Talk:Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance/Archive 1

Archive 1

MGS Touch In the chronology?

I think this have to be removed, because it's not a main game but only a ripoff of a main canon game (MGS4). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.20.124.245 (talk) 23:26, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Removed. ^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 01:13, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

fit the new protagonist

"The series' former tagline, "Tactical Espionage Action", has been replaced by "Lightning Bolt Action", to fit the new protagonist, Raiden; the word Raiden (雷電?) is Korean for "Thunder and Lighting"." what makes raiden a "new protagonist". he was the protagonist in mgs2, as everyone knows. i find it likely that "lightning bolt action" gives a hint, that the game is not about stealth (as was mgs2 with raiden) but will feature the mgs4-raiden and his techniques and style of fighting. as long as no official source explains the subtitle "l. b. a.", no crappy explanations should be in the article, except the most likely speculations. but instead someone put in the (appearingly) fact "..to fit the new protagonist.."91.15.134.56 (talk) 09:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, in that case, you can't assume that the game is about Raiden (as MGS2 was hyped to be all about Solid Snake, and ended up having him as a supporting character). "no crappy explanations should be in the article, except the most likely speculations", you say, but why do the speculations belong any more than 'crappy explanations'? To be realistic, this whole article should be blank except for "this is a game set in the Metal Gear Universe. It will be released on PS3, Xbox 360, and PC". Obviously, better grammar than that, but you get the drift. The sentence "The game will center around Raiden" should be removed (see my above statement). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.12.186.36 (talk) 20:36, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Raiden Meaning and Significance

On the page it says that Raiden means 'lightning bolt' in Japanese. This is inaccurate. Raiden means, roughly, thunder and lightning. This should be changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piisuke (talk • contribs) 20:58, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Xbox 360 Exclusive

Seeing as how Kojima didn't appear on stage for MGS:R instead for MGS: PSP, isn't safe to say its a Xbox 360 Exclusive despite the image that shows (PC / PS3 / X360) ?

I don't think it is a multi-platform game, Until Kojima Production announces it for other platforms.

-PSNID: FPlus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.164.230.139 (talk) 20:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so tim: http://twitter.com/geoffkeighley/status/2008492885 and http://img242.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=97172_393950_122_408lo.jpg say it's on PS3 as well. - 75.4.207.105 (talk) 09:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Unregistered Person's Input

Just an idea, I think genre should be left blank for now. Frankly, I believe that "Lightning Bolt Action" means action instead of stealth, but we don't know anything -- thus, the article should reflect that... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.12.186.36 (talk) 21:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Removed GENRE from article. We don't know much about this game right now. --Courageousrobot (talk) 22:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Honestly? It's a Metal Gear game, stealth is what it is. That like saying Halo gets an RTS... oh.. oops... my bad Halo Wars. Anyways, we should leave genre blank until otherwise stated. And we should leave platforms that way as well, it's only been officially announced for the 360. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 00:43, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

For some reason, the genre claims to know that this is a Stealth Action game again. Whodunnit?

Article Semi Lock

Please get this Article Semi locked, so unregistered users can't mess with it, I tried to fix it but couldn't get it back to normal! —Preceding unsigned comment added by O.neill.kid (talk • contribs) 20:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Canon?

Was there any word on whether the game is part of the main series or spin off series (along with the likes of Metal Gear Acid etc)? Medazzatrash (talk) 19:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

There is next to no info at the moment. It's being developed, it features Raiden, it's coming to 360, that's it. Thanks! Fin©™ 19:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

so why is it in the "canon" series?? Cliché Online (talk) 20:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Also who is directing? Says Kojima here, was that mentioned at the E3 announcement?Soot and stars (talk) 20:42, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Moved the game from the main series to the spin-off section. From the promo art, Snake does not appear to be the protagonist. The change in tag-line to "lightning" also makes 'spin-off' feel more appropriate. Obviously this can be changed when we know more - point being we know very little now. --Courageousrobot (talk) 22:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Fair points! Thanks! Fin©™ 22:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Just because it isn't starring Snake doesn't make it a spinoff, otherwise MGS2 AND MGS3 would both be spinoffs. And it doesn't matter if the gameplay changes, can still be canon. Point of the matter; it's always better to assume that the game will be canon until there is proof that it won't be.

Yes, it would be better fit it into the canon series, it's by Kojima Productions and there is Kojima (the creator of the series) as the producer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.109.1.129 (talk) 03:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

But Kojima Productions have also made Metal Gear Ac!d and Metal Gear Ghost Babel. Both star Solid Snake and Kojima himself was involved in both games, but both games are spin-off games and do not appear in the main series canon.

Nope, MGS Ghost Babel was developed by TOSE and the designer/director is Shinta Nojiri (that it's the director of MGA too)^^ However maybe you are right, Kojima said in a interview that it's involved only in Peace Walker on PSP.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.21.130.76 (talk) 15:30, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Hideo Kojima was involved with MG: Ghost Babel. He was producer/supervising director, according to his wikipedia page. He was also listed as "Executive Producer" in the credits for MGA. The only game in the series he had no involvement whatsoever was Snake's Revenge.

I think it will be canon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.16.122.207 (talk) 22:44, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

In an interview at http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3179921, I quote "Timewise, this game takes place between MGS2 and MGS4", so I'd say canon since it fits the chronology and same universe, unlike MGA. Doesn't star snake? Neither did MGS3 or MGS2, and that makes up half of numbered MGS titles, so who is to say what an MGS title 'should' be in terms of starring characters? Martinstatic (talk) 11:48, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Not an Exclusive

Hideo Kojima didn't say that it was an exclusive so it could still come to the PS3, but that will not be confirmed until tomorrows E3 Sony's Keynote! Hideo Kojima even hinted that it wasn't an exclusive and also hinted that another MSG (Rising or maybe another one, or both!) will be coming to the PS3! —Preceding unsigned comment added by O.neill.kid (talk • contribs) 19:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

So for the moment, the article will reflect that it's coming to Xbox 360. Anything else is rumour or speculation. Thanks! Fin©™ 19:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

There is no reason to add a comment about it possibly being multiplatform, it'd be a bit like adding a comment saying "This might get delayed, but we don't know if or when". Thanks! Fin©™ 20:07, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

and there is no reason to put this action game in the canonical series! Cliché Online (talk) 20:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

G4TV has confirmed that it's not exclusive. So you should probably change it asap.

