What I'm especially interested in is how they attempt to do so when Boon's gone on record via twitter or somewhere and saying, for example, Hsu Hao will never be in another MK game again. So is that character then officially out of the canon or...?

KenshiMaster16, Mortal Kombat 's plot fell apart starting with Mortal Kombat Deception. Armageddon didn't really have one. So Deception and Armageddon are pretty much null when you have to explain what happened to the characters in those games.


Can anyone name at least 5 MAJOR plotlines that didn't make any since starting from Mortal Kombat 1 from Mortal Kombat Deadlly Alliance? I doubt it from anyone who has followed the series.

The underline point in starting the series again similar to Deadly Alliance's storyline, is that you did not have to know what happened in MK1 - MK4 to know who is who and what is going on. The overall plot had nothing to do with the new ideas. Past events did happen, but in general did not matter, giving new players and old players a fresh start. I was hoping that MK8 or MK 9 or whatever the newest MK would do that.

Ed Boon says lots of things.

This and noone disses the Hao without impunity.

Ok you people asking if this is gonna be a psn/live arcade game are mentally retarded. Also the game won't be out until around jan-march of next year meaning the graphics will improve. Even still, some of the footage like the Sector vs Mileena at the Forrest stage looks way better than anything in MK vs DC graphically.

It's a chance to better deal with Reptile's devolution, make Bo' Rai Cho less of a stupid character and more of a wise master that he's supposed to be, make characters the likes of Kai, Jarek and Reiko better written and given tons of more depth.

Also, Shinnok never was really threatening. This could be the perfect chance to make him as a character, gameplay and story wise, more formidable with other boss-esque characters.

Anyways, I can think of several characters that need MAJOR re-tooling to fit in more nicely with the rest of the cast and make them more appealing.

- Bo' Rai Cho
- Kai
- Reiko
- Jarek
- Stryker
- Kintaro
- Sheeva

Well for me, the appeal is the fact that I love the story of MK1-MK3, but it's still quite confusing with how many times they've changed things or tried erasing things etc. such as Johnny dying a few times and other things that essentially happened but then they changed their mind. When creating the story piece by piece as the games go on theres bound to be fuckups and new ideas such as the old Sub being Noob and they will just make choices then go against it in the next game. Hindsight is 20/20, and now that those games are made, now they can go back and iron out all those kinks and things they didn't want there anymore. I would like to know one story and have it set in concrete. Not only that, but to have it in awesome cinematics for my visual pleasure. People want a Mortal Kombat movie retelling the same story with the same characters, why not let the games do it?

Also, for me, my favorite characters are all from MK1-MK3. So of course, that's a plus. I can have a game where I like every character rather than half awesome characters and the other half as "ok" IMO. Not only that, but I also loved the stages from MK1-MK3 the most except for a few MK:D ones that were pretty neat. So I also get the benefit of seeing stages such as The Pit II, The Dead Pool, The Living Forest, and Shangs Throne Room all made the way they are supposed to be, in 2D playing field, but with awesome 3D graphics and detail. So all of this is another extreme plus.

Finally, although I was curious and still am a little bit about what happens next after Armageddon, a huge part of me doesn't want to know or just doesn't care. The way they were talking, about getting rid of 90% of the characters...that's a crappy thought for someone who likes the originals, which of course not all are gonna make it. Not to mention their new characters, especially Daegon and Taven, were just getting bland and unimaginative. Do I want to take the for sure safe bet with the characters I grew up with and have come to love, or start a whole new chapter and hope they can come up with some cool new characters?

Besides, I don't even think THEY want to follow up Armageddon. I think they realize they fucked up by painting themselves into a corner to the point where they were about to destroy everything in some sort of finale...but we all know that was one terrible ass finale. So I think they just want to rewrite the story, starting with the beginning, and just rewrite up til a certain point ironing out all the inconsistencies and holes from before, and end up not getting to the point of Armageddon. Meaning...they will likely keep MK1-4 or even MK:DA the same...but then go a completely different route this time around. I think they know they fucked up and they want to change that. And who are we to say they can't? It's there franchise...if they want to reboot and fix things and make everything better from the start, I like it.

