ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ต.ค. 2024
- Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance is a dumb game with a dumb name, but the finale has surprising substance. Let's find out why.
Twitter: rycluse
Channel art: bruno_desn
Music:
Revenge for Vengeance - Metal Gear Rising OST
Collective Consciousness - Metal Gear Rising OST
It Has To Be This Way - Metal Gear Rising OST
I make other shit you know
th-cam.com/video/ahzxMxXQgzc/w-d-xo.html
The fact you posted this shit 2 hours ago is crazy
Holy shit.... Wait
BRO I FEEL THIS
all my video gets like 10 views but one of them got 2k for no reason
it’s pain
doing the meme before it becomes a meme...
this just randomly blowed up i just remembered that metal gear rising and decided to watch some content for nostilga
"macromachines, dad
they soften in response to physical trauma" -senator legweak
WUT? AHahahahahahah
I believe you mean representative instead of senator.
I have a stroke.
Us soften in question to spiritual healing
This is the comment you find on the top with 19k upvotes and it only has 150.
Sad.
Imagine how well written your character has to be to have this much of an impact on the story of MGR, the meme culture and basically the whole internet, despite only appearing in the last 30 minutes of the game.
Lmao you're here 😂
Where's the comments 😕
@@snasundertael69 i don't know 🤨
as expected you are here too🤔
Depending on your death counts it's an hour or two.
The reality that theres a legitimately deep discussion to be had about ideologies in this boss battle just makes it even funnier frankly.
Especially since it's just basically a fusion of a jacked-up Hank Hill in a nailstripe suit and a cyborg Donald Trump who almost beats you to death just to get a vote from you.
That's the thing about metalgear, there's always layers to *everything*
And more seeing the like counts on this comment right now is 666 which makes it funnier
@@thegreatkingdedede7391 I'm gonna whoop your ass, Raiden!
@@thefreshkingofbel1179 oh yes very funny.
I love how in the DLC Armstrong goes to shake Sam's SEVERED ARM.
Shows what sort of black humour he has.
Well, it wasn't severed. Only severely damaged through a stab in the shoulder.
@@ebutuoytikcus4352 might as well have been severed, he had to get it amputated and replaced with a metal one
It's not black humor, it's a power move. Sam cut off his arm. Armstrong cuts off the same one with his severed limb, reattached his own, then presents it to shake with his dominant hand as if to say "even your trump card wasn't good enough, my arm's on, your arm is falling off". It emphasizes Sam's complete and utter defeat. He's even forced to get a cybernetic replacement, something which he refused to do in the past, reliant purely on his own skill and his natural abilities enhanced by an exoskeleton. Armstrong figuratively stabbed him with his superior conviction, and robbed a piece of Sam's humanity in the process.
As black as his skin turns when he turns on his nanomachines
Sam also laughed when Armstrong went to shake his hand
The way Armstrong says "This is the greatest fight of my life!" during the final fight makes me happy because it means we were a worthy opponent and gave him a fight he'll never forget.
And we never forgot either lmao. The fight was such a spectacle!
Finally, a worthy opponent
Not much to forget when ur DEAD 💀
@@siyacer our battle will be legendary!
well, it was also the last
Odd how the silliest Metal Gear has the most consistent plot and message
Because Kojima didn't had much to do with this one.
Nah
The silliest is because when the people think about meme, they think about random post bullshit funny internet, while in this game the meme is in serius tone, how to shape the world
@@diegomedina9637 And I think for once it’s a metal gear game that doesn’t have a pissing “joke”
The biggest question is, why does everyone wanna lick kojimas ballsack? :/
I'm legit kind of sad that when you fight him he's only "Senator" Armstrong. He TOTALLY could have won the presidency if Raiden waited a few more years. Then the final boss could've been PRESIDENT Armstrong.
The Final Fight:
*PRESIDENT ARMSTRONG*
That sounds good
Well, the final boss of metal gear solid 2 is basically the president of the USA already.
Dojya~~n
@@boilerforsale3941 "Alternate universes son."
"Microscopic Robots, Kid!"
- US Congressman Limbtough.
The opposite big, metallic creatures, male child
“Played college ball you know ?”
Micro and nano are not the same thing, ya know🤔
"Largen't advanced electronics, youth!" - AppendageDurable
NANOMASHEENS SON
To me, the scene where Armstrong and Raiden give weak comebacks to each other always gave off strong vibes of them being essentially the same, and yet opposed. In other words, not opposites as some might assume after years of being exposed to that trope on repeat. Raiden is determined to be opposed to Armstrong, and fundamentally rejects the possibility of agreeing with him. At the same time that Armstrong is trying to convince Raiden that what he believes is right, Raiden can't entirely tell him based on his own beliefs that he's wrong because he believes in the same thing. As such, they are stuck in a futile argument of agreeing while not agreeing, complaining about the flaws in each other's mindsets without being able to fundamentally debunk each other. Thus, the weak comebacks.
Perhaps this is why Armstrong saw Raiden as his successor. Deep down he knew that Raiden believed in the end goal, even if he didn't agree with the means to get there. Ultimately, they were fighting for the same thing, and as long as that goal was reached it didn't matter to him who's methods of getting there were used. Whoever walked away from that battle would be the one to decide the method.
"Standing here I realize you're Just like me, trying to make history"
"History will decide who's right" -Jetstream Sam
its truly touching because it reveals that Armstrong did believed that everything was for the better, he didn't cared if he ended up dying, it was never about him anyways
Here's a fun fact, revengeance is a real word, it means: to use violence to attain peace
i wish it was, but that definition was made because of the game title and it isnt official
@@jynxed66six54 aw, much sadness
Awwww...
@@jynxed66six54 Apparently it *is* in fact an actual word, used in the 16th century.
Reminds me a bit of Megatron
Senator Armstrong isn't more than a meme, the word "meme" is an infectious idea, with unlimited potential!
Yeah, these whole thing used meme as a plot, there's no more than that.
@@KABLAMMATS The word "meme" was coined back in the late 70s.
Meme is just a funny picture
And definitely was not the downfall
@@nannerdunlocke1231 And Revengence takes place in 2017, I think.
Deep
The best part about Armstrong is the fact that up until he starts talking about “purging the weak” (and when you remember he got the brains of orphans addicted to piloting killer robots) he’s making enough sense to kind of worry you. Makes you go “oh shit is… is he right?” Man is so charismatic he makes you forget about the whole orphan brain thing
This is a thing to always remember honestly, to read fine prints
I always interpreted that Armstrong wanted to purge weaknesses in people, not necessarily execute those who can't bench 120lbs. Honestly, I'd rather live in his version of an ideal country rather than what modern society is becoming. People are becoming increasingly selfish, lazy, greedy, entitled and hateful.
Although f*ck Armstrong for using child soldiers, even if their traumatic memories can be wiped. Nothing makes that OK.
@@321findus Oh yeah, he definitely meant it figuratively. I think he believes that the world should belong to the people that are strong enough to fight their own battles like him and Raiden.
@@321findusno his goal was to leave the mentally and physically weak behind and only reward the strongest
You making up excuses for a maniac shows that your the type of gullible sheep Armstrong can manipulate in to becoming his mindless drone
Y'all do realize his were literal Fascist talking points... right?
It's pretty damn ironic that the one character who comes the closest to actually fulfilling The Boss's final wish is Senator Armstrong, sure he goes about it in completely the wrong way, but the sentiment is the same.
You could make the argument that Snake and Otacon were the closest. Ridding the world of Big Boss' legacy intentionally or not left a world very similar to the one the boss wanted. Where friends didnt have to fight each other for their countries beliefs.
not at all, he makes the same dumb mistakes that major zero, big boss and ocelot all made, trying to interpret the boss's will in whichever way they see fit, david was the only one to truly enact the boss's will because he wasnt trying to enforce an idealistic world view upon others.
are you fucking kidding me? he made a huge spider robot to force everyone to do what he wants
@@brunocar02 You're the first person I've ever seen to actually refer to him as David lol
The boss's will was live and let live
"Make America great again!"
- Senator Armstrong.
Do you think they actively copied that?
It's like they predicted the future in that game. But nobody payed attention.
@Lord Voldemort - Seriously? It's like how the Simpsons predicted Game of Thrones when Daenerys would go batshit crazy and set the town ablaze on her dragon, and that was years before the script was even written. It was a moment of unsuspected clairvoyance. Same with this, they didn't know it but it predicted what we would see in the political noise years after.
