that many exclusives that people wanted to play. What they had to offer nobody wanted and what they tried to get they couldn't deliver. What they had you could've played on the console games and were much better versions. Why would you play Final Fantasy X/X-2 HD on the Vita when you can get it in better resolution on the PS4? Having games, importantly a strong exclusive gaming library is important to get people to solely play that system. Nintendo has learned this when the Wii U suffered in its earlier years when it had nothing to play and noticed sales picked up when they finally gave us an abundance of games to play later on.
      Lastly, Sony did not care. They barely did any marketing for the Vita and the games they had to offer. When sales kept plummeting, they barely did anything to help pick things up. At least with Nintendo and the 3DS' sales which were less than the DS's managed to turn things around with doubling down on pushing the system out and giving us better titles to play with. Sony just did nothing hoping that people will eventually play the Vita and just quietly pushed it under the rug when less and less people picked it up.
      We know why it probably was a good decision for Sony to pull out of the handheld game and not make a successor. Another question could be despite how the Vita fared, should they? That's for Part 2. Stay tuned.

     What do you think contributed to the PlayStation Vita's demise?