Jump to content

Talk:Metal Gear Solid: Portable Ops

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Portable Ops was met with universally positive reviews"? In what dream world?

[edit]

This game is widely held as the worst MGS game ever.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/metalgearsolidportableopsplus

Someone apparently left out the rest of the "universal" reviews that weren't so positive. Stay classy, NPOV. 75.74.188.74 (talk) 16:34, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Um... That's Portable Ops Plus. It doesn't actually have much to do with Portable Ops, as it is only a multiplayer expansion with no storyline, and the "single player mode" is only there to train your soldiers for online play. Here's the game you're looking for :
http://www.metacritic.com/game/psp/metal-gear-solid-portable-ops
It only scored 2 points less than Peace Walker. To be honest, I find this sudden MPO hate that's been sweeping the MGS fandom lately a little baffling. 86.207.213.52 (talk) 16:16, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE READ - DAVID BOWIE REFERENCE

[edit]

Ok you know there was a lot of david bowie references in MGS3? In Portable Ops of you get killed one of the things said is "Snake? your circuit's dead" "your circuits dead" is in the lyrics of space oddity. I wondered if that was intented because in MGS3 "Space Oddity" was used also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.226.126 (talk) 11:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in Metal Gear Portable Ops +, Gene has a permanent weapon in the top slot called the "Bowie Knife" which is throwable. AlexFili (talk) 12:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Bowie knife is by no means a reference to David Bowie. It's a real type of combat knife, used by many forms of military, even today. Look it up sometime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.212.84 (talk) 21:59, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Epilogue Canon

[edit]

I'm editing the details of the ending. It is never said in the game or related canon that Snake does join Ocelot, and forms the Patriots. All you hear is Ocelot stating he wants Snake to join, in return for joining the "shadowman"s organization, "Shadowman" being the unknown third party.

If someone can supply canon material which states that Big Boss joined/formed the Patriots, please cite it when reverting the article.

It was in Metal Gear Solid 4. Metal Gear Solid 4 also reveals that the "Shadowman" was Major Zero (although it was also implied to be him in-game, such as his codename "Man with the same codename as Null"). Weedle McHairybug (talk) 12:25, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GPS

[edit]

No on cares about the whole GPS thing? http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/top/psp-camera-and-gps-sale-date-announced-197839.php shut up 13:78, 2 Never 2073 (UTC)

EVA Canon

[edit]

it mentions that EVA disapears in Hanoi, if this is the case, how can she be in this game set in 1970?? i seem to remember that EVA disapears 2 or so years after snake eater. Evildoctorbluetooth 09:13, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MPO is still early in development. From my understanding, EVA, Ocelot and Raikov are only recruitable online and are not key characters to the plot like Snake, Zero and Para-Medic. Jonny2x4 12:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The timeline at the end of MGS3 never states whether it was the (fake) female EVA or the (real) male EVA who disappeared in Hanoi in 1968. Maybe it referred to the real, male EVA. That way, the female EVA can be in this game.

Nope. The "real EVA" was just a red herring and ultimately, a non-character who was unimportant to the plot. Kojima writes his plot so that the characters are referred by their common name (i.e: Snake instead of Solid or Naked). Obviously, meant the EVA whom Snake encounters in the game. Jonny2x4 22:20, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but the timeline states that she dissapeared, not that she died. Maybe Kojima was not sure about what to do with EVA, so he left that as an open door for any oportunity. That EVA might or might not have a role in this game story is uncertain. Persnally, I believe that's prettry hard, but I would love to see that, for some reason, Snake, EVA and Ocelot are forced to work together. Besides, it seems that Ocelot DOES have a role in the story, since in one of the trailers, I believe that the one that says "It's all part of our plan to make the world she envisioned a reality" is actually Ocelot, so... we could say that Ocelot is acting in fron and behind the curtains, like always. (Alexlayer 00:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Well, the game is out and EVA and Ocelot are both recruitable and have dialogue with Snake but only can be gotten through a side quest which may or may not be canon. Ocelot joining your side is surely not canon, as even when you finish the sidequest he doesn't become playable until the next playthrough, but the dialogue he has with Snake in the course of getting him might be canon. Mention should be made either way. Flamecannon 23:18, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Director

[edit]

The article says that Shinta Nojiri's producing/directing this (and I actually put that on his article after reading it here), but on the official Kojima Productions site, Masahiro Yamamoto's profile says that he's directing, and nothing about MPO is mentioned in Nojiri's profile.