The article doesn't state it is exclusive. Thanks! Fin©™ 22:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

not exclusive http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/696050/Metal-Gear-Solid-Rising-Not-Exclusive-To-360.html Markthemac (talk) 23:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

You realize that the quote in question only says that they did not say it was exclusive to 360. Given that there has yet to be a statement confirming the exclusivity (or lack thereof), we can't be certain. Megaman Z (talk) 20:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

the announcement was like an hour and a half into the conference, and about 45 minutes into the conference microsoft said that everything that would follow would be exclusive to the xbox —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.118.195 (talk) 00:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Microsoft are liars. Barely anything in that conference actually was exclusive. Molyneux even clearly stated that Fable 3 was 360 exclusive, yet it had already been confirmed that it would be on PC too. --142.213.254.2 (talk) 15:50, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Colon in title

Are there any official sources that can confirm if the title is Metal Gear Solid: Rising or Metal Gear Solid Rising? ^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 20:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Eurogamer uses the colon. Thanks! Fin©™ 20:27, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah but GameSpot doesn't, nor does Kotaku. ^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 20:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Fair point. I think it's best to stick with the colon though - the other MGS game articles use it, even if the cover art doesn't. Thanks! Fin©™ 20:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

True. We'll have to wait for the Kojima Productions site to list it, see what they use. ^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 20:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Most MGS games have it like look at MGS4 so it can stay for now. --O.neill.kid (talk) 20:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Check out Kojima Production's E3 News Feed - they use the colon. --Courageousrobot (talk) 22:21, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

The Promo site for Kojima Productions used a colon for the title in the recent news ticker. ^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 22:20, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Is this part of the main series?

It sounds more like a spin off at this point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.55.222 (talk) 20:38, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

exactly, no one knows but it seems that some xbox360 fanboys are happy to add this entry in the canonical series. also who said kojima is the director and producer of this project? Cliché Online (talk) 20:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I think it is more of a spin off as well, but if it does go to the PS3, then I think it will be more of a prequel or sequel. --O.neill.kid (talk) 20:40, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Seeing as the series tagline has changed to "Lightning Bolt Action," I'd say it's extremely likely that this is a spin-off, and not part of the main series. MarsWikis (talk) 21:36, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Like I said above, nobody knows anything yet, so let's just leave it at canonical until we know better. Thanks! Fin©™ 21:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. I think it should be moved to the spin-offs category until we know better. MGS Peace Walker has been confirmed as a canonical part of the series. MGS Rising has not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.227.124 (talk) 21:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

There's no reason to assume it ISN'T canon. The only reason people are even considering it to be non canon or a spinoff is simply because the "Lightning Bolt Action" thing. There's no evidence to point to it being non-canonical, thus as of now it should be considered canon. In court you're innocent until proven guilty, so I feel as if this game should be viewed as canon until proven otherwise. --Xero Anarian (talk) 04:41, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Why MGS:Rising doesn't appear in the Metal Gear series fictional chronology box?

I think that if it's considerated as a canon game it must appear in the fictional chronology box, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.7.85.180 (talk) 20:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

It would, if it was confirmed as canon and it was specified when it happened in the chronology. Zomegad (talk) 22:32, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Big Boss

It is stated within the article that the teaser website featured a "young Big Boss." However, it has not been confirmed this is Big Boss. In an interview with Kojima the character was referred to as "Old Man" We will probably find out tomorrow who it is but it should be noted it is not necessarily Big Boss. 24.119.7.28 (talk) 06:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

No doubt that it's Big Boss now. 86.41.37.180 (talk) 08:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Uh yeah

You do realize until Kojima confirms it its only on the X360 and TBA.

That "source" is Kotaku, known for rumours and putting stuff up they don't know.

So until you guys get a real source someone needs to remove it. 99.236.125.59 (talk) 11:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Kojima has not confirmed it as a 360-only game. Medazzatrash (talk) 11:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Nor has he confirmed PC or PS3. It being on those platforms is pure speculation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.125.59 (talk) 02:50, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

What about the Microsoft dude who said "You know, we didn't say it was exclusive..."

If it was, they would've bragged about it more imo. Oh, and also: http://twitter.com/geoffkeighley/status/2008492885212.8.197.165 (talk) 10:32, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I think you'll all like to hear an interview with kojima regarding his stand on Metal Gear Solid as a console-exclusive game. In an interview with Game Informer, 2005 (previewing Metal Gear Solid 4), kojima makes such statements as: "If I did decide to move the Metal Gear Solid series to another console, it would stay specifically for that console." In other words, he would not port the game to any other console than the one it's developed for, because of button mapping, compatibility, etc. He then proceeded to state such quotes as "The Playstation system and i are a good match" and other forms of expressing his preference of the Playstation system. It's unlikely that this will be released for any other console than ps3.