Of course not everyone will like that, and will always want to know what happened to who...and maybe in an interview or something they will let you know what they had planned. Or maybe im wrong and they are just doing this reboot retelling as a 1 off...and then theyll go back and kill off a bunch of characters and start their post apocolyptic everythings destroyed storyline.

In my opinion that sort of beat the point have a sequel. Every video game series has unpopular characters. Does that mean game dev should redo that entry so that 80%, 90%, or 100% of people can like certain character? Of course not.

If a overall reception of a character is negative.

A. revamp him or her in a SEQUEL.
B. Never include that character again in that series again.

You you don't need to retell a old story to make a character better, you can do that in sequels. Should the next Street Fighter be just a retelling of Street Fighter 2 ( or whatever version of it he first appeared) , just to tell new fans why Akuma, is similar to Ken and Ryu, or just give him a make over?

I'm okay with vastly unpopular characters returning (like Meat, Hsu Hao, or Stryker), but there are plenty of characters that are very well liked, but just very underrepresented.

Such as Nitara, Hotaru, Havik, Sareena, Fujin, and Frost.

Reception to them was very positive, but ultimately they sort of got neglected.

Plus, where do you go after Armageddon? What I mean by that is, is what the hell do you even do story wise to make things interesting? You can only keep building threats bigger and bigger til you just cant get any bigger. They beat Shang, then they beat Khan, then Shinnok, then Quan and Shang...at this point they were good because they didn't try and raise the bar too high. Then they went and threw the Dragon King in there who was made to look unstoppable, mowing through Raiden, Shang, and Quan quite easily. Then he was somehow stopped or contained for the time being only for Blaze, an even BIGGER threat to the point where it took every fighter to try and beat him...

They essentially shot themselves in the foot. It's important to make the threats you face in games tougher as you go, but if you burn up the whole fuse too quickly, as in the case of MK, then what? In all honesty that should have been it. Game over. But it's still a franchise that they need to make money from, so what else to do but try and retell your story but this time fix the shit you messed up on and when you reach the fork in the road that is called MK:Deception, go the other fucking way.

And you also have to think about how this all could possibly effect their fans. If they have to explain 60 characters fates...do you really think they are gonna take the time to make them elaborate or detailed? No. You're likely gonna get a brief couple sentence explination of how they died. How would you like it if your favorite character for 5-18 years has an explination saying "Frost was killed by Scorpion. She attempted to do what Sub never could and defeat him, only to suffer a Toasty!" No drawing, no cinematic...cuz it's way too much work for 60 characters. Is that satisfying for you? You'll never see or play her again, and you won't even have to bother getting your hopes up or excited when roster reveal time comes around. Now apply that to 90-95% of the characters, that we've all grown to love or favorite for all these years.

I for one think that the main concern for the developers of this FIGHTING game is the fighting mechanics. I don't think that they'd actually not do anything gameplay related because of the storyline. Just look at how convoluted it's gotten.

Well, what you do is NOT make it such that unless all the realms everywhere are on the brink of total destruction the story doesn't matter.

I guess DC Comics should stop publishing all its titles now that Final Crisis is over. Because how do you top Darkseid successfully conquering Earth?

"Well for me, the appeal is the fact that I love the story of MK1-MK3, but it's still quite confusing with how many times they've changed things or tried erasing things etc. such as Johnny dying a few times and other things that essentially happened but then they changed their mind. When creating the story piece by piece as the games go on theres bound to be fuckups and new ideas such as the old Sub being Noob and they will just make choices then go against it in the next game. Hindsight is 20/20, and now that those games are made, now they can go back and iron out all those kinks and things they didn't want there anymore. I would like to know one story and have it set in concrete. Not only that, but to have it in awesome cinematics for my visual pleasure. People want a Mortal Kombat movie retelling the same story with the same characters, why not let the games do it? "

Cage's death has been explained. Also he only died once. Even if the average MK gamer doesn't know that ,what does it mattter, that storyline is gone and doesn't matter anymore. Do you see my point? Fans of every series comes and goes. Does it mean the story should be retold? I don't mean to sound rude in that last statement.