There are articles on GameSpot and so forth that mention Nojiri producing/directing a new game, but I don't know what game they were referring to. There might have been some mix-up with the Digital Graphic Novel (I know an article on another site specifically said the new game he was working on was "B.D", as in "Bande Dessinée", or the Digital Graphic Novel).

I really don't want to edit the article until I'm absolutely sure what's right. Does anyone have a concrete source that says Nojiri's the producer/director? And did Nojiri even work on the Digital Graphic Novel? I don't have it, or a PSP. - DoubleCross 05:35, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And now I see that Jonny2x4 edited it before I even posted this. Buh. I'll keep my questions open though :) - DoubleCross 05:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

North American Release date

[edit]

I removed the NA release date which said "Winter 2006/2007" to simply "Winter 2006" as the official Kojima Productions website (English version) has the title scheduled for "Coming this Winter". While this might be challenged as being just the Japanese date, I would like to point out that the other release dates found the index page also match those from their NA counterparts. Ex: Metal Gear Ac!dis listed as "PlayStation Portable [2005]" instead of its Japanese December 2004. Hopefully this will clear things up if I have to refer editor(s) who might keep changing the dates (if that happens). Godzilla

Null = Gray Fox/Frank Jaeger?

[edit]

I myself have never played MPO, but can anyone come to a consensus as to whether or not he's in the game so people can stop fighting over it in the Wiki? PlayItBogart 20:21, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever keeps changing it to say that Null is Grey Fox, quit spamming this article. Grey Fox and Null are never declared one and the same. Grey Fox' birth date takes place, according to MGS, "sometime in the 70's." More recently his birthdate was reconned so that Frank Jaeger was born in 1968. This would demand that Null be 3 by the time of this game.--NWalterstorf 23:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just me, or Kojima is messing with the MGS timeline a little bit? Anyway, TKS for clearing it up.

Hm, correction: I was wrong. I found this out not too long ago. Yes, Hideo Kojima keeps changing Grey Fox's history around. Apparently this is the third time he's done so.--NWalterstorf 01:40, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was the one who changed to to say that Null and Grayfox are the same guy, now you see I wasn't spamming up the article.

Added the purpose of the coffin-shaped tank that held Null. Aymanazlan 15:44, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

natasha calls gray fox frank jaeger in MGS1 and snake calls null frank jaeger in MPO so they HAVE BEEN DECLARED ONE AND THE SAME —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.152.28.74 (talk) 00:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Overly Long Story Section

[edit]

It's... insanely long. I suggest it be abridged exstensively. 68.126.223.175

It's not just overly long. It's very badly written too. At the rate they're going, they might as well list the underwears each character wearing. Jonny2x4 05:22, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Too blocky, and I'll bet the writer got that from all those cutscenes being shown in YouTube. Erratic spelling too. Eaglestorm 06:39, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now it's way too short and uninformative. Someone do something about that.

I'm writing on a complete summary as we speak. It's gonna take time, but the summary we have now, as brief and non-spoilerish as it is, is better than unneccesarily long excuse of a summary that the anon user keeps adding. Jonny2x4 02:52, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Soundtrack/Lyrics

[edit]

I added this section. If someone could please format the lyrics a bit better it would be appreciated as im new to wiki. -huffyrox

Cutscenes

[edit]

The article is completely wrong about the cutscenes. The hardware capabilities of the PSP (Which are about equal to the PS2) has nothing to do with the cutscenes not being in-engine, it has more to do with the Metal Gear Solid Digital Graphic Novel's graphical storytelling style achieving a bit of popularity. Who wrote something patently false like that? TheBakachan