It has PLENTY to do with it, and your bird-brained denial doesn't make it any less true!
God I'm so sick of you idiots and your petty disagreements...
"Burn it down"
Same senator
@Chuck Baker But that doesn't mean anything, in this case it is more likely a coincidence as Regan used the term first.
Armstrong's policies and Trump's are nothing alike. The only similarity is superficial in that they both said "Make America great again" so no the game didn't predict anything. It is the equivalent of me saying "Regan saw the future! He knew Armstrong would exist!" But in reality it doesn't mean anything.
I don't know anything about your Simpson's point, frankly I don't care enough to look into it. But assuming the Simpson's had similarities to AGoT there's a ton of reasons why other than prediction.
I feel like people don’t understand that the company who made this actually did a realistically good job at telling a story that fits with Metal Gear, it just leans way more into the wacky side then main Metal Gear games probably would
First ever game : final boss fight consist of burning your own boss with a hairspray for a homemade flamethrower.
@@slynthehedgehog8061
You're actually describing the 2nd game. Or more technically, the 3rd game since there was one non-canon game between Metal Gear 1 and Metal Gear 2.
It's the Saints Row IV of Metal Gear.
@@pangerlenis4569 except that SR 4 sucked, and MGR is amazing
Snake eater had a roaring/meowing gunslinger that would end up transplanting a clones arm and pretend to be him while being the true hero of the story. Kinda all wacky games lol
Senator Armstrong lies in the ground, forming Raiden's shadow against the sun set. PURE PLATINUM GAMES KINO.
Yooo I never noticed that.
Holy shit
alot of people only see armstrong and the whole game as cheesy but hilarious and uh "cool".
but the fact something is so cheesy and fun doesn't make it any less smart. i swear, MGRR does Raiden's character better than MGS4.
That's makes sense though because mgrr takes place after mgs4.
at this point he's gotten past his emo suicidal phase and by the end of mgrr has also accepted his jack the ripper side.
@The One-Man Army yeah, they shouldve just left him alonw in that game lol
@Collins Ongaya a character can have character development and good character moments even though theyre not the main character.
@Collins Ongaya i guess so
The point is mgs4 didnt do justice to his character, but only repeated his arc from mgs2
It's more that he's developed from 4 and 2, I'd say.
Never realized that right after Armstrong dies he's perfectly in line with Raiden's shadow. It's a very obvious metaphor but I've never noticed it.
The fight between Raiden and Armstrong is so great precicesly because they both have a point, but can't agree on who is more right. The best fights are both physical and ideological.
This is illustrated at the final fight by them both silently agreeing that they need to fight to the death to decide who has the right to perpetuate their beliefs.
To demonstrate this, they both take of their masks. Raiden says the "this isn't my sword" line and Armstrong takes of his glasses (something he never did while fighting Sam). In those two very simple actions, they each compeltely discard their respective "protector" and "senator" faces and from that point on, they fight as two guys who are just focusing everything they have on killing each other, putting their convictions on the line. This makes the fight incredibly emotional as well.
A well crafted comment sir!
I respect your comment and I respect both Raiden and Armstrong's philosophy sir, but fuck Senator Armstrong, he made me shout in rage and effort just to get him below 100% health.
@@universesbiggestdouchebag8350 understandable man 👍
@@universesbiggestdouchebag8350 The thing is, Armstrong having 200% health actually matches the ideological battle Raiden is having with him. If you find all of the health upgrades and buy the ones in the shop, you reach the exact same 200% health value, which means that Armstrong is actually the only boss who can be considered to start on an even footing with an upgraded Raiden. Also, Monsoon is way worse - he's a run killer if you're trying to S-rank the game, while Armstrong is actually a lot easier to S-rank despite his early stage BS.
@@dieface12 Monsoon: i see you are trying to have a S Rank run. It would be a shame if someone were to MEME all over it
You know something? It's really ironic how Armstrong believes the world is so cruel that he needs to play to its tune to see it change. To do terrible things so that terrible things can stop. But Raiden, someone with an easily worse life, believed in better parts of people, taking problems one step at a time. I think Raiden changes from this in two ways: he sees Armstrong's correctness in the threat the status quo poses, and he sees how far people can go to combat it, both of which he respects. He decides to take up Armstrong's war because after seeing what one man was willing to sacrifice, even from others and not just himself, sundering the present for hope of the future, ultimately giving his life for the world he loved, he could not let it go in vain. He would merge their ways. Raiden's own fight for the present, avoiding wrongdoing now, and Armstrong's, taking the fight to the system to save the future. Raiden's perspective, going from terrible things to love and belonging taught him hope, which he carried in his philosophy. Armstrong lived well, but it was hollow because so many others were squandered around him. He was handed what so few others could even hope to earn the hard way, and it hurt him to see that. His good life was drowned out by the suffering of others. It taught him despair instead of hope. If the world's already on fire, what's a few more embers in hope it will one day go out? Opposite emotions and conflicting yet complimentary ideals met on the summit, and after conversing and musing on the world, left with this: the ends will not justify any means, but the cruelty of a means does not justify surrender. So Raiden used that information. He would not repeat Armstrong's cruelties, but he would most certainly not continue his own complacency.
Well said
In Raiden's words, he's batshit insane.
He basically wants to start wars to make 'Murica Great Again and has this incredibly extreme view of Survival of the Fittest (Not Charles Darwin, but Herbert Spencer), pro-Eugenics in truth and believes people who are sick, crippled, not smart should perish against the ones who are strong and smart, effectively a Extreme-Fascist society with Nazi ideals - minus the race-targetting programs.
Yes he admires the strong that survive and make change, but this guy is an absolute war nut that makes Sundowner seem like a hippy. He plays his face to the public as a strong, patriotic american who wants to restore liberties to the people but is nothing more than a Revolver Liquid Ocelot wannabee that wants to make the war economy how it was in Metal Gear Solid 4 but with America's boot up everyone's ass. He doesn't have the same qualities as Solidus Snake - The means of liberty to liberate society from the hands of the Patriots, an AI super network created by Zero to continue his interpretation of the Boss's will which is a one world government to unite the people via eliminating ideas, beliefs, opinions etc.
For Armstrong the ends justify the means even though it makes him a hypocrite
@Vic Viquor Ye i read it again and now i understood it. Sometimes emotions can override logic but then again we are talking about fictional characters in a slash em up, sneak mix game.
All in all Kojima and his team are geniuses for making their characters so interesting, engaging and 3 dimentional with movie cinematics and make us want to emphancize with the characters.
Two ideals, one who literally fought for his life to survive and one who used his intelligence and social skills to comfortably get to the top, basically being lucky with opportunities and smart. Well, armstrong served in the Navy Seals and chose that over football carrier but his ideology doesnt take into account actual soldiers and is disconnected from the harsh realities of war as pawns in a deadly political game of chess.
Killing a leader to start this is terrorism and regardless of intent is an evil way to acheive his goal, quite hypocritical like Cypher.
Please be my philosophy teacher
This is more of a surface-level character design thing, but I like how Armstrong and Raiden are total mirrors of each other. Raiden is, on the outside, a cold metal shell with only a bit of humanity. This reflects how he kind of robotically goes through the motions over the course of the game. But inside, he is flesh and blood, and he only reveals this humanity when he is injured (or rather has his ideologies challenged by the bosses).
Armstrong, on the other hand, appears to just be a normal person. He clearly wears his heart on his sleeve, and is happy to give big dramatic speeches. But his very heart is a machine. When Armstrong has his ideologies challenged, he hardens his body and doubles down, violently defending it. In doing this he shows his inability to accept any other path than what he has chosen.
In a way it makes sense for Raiden's hardest fight to change him the most. Armstrong broke through Raiden's shell more than anyone, and was able to alter the way he viewed the world. Of course on the other hand, Raiden was the only one able to break through Armstrong's defenses, proving his ideology to be flawed.
It could be simplified even futher; Raiden is outwardly a machine with true humanity in him, while Armstrong is flesh and blood encasing a cold ruthless machine.
I love this comment. It's great
For a boss that was shoved in at the last second, it's pretty mind blowing that he's become such a fan favourite character. Not just for Rising fans, but Metal Gear fans as a whole.