"Also, for me, my favorite characters are all from MK1-MK3. So of course, that's a plus. I can have a game where I like every character rather than half awesome characters and the other half as "ok" IMO. Not only that, but I also loved the stages from MK1-MK3 the most except for a few MK:D ones that were pretty neat. So I also get the benefit of seeing stages such as The Pit II, The Dead Pool, The Living Forest, and Shangs Throne Room all made the way they are supposed to be, in 2D playing field, but with awesome 3D graphics and detail. So all of this is another extreme plus. "

Deadly Alliance is my favorite MK. If I wanted to play with Mortal Kombat Deadly Allliance characters, I'd play Deadlly Alliance. If wanted to play in Deadlly Alliance stages i'd play Deadly Alliance. If I wanted Deadly Alliances gameplay I play Deadly Alliance. As much as I love Deadly Alliance , I have no trouble, in letting it go in favor in progresing the series as a whole.

The point is that Deadly Alliance has already been released and explored. Going back now is sort of pointless, its been done, the same with past MK games. That is the whole point in having a sequel. New gameplay, NEW characters with old returning, NEW storylines for both new and old characters. You see that way old and new fans win, because it is all new, that is why sequels are made.

"Finally, although I was curious and still am a little bit about what happens next after Armageddon, a huge part of me doesn't want to know or just doesn't care. The way they were talking, about getting rid of 90% of the characters...that's a crappy thought for someone who likes the originals, which of course not all are gonna make it. Not to mention their new characters, especially Daegon and Taven, were just getting bland and unimaginative. Do I want to take the for sure safe bet with the characters I grew up with and have come to love, or start a whole new chapter and hope they can come up with some cool new characters? "

Honestly I don't care about Armageeddon either, but what would be the point in going backwards reusing old stages, storylines, characters. Many of us are not against the idea of using some old backgrounds from the past MKs, but at what point do we move foward with the series? Also what is the good of getting rid of 90% of the characters, when the majoirty will be in a future game since this "Mortal Kombat" retells MK1 - MK3? What next a retelling of MK: DA - MK A?

"Do I want to take the for sure safe bet with the characters I grew up with and have come to love, or start a whole new chapter and hope they can come up with some cool new characters? "

I don't understand this statement. Mortal Kombat has always introducted new characters along with old returning new since the sequel back in 1993.


Besides, I don't even think THEY want to follow up Armageddon. I think they realize they fucked up by painting themselves into a corner to the point where they were about to destroy everything in some sort of finale...but we all know that was one terrible ass finale. So I think they just want to rewrite the story, starting with the beginning, and just rewrite up til a certain point ironing out all the inconsistencies and holes from before, and end up not getting to the point of Armageddon. Meaning...they will likely keep MK1-4 or even MK:DA the same...but then go a completely different route this time around. I think they know they fucked up and they want to change that. And who are we to say they can't? It's there franchise...if they want to reboot and fix things and make everything better from the start, I like it.

That is sort of what I am saying. They don't have to take on the events of Armageddon when doing a new storyline. They baraly have to mention anything from past MKs, that is a point of a reboot in the case in the likes of Deadly Alliance.

I completely disagree with that description of MKDA. Deadly Alliance's Konquest Mode was almost entirely about better fleshing out the previous games and their connections to the current one.

Example: We learned in DA that Sonya threw Kano off a roof, Motaro found him, Sheeva killed Motaro, then Kano ratted her out to Kahn, becoming his new general.

Is any of that really important to DA itself? Not so much except to explain how Kano became a general, which is what he is in DA.

But it fleshes out MK3. And some of us love stuff like that and have been asking for more of it for years. So seeing MK1 thru 3's stories acted out in realtime, as opposed to being told to us after the fact in text, will be awesome for us.

Well, some fans have to understand that some characters are simply more important or more relevant than others and therefore warrant more drawn out endings.

