Originally Posted by LoLomgbbq All images of unknown mascots are the same
. You have yet to be given a reason to care for this character or his story.The only reason that image you posted does that is because you already know who snake is and his history as a character.
Mascots are rich in character so that your first impression leads you to draw plainly visible conclusions about them. Lead characters, generally, also share this trait. They have a readily apparent nature, and then character development occurs from there.
If your lead character doesn't have any easily discernible characteristics, your audience will carry a lack of attachment for that character.
You're kind of
right when you say that I already like Snake because I know the history and character, but you're dead wrong if you think you can use that to invalidate my opinion of him as a mascot.
My first impression of Snake was in MGS; at your very first glace, you can see that Snake is highly reminiscent of 80's action heroes, except with a very 90's cleanliness, reservation, and refinement. The black sneaking suit, the semi-silent protagonist style, with a few key characteristics to bring us back to remind us that Snake is a 80's style "super-alpha" behind all that reservation. The Rambo bandanna, the cigarette. Snake actually takes advantage of our existing biases in a way that's subtle enough not to appear as plagiarism. We just discern it as Kojima created it: elements of classical 80's action heroes get invoked, but it's done very intentionally and everything we find out about Snake from there on fits the first impression.
What Kojima really did is merge very popular notions to create a character that we instantly felt at home with. That's why Snake is such an easy character to like. The subtleties we discover within the story were ever-more fruitful because they're often as well-done as the 2-dimensional first impression that we get from him. As a mascot, the creation of Snake was a success. It gave us a starting point that we all understood, and we all saw the character develop from that easily discernible first impression.
A mascot, or a lead character being trouted around as a mascot, is not successful if it doesn't evoke any emotional response from you. If you can't relate it to anything
, the creator now has to work very hard to control the experience. The "beholder" will continually try to attach characteristics to the character, but unless the story is designed very carefully, you might get the wrong impressions and ultimately just end up confused about development within the lead.
A mascot only becomes a mascot if people can instantly feel at home when they see it. Snake was instantly successful in this respect for the reasons I already stated. He's been so successful that he embodies far more than just the cool notion of combining 90's style with 80's flare. He's a mascot unto himself now, for people who pick up the series.
For people that didn't pick up the series at MGS 1, they were introduced to many different Snakes. Big Boss, for instant, was a recent one who was designed to be very reminiscent of revolutionaries like Castro, yet in the guise of an American military man. Yet another very compelling idea, delivered very simply upon first impression.
Kojimas new game hasnt even got off the ground yet and you want to say this character has no "soul"? A mascot becomes a mascot after the fact, not beforehand.
Take the power of silhouetted image for example:
You know who these characters are (presumably) even without faces or details simply because they were given a chance and each brought something new to interactive entertainment.
Losing his touch? please. Yes, you and your opinion are the be all and end all of someone elses creative use by date.
Though whats interesting is no ones complaining about "more future sci fi crap" like they do with COD.
I already answered most of this so I won't spend much time on it. It's not a good mascot and it's not a good lead. I said it evokes nothing to me
and that I'm worried Kojima might be losing his touch. I might be wrong, but I don't think I am.
SuperZan coined it: "Undead Astronaut Wicket-Keeper "
That's a rather hilarious and true way to describe it, for me. It's just too much.
I can't really identify with the notion of all those things coming together. I'll check it out, but I don't it'll be all that interesting to me. It seems like Kojima, himself, is confused about what he's trying to do with this character.. the same way he seemed confused about what he wanted to do with our revolutionary Big Boss in MGS 5. At least the idea of a revolutionary Big Boss was a good idea (albeit, he had that idea long ago), but this time, I don't think Kojima even has an inspired character to work with. It's a valid reason to be skeptical.Edited by Mookster - 6/7/16 at 2:12pm