Development

Development section was a mess - it had a number of unrelated "paragraphs" talking about Metal Gear Solid 5, referencing articles that were published prior to the release of the fourth game. This game does not appear to be marketed as the fifth Metal Gear game, and the mess of links seem largely irrelevant and outdated - especially in relation to Metal Gear Solid: Rising. --Courageousrobot (talk) 17:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

360 exclusive

im pretty sure this is actually a 360 exclusive since at the E3 microsoft conference the announcement of the game came after them saying "everything from here on is exclusive" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.118.195 (talk) 00:34, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

At the moment multiple platforms are listed on GamePress. We have press sources stating that it *isn't* an exclusive. Until we have a confirmed source saying otherwise... --Courageousrobot (talk) 05:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Serious question: What's wrong with the confirmed source being Konami? Aleksael (talk) 06:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

That Konami article just says its coming to the 360, not that it's exclusive. GamePress says that its also coming to the PS3 as well as PC. Also this G4 article quotes Microsoft clarifying that they never said it was exclusive: http://e3.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/696050/Metal-Gear-Solid-Rising-Not-Exclusive-To-360.html --Courageousrobot (talk) 18:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I think you'll all like to hear an interview with kojima regarding his stand on Metal Gear Solid as a console-exclusive game. In an interview with Game Informer, 2005 (previewing Metal Gear Solid 4), kojima makes such statements as: "If I did decide to move the Metal Gear Solid series to another console, it would stay specifically for that console." In other words, he would not port the game to any other console than the one it's developed for, because of button mapping, compatibility, etc. He then proceeded to state such quotes as "The Playstation system and i are a good match" and other forms of expressing his preference of the Playstation system. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.115.28.21 (talk) 18:08, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

And on top of this, your reasoning is flawed. Kojima prefers the Playstation console and system. Them claiming it's exclusive simply means the 360 will never see this game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.115.28.21 (talk) 18:11, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

98.115.28.21, If Kojima says: "My next game will be exclusive to a console."(2005), then comes five years later and says "MGSR will release on PC, Xbox 360 and PS3."(2010), it means that the game will release on the three platforms aforementioned. Don't edit Wikipedia using outdated sources that don't even support your claims, please. Thank you. -- Lemon's Pride (talk) 22:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid 5 redirect wtf?

...Seriously, what? This is quite clearly a spin-off, especially with Raiden being the main character and the new slogan. If anything should redirect from Metal Gear Solid 5 it should be Peace Walker for the PSP (Kojima himself said it was a true sequel in the MGS series). 92.10.183.74 (talk) 13:58, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I believe Metal Gear Solid 5 should not be redirected with absolutely nothing, to begin with. Who knows if a really numbered Metal Gear Solid 5 will eventually show up in the future. (Mr Wesker (talk) 01:14, 4 June 2009 (UTC))

Both Rising and Walker is considered to be Metal Gear Solid 5. --SkyWalker (talk) 01:47, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Would a hatnote be necessary? ^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 01:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Are you sure they're BOTH considered to be MGS5? That said I agree with Mr Wesker, shouldn't redirect to anything but if Kojima ever says that Peace Walker WAS the true follow up to MGS4 then it should deffo get redirected to PeaceWalker, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.23.219.135 (talk) 09:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Kojima refers to both Peace Walker and Rising as MGS5, while specifically calling Peace Walker "the MGS5 inside me". [1] I just disambiguated the two articles. --Ciao 90 (talk) 14:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Confirmed for PC

It was just confirmed at the Konami E3 conference that it will also be on the PC. 65.66.148.215 (talk) 22:37, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Stealth-action game

According to the 2009 E3 Konami press conference this will be a stealth action game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.55.222 (talk) 22:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Chronlogy

Someone screwed up the order of the chronlogy table. This is Raiden, introduced after MGS and it is behind MG. Someone fix and source that pls. Bahahs 22:10, 9 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bahahs (talk • contribs)

who's the director?

who is the game's director? there has to be one, there can't be just 2 producers, right?--Fatsticks0 (talk) 23:00, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

No directors have been announced as of yet. Zomegad (talk) 00:44, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Where does it belong?

It appears there is a fellow on a top-priority mission to establish this game as a spinoff, with many people reverting his/her edits. The problem here is that there is no side of caution to err on. Konami haven't come out and affirmed that it's "canon" (I am sick of that term at this stage), while they also claim it's one part of an MGS5 duet.

Instead of engaging in an edit war, I'm going to try and open discussion again. Both sides are saying "logically this, logically that" but a person's logical conclusions aren't fact, they're POV and speculation. Are there really no WP policies regarding what to do in a situation like this? Does "innocent until proven guilty" apply on wikipedia? 86.41.35.77 (talk) 13:55, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

There is not much to say. As you have already pointed out, Kojima has already stated Rising is "a next-gen MGS5" (and he did the same for PW), an that Rising is "the next MGS" (from his speach at GDC). So yes, Kojima does include Rising in the continuity. That there has not been more details on the game (probably because Kojima is still in the process of planning it, and doesn't want to disclose any plot point now, contrary to PW which will be out next year) does not nullify the previous statement.

Kojima didn't say "Rising is a spin-off", so edits done with the "it's a spin-off" mentality are not substanciated and have nothing to do here. If Kojima considers both games (PW and Rising) to be the two sides of the MGS5 coin, then we'll follow that, and not the personal opinions of some guy who apparently doesn't like Rising.

I also want to point out that the article is not assuming anything, and does not have "canon" stamped all over it. I think the community here has done a good job of acknowledging Kojima's statements, while keeping in mind we still don't know a thing about the game. The template he wants to remove doesn't even include Rising in the chronology (because we still don't know when it happens)! If that guy takes any mention of continuity as an offense, that's his problem, but if Kojima said R is MGS5, we can't do otherwise.Folken de Fanel (talk) 17:50, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

In Japanese mythology

In Japanese mythology, Raiden is another name of Raijin, the god of thunder.

Who made this up? --Mato Rei (talk) 10:36, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

More importantly, who's the smartass that erased it? My reference was deleted by Alxeedo without any explanation. I'm tired of griefers who think they know better. So unless he/they come up with some constructive argument, I'm going to add it again. http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%9B%B7%E7%A5%9E Kaminari (talk) 12:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Cover Art

I have a feeling that cover art is fake, does anybody have a source for this? GroundZ3R0 002 00:39, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it looks fake. Zidane tribal (talk) 03:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I withdraw my accusation. This shows it was on Xbox Live. With the same exact gun on his back also being shown in the E3 coverage, the hair style the same way, the art being put on Xbox Live, and the spinal cord being featured like in the E3 coverage. And all of these elements were completely secret before E3 and this was leaked four days before E3. There seems no way for this to be fake. If there are no problems with it, I am going to repost the cover art. GroundZ3R0 002 04:56, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of pictures, do we have to keep the guy getting cut up PG (ie. no blood)? I am well aware of the page "Wikipedia is not censored", but I'm just curious. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 06:53, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

The article is WRONG!