He also played college ball... you know?
at some cushy ivy league college
Try University of Texas
Could have gone pro if he hadn't joined the Navy
war as business to collecting fans and massive choose
@@ditto7047 He ain't one of them beltway pansies
Don't fuck with that senator!
Great video, but I have to disagree that Raiden is carrying on Armstrong's ideology. Armstrong's ideology is about the freedom of people, giving them a chance to fight for their own ideals, and basically saying that those who can't enforce their ideals don't deserve their ideals at all. However, Raiden specifically counters this by his entire goal of "protecting the weak". He, of course, is a hypocrite, because he's using this ideal to justify more killing, but in the end it's easy to understand what he means. His goal is to fight for those who can't fight for themselves, and imo, in this way, he is a perfect enemy for Armstrong. Whereas Armstrong wants to start greater war where everyone fights for themselves, Raiden is content with fighting his own war without involving the others that he had worked with along the way.
Of course, the irony of this is that Raiden is doing exactly what armstrong's ideology said he should do, which is to fight for his own ideals by force and fight for what you believe in, not for a corporation or country. Armstrong got killed by exactly what he was advocating for.
Anyway, subbed.
i agree, raiden's last line is "i've got my own war to fight". meaning he is doing what he wants to do. the difference is between what armstrong's "own war" and raiden's "own war" actually are.
It's not ironic that Armstrong's ideals in Raiden kill him, it's exactly the reason why he wins even in death. Their methods are different, not the ideology.
Ah, but you're ignoring a very particular thing about Armstrongs ideology; he can't fight for his own ideals, because his ideals are to not use the thing that grants him agency; he can follow something other then his ideals or no ideals at all.
@@marcusdaloia2974
Uh can't fight for his own ideals? Did you miss the last boss fight of the game and jetstream sam DLC?
He's just smart enough to know that you can't fight EVERYTHING with just a mean right hook and football punting form, also nanomachines.
Gee thanks for that summary pal !
I think part of the reason Armstrong likes Raiden is that; Remember when Raiden was saying Armstrong never "Felt hungry" or "Had to kill just to survive"? Raiden is speaking from experience, as a former child solder. Yet here Raiden stands strong and powerful having killed some powerful men, women, and machines in the world. In Armstrong's nation: Raiden would be a model citizen, someone they would likely turn into a literal poster boy! I feel if Armstrong just brought up Raiden's past and said something like "Turned out pretty good for you, eh?" What would Raiden say, how would he counter that? Of course he could start talking about how until very recently he had been a puppet for secret shadow governments for his whole life. But Armstrong hates secret shadow governments just as much. Armstrong's ideal world is just Raiden's life but with Raiden at the front seat of it. Thats why Armstrong is is Raiden's shadow, at the end of the game Raiden starts to live his life the way Armstrong would have wanted.
2 months late to the discussion but I'll give your comment a shot
> I feel if Armstrong just brought up Raiden's past and said something like "Turned out pretty good for you, eh?
All Raiden would have to do is to remind him that Raiden is an exception, not the status quo. His experiences collectively are what made him who he is and missing maybe even one of them would've drastically changed him as a person. He was uniquely equipped to enter the life he's in now. The same can't be said to "the weak" that he tries to protect
The only problem with Armstrong's ideology is that he is a hypocrite by definition since he compromises the very thing he wants to end. That is war
In the original japanese version, when Raiden says "you know nothing about the weak..." Armstrong responds with "Neither do you" and explains why Jack isn't weak.
@@ForTheBrotherhood I'm guessing Armstrong says it's because Jack overcame those challenges due to the qualities of the strong or something right? which would further show their separate definitions of weak.
@@stalechite4152 I think he could also say that it wasn't on the virtue of strength that he got where he was. Snake, Rose, Sunny and all the lessons they taught him made him the man of conviction he was, not just some "survival of the fittest" struggle nonsense. The real fallacy of Armstrong's philosophy is that no one in power gets there on their own. People have to GIVE you power.Even the most powerful warrior to ever walk a medieval battlefield would be nothing without his fellow soldiers to protect him, his armorer to arm him, and his cooks to feed him. Leaders exist because people need a spokesperson to express their will.
I can't help but feel that when exposed to Raiden's idea of "The Weak" the Senator may have internally agreed with Raiden on the moral scale.
I mean from the get go he agreed that folks who didn't deserve it were gonna get punished in his new world. "Making the mother of all omelettes can't fret over every single egg" But I figure it may be less of a "Survival of the Fittest" mindset there and more "I know its awful, but it has to be done". And his rebuttal building up Jacks achievement of "Surviving" he might believe that Jack's idea of "The Weak" will have the chance to build themselves up like Raiden through strength and force of will, rather than being kept down by those already ontop and who use the system to suppress competition.
Once more the way he deliverers it . His confident swagger and smug face gone replaced with pacing and a concerned look. He knows he's the "Bad guy" but he wants desperately for Raiden to understand he's a necessary evil in order to better the world.
God it makes me wish we have games like this today.
I think the biggest miscommunication between the two is that they fundamentally mean different things when talking about 'the weak'.
Raiden is talking about the poor and oppressed, those rendered helpless by a broken system.
Armstrong is talking about the weak willed and vapid, those who don't believe in anything other maintaining their own wealth and power.
I think that's part of Armstrong's confusion regarding Raiden's opposition, they're fundamentally talking about different people.
@@thomasparkin259 I think they're both aware that they have different definitions of the word. So they aren't so much misunderstanding each other as they are arguing from different perspectives on the same problem. Armstrong points out that Jack fight to "protect the weak" only serves to keep the status quo, and that he's ultimately helping the "weak" and corrupt heart of America thrive. While Jack points out that Armstrong's attempts to tear out the roots of the corruption in America involves treading upon the "weak" and powerless, perpetuating the same problems he's trying to solve, and that he's only able to dismiss that because he's never been in their position.
That's why Raiden walks away with a combination of his and Armstrong's ideals. He now realizes that this status quo has to be broken is some form or fashion, or the weak will be trodden underfoot again and again at the whims of the wealthy and influential. How he differs from Armstrong, hopefully, is that he isn't willing to stoop to the same inhuman means of accomplishing this goal. Because he's able to empathize with the people who could be caught in the cross fire.
@@donnovandalusong266 there are plenty of games with the same or similar levels of depth, they just unfortunately tend not to have the budget of AAA games.
@@thesquishedelf1301 amén
Senator Armstrong is just funny valentine without D4C
Is that a fucking jojo reference?
@@HD-tl6yj hell yeah
Imagine FV with D4C and nanomachines
Then he wouldnt be spinning ,if you get what i mean ;)
@@Ananas_on_fire Corpse parts son! You can't hurt me!
"I'm going to rid the world of pointless wars, Jack" is on one hand a line that should directly speak to Raiden, as his misery of having been a child soldier is due to one of them, but also shows the hypocrisy of Armstrong's philosophy and actions very clearly, since he literally started a pointless war just five minutes earlier and had propagated the use of child soldiers through the SERE's programme.
A war to end all wars is just going to be the worst war so far until the next asshole tops it, and much like Sundowner puts it, war's just part of humanity and even Armstrong won't put a stop to it, especially with his methods.
Armstrong would argue that his war is far from pointless, that it has the greatest reason of all: to liberate the most powerful country in the world from its puppeteers from beyond the grave.
Whether or not you agree is up to you.
like... you said it yourself, "rid the world of POINTLESS wars." his intent was never to end all wars, only that the wars of the future should be fought over beliefs. it's not hard to understand that since he says it himself as well. his war was far from a pointless one if he was doing it to (in his eyes) change the world for the better.
@@sb17899 It is hypocritical: why are other wars pointless then? In what way? By his argument, then anyone who started any previous wars (even the one he claimed to be pointless) can claim the same thing: Afghan wars was to defeat terrorists and bring peace, Liberean war (the one Raiden was born in) was to defeat seditious rebels to restore peace, ... He does not give this reasoning because it does not fit his own narrative. In the end, it is a war to build his version of what the world would be, and it is just as "pointless" as the one he is claiming to eliminate.
@@sb17899 rejection destroying economy
Also, a world filled with constant fighting over personal goals would be filled with pointless wars.