Hmm it's not the power of the PSP, its the significantly smaller sized space on the UMD compared to a DVD maybe? Parjay 15:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that wouldn't make any sense- the comic-style recorded scenes take up substantially (order-of-magnitude grade) more space than an in-engine sequence. They use the comic because it works better, I imagine, on a small, relatively low-res screen. Hyperspacey
Well, that doesn't make sense either. The lower resolution would be more beneficial to in-game cines because there'd be less rendering overhead, having just played the game for the first time, basically until my PSP needed to be plugged in, I go back to it most definitely being because this particular graphical storytelling style is unique and very slick. (And yes, the comic style cines take up an order of magnitude more space, at least. In-game cines are just text files with coordinate data, keyframes and whatnot. The MPO cines are video files. They might have saved some space if they'd used the engine from the graphic novel, where it's all layered planes with mapped images...but that'd probably increase the load delay on the cines.) --TheBakachan 06:29, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I mean they work better from a visual perspective- let's face it, on a PSP screen in a busy train you'd be hard pushed to pick out facial detail and the like on characters in engine cutscenes, whereas the comic sequences show the action in broader strokes, so to speak, and would probably convey the action a lot easier. Hyperspacey
The comic-style cutscenes are "pre-rendered" FMVs stored as pmf files on the UMD, meaning they would take up roughly the same amount of space as any other FMV, CGI or otherwise. It was a stylistic decision that was made right from the start, and had nothing to do with the volume of the UMD, as it would take very little effort and space to render cutscenes in real time. WtW-Suzaku 14:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The PSP does not have the nowhere near the same capability as the PS2, or near it. Its more closer to the PS1, barely just a bit more powerful. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.145.26.103 (talk) 18:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Passwords

[edit]

GameFAQs has a list of recruitment passwords for special characters. I tried them all. They work. http://www.gamefaqs.com/portable/psp/code/932978.html --MemeGeneScene 18:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC) No real need for the passwords to be on the Wiki. Just put an external link? SuperBorisOnAPlane 11:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sequel details leaked?

[edit]

http://www.thesnakesoup.org/?section=announcements&content=index&t=724

truth or april fools day joke with no expiration date? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.4.29.21 (talk) 15:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It was an April Fools joke, just to clarify. DeadByDagger 05:39, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for vandalism

[edit]

This IP address is owned by a school, and is being used by someone else to annoy me. I just wanted to apologize for the penis pictures. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.93.89.2 (talk) 16:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

MPO: special edition?

[edit]

since the new and improved EU and AU versions of MPO are coming ou in late May, I wonder if any of us American folk will be able to grab some of the action. of course, Kojima would probably pull out some special edition to keep it all under. any thoughts on it? 151.196.130.5 12:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS2 version?

[edit]

Has anything been said about a PS2 version? After learning that this version is series canon, i'm interested in a PS2 version. PowderedToastMan 05:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PORTABLE Ops on a console? I don't think so. But, you never know. DeadByDagger 05:40, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Payton already confirmed that MPO is a PSP exclusive. It will NOT be ported. User:Bigger Boss 12:45, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Man With The Same Codename As Null

[edit]

Isn't it obvious that it's Major Zero? Just think about it. Shouldn't it in some way be written in the article?

MPO takes place 6 years after MGS3 so how could Null be Zero, because Zero is old in MGS3 and Null is young in MPO, so no I doubt Null is Zero

'Same codename', not 'same person'. Geez, it's obvious that Zero and Null aren't the same, nevertheless, Null and Zero are basically the same codename. And Gene was talking about someone with the same codename as Null. 84.134.192.149 14:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious? Maybe. Either way, there's no confirmation and wiki isn't the place for rumours or speculation. Parjay ► Talk 15:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is some evidence Major Zero is the man with the same codename as 'Null'. The name null technically means zero. He also planned Operation Snake Eater, and when Snake was meant to ask ADAM the question "Who are the Patriots?", the patriots apparently didn't exist then. How could he have known that in the future, the USA branch of the Philosophers would be renamed to the Patriots? It all seems quite fishy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.89.174.13 (talk) 05:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding citations and stuff