Why do you keep stating that it's the same character as in MGS2 and MGS4?! That has not been confirmed officially and the face looks nothing like the Raiden in the past game. The slogan "Raiden is back" proves nothing since the codename Snake was used my multiple characters as well. Article needs to be fixed to stay factual instead of guessing. 204.17.31.126 (talk) 15:40, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

That may be, but the only information released is that the name is "Raiden". Seeing as Raiden is an existing character in the series, we must assume this is him until any official announcement is made that says otherwise. So your case is purely speculation, albeit possible but speculation nonetheless. GroundZ3R0 002 02:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes this is Raiden, the article is right, and you are wrong. Interview with the designer on 1-UP says so, I quote (and link) "In the media we're showing off now, you can see Raiden cutting off the motion system of a cyborg soldier, removing the battery and absorbing its energy -- that's how Raiden can heal himself and earn other powers." (Meaning that the Raiden we're seeing here is the one from MGS4, when he went all ninja-cyborg? "That's correct," Matsuyama said. "Timewise, this game takes place between MGS2 and MGS4, although this certainly isn't the Raiden you saw in MGS4. He looks a little more...I don't know, villainous here? You'll be learning how he made the transformation into the character you saw in MGS4 in this game's story.") " Link > http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3179921 Martinstatic (talk) 11:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

It looks exactly like Raiden. No idea what you're talking about. ★Ffgamera★ - My page! · Talk to me!· Contribs 06:46, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I dare say Rising Raiden looks more like Raiden than that Protagonist of early MGS4 Trailers looked like Snake. But eventually he was Snake, oh boy. ;) 87.174.231.7 (talk) 10:05, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Release date

Why is the article showing a release date of 30-02-2010? Has it been confirmed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nazz3 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Screenshot

This article had the screenshot request thingy, and I figured I could provide one; http://i55.tinypic.com/11l08pw.jpg

I think you're supposed to post it here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nazz3 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Reboot

I don't know. It seems to be a reboot. Raiden doesn't look anything like in MGS2 and MGS4. Yes he has the same Haircolor and (since E3 2010) the same Eyecolor. All the machines appearing in the trailer have not been seen in MGS4. Well the creators claim the game is set between MGS2 and MGS4, but I think it's more like MGS Mobile, whicht isn't canon/ continuity. Maybe we should mention stuff. In any case this is definitely a spin-off. Even if it's canon. Producers want it to be a new "standard", that "there would be an MGS and also a Rising every few years". 87.174.243.197 (talk) 09:49, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree with that spin-off-thing. Technically it is a spin-off. Which doesn't mean, it's non-canon. But what the hell are you talking about a reboot? This defonitely is Raiden and he looks EXACTLY like his MGS2 and MGS4 counterpart!!! There has been NOTHING out on the plot yet, except that the game's story takes place between MGS2 and MGS4. So until we hear anything else, the article is fine as is and anything else would be ORIGINAL RESEARCH!!! So just shut the **** up and go to a forum with your theories!178.203.20.49 (talk) 22:27, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

The robotic soldiers in the trailer are unused concept designs for the Beauty and the Beast Unit from Metal Gear Solid 4, and can be seen in Yoji Shinkawa's MGS4 artbook. Based on the likely setting (Area 51), the large number of cyborg enemies, and the appearance of Crying Wolf in an early teaser image, it's most likely that most of the enemies in Rising will be with the Werewolf PMC from MGS4. In MGS4, Werewolf was shown to be stationed in Nevada, which is where Area 51 is.

More importantly, Rising is confirmed to be a canon story set between MGS2 and MGS4, and will go over the details of his missions during that time, including how he became a cyborg and how his exoskeleton changed from its Rising appearance to its MGS4 appearance. This is all stated right in the article, with citations. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 17:48, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

He doesn't look the same because this takes place after he was taken by the Patriots and transformed into his cyborg-self (as mentioned in MGS4). What you have seen in the pics and trailers is armor attached to his exoskeleton-like structure. He no longer has the armor by MGS4. Evidence that the armor is removable can be seen in marketing stills and videos.

Raiden

Raiden

There is visible text on the armor

"Use designated tool to remove fastener"

And what appears to be on the sternum:

"Caution - Enslave lock is ......"

If this above quote is accurate it could hint at the possibility he is being controlled by the Patriots somehow and there is a connection to the added armor. 96.19.242.89 (talk) 18:40, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Fox Engine

I'm pretty sure that there are valid sources implying that they made a new engine for this upcoming game called " fox engine".

sources

• http://kotaku.com/5831721/look-at-the-faces-hideo-kojima-is-making
• http://nerdreactor.com/2011/06/03/kojima-projects-to-be-multi-platform-via-fox-engine/
• http://attackofthefanboy.com/screenshots/fox-engine-screenshots-from-kojima/
• http://gamersyndrome.com/2011/video-games/kojima-fox-engine-revealed/

Footage

• Kojima Fox Engine: E3 2011 Demo on YouTube

Some sources are more trustworthy then the others but i think they all justify the fact that the engine does exist and will be used in this game.--MartianH (talk) 21:57, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Revengeance To-do List

Okay, with the announcement that the game has been rebooted as Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance, with development moving to Platinum Games, the whole article needs to be revamped.

• The game is no longer a stealth action game, and is instead being developed as a full action game.
• The game is no longer an interquel set between MGS2 and MGS4. It is now set after MGS4, and is probably not part of the canon storyline.
• It seems the concept of "Zan-Datsu" has been removed.

