Tsk Tsk Tsk...

They never got it wrong with MKDA.

MKD was so average it was boring....

As for MK2, I cannot help you. However there is a new Mortal kombat agme coming out for next generation consoles. Lets hope the graphics and the gameplay is the best thing ever...

yea lets hope...

but i think they got it wrong big time wit mkda..i mean wit the addition of a vampire..a female sub-zero...it just felt like they were runin out of ideas.....i mean whose idea was it to add a dam vampire to MK???...i think they need new talent...they need john tobias back

John Tobias did nothing really with the storyline. Infact, MK2 storyline is nothing but a few basis ideas for characters and thats it. Setting up a tournament, someone wants revenge, some are the good guys, MKDA tops MK2 in storyline any day.

MKDA had characteristic descriptions of each of the fighters, and the participants were logical and well designed. Vampire? Who says that a vampire can't be in MK? (I'm so fucking tired to write again, check for the term Rodjung in eastern mythology concerning the Himalayas for example and then talk about vampires if you have the spine) female Sub-Zero? She was his damn pupil, so why would she be different in aspects dealing with her power?

Another thing was coherency and consistency in MKDA compared to MK2. MK2 had what if endings and were slightly logical in their way, but: MKDA had much more: each ending had a pre-basis and flowed directly with the others (Sub-Zero and Frost, Nitara and Cyrax, even retconned in the intro of MKD -what was the most genial idea I've ever seen Boon and co. come up with since MK2). MK2 had a fair dark-fantasy storyline, but MKDA top-ped it as the rest of the iceberg.

i don't really think the general direction of the story needs fixing...just how they're writing it...i mean lets face it....most of the endings in mkd sucked ass(looks in sub zero's direction)...but the endings that were good turned out to be huge....noob saibot turns out to be the original sub zero, havok ressurects shao kahn(which was totally screwed over by the game cube version, and totally eliminated havok's importance in the mk universe...just another reason to hate nintendo i suppose) but yeah....we don't need a new direction...just better writers...the whole one being thing intreagues me

but if you mean fix the story as in a mksm retcon fest...then no thanks

no offence...but ur an EXTREME hard core fan..who will take anything boon puts out...but yea i mean wat was the point of havin a vampire in mk?? theres no purpose to it..it was a dumb idea..theres no purpose to frost either..she came n left...there was nuthin special about them...john tobias came up wit alot of the orginal characters and designs.. thats y we need him back...

Who says that Nitara is a 'Rodjung'? I think that's something you made up. And just out of curiousity, I did a search for Rodjung, as you suggested. I tried a search for keywords 'Rodjung, Himalayas, Eastern mythology and vampires'. I found nothing! Nothing at all on the internet about 'Rodjungs'. Maybe you just got the name wrong, but I thought I'd let you know that. I think that Nitara wasn't a vampire or a 'Rodjung', just a gothic woman with wings, a wannabe, and I also think she was slightly out of place in MK, like where did these vampires come from all of a sudden?

I think that the MK storyline has been destroyed beyond recognition post MK:DA. There's so many plot holes, the storyline is inconsistant and mostly incoherant with so many things that don't make sense. Repetitions in the storyline such as everyone being ressurected at some time or another. And cardboard cut-out characters, especially the new characters in DA and Deception. MK:SM, from what I have heard, completely destroys everything that was set up in MK2. Wow too bad for the fans with the 'MK has a good story' argument, that must suck. They need to employ a writer with at least competent writing ability, not some wild imagination that scribbles down whatever is in his head and forgets everything they've built up in the past.

well said..u read my mind

Definition of a Rahyangs (pronounced rodjung, rodzsung, rahdjang): by definition a rodjung is an undead relative haunting those who buried them improperly or without caring. A dead body if left unatended during the night in it's grave, can be possessed by malicious spirits and demons.