[edit]

If there is something out of place and stuff, please let me know. If not, correct it yourself. This is Wikipedia after all right? Bigger Boss

I'm not sure it's necessary to cite a ref for every single sentence on how the game plays, in the gameplay section.Parjay 21:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In case you never mentioned, the article for MGS3 and even MGS are like that for the most part. I am just trying to do the same. Some stuff in this article is plain horrible, especially the story summary. Bigger Boss 03:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just saying, some sections repeat the exact same footnote cite sentence after sentence, where it would suffice to simply place the one footnote at the end of the entire paragraph. Parjay 10:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be willing to correct that then? User:Bigger Boss 13:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portable Ops Plus

[edit]

The new Portable Ops Plus is NOT a sequel. Its mostly an expansion of the original game, similar to Substance or Subsistence for instance. Bigger Boss 2:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

So that is your argument to why Portable Ops + should not be on this page? Well sir your argument is flawed. If it were the case that Metal Gear Solid Portable Ops + should not belong here, then WHY is Subsistence and Substance on their respective, MGS3 and MGS2, game entries?

He never said it shouldn't mentioned. He's simply point out to other editors that the game is not a sequel as they been stating it is. Jonny2x4 03:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion

[edit]

Why is the line "An expansion to Portable Ops, named "Metal Gear Solid: Portable Ops +" has been affirmed and is in development. It is currently a Japanese only release." deleted? It is relevant and appropriate to the article.

It's been confirmed for an American release shortly after the Japanese release.(Myscrnnm 05:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Redirect of Metal Gear Solid: Portable Ops Plus to here

[edit]

I am redirecting Metal Gear Solid: Portable Ops Plus. MPO+ is more of a revision of MPO and doesn't really merit a new article. This also keeps in line with other rereleases of Metal Gear games (Integral, Substance, Subsistence) Strongsauce 02:09, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

False reports of sequel

[edit]

Hello, Strongsauce. Can you tell me when Ashley Wood worked on MGS4...?

Last time I checked, his work concerning the Metal Gear series only includes the comic books, the Digital Graphic Novels and Portable Ops. Therefore, the link is relevant and is refering to the fact that his work in the series is over at the moment. Thus, the article is refering to two titles: The original DGN and the coming installment. Bigger Boss 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Bigger Boss.
I never said that Ashley Wood worked on MGS4 but that doesn't prevent him from talking about Metal Gear Solid series on his blog does it? The blog post you ref'd mentions Snake in passing and is most likely referring to the end of the Metal Gear Solid Series.
"Also Metal Gear Solid is coming to an end, not that Snake would ever get the flu, you sneeze near the guy and he’d break your neck (or inspect your dewberries)." is the direct quote and hardly seems to be a good reference to him being done with the comic book because he would most likely say, "My work on the comic is finally done!" Although I'd agree that it most likely is finished.
I'm not going to bother getting into a revert war over this but your assumptions and inferring is not what Wikipedia is about. You seem to infer a lot from these articles and infer a lot about what I said but Wikipedia is about fact checking and nothing in that blog post has any substantial content.
I'd like to hear what other editors think, maybe I am totally wrong about it. But that blog post really confirms only one fact: That the Metal Gear Solid series is ending.
But thanks for being so condescending about this. Strongsauce 11:18, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever... Also, I consider offensive that you start editing or erase stuff that I have put a lot of work into, namely the sources in the main article. You deleted two(?) of them, for no reason whatsoever I believe. Basically, you erase content but instead of trying to add other sources or justify your actions, you dont. Why...?

Since when proper quotations are considered "bad" or "excessive" nowadays...?

Also, is it just me or you conveniently chose to ignore this piece of text...? "Ash has had awesome fun working on both titles and who knows what the future will hold for the both of them." Namely, the comic book series for the original MGS and Sons of Liberty.