Senator Armstrong appealed to me because he both talked the talk AND walked the walk. When I first played Revengeance I had never seen any memes on the game and honestly had no idea I was about to see Armstrong use Raiden to score a field goal, it was a genuine surprise. That spectacle was amazing enough on its own, but the main thing was that Armstrong actually fought in the first place. After Excelsus was destroyed I was sure that he'd just melt into a mewling puddle begging forgiveness and mercy so we could feel appropriate contempt for the pinstriped executive hypocrite who spread war but cravenly flinched from it himself... I mean, that's how these stories usually go, isn't it? but then when Armstrong doesn't even blink and gives Raiden a brutal beating you sit up in your chair and start to realise that something more interesting and distinct than your standard bland 'profit = bad' homily is happening here and it's really worth paying attention.
The speech armstrong gives in the Japanese version is pretty different...
Here is the Japanese dialogue for the speech cutscene.
Raiden: you’re pretty strong...
Raiden: But, that’s all you have
Armstrong: what’d you say?
Raiden: ‘The pride of the people’?
Raiden: ‘The strength of the nation’?
Raiden: The economic downturn wasn’t because of the downfall of the patriots.
Raiden: It’s because the 1% hoard their wealth
Raiden: In the end, your goal is nothing but money...and your approval ratings.
Raiden: You don’t have a single conviction to stand by.
Raiden: Scum like you are nothing but parasites.
Armstrong: ...Oh? That’s what you think, eh?
Armstrong: Listen up, I’m gonna teach you a few things
Armstrong: For sure I’m after approval ratings and money. But there’s something more...
Armstrong: “I have a dream!”
Raiden: A dream?
Armstrong: For sure, the people today have national pride.
Armstrong: But their idea of a ‘strong America’ is completely worthless!
Armstrong: What I want is ‘pure’ freedom!
Armstrong: The freedom to exercise your own authority as you see fit...
Armstrong: Without hiding under the umbrella of the law.
Armstrong: Naturally, if everyone exercises their own power, strife is inevitable.
Armstrong: But that’s fine.
Armstrong: That’s exactly the kind of nation I want to build.
Armstrong: A world borne of real struggle!
Armstrong: As things are now, the people are too complacent - too lazy!
Armstrong: I’ll give them all a wake up call.
Armstrong: A call to true patriotism!
Armstrong: I’ll give them something to be truly proud of!
Armstrong: The pigs will be eaten alive!
Armstrong: If you have a problem with someone; deal with it like a real man!
Armstrong: That’s the America I’m trying to build!
Armstrong: If I’m elected, I’ll crush all the degenerates from society!
Armstrong: All the pathetic money-makers and blue sky thinkers.
Armstrong: The socialites, herbivores & metrosexuals
Armstrong: I’ll crush them myself if need be!
Armstrong: The weak will be driven out, with only the strongest remaining.
Armstrong: From the chaos, a better America will be born.
Armstrong: An America that harkens back to the good old days.
Armstrong: As people we’ll return to how things should be!
Raiden: How... are you...
Armstrong: I don’t know if it’s because of their ‘memes’ but...
Armstrong: The American dream is corrupted beyond measure.
Armstrong: War and violence is just another business venture.
Armstrong: But soon, such wars will be no more.
Armstrong: I’ll take this worthless society, and dismantle the systematic violence within it!
Armstrong: I’ll bring back the individuals right to take the law into their own hands!
*Armstrong stomps on raiden*
-
Armstrong: Well...how’d you like my policies?
Raiden: You truly are... a politician...
Armstrong: It’s a pretty good speech, huh?
Raiden: I think I really got the wrong idea about you...
Armstrong: You understand now?
Armstrong: I’ll get rid of worthless wars.
Raiden: yeah, I understand you perfectly.
Raiden That you’re a real piece of shit!
*Raiden flips Armstrong*
-
Armstrong: This society needs to change, but change always come with a price!
Raiden: And it’s always the weak who pay this price, right?
Raiden: That’s your ‘good old America’ right? You make me sick...
Raiden: Someone blessed with wealth and power...
Raiden: ...Growing up with no hardship.
Raiden: You don’t know a thing about the plight of the weak.
Armstrong: And neither do you.
Armstrong: With your own strength, you silenced every single enemy to cross your path, throughout your entire life.
Armstrong: Of everyone here, you should understand my ideals the most.
Raiden: ...You’ll be the next one to fall silent.
So if you managed to read through all of this you’ll be able to tell the Japanese script has less cursing which I’m fine with, but it doesn’t feel as impactful in the Japanese version imo.
Armstrong is a anarcho patriot. i mean, wow. thats a thing
Yeah this speech is considerably less cool than the english one
The japanese don't really have swear words like we in the west have most japanese "swear words" would be considered just less formal words from us
Yeah I'd vote for him, no question
Sometimes a good “Fuck you.” Lends a lot to a message.
I feel the second half is better in English, because it seems Armstrong respects Raiden more by saying he survived his past ordeals and came out strong, trying to prove his point that the people of America will come out stronger like Raiden
One point to add to the "I carved my path, you followed your wrath" line is that it's probably supposed to be both of them, Armstrong carved his path with this meticulous plan to fix America meanwhile Raiden just rushed into this plan to save the children's brains (which is pointed out by the other characters) however Armstrong also followed his wrath in the sense that he felt America was weakened and he had to fix it, and Raiden carved his own path by disconnecting himself from his past and fighting for his ideals
I so love that Armstrong is, in a way, a rich kid who looked at Raiden's awful past and thought, "Man, this guy's life is awesome!"
I always though it was Armstrong looking at Raiden’s life and think that the world he is building would allow people like Raiden to flourish. The people who had strength but never had a chance to use it. Armstrong wants to build a world where those people can flourish. He means to getting into a horribly wrong, but in they end I always thought he was fighting for Raiden, that’s why Raiden joined him in the end.
This guy was a child soldier and now he’s stronger for it. Armstrong when he misses the point of Jack fighting for the weak to not be abused like he was.
@@goastlyarrowplays But I think that while Armstrong was trying to build a world that could let more Raidens flourish, Raiden is still trying to stop anyone else from winding up like him. Yes, Raiden is Armstrong's ideal citizen because of Raiden's actions, but they're not fighting for the same outcome.
@@Nekros-t9e Thing is, Armsetrong sees "abuse" as inevitable to a degree, hence he wants it at least not be a waste.
He wants "men fighting their own wars, for their own causes and beliefs"
Aka he doesn't want the weak (politicians) manipulating things to use guys like Raiden, and keep them down afterwards.
@@goastlyarrowplays "the world he is building would allow people like Raiden to flourish." That seriously sounds like a terrible world: the dude was a child soldier, and the reason why he became relevant was his ability to kill people. IDK, whether that is a world we strive for.
Armstrong talks a big game about letting everyone have power and chase their own desires, but that does not change the fact that he is the one owning a military-industrial complex, he is the one with nanomachines, he is the one with deadly mercenaries on the payroll. He does not intend to give "everyone" power, just to a vague notion of people who are similar to him.
Grineer lancer: Why? why won’t you die?!
Rhino: *uses Iron Skin* Nanomachines son. They harden in response to all damage procs.
Relicvault 15 warframe
Kuva Lich: I like you Tenno, so I'm giving you another shot.
TENNO SCOOM
Fits Chroma too considering how Vex Armor works lmao.
Operator??
Operator??
OPERAAAATOR!!!
The most imposing and persuasive aspect of Armstrong is that he fully acknowledgesi the hypocrisy of his plan. He knows that he has to utilize the the very practices that he wishes to remove, which gives the impression (if not proof) that he has fully comprehended the ramifications of his actions and the effect that they will have. He seems like he has fully thought out his entire plan, which could be another reason why he is so charismatic, even in death.
"Acceleration Philosophy in a nutshell"
Accelerationism is stupid,
"You want to paint your house red, well you must first *burn* *it* *down* "
@@agnel47 Society isn't a house. If you want to use that metaphor, try to see it this way: if you wanted to paint your house red but it was infested with corrupt, sociopathic thugs who violently attacked you every time you tried to make a meaningful change to the house, burning it down and rebuilding it from the ashes might be the only way to force change. The alternative would be to tolerate the status quo forever, no matter how awful it might be.
@@jesusstaccato8448
That's Mother! Fun movie.
@@jesusstaccato8448 even so much as just kicking them out at gunpoint if it really came down to it might be good, I don't think burning it down would be necessary. There are very likely too many valuable aspects of this house to just casually toss aside in a fire.
