"Chrome. I know the history of old japan very well. Shinobis/ninjas etc. no mather how do you call them, because they had many names but one purpose. The main problem is that you don't see the fact, that those ninjas in MK, who Tobias created in his mind are not equal with the assasins from japanese empire. These are the MK ninjas and their main attributions are the martial arts, hand to hand combat, quickness.. and not the weapon combat."

Who doesn't know the history of Japan if he is occupied with things such as MK? The question is, is that enough? Or is it valid in the first place? But tats aside the point, just an interesting lingering thought.

Irrelevant, they were proficient in martial methods to an extent. Wether that is weapon, unarmed, mounted it's not the point. I am also well aware of the concept scethces of the "MK ninjas" from MK1 and those had weapons just as Shang Tsung had. Err, and you take weapon combat and martial arts as two different entities? Bad move - from personal experience.

**

"Vogel did the same mistake as you. He thought that making old school ninja from scorpion with katana sword and making Sub-Zero's outfit, style and weapon something simular to armors, weapons and outfits in Chinese empire style is a good point because he didn't see the theory of Tobias."

And is Tobias handled as a maxim here? Becouse thats not necessarily relevant to criticism and deconstruction. Theese are decorations that don't change anything about function of the characters. And the real question is: wether he liked or wether he did not like Tobias' ideas, he changed it, it is YOUR opinion on the matter, the fucntion hasn't changed, therefore Scorpi-on hasn't changed untill the plotline station.

Maybe you are attached to Tobias' verison, but that doesn't applies quality.
infact, it is their property, and -ahem- what do you know of their intentions? I mean, they might have wished Scorpion to be something like this in MKD from the first place? Theese surface things don't mean anything functional.
At least in character assembly. A person is not built up from armors, but from a personality. A profession and it's accessories come secondary.

**

"Don't let the literacy dazzle you and try to think with an ordinary MK fan's mind so you will see that he knows one thing, the thing that MK1-4 had something what's missing from MKDA and MKD and he cannot tell you what this thing is."

I do. The lack of detailed description and denser and shorter plotlines not linking through games. Every character had alot more simple backgrounds
and that is what you may find as superb to the new one. You could handle the old one as a whole unit. When we are at the sixth or seventh install-ment things get alot more changed becouse we can't let the plot to beco-me stagnant. You may not like the change, fine, but if Tobias were in char-ge now, he would had to change it also, and then you would have the pos-sibility of not liking that too.

what I meant with I do is that i can explain this part of it as of now"

Btw, I do not shameless to admit that I have a little bit more literal knowled-ge than almost 90% of those who are dwelling into the plots. I am not entitled to criticise others, nor would I want to, I merely debate, but I will use all the methods I am learned through the seminars. And those cannot be argumented over of being not valid. If I miss something or have smaller view over the issue, then I modify my opinion on something according to it.

Therefore it is not appropiate for you to say that I am bedazzled by it. I am trained to use it, since it will be my future profession damnit. And if not the literacy, then what else???

**

"This thing is not simple and Tobias's theory of ninjas in MK was only one of many. That would be a long analysis if i had to try to explain it. Chrome, the fact is that you cannot explain something what simply isn't true only because you lean on literacy and vocabulary."

I lean on axiomic facts. Now there we go, that was too literate wasn't it? It means that it is an indeniable fact, a rule that applies everytime and can-not be interchanged by any debate (such as the sky is blue, -don't get into the deate what spectrum do you experience, thats not the case. It is the reference to the color of the sky that we all know as the same)

One such collection of rules is decomposition as a part of literature. You just -sorry to say that- stated something directly opposing what is accepted throughout the whole word. Error might be in MY interpretation, but not in the facts.

**

Tobias's theory of MK world was something that cannot be imitated and even if nowdays there are cool characters, more explained story and cool things, the factor is, that Tobias's theory will still miss in all of these.

Especially the detailless and motion-based description. Yup, it cannot be copied since it was the most basic forms of storytelling. And if the theory misses? it's not like we have the right to decide over:
1. either what they give us
2. what they want to do
3. what they are feeling confortable and fitting for their creative needs

**

MK died in 1998 and what we see now is a cheap replica of something what made good income for Midway in 90's period.

For you. I experienced MK as an overly ridiculous fighter untill MKDA. I weren't into the fighting games all that much, but I clearly remember any part of the MK's plotline if need be.

**

"This replica is designed to flay the last oddment of the original MK and the last MK game will be the biggest fall. I suggest to MK Team (beacuse it is true that Vogel and the others are very creative) to make a new fighting game and let the MK rest in peace. You will all see that after a short period of time MK simply won't go so well and wont make enough income so they will throw it in the trashcan, then they will listen to my advice and make another fighting game, but when this become reality they will kill MK."

You just stated as it were an overly bad thing. It happens to all products. you are trying to permutate your opinion into facts. Maybe if it's true, who knows, I'm really not bothered with it. Becouse it will only die out if there is no need for it. The next generation of MK players will be -possibly- into the new MK's, and if they can keept the franchise alive, than whats wrong with it? Countless of people are being satisfied with a fun presentation. And those who will outnumber those who play old class MK won't give a rat's ass about your feelings, or about mine thats for sure, and I can't really blame them.

**

That's only my opinion, but everybody try to judge it himself.... Anyway, time will answer everything....

Peace!

You missed another key factor. Everyone has different needs and levels of satisfaction from a plotline. Some might be content with Rain returning as a good guy (aside the opinions on character value) and there may be some who are not content with such simplistic matters.

In my taste, MK and everything on the consoles considered so far to have excellent plotlines are mediocre so far, and since I only own a PC, I could check only the most unique games that have good plotlines (StarCraft for example is now not just a game, it has spawned a series of novels, bo-oks, it is the national -cyberspace- sport of South Korea etc.)

For example, Starcraft vs. MK? MK is a fairy tale compared to it. But it has it's shining points. Derivating from the whole discussion: please make sure that you don't try to justify your opinion as fact I beg you, it's exactly what you accused me of.

You are just too attached to MK1-4 era therefore biased about it. Such thing was naming MK4 better than contemporary mechanics. it's not, it may have been enjoyable for you, but to others it wasn't and sicne it can't stand in competition against "contemporary" engines (it wasn't 3D in the first place) it was even then an old thing remade in a new coating. Besides the only thing that engine excelled at was the use of OpenGL drivers and gamespeed. How do you explain the stepback from the different combos of each of the characters in MK3-UMK3? How do you explain the shitty 3D modelling and space handling (characters running backwards and such) and the collision calculating (leg breaker stomps can be abused) and the unbalanced roster? Theese were the basic problems of that engine. it had qualities sure, but MK4 was pulled down by those via ratings who were contemporary at the time.

Peace. I will prevail tough