Its probably not the best source but unfortunately, I cant find any other, other than an e-mail sent by Chris Ryall, editr in chief of IDW.

Thank you very very much for being such a nice individual. Note the sarcasm. Bigger Boss 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Play nice, you two. Anyhow, regarding the removed citation; it needed to be removed, it cites nothing for the sentences preceding it. Parjay ► Talk 15:07, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

North American release date

[edit]

Finally got an actual release date: Nov 13th which was one day off (Nov 14th) from what several editors (mostly anon ips) tried changing it to. IGN Info about release date Strongsauce 23:33, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spamming

[edit]

twice this evening i had to remove spamming messages. i'm not sure on proceedures, but is there a way to stop randoms editing the page, if so, could someone keep further eye out, and possibly take that action.
i'm an eight year metal gear fan, it's a big let down to see a metal gear page spammed.
00iddy 09:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Infinity mission?

[edit]

Can someone please expand on this???

--S02178 (talk) 01:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC) S02178[reply]

Very well. I might add, that Infinity Mission is never actually referred to in-game (as far as I can tell).

In 'Mission' mode there are four difficulties; Easy, Normal, Hard, Extreme. Each mode adds extra enemy soldiers, more advanced weaponry and equipment, 5 more objectives, and one more enemy soldier in the final objective.

Every difficulty apart from Easy has randomized objectives. These can take place on a random stage, have a random start and a random end point. There are also 'special objectives' such as "Survive for 3 minutes" or "Neutralize all enemies". When these are completed, the player has the option to perform a mid-way save (when loaded from, this save will disappear, so if you quit your progress will roll back to pre-mission status.

There are a wide variety of soldiers and equipment, and it can last you quite a long time to try and level up all of your soldiers. Well, that's from my experience anyway. AlexFili (talk) 10:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Metal Gear Solid 4 Spoiler

[edit]

One of the last lines in the "story" section for portable ops reveals a spoiler from MGS4, while it is rather minor (in some ways) it ultimately spoils things for those who haven't played MGS4. People who choose not to play MGS portable ops will read this "story" section and will be greeted by this spoiler. If it has to remain in this section it must be tagged with spoiler warnings.

Actually, MPO delivers the twist in such a blatantly obvious way as to make everyone doubt the validity. the ending for MGS4 could very well count as a "I told you so" for MPO players, while everyone else will have never seen it coming. 00:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.106.42.24 (talk)

Character page

[edit]

Would it be possible to place the character list in a separate article? The Mario Bros. are the bomb!, 5:57, 6 August 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.79.176.31 (talk)

I WANT IT!!!

[edit]

It is impossible to find a copy of this game anywhere in Ontario. If anyone knows where I can get one, please tell me.--Canadian Reject (talk) 16:16, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, can't help. Mind you though this is not a forum! At least not for this kind of stuff.91.19.223.161 (talk) 09:29, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Canon or not canon?

[edit]