@@Ζήνων-ζ1ι God, that's a really good observation. Great film too.
Well, the Excelsus fight song represents the way Armstrong presented himself to every character up to that point, with the tone of Raiden's perspective. It doesn't just represent a ruse or Raiden's opinion of a politician, it represents the man Mistral fell in love with. It represents the man Sam is thinking of when, in the Wolf recording, he's weighing Raiden's ideals in terms of what they're causing him to doubt. Armstrong is a character of layers and this is the outermost layer, the "mask" so typical of most every real life politician. It really helps here to consider Sam's whole arc, too. Armstrong only changes Sam's mind through a sheer man-to-man test of strength. Then Raiden comes along representing something deeper than that and Sam decides that, if Raiden can beat him, it basically means he has the strength to overpower Armstrong's ideals with his own.
And of course Sam only dies because he refuses to change himself, even while embracing the possibility of change in the world he lives in. You see, the characters in this game all seemingly represent incremental generational differences in our current society. It's something I, as an avid researcher (philosopher, anthropologist; philanthropist), have noticed more and more about people when trying to view the "big picture" of society through the lens of TH-cam. A particularly fin touch of Rising's presentation is in its use of characters who have all had the option to completely alter physical appearance and presentation. By judging each character's cultural and ethnic backgrounds alongside each character's chosen appearance, we can learn a lot. We tend to joke about things like "Who chooses to look like a middle-aged football dad" in reference to Sundowner but, if you consider him as a person consciously aware of how society responds to people based on outward appearance, it actually makes a lot of since for his personality.
In order to get a clear understanding we need to try to establish the literal age differences between characters. This would really need at least a paragraph for each character, so at this point I'd rather encourage viewers and readers to do their own research. The context we gain from this becomes fairly rich and interesting. We become more aware of certain situations; Monsoon, while a devoted follower of Armstrong, is also much older than he is. Sam is "between" Raiden and Armstrong in terms of generational differences; also worth noting is Sam's face is 100% the one he was born with, along with most of his body.
Besides considering age in years, it's also important to consider "social" maturity, of course. For all intents and purposes, Mistral plays the role of a high schooler crushing on a politician who gave a speech at her graduation ceremony that totally changed her, like, permanently for the best. Sundowner, while I believe he is older than Armstrong in years(?), is much like the young adult who went straight from high school into the military, and saw in Armstrong the kind of politician he would be eager to go to war for. Basically, after doing a lot of studying of these characters individually and together, we can try to pin down a reasonable list based on age and maturity:
First, while the characters we encounter as Raiden are static, Raiden represents a dynamic perspective, growing and maturing by learning lessons from "older" generations. So, here is my attempt at listing everyone, according to the mentalities of real life generations that they represent, from youngest to oldest: Blade Wolf (he represents the blank slate of the "newest" generation), [The start of Raiden's arc, in R-00, basically fits here], Mistral, Sundowner, Sam, Armstrong, Monsoon, [The end of Raiden's arc, by the time of the post credits fight, basically fits here]. Also of note, Raiden's support team is made up of different generations all working together across the gaps between them. When you include George, you get a really interesting pattern: Wolf (again a sort of "blank slate" representing the youngest), George, Sunny, Courtney, [Raiden fits about here, age-wise], Kevin, Boris, Doktor.
Also, for anyone who read all of that, it's basically still just a bunch of work-in-progress conjecture, totally open to interpretation and correction. ;0
did you just type the entire script of mgs4
@@ChawedMirthPrattEnterprise Nah man, the mgs 4 script will be 5 pages. This one doesn't even cover the first act of the game.
"I was wrong about you"
*credits roll, good ending achieved*
Senator Armstrong is one of my favorite characters from the Metal Gear Series. The others are Big Boss and Solidus Snake
Raiden, Armstrong and Mistral are mine
How about The Joy, mother of special force?
I see you have a type
Personally my favrouites are Sam, Otacon and Liquid
This was a spectacular analysis choked full of so my details I completely missed. This game was too much of a ride to keep up with every single thing going on and I hadn’t even noticed that each character symbolized a different justification for war. I really wish you analyzed the fight more as both the music and the dialogue had so many examples that demonstrate the characters doubting their own beliefs.
The very first lyrics of “It has to be this way”/“Standing here” point out both the realization that they’re extremely similar in motives and that neither of them can safely decide the right from wrong.
Furthering your point about how they both had their perspectives changed throughout their debate, Senator Armstrong went into the fight explaining how it was a war on terrorism and that Raiden was included as a target. He ends the fight going as far to call Raiden his successor, and even tried to partner with Raiden halfway through.
And although Raiden clearly did not cooperate, there’s something about the way he shakes Armstrong’s hand that makes it seem like he was convinced for at least a brief moment, perhaps yelling that Armstrong’s insane was partially to snap himself out of this mindset, but take that last thing with a grain of salt.
A press
@Dylan Wiebe Yeah that was kinda the point.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Henry"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
an a press is an a press you can't say it's only a half
A nanomachine is a nanomachine. You can't say it's only a half.
Armstrong predicted the jack'O pose.
What the fuck
lol
AYO😭
Armstrong's central ideal is, "the strong get to decide what happens. The weak don't."
Raiden, by virtue of winning, took that philosophy with him. The strong did win.
What Armstrong didn't count on was someone strong giving the weak a platform. Someone strong enough to kill him.
Memetor memestrong
Mememachines son!
Nanomamemes, son!
10/10 would nut again
Don't forget Memesoon.
Nanomachine, nanomachine, I'm a mother fucking nanomachine.
Don't fuck with the Memetor
This game's just proof that you can make a game where the term "over the top" doesn't even come close and have it be remembered more than games that came out 2 years ago.
We need a sequel to this game tbh, I need more Metal Gear Rising
Yeah... New songs... New characters... New memes!
What also struck me was how Raiden couldn't cut up Armstrong. Armstrong and Sam were the only enemies who he didn't mince. With Sam, he didn't dice him out of honour and respect. With Armstrong, he plain couldn't. By in-game logic, it's just the nanomachines. From a symbolic perspective, however, I think it represents him being unable to reject Armstrong's philosophy no matter how hard he tries.
"Make America Great Again"
"I have a dream"
It may have not gotten to Raiden but.
He has my vote
This video has shot up in views in the past two weeks. I don't know where you guys are coming from but I'm really appreciating all of your thoughtful responses, so keep it up. Tune in next time where I talk about the great mysteries of mythological allegory and why literally anyone should give a shit.
For science. You monster.
TH-cam recommendations are weird, my dude.
yeah, it was also recommended to me
however i've been listening a lot to It Has To Be This Way and did a couple of searches on Armstrong, so i kinda brushed it off
great video and +1 sub for you
I personally got recommended it by youtube.
George has been playing Metal Gear Rising alot lately, only natural people wanna know more about nanomachines, son.
I haven't touch anything metal gear related in a long time and yet youtube recommended me this video, not that i'm complaining.
Memes aside, he's definitely one of the most "human" character in fiction i ever seen.
Only in Metal Gear you can have a Cyborg Ninja fight a senator from Texas made of steel, and have them argue about economics all throughout the fight.
Despite not really being a true "Metal Gear" game, I still think Armstrong has to be the best villian in the entire series. There was actually some legitimate motive behind his actions, rather than Liquid's petty revenge plot (still a good villain, just stupid motives) or Solidus's... being the new "Big Boss" or whatever.
Big Boss just wanted to make a world of endless conflict so that soldiers would always have a place in life. Overthrowing the Patriots would come along with that. Solidus wanted to overthrow the Patriots for America's sake. Just like Armstrong, he wanted to make America great again. He also wanted to be able to be able to preserve proof of his existence by doing something great. To leave his personal meme on the world in place of the fact he can't leave genetic offspring behind. Similar to his idol George Washington.
Have you actually played MGS games aside from rising? A lots of the villains has reasonable motives. Solidus wanted to expose the Patriots, HE HAD good intentions. Liquid is understandable, he was kinda dumb. And a good villain doesn't need reasonable motives to be good, a good villains IS how much they believe in that motive. Even if its a dumb motivation.
@@yourewallsareveryconvenien8292 It's an opinion, bruh. Liquid was stupid and petty to me, but still fun, Solidus was muddled and boring, the Boss was... interesting, but not explored enough in 3 enough, Liquid Ocelot was ridiculous but fun, and I did not care for 5 to begin with. So yeah, Armstrong still wins.