Characters like Shao Kahn, Quan Chi, Reptile, etc....yes, they should warrant detailed, thought out endings.
Characters like Jarek, Reiko, Hsu Hao, etc....don't. Even the people who like them shouldn't have to ask why.

"do you really think they are gonna take the time to make them elaborate or detailed?"

They don't have too, even if they did they could do it in sequels when a character who had ties to that character reappears.

"You're likely gonna get a brief couple sentence explination of how they died." Yes that is pretty much, all they needed if they have no plans to use the character again. You don't need know every explaintion in.

In case you had not noticed it Mortal Kombat has always been a swinging door when comes to characters. Say if Frost was killed off in MK: Deception, then in this new series was re introducted and given a new direction in MK8. No ties to anything, do you honesty think a new MK player would care or even know?

That was why Mortal Kombat Deadly Alliance 's Konquest was so great. To the new MK players none of that mattered. All the characters all had new storyline directions. Old MK fans found out what happened between the gaps, but in the long run MK1 - MK4 did NOT matter nor did it have to be told to the MK noob. The bios in Deadly Alliance set up the storyline for itself, not the previous Mortal Kombat games.
Also what is the big deal about real time stories? Again we already know what is going to happen, making a real time movie wouldn't change that nor would it make the game any better. I love mordern tech too, but for goodness sake , when do we move on?
Is there big of difference between reading what happened and seeing it? The old MK 2-D games are great games for their time, adding movies to them would not make them better. Is Mortal Kombat 4 better than MK2, or the MK3 series just because they had cg /in game ending movies?

Not to go off topic, but since the conversation got turned somewhat to story, is there even a COMPLETE timeline or something of every character-driven event, like someones death or Sheeva betraying Motaro, blah blah, that exists somewhere on some website?

And to go back on topic; if new gamers don't give a squat about story and every new direction for MK will just forget past events, why bother? Why not just cut out bios and storylines and just focus completely on gameplay?

I love the story, and I'd generally be somewhat pissed if a character died and we don't get a general explanation of why.

In timeline form? No, there aren't any story guides written like that.

I could do it for ya but it'd take me at least a month. Too much trouble. Again, that's why I'm glad the new game sounds like it's going to show the events that way FOR us.

Well damn. lol That sucks.

I don't think there's a definite timeline of events locked down, but the Mortal Kombat wiki follows and documents when and where most important characters actions took place, such as Sheeva killing Motaro, Sareena meeting younger Sub-Zero, and Cyrax getting his soul back, just as examples. MK Wiki

Not necessarily true. You could:

1.) Calm the waters:

"Something big just happened"...ect ect....and now "we're all REcouping, REbuilding, REorganizing...ect ect ect. See the theme starting there?

2.) Explain the last "cataclysmic event":

This is what happened, and these are the effects....ect ect ect

3.) Create a new threat that is relevant to new & refreshed characters:

This is what we're doing now, and they are our opposition to that. Or...*blam!* The new threat shows up unexpectedly...ect ect ect

4.) Involve a select few of the older characters:

Only a few survived from the last cataclysmic event, and now they are our mentors..or we learned our lesson from them...or now they are all dead....or whatever...ect ect ect.

===

Okay so, maybe not in that exact order, and certainly, that's not a complete concept BUT, that's the sort of thing I expected coming to this game. A Sequel....not REboot or whatever...

I expected a reinvisioning of the way these characters are built up and presented to us. But even that I believe, would utilize the facts that are there, complete the rest of the picture for those selected characters (tell what happened to them from MKA), and move them on forward from there.

The art of writing is so wide open, and literally has a gazillion ways to travel given proper creative talent and skill behind the pen, that I don't see why they wouldn't want to go that route. WB has access to this talent and skill so... SO?

I'm waiting please.

lol

Was I the only one that thought Deception was a pretty decent story? Sure it has a few rotten apples (new Black Dragon crap, Tanya, etc.) but it introduced some fun concepts like Order/Chaos and several of the returning characters were extremely well done (Ermac, Nightwolf).

Armageddon was what ruined the plot for me. I didn't see any big problem with Deception. It wasn't as good as Deadly Alliance perhaps, but it was better than say MK4.