This game is no longer canon. http://www.konami.jp/mg25th/truth/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.165.245.169 (talk) 05:29, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Finally! Seems quite reliable as a source! Now all thos MPO Lovers will propably argue, that it being not listed as a main game doesn't mean, its not canon. bla. Its nt a main game anymore apparently. 91.19.223.161 (talk) 09:06, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The game's events are still referenced in the chronology on that site though, as well as being in the timeline on metalgearsolid.com. I do think it shouldn't be listed as a main game however. In the Kojima Productions Podcast 122, at the 24:40 mark, they pretty much say that it's canon but *not* considered a main game. 91.44.114.141 (talk) 02:35, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed still canon, Kojima simply doesn't consider it a main chapter, most likely because he did not direct it. In the words of Kojima himself, "Umm... they [Portable Ops events] happened, but it's not like a main chapter." Also, Peace Walker makes a direct reference witht the line "Finally, we can leave that crap in San Hieronymo behind, and break into the mercanary business for real." Not only this, but think about the plot of Peace Walker if Portable Ops did not exist. Things would make little sense. 134340Goat (talk) 19:51, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How so? I think events make actually more sense, if you ignore Portable Ops and jump straight from Snake Eater to Peace Walker.87.177.93.222 (talk) 16:33, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You actually create more plotholes if you leave out Portable Ops. Read this. It's a really long read, well over an hour, but it explains very well why Portable Ops is firmly cemented as canon. 134340Goat (talk) 20:43, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, and besides, if we go by your logic, we should discount the MSX2 games from being canon simply because the Konami timeline published during Peace Walker's development omitted the two games (here's the link, in case no one believes me). Plus, from what I've heard about the "truth" page, they apparently messed things up on the timeline, such as either reusing outdated dates (eg, listing the events of MGS4 as occuring in "20XX", which was originally used for the MGSagas DVD, which at the time of release, they hadn't exactly unveiled much of MGS4's plot yet, yet the date makes absolutely no sense whatsoever now that its established to have occurred in 2014) or otherwise simply getting things just plain wrong on the site (eg, claiming that Big Boss fell into sulphuric acid during his battle with Solid Snake in Metal Gear 2, despite it not only being stated that Snake burned the guy to death, but MGS4 showed him being reconstructed and his appearance in the epilogue). Weedle McHairybug (talk) 12:34, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why the game hasn't to be considered not canon. Because Konami doesn't include it in his collections? This game should be reinserted in the canon template as the description of the article says.

Yeah, and besides, Metal Gear Solid 4 still includes it in its timeline, even after effectively redoing it to include the trophy options, so its canon regardless. Heck, Kojima himself mentioned that it "happened." in one of the podcasts, and that was AFTER Peace Walker was released. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 18:45, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Page needs to be updated. The game is no longer canon. MGS5 official site confirms it. So does the 25th Anniversary page, both left MPO out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.165.198.112 (talk) 03:03, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How about we remove the MSX2 games as well and claim they're non-canon? Those were, by your logic, confirmed to be non-canon on the 0Peace Walker development timeline site simply because they weren't even listed on the timeline. Sorry, but it takes a lot more than just their not being on a timeline (which is sometimes the result of an error) to be confirmed non-canon, especially when Kojima himself already confirmed MPO as having happened in a podcast, Peace Walker directly referenced the events of San Hieronymo, and heck, the stills from MPO were retained in MGS4 even when Kojima had it rereleased for the trophy edition. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 16:40, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your argument uses evidence from 4-6 years ago. Current official web does not list MPO as canon. These are facts that need to be reflected in the article, even though you don't like them.