A rodjung is basically a possessed corpse brought back to life, what seks to wreck havoc may it be through senseless stalking of prey, or disguising themselves as weary travellers. The particular interest lies within the apro-ach of rodzsungs in Nepals mythology, where the buddhist, hinduist and other regional faiths have all common elements of folklore predating, but mostly stemming from the period of Bon priests (Bon priests were dis-tinguishable by the color of their caps, as they were sorcerers, considered heretics by later buddhists moving to claim domain in Nepal since they considered human offerings and sacrifices possible and noteworthy. The Bon priests were eradicated shortly afterwards, sporatically their legacy endures within Nepals buddhist shrines, monasteries and chortens).

The Bon Priests had many amazing atributes listed as original powers stemming from a form of higher asceticism, such were the Tulpa (perfect copy of the person, that one who wields the strongest mind to create one that is) and Death yellers (possibly being able to command someone to die, considered as canonical singing before ceremonial murders) and the ability to actually communicate with the evil spirits manifesting themselves thus even able to create rodzsungs.

A rodjungs description varies, some elements were incorporated from chinese emigrants, mostly that of the "hopping ghosts" (hey, Darkstalkers reference: Hsien-Ko / Lei Lei is a hopping dead). Since the variants of native animals was scarce at best, rodzsungs sometimes possess extraordinary feats, such as sometimes spreading wings, those of a himalayan mountain bee, or sometimes cave bats (The Himalayan mountains have bats at their lower, southernmost feets. Btw, this rings any bells?).

The Bon Priests methods consisted mostly of ceremonial recitations and from the principle of the manifestation of will through symbolism: speech and writing were instrumental (for example: the praying mills, the scriptu-res placed in stone graves to keep away spirits and deny them the opportu-nity to dig up the dead), thus controll was maintained in a similar way. An artificial rodzsung had written scriptures upon it's very skin in bonpo (the art of Bon, btw, check Nitaras wings again).

Why was Bon eradicated by Buddhism? A simple quote would say all:

"A minister called gYu-sgra Ne-ra said to the king: . . . In India there is said to exist the so-called Buddhism which is unlike Bon. It is easy to practice and light to bear. I beg you to have it here. The minister mChims-bzher said: 'This Bon is heavy to carry. It is voluminous to learn. Its depth impedes accomplishment. Its protectors are easily offended. So I ask you to abolish it." (from the Treasury of Good Saying: A Tibetan History of Bon, 84)

"A person who has attained realization, would not have made a distinction between Bon and Buddhism.." (a Bon priest, from the Treasury of Good Saying: A Tibetan History of Bon, 91)

"At that time the Buddhist made many Bonpo texts into Buddhist texts. The 'Mental Teachings' of Bon were transformed into the Sems-lung-phyogs (Dzogchen) of Buddhism...thus many texts were made Buddhist and their titles changed." (from the Treasury of Good Saying: A Tibetan History of Bon, 92)

Some time after the decline of Bon the Buddhist monks also broke their rules and polluted themselves with the wives or sisters or daughters of their people claiming them to be mudra. They tasted human flesh claiming it to be the mass of offerings. They indulged in various impurities claiming them to be sacred items. So the royal divinities were deeply perturbed....
around that same time, the spirits of the dead became ghosts since the Buddhists forbade the transmission of the 'posthumous evocation rituals'. The ghosts and Indian demi-gods combined to inflict plagues on mankind and disease on animals. Rain stopped." (from the Treasury of Good Saying: A Tibetan History of Bon, 99)"

Though the quote is sometimes inacurate, the parts where it speaks about the connection of flesh and mind by Bon is fairly downright to the point. Since sometimes certain areas adapted much more from Bon that was healthy for their own sake, purges were common in early times of the buddhist occupation. The flesh part is accurate. It continues:

"The wheel of Bon will be turned for the Benefit of the Thirty-three Gods." (from the Treasury of Good Saying: A Tibetan History of Bon, 139)

