With rumors of a Metal Gear Solid live action movie circulating around gamespot, I figured I would put in my two-cents on the issue. I believe it would not only be unwise for Hollywood (or any production company) to touch Metal Gear Solid or (any other video game title), but catastrophic for the video game industry as a whole. Just as movie-to-video game tranisitons are bad (Jumper, Bourne), the jump from the little screen to the big screen is equally as disastrous.

Let me explain. Video games are a subjective type of entertainment. When I first played Metal Gear Solid for the Playstation, I felt like I was moving an actor through a movie. A damn good movie at that. However, at the same time, I felt like I was the infamous Solid Snake, and that I was helping someone's cause. Saving something real. I wanted to be the next great agent. The experience I had with MGS is undoubtedly different than someone else's experience to the same game. We all have seperate emotions and opinions, and the great thing about video games, is that they can bring all these different human constructs and notions together. It is the art of being subjective.

Movies and videos are objective.

Movies set out to accomplish usually one goal. Make something entertaining. That works- to a point. I've seen numerous video game adaptations on the big screen, and I have been entertained by them all. Nevertheless, I haven't enjoyed them in the least. Hollywood not only tosses the original storyline that the games established, they turn it into something completely different. Or, in the rare occurence that they keep the storyline, there is always something missing. An actor may not remind you of the character you've grown to love. Maybe the emotions displayed on the screen aren't the same emotions you felt with the controller in your hands. In video games you choose your own path, and how you view the trip down that path. In movies, you are sent spiralling down a road that has been chosen for you. And it can ruin everything.

I think that if MGS were to be made into a movie, a lot of people would be outraged. As far as I'm concerned, MGS is a game inside of a movie. I'd hate to see someone in Hollywood try to make a typical action film with the name we've all come to love.

We need to let Hollywood be Hollywood, and let the video game industry be the video game industry. Close neighbors- but never intertwined.

Written in late November to avoid confusion...

As Christmas of '08 nears, we can expect the usual frenzy that seems to follow the holiday releases. All three systems are finally out (and bug-free for the most part), and have enough choices as far as games go, to make the first real "competitive" holiday shopping season. Or will it? Microsoft has its "massive" list of games, and its great online play to rely on. The Playstation 3 has amazing visuals and some big exclusive blockbusters. Nintendo…..well Nintendo has…….an innovative controller? Sorry. Bad joke. Figured I would throw one in to cause an even bigger stir amongst fan boys everywhere.

On paper this looks great for the consumer. However, is this holiday season really going to be that competitive? Let's delve deeper into the categories of video game consumers. Number one: The guy who is loaded, and wants the best of the best. He is going to drop the $1000 for that nice, big HDTV. He is then going to buy the PS3 with that hefty HDMI cable. Why not? He's got plenty of money. Number two: You have the guy who is buying something for his entire family. Something they can all do together, and have fun doing, without the intricacies of all the new technology. He is going to buy the Wii, with a couple controllers and the newest Mario game. Number Three: You have the guy who's in between. Wants graphical power, but isn't loaded. He also enjoys playing Halo just as much as the next guy. He'll grab the 360. Case closed.

I came across an interesting fact about my PS3 (traded in my 360 for it). I use it to play PS1 games more then to play PS3 games. Why would I do this you ask? I mean come on, the PS1 graphics are lame, the sound quality is something to be desired, and CD-ROM? Please. But looking past all these issues, the ole PS1 greats represent something more than old and dusty technology, they represent the hay days of gaming. Back when Sony and Nintendo were pushing and shoving to get to the top. Back when games weren't just hand-me-down ports, or where offering online play was the only way to grab a half-way decent review. It was a time when third-party developers rivaled first-party developers in every way. Things were competitive. And some of the best games and series of all time were released during this era. On the PS1 you had Metal Gear Solid, Resident Evil, Final Fantasy (in 3D!), and more greats. On the other side you had the Ocarina of Time, Goldeneye, Mario 64, etc. This era launched unforgettable games and unforgettable memories.