http://www.konami.jp/mg25th/truth/

http://www.konami.jp/mgs5/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.165.198.112 (talk) 17:18, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you to argue with the official timeline that's been confirmed for 2 years? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.165.198.112 (talk) 17:22, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Trophy Edition for MGS4 is actually barely even a year old, and they still retained the stills of MPO, so yes, its still canon. And BTW, an "official timeline" also removed the MSX2 games from there, being completely absent. Should we all of a sudden label those as non-canon? I'm sorry, but you're just getting ridiculous. Unless Kojima specifically states MPO is non-canon, we're still treating it as canon. Peace Walker still has the San Hieronymo line, and Kojima hasn't retracted his "Portable Ops happened, but it is not a main chapter" line in that podcast. And I suggest you consider THOSE facts, even if you don't like MPO. Besides, as one person pointed out, the MG25th page still listed MPO on its chronology section, so even there, it still counted the game as canon. And the MGS official site (both English and Japanese, I verified this myself), back when it had that timeline, posted Portable Ops and the MSX2 games as footnotes, while the other Metal Gear games barring Revengeance got entire banners. The timeline was removed in favor of the Versus Battle by April or May 2013, though. And can you at least try to sign your posts? Weedle McHairybug (talk) 19:42, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Everything you said is irrelevant. Fact is the current timeline on the MGS5 site omits MPO. It's not a mistake. It was left out of the 25th Anniversary, HD Collection, Legacy Collection, and MGS5 timeline. Yes, at one point it was canon. In 2006 it was treated as a main game. By 2010 "it kinda happened". After 2012 it was removed from ALL new materials (official pages, collections, timelines). The MGS4 trophy patch is irrelevant. It was made to just add trophies, not change the game. Besides, the fact that a handful of screens were shown doesn't mean much, the actual events of MPO have never been mentioned by any other game. It's no longer canon, deal with it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.165.198.112 (talk) 02:16, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The MSX2 games were also implemented into Subsistence to give people the opportunity to play them. That never stopped them from altering the games. If they could do it there, they most certainly can alter some elements from MGS4 when it was rereleased (especially in the Legacy Collection, which unlike the first release of the Trophy Patch, actually was the Trophy Edition release packaged). And the only way its to be treated as non-canon is if Kojima explicitly states its non-canon in a podcast (and by that, I mean actually lists it as non-canon, not merely being a side game). Maybe you should pester Kojima to see if it is non-canon. Do I particularly care for Portable Ops? No. I do feel it was a bit better than Peace Walker, but other than that I do not care for it at all. Oh, and BTW, Portable Ops was in fact mentioned in other games: Twice, in fact. MGS4 had EVA referring to Gene's speech in MPO as well as Ocelot founding the Patriots with Zero (both instances were clearly MPO's work rather than MGS3's, especially when the latter implied that the DCI was the actual founder of the Patriots, and EVA's debriefing was clearly different in regards to what occurred), and Peace Walker had Miller explicitly mentioning San Hieronymo (which only appeared in Portable Ops). Heck, Kojima even stated that MPO and MGS4 were actually necessary to play. Besides, if we go by simple omissions from the timeline, we might as well label the MSX2 games as non-canon, since those games actually did end up removed from the timeline (as demonstrated with the Peace Walker development site's timeline). And as mentioned, the Legacy Collection also includes the DGNs as well, should we label them as automatically canon just because they're included on the Legacy Collection, even though they had a lot of changes to the story (heck, MGS2's DGN had the most changes to the plot, where Snake was obviously the main character, even defeating Solidus)? Besides, even the MG25th site (which you love to use as proof towards MPO's non-canonicity) still lists MPO under the chronology section, so your argument is invalidated there. Heck, the MGS official timeline, on both the Japanese and English sites, both mentioned MPO on there, and let me point out it was an updatable timeline (meaning it is able to be altered), yet it remained on there up to the timeline's removal from the official site. Not to mention, Kojima's overall reaction to MPO is completely inconsistent if he wanted it made non-canon. He would have behaved exactly like he did with the NES version of Metal Gear (ie, be somewhat of a bully and voicing his harsh opinion of the game regardless of how much it hurts his own coworkers). Weedle McHairybug (talk) 13:06, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take you apart one point at a time: 1. MGS4 trophy edition. I can't believe you are trying to use this. Why didn't they change the gender of Dr. Clark in MGS1 when they released the Legacy Collectiom? Stupid question. They can't go back and change everything. MSX games were different. First, it's a 2D game. Second, they had to make changes due to legal issues over character art in MG2. Your comparison is idiotic. 2. Kojima won't openly kick it out. His team worked on it, he was involved in development and story. But, much like Ghost Babel and Acid are simply being left out. Comparing it to the NES MG is incorrect as Kojima had nothing to do with it. 3. MGS4 talking about MPO. Are you high? Eva never mentioned Gene or his speech. And the formation of the Patriots did not happen in MPO. It was implied, but not final. That didn't happen until Big Boss joined. Regardless, the credits timeline at the end of MGS3 stares the end if Fox, start of FoHound, and formation of the Patriots. So these events were already outlined. You are wrong! 4. MPO is necessary to play MGS4. Stupid marketing. If you have actually played the two games you know that's bull shit. Besides, as I said before, in 2006 it was canon. Now it is not. There is nothing in that game that is relevant to the main series. 5. DGNs are not games. It's bonus material. Are VR Missions canon? Stop talking out of your ass. 6. MPO is not on the 25th site. You are confused. 7. Current web says MPO did not happen. Fact! I'm done with you. Clearly you don't know much about the series, at least not enough to make objective decisions about the page. Regardless, you are wrong and I wasted enough time on you.

