Board Thread:Metal Gear Solid V/@comment-25230536-20140915193009/@comment-25366375-20140919052431

Yong didn't say he believed Quiet is Chico, but he did say the theory was plausible. Point is, he made a long video about the theory and was soon after debunked. Yes, and the theory was plausable based on available evidence. Then, it was confirmed to be wrong by Stephanie Joosten (which is yet to occur with this theory), and that is the concept of a theory. Surely you can't deny that theory had its merits, despite being quite a radical suggestion. If not, I suggest watching the video once again, with an open mind. That's what I feel you're lacking here; an open mind in general. For the umpteenth time I'll explain that I don't believe that this theory is an undeniable fact, or even that it's the single most probable theory to turn out to be true, but much like the Chico = Quiet theory, there are aspects to it that can't be so easily dismissed.

Perhaps the cause for obscuring Medic's face is simply to signify that he's a background character. He only appears at the very end of GZ. Furthermore, we haven't seen Morpho, and he's a returning character. Hiding a character's physical traits doesn't always coincide with a dramatic character reveal.

There's also the possibility Keifer was hired as the Medic because he famously played one in the film Flatliners. Kojima is a bit of a movie buff... I can tell you right now that Ishmael isn't Morpho. Again, the voices. Whether you want to admit it or not, there's something significant about Medic, Ishmael and Snake all having the same voice. It doesn't always coincide with a dramatic character reveal, but it's a pretty safe bet that with Ishmael (if indeed they reveal his face), it will.

Sure, maybe that's why Kiefer voices the Medic, but I seriously doubt Kojima would doube-book the main character for a chuckle.

If you agree that Medic and Ishmael don't sound the same, then you must concede the evidence connecting the two is extremely scant. If you concede, then why is this the theory you find most plausible? Why not Ishmael is Decoy Fox or some such? What I said was that they don't sound exactly the same. And I've openly admitted that the theory is standing on a weak leg (hence my suggesting that it's not indisputably true and conceding many times it's probably going to turn out to be false) but it's far more plausible than the Decoy Octopus/Gray Fox theories because it doesn't complicate the back stories of 3 different characters. Also the evidence is highly circumstantial, and while the Medic = Ishmael theory is, the glaring issue is voice actors. This issue, in the Metal Gear universe anyway, can't be dismissed with a simple "sometimes they re-use".

As stated before, characters with Bible-based names are seldom rarely reserved for one-off roles in MG games.

Examples:

Big Boss: John

Solid Snake: David

Liquid Snake: Eli

Ocelot: Adam

Eva: Eve

Zero: David

(???): Ishmael Yes, you've made this point, and while I still fail to see why a character can't be important for a single game (the majority of MGS1 FOXHOUND as an example), you haven't provided an answer as to who Ishmael will be in the grand scheme of the series (your point about "Enemy" will be addressed separately). Also I think Ishmael being a Biblical name is secondary to it being a reference to Moby Dick, but that's just me.

I have suspicions who Ishmael might be, but I'd rather not spoil anything if the hunch turned true. I can give one clue. Kojima mentioned a movie several times on his Twitter. He sometimes bases his plots and characters on movies. The movie in question is called "Enemy". That is as far down the rabbit hole as I'm willing to go. I looked that film up, and while it could be the case (see; nothing definitive either way on my part), I personally doubt it considering the similar impact we received from Les Enfant Terribles. Anyway, that's all I'm going to say on the matter, as it's clearly futile and you'll seemingly continue to skew my words. After all, it's just a game, and I think we're both taking it way too seriously, so I'll call it here. Feel free to reply but I won't be in response. I've said all I can.

177.249.101.8 wrote: I think we are starting to go to deep into the story, Ishmael seems to just be a hallucination, but then again I could be wrong You're definitely right about that first point, and I'll gladly stop clogging up this thread.

Your theory has plenty of basis, and I used to think that rather strongly myself until recently, so I definitely see where you're coming from.