So, changes that need to be made:

• Information unique to the original plot (interquel) and gameplay (stealth, Zan-Datsu) of Metal Gear Solid: Rising need to be removed from those sections of the article and summarized in the development section, with sources retained.
• Gameplay section needs to be updated (with new sources) to reflect the game becoming more action-oriented, with new features seen in the trailer such as the ability to run at high speed and grapple/throw large enemies.
• Plot section needs to be updated (with new sources) to reflect the fact that the game is now set after Metal Gear Solid 4 and potentially takes place in an alternate, non-canon timeline, much like Snake's Revenge, Ghost Babel, and the Metal Gear AC!D games.
• Development section needs to be revamped to reflect the dropped concepts and new developments.

I'll work on it as I have time. Feel free to chip in, just make sure to source your additions and keep a record of the game's earlier stages. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 04:43, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

What makes you think that it isn't canon? That is a really odd assumption. The fact that they state that it is after MGS4 is probably a really good sign that it's canon. Also I say it's a bit to early to remove the Zan-Datsu stuff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.228.36.45 (talk) 06:35, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

"METAL GEAR SOLID: RISING was a spin-off intended to feature the actions and transformation of Raiden, one of METAL GEAR SOLID 2: SONS OF LIBERTY’s main characters, in the lead-up to METAL GEAR SOLID 4: GUNS OF THE PATRIOTS. However, after Platinum Games came on board, the story was changed to take place several years after METAL GEAR SOLID 4 to give them more of an opportunity to show off what they can bring to the series. Cyborgs are spreading at a rapid pace in the game’s world, resulting in earth-shattering superhuman action at every turn! The original aim for a combination of stealth and action has also been enhanced, for a more aggressive new focus on pure, exhilarating action."

"Naturally, Kojima Productions is still overseeing the game’s story and its world, and is also providing visual direction to ensure METAL GEAR RISING: REVENGEANCE retains the characteristic look of the METAL GEAR series. Though its exact identity is a step apart from the METAL GEAR SOLID games, the blood of the series still flows within this new METAL GEAR. Kojima Productions and Platinum Games: Two world-class powerhouses among Japanese studios join forces to bring you METAL GEAR RISING: REVENGEANCE . What can we expect from this astounding combination? Keep your eyes on this site for more details!"

Source: http://www.konami.jp/mgr/en_us/index.html --FLStyle (talk) 19:11, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

We need to change up the Platforms that this game will appear on. Many of the references/citations to multi-platform are to articles from before, when RISING was being handled by Kojima Productions. Now that it's under Platinum Games, the platform availability list has changed. Only CONFIRMED now, is for PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360. The Official site doesn't mention PC or PSP Vita at this point, and we should just catalog the older references as confirmation before the new developer. Deelite310 (talk) 21:05, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I would like to suggest splitting MGS: Rising and Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance into two different articles. Because from all the information we already have, these are not the same game whatsoever. Different developers, different engine, different gameplay, different story. The only similarity is the main character and the word "Rising." I think it's acceptable to say the original game was cancelled, and a new game was started from scratch with some of the same ideas. Not the same game by any means. Just a suggestion. 76.28.22.30 (talk) 01:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

We know the original game was cancelled, KP was making this game before they rebooted it with a different story and gameplay under Platinum Games. I don't see why it should be made into two articles though. The previous version belongs under the "development" section of this article imo. 84.135.147.5 (talk) 10:28, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Since it seems that Kojima himself has said that this is a spin off and not part of the main series, what are opinions on it being switched to the 'spin offs' category, rather than the main series? 194.72.9.24 (talk) 15:28, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it really should be switched. 84.135.163.32 (talk) 16:18, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I disagree. He says its a spin-off, but its part of the Metal Gear Solid timeline, happening a few years after MGS4 Deelite310 (talk) 20:37, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree with Deelite. The way that we (Wikipedia editors) have been handling main series vs. spin-off is that spin-offs are the non-canon games, at least according to the template. This game may be a spin-off in the general sense because of its gameplay changes but it might still be part of the "main series" canon. The canon status of this game is still unclear but there's no reason to guess that it will be non-canon, at least right now. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:05, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

The canon status should not what classifies this as spin-off or not imo. 84.135.163.32 (talk) 21:57, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I concur with this. The game may technically take place in the same universe, but it seems to have little or no bearing on it (bear in mind Raiden had all his implants removed at the end of MGS4). The gameplay style is totally different, and as I said before, Kojima has now repeatedly said that it's a spin off that's not part of the main series. Anyway, someone seems to have taken the initiative to switch it to the spin-offs category, so I suggest we leave it there since the majority of the information points to it being one.GeneralAtrocity (talk) 14:30, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Nice! This is something, some people haven't been getting for years. A spin-off can be a canon game! Well, guess you still think of MPO and Peace Walker as part of the main series...141.35.40.137 (talk) 08:30, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Look up the List of MG Games. There they actually ordered the games by their stance as games and not purely based on story/ canonicity. Frankly, I think whether something is canon or not is taken far too seriously. These are games! These are fictions! Damn good ones (mostly), but still fiction. It's not a history. Canon only means, that the powers that be will respect these events when they write new stories as to not repeat the same storyline and character developement to maintain the illusion, that we are actully seeing something real and thus guaranteeing, that we get emotionally involved. However! Canon is subject to change. It is quite common now that every now and then we get retcons, reboots or things are omitted. If it's done good, you don't even notice a retcon! The Metal Gear Series already had its fair share of retcons. Solid Snake being Big Boss' Clone, Liquid taking over ocelot actually being part of hypnosis-nanomachine-whatever-thing, The guys of MGS3 being the founders of the patriots, Big Boss overcoming The Boss' death during san hieronymo and then really overcoming it in Costa Rica, McDonnell Miller actually named Kazuhira Miller, first an asian guy, then an american with ponytail, now half america half asian; do I have to get into the metal gears or the soliton radar? My ultimate point is: 1. Start judging these games as games! and 2. A spin-off does not mean, it is canon or not, it means, it is an offshoot title of the main series (which is usually in video games the numbered one, y'know MGS5 would be the continuation of the main series), whether it features different gameplay (sword action intead of stealth) or is just being release on a different platform with different gameplay requirements (hand held vs home console) or maybe even daptions into other media (comics, movies). Canon only means "that, which is important" and is derived from literature, where the term refers to literary works, that are widely considered pivotal must reads (Charles Dickens, Arthur Conan Doyle, Asimov), however what works are included in this canon does admittedly depend on the times (MGS3 rules!) and changes every few generations and is ultimately a kind of fad. Now what does that tell you about canon? 91.19.227.67 (talk) 08:43, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Wrong Japanese Title.