1. Considering how the HD versions of Metal Gear Solid 2 actually did change some labels out (such as changing the dedications to the Marines sign on the door wheel to "Metal Gear 4 Guns of Patriots"), yes, they most certainly can do that. Besides, George Lucas actually did alter his own films (Greedo Shot First says hi). Heck, the guy who created the Warhammer card series even went as far as to recall all prior games and erase all evidence of the shorties or whatever that race was called.
2. While he did have some involvement in MPO, he was more involved in MGS4's production than in MPO's, being the actual director, so yes, he actually would openly kick it out knowing what his personality is like especially from that instance.
3. No, but she DID mention that the CIA had The Boss killed because they feared her charisma, which clearly was not in MGS3 (quite the opposite, in fact: EVA stated that the United States was forced to kill The Boss off because Volgin ruined the mission by nuking the Sokolov Research Facility). And Zero being the founder of the Patriots was in fact implied in MPO (or do I really need to remind you about how Gene mentioned that Ocelot's employer was "the man with the same codename as Null", and that "Null" is the German word for "Zero?"), and either way, MGS3's strong implication that the Patriots were formed by the CIA Director was clearly thrown out in MGS4 when they mentioned Zero as being the founder (and BTW, MPO explained why the CIA director was no longer the founder of the Patriots). And while MGS3 did mention the formation of the Patriots in MGS3, it did NOT mention Big Boss's involvement in forming the organization (or Zero's, for that matter). Actually, it was implied from the call that the DCI was the one who formed the Patriots, and that the United States Government formed it by extension, not some guy who served alongside the Boss and was a fanboy of hers. So yes, that was indeed a Portable Ops reference. The only thing truly consistent with MGS3's original implications and MGS4/MPO's revelations is that Ocelot was involved in the formation of the Patriots.
4. It's not "stupid marketing", as Kojima actually ordered his own staff to NOT make any finalizations to MGS4 until MPO's story was finalized. Had it been stupid marketing, he would have just said it tied in to MGS4, and left it at that (you know, "Honest John" type advertizing), not state that he even ordered his own staff to not finalize MGS4. And either way, by your logic, until 2009, the MSX2 games were canon, yet after that, they weren't thanks to a timeline on the site. And either way, Peace Walker already referenced San Hieronymo explicitly anyways, so its a moot point.
5. a. The DGNs may not have been games, but they still weren't Kojima's work, they were Ashley Wood's work, and thus already were a contradiction about it only containing things he himself worked on. b. VR missions was actually referenced by Raiden in Metal Gear Solid 2, so its canon in the sense that Raiden did those missions in-universe, and besides which, unlike the DGNs, the VR Missions actually were made by Kojima.
6. Actually, you should tell 91.144 that, since (s)he was the one who said that MPO's events were still referenced.
7. Current web/timelines also stated that the MSX2 games were non-canon. Should we all of a sudden state it to be the case?
And I am not wrong. I may be wrong in a few other areas, but I'm definitely not wrong here. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 14:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No longer canon, confirmed by Kojima it the twitch tv interview. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ufKS1gdnIGU (at about 43 min). Games he directed are canon. Games he produced are not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.165.198.112 (talk) 01:45, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, he said the game's main events did indeed happen, and the only things that may not have happened are some of the details. Besides, by his logic, the DGNs won't count as canon, yet he included those in the Legacy Collection despite it being only for games he had directed. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 17:43, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not only did he confirm it's canon, but he also stated that it's indeed a main entry of the series. The template should be updated to reflect this. Not sure about MGR though. It IS canon, but I'm pretty sure it's classified as a spin-off. 134340Goat (talk) 19:36, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Metal Gear Solid: Portable Ops. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:25, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Metal Gear Solid: Portable Ops. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:26, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Metal_Gear_Solid:_Portable_Ops&oldid=1203982648"