@@mistermanners6661
What exactly is muddled about Solidus? Its a very similar set-up to Armstrong. its just that Armstrong has better one liners and choreography to make his stuff memorable.
Armstrong is one of the more memorable Metal Gear villains, but if we're simply talking motives, he's nothing special.
i heard that mgsv (or at least the phantom pain) is not a true metal gear. despite being a stealthy game. but mgr is the last true metal gear. he says that it's not about gameplay but about message. and i get what he mean
9:00 I think what makes him an interesting character is the unanswered question of "But if he survived/won, would his efforts have still made everything worse? Or could he really have maintained his dream-world through sheer strength?".
I always liked Armstrong because he's someone who, even in death, stood by his principles. Even if they were slightly hypocritical to one another, he believed what he believed.
We don't have many people like that anymore.
Doesn't make any less better or not incorrect.
Standing on what is wrong for the sake of principle is stupidity.
Erich Honecker.
well we have not portraid a senator as a insanely muscular strong stubborn person in years either.. I think it says quite a lot about someone who is that in shape and stubborn
@@nothinghere9486 People have their own principles as the commenter said, who or what defines if they are wrong or right? Opinions can't be defined wrong or right because everyone has their own, they just can't go against what we call "The Law", you can't have the opinion to break the law, can you? (And i think this is one of the main points of the boss fight too, ideals conflicting, what's right and what's wrong?).
@@henriquealves3086 objective reality exists, and it determines whether an opinion is right or wrong.
I can have an opinion that squids are really just another fish in the ocean. It makes that an opinion, but it also doesn't make it right.
I can have an opinion that my gender is the planet Jupiter, but that it is an opinion doesn't make it true.
Stop. Justifying. Something. For. Simply. Being. An. Opinion.
Right is right, and wrong is wrong. Standing on what you believe in even if you are already wrong is not principled.
IT. IS. STUPID.
*Nanomachines, son!*
-sorry, had to do it since the video didn't-
Well-explained btw! This format is interesting
DONT FUCK WITH THIS SENATOR
Literally the only reason I clicked on this video. :(
After watching Russian Barber's video about Operation NANO MACHINES SON. I just see Armstrong just inject a fuck ton of Nanomachines just saying Nanmachine sons
Holy shit I was just watching a video on Revengeance
Collective Conciousness is the theme for the *facade that Armstrong puts on* . That's why it also plays during his fight in Jetstream.
3:22 This kick has been passed down the Armstrong line for generations.
As someone who strives to be a writer, listening to character analysis's like this helps quite a lot in how i should always be looking at opposite viewpoints from characters and yet be so similar in the same spectrum. Critical thinking like this always is a joy to have in my opinion so i hope you continue to do these for a long time and have fun with it!
"laws are change to suit the people, not the other way around" beautiful
great analysis , its unfortunate that this game didnt sell more
also, platnum game's Vanquish, seems like it has a similar "moral" to rising, which is my enemy is not to different to me
this game deserved so much more than it got.
I feel like Rising is going to end up like MGS2, hated at launch, but revered in the end.
@@Crazimo i didnt know it was so hated i loved it and thought everyone else did especially since it got good reviews. but i agree mgs 2 was awesome and under appreciated on release and the same with this
Mgs2 has the best end message by far from any mgs, the one you can relate the most to. Since it affect us all
@@goosechaser13 its been so long since i last played it i forgot most of it ill have to go back again and have another go. my fav game growing up!
I want future videos to be more like this one, though as always there's some experimentation. I went completely music-free this time around, other than the samples and the intro and outro. How do you guys think that turned out? I normally like having music but I couldn't make it fit so I figured this would be worth a shot.
TankorSmash specifically for this example the lyrics set up the ideology topic and introduce unfamiliar audiences to the sort of experience the game overall -and not only in the discussed instance-tends to deliver. As someone who never played a metal gear solid game in my life I quite enjoyed the video and feel at least partly informed about its portrayal of Hegelian dialectics. I think there might’ve been a bit too much subject matter deprecating jabs but the concept of digging into the meanings of specific aspects in videogames sounds lovely to me
@ben zur Interesting that you mention Hegelian dialectics. That was definitely the idea I had in mind when making this but I didn't want to reference it directly since that increased the chance of me talking about something I don't know. I guess if you made the connection then I did my job well enough.
@TankorSmash The samples aren't something I plan on doing again, though I felt it important to directly reference it since the lyrics were relevant. I admit that some of them go on a bit long but I also admit that I've listened to and loved this music for so long that I outright didn't consider someone might not like it. Definitely going to consider that in the future
This is a somewhat random idea, but what if you did a character analysis of either GLaDOS or Chell from portal/portal 2.
Rycluse the video works quite well without music. However I think if it was longer than 15 minutes it would get quite... dry if you know what I mean.
No music plox. Gets distracting
To expand on Armstrong's philosophy of strength. Strength is the _honest_ expression of power. The issue Armstrong is attempting to address is that weak men, *unworthy* men obtain positions of power through dishonest means. In a honest system a strong man will able to rise to power and keep power through his own strength, in a dishonest system a weak man will be able to rise to power through lies, subterfuge, and manufacturing consent. Armstrong seeks to destroy such a system, but the system has become so corrupted, and weak men have been able to steal for themselves such unearned power, that Armstrong must first engage with such a system before he is able to destroy it.
Those who would support state power over personal power have abdicated their responsibility of enacting power to the state. 'I do not need to defend myself because the police will. I can't act on my will for change because I will be arrested.' Those who choose disempowerment are not the peers of the strong, but their consent is used to suppress the power of those who seek empowerment. Manufactured consent is so powerful that those even seeking peaceful means of empowerment can be easily demonized as 'terrorists' or 'insurrectionists'. Wars for these unworthy men are supported, while the power of those at home is constantly diminished. Through these political, economic, and media systems those unworthy who are in power are able to prevent those who may more worthy from rightfully taking their place.
To a strong person, they do not feel beholden to a system they were placed under by others. They do not see a _reason_ why their will and ambition should be curtailed by the system; they may see a power threatening them, but not a reason. They do not accept that a system represents their power; only they represent their power.
One thing this all reminded me of was a webnovel I read called “practical guide to evil.” It has a young villian protagonist who’s mentor notes he’s figured her out: for all that’s she’s ruthless enough to actually do anything for her goals, her ultimate goal is peace across the land. She’s surprised he doesn’t seem to have a problem with this. He notes they are on the Evil side, yes, but that is about being both decisive in will (what most selfish) and strong enough to achieve what you want; sure her outcome is unarguably on the side of good, but if she’s strong enough to obtain peace and keep it, she must deserve it. (Extra Interesting because his goal is to actually defeat Good, he notes privately that the odds she kills him if things go her way is pretty high.)
Then what is a "strong person" then?
@@wiswc Self reliant, resilient, capable, ability to express personal power
@@wiswc someone that can handle things with their own ways, their own power, without any system blocking them from handling it their way, their way can be killing the person
This is literally the entire theme of One Piece holy shit
Virgin Raiden vs Chad Senator Armstrong
Please do more character breakdowns, even just in this game would make me satisfied.
Hey nice blood angels profile picture
“How the hell did you get elected?!?”
The same way the US elected Solidus Snake.
That glorious thiccccccccccccccccc ass?
Doesn't he acknowledge his hypocrisy when he says "I'm using war as a business to end war as a business."
He acknowledges it the entire time.
When he says it is time to say the truth, he makes it clear that he is using the same methods used by the corrupt system, to destroy it from inside. Not unlike how raiden too acknowledges his own hypocrisy as he destroyed those weaker than him to achieve his goals, hence the line of how he isnt using his sword of justice.
I hope you see this: Your point about how the previous bosses were a way for raiden to confront the many reasons behind conflict is worthy of it's own video. This story is a natural sequel to the Heros Journey archetype. Raiden/any hero isn't without equal and isn't without worthy opposition, so having established himself as such, he has to confront the types of downfalls and flaws that could destroy him in one way or another. He had something in common with each boss and now has to confront an allied ideology in an antagonist character, but from their clash he more truly rises above as a greater, more complex hero of the story. Might be why people instinctively find this game so compelling. Is this a new archetype?