"The subjects expressed in our system of Bon are the Triple Doctrine, the Two Truths, etc., i.e. not those of Chos (Buddhism)of which Bon is alleged to be the false name." (from the Treasury of Good Saying: A Tibetan History of Bon, 186)

"Thus there are not only demons who pretend to be text discoverers in order to undermine the doctrine, but, because of the ineffable karmic forces which govern sentient beings, false textual treasures, which bring their ill-wishing to fruition, are numerous among ourselves and "the Others". They do great evil to the doctrine." (from the Treasury of Good Saying: A Tibetan History of Bon, 190)

OK most immportant part: Rodjungs, unlike the Kappa vampires of Japan what suck blood through the -dig this- anus, Rodzsungs are quite distin-guishable becouse of their zealous nature in bringing down men and women ALONGSIDE with their beliefs!

There are plenty of similarities between Nitara and eastern mythology, so to say that she doesn't fit is downright DUMB< STUPID< AND UTTERLY SHORT SIGHTED. Say rather that you don't like her design, but do not say that she does not belong to MK, a GAME BASED ON MYTHOLOGICAL and EPICAL events and roots. HE/SHE who SKIPS THIS TEXT AND GOES ON ABOUT THEIR BANTER wether or not NITARA BELONGS TO MK, can be considered IRRELEVANT WITHOUT PROPER DEBATE BASIS.

My point is, since spiritualism and eastern beliefs are -hmm- so popular nowadays, that Boon and co might have gotten some references about eastern equivalents of blood preying demons, and they incorporated as much as they can into MK with the characters roots based on various cultural, socio-demographical superstitions and legends. Anyways, may she be intentionally similar or just plain down reminiscent of eastern myths, Nitara can and is a worthy addition to MK games.

To have something actually exciting about theese creatures I would advise you Leslie L. Lawrence's books, if there are any translated to english (what I assume has alerady been done).

P.S: anyone donwright unable to find something about this in the first place is searching the wrong way. Not even Wikipedia has extensive knowledge and background about theese things, and forget google or anything else similar.

Advised literature: "Treasury of Good Saying: A Tibetan History of Bon" from where I quoted, it's actually a good start to have a wiew about Bon.

but dam u gotta understand not everyone knows all that shit..lol...i dont even think anyone around 20 blocks from me knows any of that..ur goin WAY TO DEEP into things...n besides she just dont fit in...

You still don't get it do you? Is not wether it has elements of mythology, but it's about hows everything subjective. You say that she doesn't fit in, I say that she does perefctly, hell, even beter than Raiden or Scorpion. Why? becouse it's my preference. I hate it when all of people begin to bark about why this character is shit simply becouse they don't like him/her at first sight (91% of people judge on first sight wether they accept it or not. THIS is fact.) I leave out characters that don't served and would not serve any real purpose as primarily a character. Thats why I dislike Rain and co, becouse they are secondary in importance. I don't give a damn about powers and looks at first, I only examine the purpose he/she/it serves nothing more. All others come second. That is pseudo-professional cha-racter analysis for gods sakes.

So it's not about literature and stuff like that (by the looks of it, most of MK fanboys aren't concerned about storyline coherency, they just go out of the roster, the plots mean dogshit to them) but purpose. And Nitara served a purpose thats for sure (all elements point that way: character buildup, teamed up with a playable character, and has interactions with at least two or three characters, and had important elements in MKDA -researching Reptiles race, giving the lizard his kirehashi, schemed to slow him down).

The conclusion: the professional part of me would say you don't prefer Nitara for example becouse you didn't liked her in the first place, otherwise you would have bothered with reasoning why. Other than saying she just doesn't fit in is complete dilettantism (no offense, but seemingly true). I say you don't like her becouse she looks "ugly, weird, you're alienated from the concept...doesn't matter", and not becouse of sense to driving force.

I'm gonna give my adwanced literature certificate away for a dollar if this continues. Ehh.