Now don't get me wrong. I think that gaming has come a long way. And some of the changes have been for the better, but is it just me or are there seeming to be less and less really good games? Things aren't competitive anymore. Games for the Wii are based around one crowd; children and family. The 360 is based around online play and shooters. The PS3 revolves around visuals to win over buyers. Each company has a set objective. And the developers know this. Games are getting more and more specified, and most are missing instead of hitting. Most developers aren't trying to make a great overall game, they are trying to "be good" in only a certain audiences' eyes. And that's fine, to a point. But what makes a great game, a great game is one that no matter what genre you're a fan of, you can say, "That's a damn good game."

I guess what I'm trying to say, is that what used to be so great about video games, was the competition. That competition resulted in better games. And those better games brought people together, where they could all have fun. And isn't that what it's all about? Isn't that what entertainment is? Nowadays, having a next-gen game that supports up to two local players is a rare commodity. Even with online play, gaming is getting more and more "plain" and lackluster. Any game that seems to pose any originality or innovativeness is hyped to the extreme point that it is doomed. When people expect perfection- they are going to be disappointed.

We're seeing the same things time after time. Gaming is losing its originality. And unfortunately this isn't bringing the "gaming community" together, it's tearing it apart.

Looking at Midway's recent financial debacle, one can start to appreciate that handful of developers that have withstood the test of time- so to speak. With Resident Evil 5 due out in one month, and the reinvented Street Fighter releasing in only weeks, Capcom deserves to be mentioned. Having crafted some of the best series' to ever grace the console world, Capcom has become a fan-favorite- and rightfully so. Many of us can still remember dropping quarter after quarter into the bulky street fighter arcade machine, or screaming shrilly like a girl when a zombie shot headfirst through a window in Resident Evil. These two games (among many others) have helped to yield some of the greatest memories in gaming- if not in some people's lives. For me, it's the latter. However, regarding Resident Evil, it seems that Capcom has taken away the qualities that made the previous games so mesmerizing (in the eeriest of ways), and turned it into a mainstream, "over the shoulder", Ghost Recon wannabe.

Streets that used to be dark, gloomy, and display carnage and desolation are replaced with sun-lit African locations where creatures Capcom swears "aren't zombies" run on sandy streets, screaming a blood-curdling cry- a scythe in one muscular hand. Needless to say, Resident Evil no longer feels….well, like Resident Evil. The atmosphere has changed, and in an age where graphical processors can make you see the glint of sweat on a soldier's brow, atmosphere can mean everything. Spine-tingling scares and puzzles and scarce ammunition has been replaced with full-scale warzones and massive shoot-outs.

We live in an age where people don't want to think when playing a videogame. In a Halo-society, we want big guns, big maps, and a lot of spare time. There is nothing wrong with this- videogames were created for that sole purpose- but having to "think" is what made Resident Evil stand out on its own. It's a shame to see the once "cult-favorite" walk the path that so many others have, when originality is what made the series as great as we all know it to be.

Don't get me wrong, the change started with Resident Evil 4, and that won Game of the Year, and it deserved the honor. I'm sure Resident Evil 5 will share a similar fate- or so the newly released demo suggests. The new direction Resident Evil has taken by no means makes the series falter- the games are still great. That being said, it seems that Capcom has shrugged off its faithful in order to please the mainstream crowd that desires more Booms! And I believe Capcom knows this. Unfortunately, a CGI movie featuring old characters doesn't quite dress the wound.

Maybe I'm becoming a crybaby fanboy (the one thing I promised I wouldn't become), and perhaps I'm blowing this whole ordeal out of proportion, but I think not. If you are a real Resident Evil fan- those who can still remember the distinct growl of "S.T.A.R.S.!"- I'm sure you'll agree.

I played the Resident Evil 5 demo just recently with a friend of mine, on the new co-op mode (one welcome feature of the new way of things). We both continued to get slaughter by the swarms of creatures "that aren't zombies". After five or six futile attempts at survival, my friend shouted in anger, "We are Resident Evil veterans, man! Why can't we beat this!?" I laughed, almost loudly. The answer was simple.

This is no longer Resident Evil.