I remember playing this for the first time and was confused because Armstrong had spoke with such passion and reason that you kinda agree with him. I played the game again recently and I then understood the hypocrisy. The key, was exactly what you had mentioned about peoples perspective of the "weak". It's similar to the concept people idolize of "survival of the fittest."
I think the most important thing is that Raiden doesn't completely replace his own beliefs with Armstrong's, as you mentioned, he finds a way to combine the two into a 'happy' medium, so I don't expect Raiden to all of a sudden become the next big bad.
Rip Senator Armstrong
A man with a dream and a warrior
Now, for those who don’t quite understand, let me explain: Armstrong wishes to end war as a business and create a Social Darwinist utopia, where all the citizens of America fight their own battles and the strong survive while the weak perish. From a certain point of view, his arguments actually do make sense, and considering America, and by extension the world, were until recently controlled by the whims of the Patriot AI, it’s not hard to see where he’s coming from. For what it’s worth, he very much despises the Patriots; in fact, Armstrong is ideologically quite similar to fellow Patriot-hating politician George Sears, AKA Solidus Snake, who coincidentally Raiden also fought. Hell, much like Solidus, Armstrong also has some connection to the creation of child soldiers.
Of course, it needs to be noted that while Armstrong definitely makes a good case, he is also a bonafide anti-villain. For those who need clarification, TVTropes describes an anti-villain as “a character with heroic goals, personality traits, and/or virtues who is ultimately villainous. Their desired ends are mostly good, but their means of getting there are evil. Alternatively, their desired ends are evil, but on a personal level they are far more ethical or moral than most villains and they thus use fairly benign means to achieve it, and can be heroic on occasion. They could also be someone or something whose desired ends or means are not necessarily ‘evil’ at all, but their actions simply conflict with that of whoever seems to be the protagonist.” While he does have good intentions and seems to genuinely want to better his country, the fact he resorts to terrorist actions, child soldiers, and ridiculous levels of violence makes him clearly the bad guy.
I'd really like to see more deep dives like this, perhaps even with splashes of real world philosophy discussion to better fill in more abstract aspects of the characters you talk about.
This was a great video, can't wait to see more.
Armstrong definitely has my vote if I was American
Collins Ongaya Doing some wrongs doesn’t make the end goal any less right.
@@TheAnalatheist The ends don't always justify the means. Armstrong's end goal was irrational and impossible for our society to realize anyway. Voting for a man who uses child soldiers by harvesting brains and fans wars in Africa and supports terrorism can never be right. Nobody should vote for that.
Real politicians are liars, lobby shills and short-sighted, but they generally don't go as far as Armstrong. Anyone who thinks differently is delusional and villifies politicians to a dangerous degree.
Yourson Isold Politicians and their donors already do those things, though harvesting brains or organs in general isn’t usually the politician’s work, but rather their rich donors’ pastime.
@@TheAnalatheist Conspiracy theories and delusions don't count as facts.
Organ harvesting is something done in 3rd world countries and the like. Of course rich politicians will certainly pay for illegal organ transplants acquired in such shady ways (like every rich person in a 1st world country), but those are single instances among individuals. Its not killing hundreds of children to harvest their brains and turn them into cyborg soldiers for a united effort to control the war market. It's ludicrous to even compare the severity of the two.
+Yourson Isold
"Conspiracy theories and delusions don't count as facts"
How about nihilistic pessimism? Let's be real: considering how messed up the world is it wouldn't be surprising at all if some of our representatives were involved in those things knowingly or not sondiering the whole compexity of it all. The only real delusion is thinking it's not that bad. The scale is another question entirely.
Heck if it (Armostrong) benefits us then why should we care anout the ones that don't? Well yeah you might have family and friends but other thern them why care? Pragmatically speaking it's a benefit if it works.
I really love the fact Armstrong helped Raiden to get up when Raiden said he was wrong, and thought he's gonna agreed with him.
Love Armstrong despites him only appeared for a scene before the final fight. Wish it was longer. Maybe in MGR2 😂
Armstrong is right about the current state of the US (remember, Revengeance is set in 2018) but his solution to the problem is deeply flawed. He is dreaming about an ultralibertarian utopia, where government involvement is limited and everyone is basically up on his own. But that's also where Armstrong's nanomachines come into play. If he manages to kill Raiden, there will be no one left to physically challenge him, effectively making Armstrong invulnerable. It's pretty easy to spout libertarian propaganda when you know that you're on the very top of the food chain with a few others while the rest of the country - let's call them the bottom 99% - is literally fighting for survival. Sounds familiar? Think of his nanomachines as "protective wealth" that will shield you from prosecution (too big to jail), criticism (owning part of the press) and harm (living in a gated community, ride in armored cars, have bodyguards, etc.) All of these advantages will make you a very hard target.
There is merit to your words, however, I highly doubt that he would willingly stay on top of the food chain for any longer once he is done with destroying it, since he really doesnt care for himself other than his own ideals. So all of this "protective wealth" as in nanomachines is just the ensurance that he gets to do whatever he wants to do as for an endgoal.
Well, at least thats how I see it.
"libertarian propaganda"
@Alex K. I don't want to come off as pedantic, and I'm not sure if when you said "the bottom 99% literally fighting for survival", you were referencing the US currently or in MGRR, but its a load of hogwash. There are a group of people who comprise of less than double digit percentage of the population, point stipulated, but just because these people are "fuck you" rich does not mean the middle and lower classes are literally fighting for their lives. They're not. America's poor would be middle to upper class in most countries. America's economy is on absolute fire right now (if you don't take into account the scary debt situation we're in right now. With this horrible amount of debt, this will come back to bite us in the ass in the future).
A message to the radical egalitarians who are entirely results driven (meaning when they see a poor person and a rich person, they believe the injustice lies in the rich person being rich and the poor person being poor, not HOW the rich person got rich and HOW the poor person became poor), your idea of a perfectly 50:50, equal world is a fools errand. As long as humans are free, they are not equal. And as long as humans are perfectly equal (in terms of outcomes and results, not in terms of systematic treatment), they are not free. What we should seek is to raise the floor, not drag everyone down to rock bottom.
Play MGS4. America is essentially post apocalyptic. War was the only thing keeping it all afloat. If war stopped, then the economy would free fall. That's what Armstrong was fighting to free America from, the dependency on war as an economic crutch. With the crutch removed, men would no longer have to fight for the collective and could be true individuals fighting their own wars.
Except hes completely fine with dying if it continues the mission. That undercuts your analysis that he is simply greedy, he essentially sacrifices himself for the cause
Man, I really would like another MGR. I loved this game even though it was completely different from any Metal Gear game. It was really an underrated gem and the fact that people still talk about it says a lot.
2013: Meh, Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance is alright, but I probably won’t ever play it again.
2022: S T A N D I N G H E R E
Armstrong won in the end.
Senator Armstrong: "By accruing all the evil into a single place that I control, I can bring about the situation that destroys all the evil at once"
Raiden: *Sees that armstrong has accrued all the evil in a single place, and because of the created situation he destroys it all at once*
Armstrong became the badguy in order to create the strongest possible goodguy when he finally destroys what he created. The thing is, Armstrong thought HE would be the one to destroy everything and Raiden was messing up the plan. Armstrong didn't notice that all the destruction that raiden had done was actually what he "planned" to do. By becoming the badguy armstrong DID create the strongest goodguy.
This would have been an amazing redemption arc had there not been an assassination plot thrown in that fucked things up even more than it started. Had there been some more thought put into the arc, armstrongs "worthy successor" line would end in him understanding that his plan had already come to pass and he must die in order for the final destruction of everything he had built. Only when all his power was taken away, all his godlike powerful mercenaries and metal gears, even his nanomachines not protecting him, would he understand that there was none of his PMC left. Everything that was left would be broken and weaker than when he started.
But thats either too thoughtful for this game, or it ties up too many strings, or doesn't fit with the theme of "unchecked military powers."
The fact that he allowed the president to escape meant that he probably DID already realize 'Wait a second!' and did what he did.
He's not just a meme
HE'S THE DNA OF THE SOUL
He is Jim Cornette
I love how you can talk for hours about how you can interpret senator Armstrong's personal philosophy and polical viewpoints and ideologies and in the game he's basically just hulk hogan power slamming you into the ground while yelling like a madman
That's the beauty of Metal Gear
But at the end of the day that's what his ideologicy is
Armstrong is one of my top 10 villains, you can mildly sympathize with him and he's just badass
Moist Chungus Feel bad for you if you can. You another useful idiot looking to be manipulated by shitty political rhetoric?