The Japanese title of the game, the one in brackets proceeding the English title is incorrect. Most probably a prank from some stupid vandals. Original text in question:

Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance (ああ、神様どこに私のハムスターはなくなりました, Metaru Gia Raijingu: Ribenjensu)

The words "ああ、神様どこに私のハムスターはなくなりました" roughly translate to "ahhhh, god, where did I lose my hamster?"

I have since then removed the incorrect title and replaced it with the one from Wikipedia Japan which I shall assume is correct (Don't have time to check).

ImageRaiter (talk) 07:20, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

PC Version cancelled

http://gamingeverything.com/12851/metal-gear-rising-revengeance-reannounced-platforms-confirmed-more-details/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.27.25.49 (talk) 19:20, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Where is the documentary?

This article is missing information about "The truth behind Rising", a documentary explaining the change from Konami to Platinum Games; produced by www.atomix.vg and SCLBits I will leave the link explaining this (hope someone knows spanish) http://atomix.vg/2011/12/13/atomix-y-sclbits-produjeron-el-documental-de-metal-gear-rising-revengeance-the-truth-behind-rising/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by The History Writter Guy (talk • contribs) 03:52, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I think there is a 25 minute documental used in the development section published by GameSpot.Tintor2 (talk) 15:13, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Pre-release rececption section sounds NPOV

I can't stand the wording used in this section and at least one of the articles does not support a statement made. Also, the entire section is basically speculation and thus goes against Wikipedia's policy. Thoughts everyone? - Sweet Nightmares 18:17, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, needs work to better establish pre-release reception based on facts and articles that clearly support those facts. I suspect we may have to wait until E3 2012 for more factual details about the game to emerge and subsequently more refined and concrete opinions from the press.--FLStyle (talk) 01:57, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

poor spelling in title, 'revengence' is not a word

oh my gawd! what is with the atrocious spelling in the title! Revegeance isn't even a real word it should be vengeance!--Lerdthenerd wiki defender 15:36, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Not a forum. It's just a combination of "vengeance" and "revenge."Tintor2 (talk) 15:43, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

but its not a word, is Konomi responsible for this poor spelling? also use your edit summary next time its rude reverting another confirmed user like me with out a reason--Lerdthenerd wiki defender 15:51, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

It's the official title that Konami and Platinum Games use. Just check first November 2011 trailer that explains the "Re" theme. Also, I didn't say I was reverting vandalism, you wrote incorrect information it without reaching consensus.Tintor2 (talk) 16:29, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

thank you explaining, i'll leave it alone--Lerdthenerd wiki defender 16:33, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Is MG Rising part of the main games of the MG series?

I think the story will fit in the main storyline so maybe this title has to be part of the main games of the MG series. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.228.104.210 (talk) 07:34, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

According to Kojima Production it's not part of the main series. While it could be considered canon for being written by the same staff, the story is more of a spinoff related with Raiden rather than a story related with the Patriots and Big Boss' heritage.Tintor2 (talk) 13:07, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Where is the source that Kojima Production says that it's not part of the main series? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.4.122.118 (talk) 02:04, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

CVG's article mentions it is a spinoff of the franchise.Tintor2 (talk) 02:54, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

It's no less a canon game in the overarching Metal Gear franchise, which is what OP was asking. Metal Gear Rising is no less part of the franchise than Metal Gear Solid. In fact I would refrain from using that CVG article as a source. It's out of date with the current knowledge that's out there, not to mention questionable in it's reliability, there's spelling, grammar and general Metal Gear mistakes all over it.

A few examples:

• The article claims that "Platinum expressed its passion for the project and offered its services in reinventing and completing Rising" when we now know that it was Kojima himself who asked Platinum to help complete this game.
• The article claims that "The game's title was changed to Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance to reflect that it isn't part of the main Metal Gear Solid seris, but is instead a spinoff that takes place after Metal Gear Solid 4." This is also untrue as it was changed to reflect, it's separate from Metal Gear Solid, not necessarily a spin-off, it's a brand new series.--FLStyle (talk) 10:24, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Websites still refer to it as spin-off. Kojima Production has also stated it would only become a series depending on the game's success [2].Tintor2 (talk) 13:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

The CNN article is almost as old and outdated as the CVG one. I have also never heard of andriasang.com and it doesn't have an article on Wikipedia.--FLStyle (talk) 23:08, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Still they are official source bringing statements from the Kojima Productions. No article has said that Rising has become its own series or that it's part of the Metal Gear Solid series. Andriasang is also an website run by a recurring IGN editor and multiple websites cite them.Tintor2 (talk) 23:52, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I think we will definitely know if it's part of the official MG series when it will be released and we will be able to play it and to know if the plot will fit in the MG canon universe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.6.125.33 (talk) 01:24, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't know, why people just don't get the following fact: Being a spin-off game does not mean that the game has to be non-canon!!! A Spin-off simply is somethin that splits of from a main body of work into its own seperate... well... entity. Rising is canonical within the Metal Gear Universe. It takes place in the same world as the Metal Gear Solid games, yet, it is not part of the Metal Gear Solid Series, which is centered around a guy (Solid Snake, Naked Snake) sneaking arround, acting covertly, whereas Rising features another guy (Raiden, who admittedly was for a breef period the protagonist of the main series) jumping and running around engaging in fast paced combat and killing hordes of enemies. Also the story - whereas the Solid series deals (or has come to primarily deal) with the Patriots, Outer Heaven and the 50 year war between these factions (simply put), Rising takes place after that. It is the same fictional universe, but a different storyline within that. BOTTOM LINE: Rising is a spin-off that is canonical. It is not the 9th game in the series. If anything it is the 15th (?) game in the series, which does include the two Acid games, Ghost Babel, MGS Mobile, MGS Touch... 87.177.67.157 (talk) 19:14, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

boxart

The japanese boxart of the game has been released and may be more appropriated using it as main image for the aticle.

The image is available at http://www.allgamesbeta.com/2012/09/metal-gear-rising-revengeance-japanese.html Гонсо (talk) 23:12, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Good. I'll try uploading it in a smaller resolution. Considering the Japanese release is PS3 exclusive there is no need to remove the PS3 part. However, the English cover would need to be changed.Tintor2 (talk) 03:06, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I wonder if your comment was misconstrued? « Ryūkotsusei » 10:05, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

No guns?

The gameplay says that there is no guns available to the player. Are you sure about that? ESRB's reasons for giving it an "M" rating stated that the player can use guns in addition to blades and rocket launchers, so we really need to change it. Wish Examiner wasn't blacklisted, as otherwise I would have posted the source by now. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 02:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

The only weapon that can be used from a distance as far as the demo is concerned is that bazooka.Tintor2 (talk) 13:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the ESRB rating stated that guns could also be used by the player. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 13:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Still needs a reliable source such as developer saying guns can be used. They have been commenting that this game is about swordmanship rather than guns.Tintor2 (talk) 21:19, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Composer

I'm a bit busy now so I'll leave this http://www.jamiechristopherson.com/Projects/Games/MetalGearRising.html link here about the composer in case somebody wants to add something. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 04:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Voice Cast

THere is a dispute over the inclusion of voice cast. I wish to include them, I find that most people want them included and appreciate the information. The user opposed has multiple reasons as the dispute progresses, first that only the Desperado's were voiced (they weren't, Raiden's actor was credited too), then I added a further reference to credit all the listed characters' actors. I got the ref wrong but that was only one reason given, the other being that other articles don't do it, so don't do it now. The user cites MGS3, an article made into a featured article six years ago, and style, policy and the availability of information have all changed, articles are not the same as they were six years ago and the MGS3 of 2006 would not pass FA today, trust me I know I just went through it with Arkham City. There is no reason, policy, guideline, rule or excuse not to include this very basic information in the article and without such good reason, further removal of the information should be considered vandalism via disruption. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:34, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

User:Cyberlink420 continues to be disruptive, now has come up with a third excuse, citing a guideline that talks about lists of voice actors, something that is not hte case in the article as the actors were integrated into prose and he wasn't complaining about that when he said that he was removing them because not all the actors had been credited. User displays issues of edit warring over personal preference to the detriment of information and content. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:44, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

From WP:GAMECRUFT:

• Cast lists: Generally speaking, a list of the actors providing voices, likenesses or motion capture acting performances for video game characters is not appropriate. If mention of the actors is an important factor of the article, typically they should be done in the article prose, and generally in the development section (Good examples are: Batman: Arkham Asylum, Portal 2, and Bioshock Infinite. Exceptions to the rule would be games where the video game cast is particularly notable, such as actors reprising their roles in a video game translation of a film. In this case the video game cast follows the general standard for listing a film cast, but should only list the major characters in the plot, and as a rule should be no longer than 10 actors.

Other than the two actors who reprise their previous roles (Flynn's reprisal of Raiden, and Pucelli's reprisal of Sunny), there's nothing particularly notable about the cast, and Flynn's reprisal is already noted in the Development section as is. Furthermore, as of the last revision before this writing, the number of cast members listed surpasses the 10-actor rule, if only barely, and unlike WPVG guidelines, the cast members are listed under Plot instead of Development. A cast list is not a requirement or necessity for a good/featured article, and given the context, a better place to add them would be the characters' respective entries in List of characters in the Metal Gear series, as has been the case for past series entries. (Not to mention the Revengeance section of said article is a bit lacking anyways, and relevant information like that would do more good there than here.)

Also, on a personal note, I would appreciate not automatically assuming bad faith; my last edit was made prior to my seeing your notice on the talk page. Let's try to keep it civil, please. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 22:54, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Bad faith was when you performed your 4th revert on the information without starting a discussion and citing your 3rd excuse as to why you were committing said 4th revert. At that point it stopped being about the betterment of the article and became about getting your way. The guideline, and it is a guideline, refers to cast lists, and states that they should be covered, if necessary, in prose, which they were. The development section is pointless as it requires duplicating information "Crispin Freeman voices Sundowner" when we already have Sundowner and can simply add (Crispin Freeman), and how voice actors relate to the development of the game, I don't know, as I've made clear at the guideline's article, it's stupid and outdated and needs to go. The major characters in the plot were the only ones who had voice cast added. You're reaching with this guideline at best, to find something that will support your stance. Saying that Flynn's reprisal is already mentioned is not an excuse, move it, rewrite it, or if it isn't saying the same thing beyond making the point of a reprisal, the pieces of information will not cause the article to spontaneously combust. The 10 actor rule is abused at Batman Arkham City, to abandon, to great abandon, and it just passed Featured Article, so this is not a hard rule at all nor does it hold back an article from quality. You feel they are not notable, I feel, and am sure so do others feel, that the actors are notable, and find such information interesting and informative, the purpose OF the article. Adding voice actors in a SEPARATE article is not an alternative, a user should not have to go to another article to find information relative to the current article. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 23:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Arkham City seems a good model to follow considering it's about to become FA. If that's okay then wouldn't Japanese actors also be necessary since they are the native version? In Raiden's case it would be "Raiden (Kenyu Horiuchi, Quinton Flynn)." In Arkham City's case there is only actor since its original version is in English.Tintor2 (talk) 02:25, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