You mean Jim Cornette
sympathize with him? why? because he wants to purge the weak? he is a megalomaniacal at best.
@@RuiLuz he does not want to purge the weak
literally . He is not megalomaniacal he doesn´t want power he needs power to change America .
@@RuiLuz Pretty sure he doesn't literally mean the weak, as in physically. He means the weak willed, like he says in his motive rant, the people controlled by power and wealth and others. He wants to purge those who don't decide for themselves, and base their life on other variables.
You can totally empathise with him, atleast until he starts harvesting orphans. Then it depends on your empathy, I guess.
Wait a second... Correct me if I'm wrong but...
What's so hypocritical about using something yet wanting to destroy it?
Example. I'm a low-level police officer. I hate corruption and I want to destroy it. I use this same corruption to get to the top of police career and after that use my freshly gained power to eradicate this corruption. Is it morally right? Guess no. Hypocritical? Don't really think so
you seem right to me, it really doesn't seem hypocritical to utilize a corrupt system to eventually gain the power to get rid of it
the only problem with using the corruption is that its a double-edged sword. you need to make sure that you don't end up being corrupted yourself on your quest to destroy corruption.
Even if you don't succumb to corruption, it won't stop others from pointing out the corruption, whether for their gains or to carry out what they believe is justice
As long as they follow through with destroying the system, I have no problem with using said system to get to a point to destroy it. If no one else is doing anything, someone has to make a choice to change things...
By the time you actually gain the power to change things, you will be too compromised in your own ideals to actually change things.
Source: every politician that has ever existed, they all start out as idealists and end up as jaded tight asses that seek power for powers own sake.
Armstrong did the Killmonger. He made a clear point to the protagonist and laid down his life knowing they'd carry on his legacy.
8:40 armstrong dummy thicc
Mad cake
pmc and nothing japan else
Hey, this was really good. It's always nice to see a somewhat serious take on Revengeance. I'll admit I dont have much to add, you laid everything out very concisely.
I love the song 7:44
It's not that we want the economy to be the most important thing, but rather that we are tethered directly on a psychological level to how the economy behaves
Well, it's not even so much desiring it to be so, as simply acknowledging it as such.
After all, what actually IS the economy, deep down? Simply put, it's the allocation of all resources available to society. ALL of them, from the urchin's little scrap of bread to the elite's biggest production line, from how you choose to spend your time to what you choose to invest in, this is all the economy, everyone making the little choices to create aggregate results.
Economy is the most important thing, because EVERYTHING is part of the economy. You can't divorce yourself from that fact, so to ignore it is simply foolishness.
The neo-cons disagree!
When the final boss is stronger than the giant mech he uses to crush you.
Even better on a second viewing! A perfect video essay on all counts. Great editing and I felt like it was all good points with no filler. I’ve subbed! Hope your channel does well!
I just cant stop thinking that he looks like the "thats a lot of damage" guy
Phil Swift
Oh my god, he does.
I Secretly Approved this video!
I've always thought the game doesn't get enough credit for it's writing, because it gets overshadowed by the absurdity of everything around it. Especially the dialogue. Fantastically written.
Not really, the writing is pretty terrible and wack but it’s supposed to be like that
@@rapidingh723 it did what it wanted to do and definitely wasn't boring, I'd call that a success
"Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance is a dumb game with a dumb name, but the finale has surprising substance. Let's find out why."
This game has far more substance than what it "says".
He is a better villain that Skull Face
WHHOOOOOO !!!!
_SUCH A LUST FOR REVENGE_
*_WHOOO!?!?_*
I was actually in tears laughing at that.
I LOVE THIS TH-camR he gets straight to the point no intro
It's true I'm pretty good
Definitely would watch more of this stuff, you're good at it.
Really enjoyed your analysis. I’ve finished the games 10+ times at least and loved every moment, your analysis pieced all what I thought was the Senators beliefs and even deeper which I very much enjoyed. Thank you!
One of the core aspects of some of the best Metal Gear antagonists is that you can often make sense of (or in Senator Armstrong's case, even agree with) the fundamental ideologies off of which they build their philosophy. The Internet serving as a vehicle for an infinite feedback loop of propaganda and subliminal messaging through seemingly innocuous channels, the questionable ethics of AI and the perception of sentience therein, the idealisms propped up by the "new American dream" and the evidence presented towards its effects on the decay of the nation's identity and resiliency. These are all notions that, through legitimate discourse, some can at the very least find logic in, or even help establish a building block of their own personal philosophy that they didn't know they agreed with, until now.
The thing that makes these characters true "villains" is the actions they take to enforce their dogma and ensure their beliefs are realized. Child soldiers, brainwashing, biological weapons, genocide... these are just a few of the things that MGS antagonists have used to push their doctrine. The "better world" they seek to establish is immediately overshadowed by their casual disposal of morals and the crimes against humanity that occur as a result. The means to an end is all they see, and they are so blinded by the glory of what awaits them in the endgame that they refuse to shift their eyes to bear witness to the blood they've spilled to attain it, and even if by some miracle they do, they once again are willing to toss it aside ("Making the mother of all omelettes here, Jack. Can't fret over every egg").
This is, in my opinion, what makes a few of the Metal Gear villains some of the most compelling and interesting antagonists in media. They can be, on a fundamental level, completely agreeable, but the path they carved to get there is soaked in blood, so the moral ambiguity of it all raises more questions than can really be objectively answered.
In my opinion, both the Metal Gear Excelsus fight and the song Collective Concsisness are somewhat metaphorical in nature. You first fight Senator Armstrong when he is hiding himself within a literal machine of war. This reflects how he uses the figurative war machine to mask his goals and motives. It is only when Raiden tears down his seemingly hollow motives and reveals his true intentions, that the real fight begins. Note that the lyrics to Collective Concsisness only play when Raiden literally tears down the war machine.
standing here i realize....theres no nanomachine jokes on this video
"I mangaged to get throught this entire video without making a single nanomachine joke."
And without a single mother of all omelette joke too. You earned a fucking subcribe.
I agree. But I also disagree to am extent. To put it bluntly, where I agree with you lies in the fact that "You can't have one without the other," or at least that's what I got out of watching this video. To justify this, Senator Armstrong's drive towards tearing America down only to reform it For The People--take note of that simple phrase--indicates that as Armstrong stated himself, "using war as a business." After all, you can't peace and harmony without war and conflict.
The reason I bleakly disagree with you is because of the fact that Raiden and Armstrong's interaction with each other symbolizes how *grey* their philosophies are. To make this a bit easier to understand, *grey* out of context roughly translates to neutrality. When Armstrong and Raiden were heavily perplexed with one another's "true" meanings behind their philosophies and reasons for enacting with or against war, the reason they were so shallow is because they're not so monotone and simplistic for comprehension. Not because they're hard to understand, rather because they're hard to enforce verbatim. They're not so truthful as they appear to be, and that's mostly thanks to morality. I don't even think politics or economics are as relevant as many others put them out to be, although I can reasonably understand why others would in the first place. Not everything is so "cut and dry" if that makes any sense.
What's makes MG:R so special is how well it translates to real life and the conflicts we face, whether it be politically, economically, discriminately, etc. We all have our own reasons for our desired motives and we all view morally view things differently. I've always been told that "You'll only learn the truth the hard way," and throughout my experiences involving hardships I blindly understood that what I was told about said "truth" was right. Now as I've aged a little bit more, I've realized that this ideology was very misconceptual due to the fact that I don't even know what this truth is supposed to be or what it means. This very ideology that "You'll only learn the truth the hard way" is shallow because what truth is there to believe? There is none, at least for me. That's why I used the term "grey" when I referenced morals; morality isn't the truth. It's a belief. Morals explain what's black and white or right and wrong, but they never explain what's *grey* or in the middle; what's underneath the surface of these philosophies that gives them an in-depth meaning, should that meaning determine if it's morally right or wrong. Thanks to MG:R, I've learned to simply view life as a whole through a neutral good lense.
Nonetheless, your overall analysis was very well made and you most certainly earned my subscribe good sir. Keep up the great work.