But by the same token, games like Final Fantasy XIII, God of War: Chains of Olympus, and Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater are also featured articles, but don't have their cast lists on the main articles, instead displaying their respective voice actors on their respective character pages or making it prose in the Development sectoin. There's no consistency. Given that, doesn't it make more sense to do things the way it's currently outlined under WP:VG? -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 02:50, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think the characters list has info about the Rising voice actors. In fact, the list has almost nothing about the Rising characters. There is something I've been wondering and is that some characters appear in only one game (especially the bosses) so listing them in an article about the franchise could make only undue weight since they could be explained in their game. I mean List of characters in the Metal Gear series has 152,629 bytes, still lacks references but it has lots of one episode characters. The more we add to that article the harder it will be to navigate.Tintor2 (talk)

As I explained Cyberlink, MGS3 was made an FA over 6 years ago, standards and information availability has changed since then. God of War actually does have the voice actors on there. As for the characters Tintor2, I thought the same, I am periodically trying to find information about them, both design and characterization because they're obviously somewhat unique designs and the descriptions here are a bit bare. The article should be able to exist independently of other articles, and as you say, the List is already quite long. I don't think the Japanese voice actors would be appropriate for the same reason the Japanese translations of the names are not, it's an article on the English wikipedia and those voices are not present in the Western release as far as I am aware, I'm not 100% but I don't think they appear in the Western version's credits either, but they were quite long so I didn't pay full attention. That would really be for the Japanese wikipedia to cover. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 10:46, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I've already added the cast members for both regions to the Characters article. And as I've always understood it, for games of Japanese origin, it is appropriate to have the actors for both countries listed. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

As stated, listing them on another article does not resolve the issue here that there is no reason not to put them here. The Japanese voice cast are irrelevant to the article, they are not in the Western version of the game, not even in the credits as far as I can see, and this is the English wikipedia, I wouldn't expect the Japanese wikipedia to list the English actors either if they're not in the game or credits. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:52, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Given that this is a Japanese game, it's still relevant to include the Japanese voice actors, same as you would for any anime or other Japanese game. Hence why games like Metal Gear and Final Fantasy have the Japanese VAs listed on their character articles. Also, for things of American origin, Japanese Wikipedia DOES list the English voice actors. The Japanese Spongebob article, for example, credits Tom Kenny as the English voice. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 17:23, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Again, other articles doing something is not an excuse to perpetuate it. It's a game made in Japan, it was released in the West first. It is not an obscure Japanese game, it's a game with a nearl simultaneously worldwide release with exclusively english speaking actors in a game series with a few notable voice actor roles. The Japanese voice actors did not help make the game independently popular and secure a western release, and their coming from the place the game was made does not make them notable or relevant to an article where I imagine 99.9% of the readership have no idea who they are. There is a similar rule that applies to article names, only where games are released only under the Japanese title originally are those names to be included in an article, this is not the case with this game. The guideline makes no mention of crediting a cast because they are from the creator nation. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:00, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Here there are some English voice actors credited. This source is already being used in the article in characters. About the characters I didn't mean explaining them but making redirects for this page.Tintor2 (talk) 14:23, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

That can be done too. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:52, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Story - Armstrong's role lacking in the article?

Just a minor point, but to cut a long story short, the point of Operation Tecumseh was not to assassinate the president, it was merely the smokescreen provided to make sure that Armstrong's true motives remained hidden until the end. This seems very reminiscent of Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty and its "S3 Plan" in which that article includes The Patriots AI's explanation of what their end goal was (simulation and control of human society and behaviour), as opposed to the "Solid Snake Simulation" that was revealed to be false. Also Raiden's decision not to return to Maverick was due to Armstrong's influence (Armstrong's view on war as a business meaning PMC members fight for reasons they don't understand nor believe in). Would the section benefit from a little correction and addition? --FLStyle (talk) 18:21, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Armstrong's true motives could be helpful in the plot. However, comparisons with the S3 plan would just make the article more confusing to the general reader.Tintor2 (talk) 00:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

It wasn't my intention to suggest that MGS2 endgame events should be added into this article, just that it was a similar situation to Rising in both the events of each games and how it's reflected in the MGS2 article and maybe could be in the Rising article. Apologies if I didn't make that clear.--FLStyle (talk) 01:03, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem.Tintor2 (talk) 01:22, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

His words of "You're not ending my plan, you're expanding it!" implies that he did initially consider assassinating the president, but decided against it when he realized that Raiden's arrival at the base would have actually benefitted his plan even more than originally. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 02:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I think entering into a codec with Kevin or Boris states that Armstrong wasn't killing the president. Also, wasn't another objective removing his connections with Desperado? The soldiers in Pakistan weren't from World Marshal but Desperado.Tintor2 (talk) 16:09, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, shortly after arriving at the base, the World Marshal soldiers were shown possessing the XIFF code of "Unaffiliated", causing Courtney and Raiden to state they were trying to frame Desperado for the attack. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 16:43, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I tried to expand Armstrong's true intention after rewatching the scene. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:42, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Changes to reception

I have made some changes to the post-release section, emphasizing more on the negative aspects that were noted, because I feel there was a bias of mostly the positive comments. I've added more from Game Informer's review

The citations redirect to reference 106 — Preceding unsigned comment added by DouglasDean (talk • contribs) 00:56, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I've removed the statement that Raiden was 'panned' back in 2001, simply because it isn't true.

Raiden was controversial, yes, mostly because people had been led to believe that MGS2 would feature Solid Snake as the main playable character, and because fans are conservative by nature. However, to state that Raiden was 'panned' is completely ludicrous.

Gamespot awarded MGS2 'Biggest Surprise' with the sneaky introduction of Raiden, and he went on to reach 42nd on Famitsu's best video game character poll. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DouglasDean (talk • contribs) 02:15, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Re-rated as 'B'-class

I've re-rated the article as 'B' class, with all the following 5-point checklist (per {{WikiProject Military history}}, as they are not currently present in {{WikiProject Video games}}):

• B1 - Referencing and citations = y
• B2 - Coverage and accuracy = y
• B3 - Structure = y
• B4 - Grammar and style = y
• B5 - Supporting materials = y

Please feel free to drop me a line on my talk page if you have any issues or questions. — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 13:14, 7 January 2014 (UTC)