Talk:Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots/Archive 5

Metal Gear Solid 4 is not PS3 Exclusive!!! No really, my friend who knows a guy says it isn't, I swear!

The following text was written by NicholaiDaedalus on the FFXIII talk page. I am reproducing it here, as it seems to have stopped people adding unfounded rumours to that article, and it just might work here.

NOTICE TO ANYONE WHO WANTS TO POST ABOUT MGS4'S EXCLUSIVITY

Before you come on and clutter up the page with rumors and things that you consider reliable, let me first point out a couple of things.

1. I don't care who your friend is, I don't care what "Reliable industry sources" connections you have, I don't even care if you work for Konami/Kojima Productions. Unless WE can WP:VERIFY your source with a citation or a link, then it doesn't mean shit. It is nothing more than a rumor. "Verifiability, not truth" is one of Wikipedia's mottos.
2. I don't care what scenarios in the past are similar. "The situation is nearly identical to the contractual obligations faced by EA with..." Blah blah blah. I don't care. Who says it's similar? Have you personally read both contracts? How do you know they are "nearly identical"? Can we even WP:VERIFY that you are telling the truth? It isn't the same contract, and the results may not be the same.
3. I don't care if you are a journalist or not. If you really are a journalist, then you should understand why we need a WP:Reliable source. We cannot just "take your word for it", we cannot just trust you. We need a WP:RS before we can do anything.
4. An anouncement that MGS4 is not exclusive DOES NOT mean that it will be released for Xbox 360 or PC, I don't care how logical the move would be nor do I care how much "common sense" it makes. The WP:RS that I hope you provide to back your claims must explicitly say that it will be released for Xbox 360 or PC. If it doesn't explicitly say that, even if it says that Xbox 360 and PC are being considered, then for Wikipedia's purposes it isn't true, because there is no way for us to know whether it is true or not.
5. Likewise, an announcement that says that any Metal Gear will not be exclusive DOES NOT, in any way, mean that MGS4 will not be exclusive. It is but one game of the Metal Gear series. Just because a series isn't exclusive, doesn't mean an individual game can't be exclusive.
6. I don't care how big the fansite is, it's still a fansite. PSM3, PS3 Center, GameSpot, whatever, they are fansites. And what do fansites do? They spread gossip and rumors and news. The problem is, we can't tell which piece from them is news and which piece is rumor. Fansites, no matter how notable, are not a WP:Reliable source. And if this bothers you, consider that if they mention an "official announcement" from SE, then it should be possible to find such an announcement from other, reliable sources. So give us that other, reliable source, not the fansite.

What it all comes down to, really, is that Wikipedia's policy on WP:ATTRIBUTION is very clear that we cannot any include information without having a WP:Reliable source that we can WP:Verify. "Verifiability, not truth." Frvernchanezzz (talk) 01:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Gamespot a fansite? John.n-irl (talk) 10:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes. A fansite. No need to go into detail about it here though - take it to the GameSpot talk page if you want to discuss it. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 11:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

It's worth pointing out that PSM3 is the web presence of Future Publishing's PS3 magazine, and along with the likes of GameSpot and IGN are completely viable press sources, provided they quote a reliable source for what they write. The issue here is that the only "confirmation" of MGS4 going to 360 comes from what the websites themselves declare are rumours. A reputable source reporting on a rumours does not make it any more definite. I suggest anyone wishing to argue the matter read the archived epic hellfest that we went through last year first. Hyperspacey (talk) 14:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Just edited the page because some moron edited the page with unverified allegations towards this game's exclusivity, while doing it he also broke most of the page. No need to thank me. :) ~Anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.116.117.212 (talk) 19:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll try and keep a lookout as well. --Bloigen 23:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

We all should keep a look out. These rumours are so stupid. 124.186.93.96 (talk) 02:22, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

http://gaming.monstersandcritics.com/ps3/news/article_1384409.php/Konami_officially_quashes_MGS4_on_Xbox_360_claim Ok...yeah MGS4 is coming to Xbox 360. Xatticus 20:13, 03 January 2008 (UTC).

That article says it is not coming to the 360. --Daniel J. Leivick (talk) 01:17, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Xatticus, thanks for posting that end-all be-all statement from Konami, considering you made "an easy suggestion" about this last August. I guess that's over, because those are some big-ass nails. Eaglestorm (talk) 03:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

To be brutally honest, if anyone thinks an "MGS4 on 360 rumours" article is going to go up on the page now, they're in need of a harsh beating with the STFU stick. Hyperspacey (talk) 16:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Its not coming out for the 360. Its been denied time and time again, what more do you people want? Its NOT gonna happen. Damien Russell (talk) 00:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to check your alarm on this, but many of us who posted here have already moved on from that one bit and besides, your comment is already weeks late. --Eaglestorm (talk) 10:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Trust me mate, it wont be over until at least 2 years after the MGS4 release for the PS3 - so my point of view is still valid. Damien Russell (talk) 12:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

GameSpot a fan site? I thought it was press... 4.240.117.82 (talk) 00:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Release Date (or time period)

http://www.konami.jp/topics/2007/1031_1/index-e.html

So 2nd Quarter of 2008...can't wait!Xatticus 20:14, 03 January 2008 (UTC)

http://kotaku.com/360906/metal-gear-solid-4-finally-has-a-release-date

New supposed release date of June 12. Lets all wait until official Konami confirmation. The article is frm a retailers conference.--WhereAmI (talk) 18:22, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I read this after i added it....id be inclined to go with it unless its disputed by Sony/Konami. Not 100% sure though. john.n-irl (talk) 19:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Have a look at this http://kotaku.com/360906/metal-gear-solid-4-finally-has-a-release-date A Candela (talk) 00:10, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Please scroll down here Strongsauce (talk) 00:55, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

It is comeing out for Japan June 12th 2008 here is the link http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jeux-france.com%2Fnews24762_mgs-4-date-us-et-pack-80go.html&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 A Candela (talk) 21:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

However, Konami did say there would be a Metal Gear announcement of some kind tomorrow. We can't possibly imagine what that might be. A Candela (talk) 22:00, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Here you go http://www.konami.com/ctlimg/konami/pressrelease/02_28_2008_MGS4_DPS.pdf A Candela (talk) 23:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I made a mistake it is comeing out worldwide on 12 June 2008 Konami Japan said so. A Candela (talk) 01:28, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah cool its comeing out June 12th 2008. A Candela (talk) 21:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

They're putting the finishing touches on MGS4

Take a look at this. MGS4 is almost here! Plus, the demo will be released to the PlayStation network soon (hopefully by the end of next month). 74.34.217.222 (talk) 23:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Wheres the news about a demo? Or is that in the podcast(haven't listened to it yey). I know in the past Payton said they wouldnt release one as it would take up too much time.John.n-irl (talk) 22:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

My cousin, who lives in the UK, read it in a magazine. PSW I think he said it was. They mentioned the demo. I'm not sure how reliable that magazine is but we'll find out next month. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.217.222 (talk) 01:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah i know the mag, id take it with a pinch of salt. Its just speculation but i'd say its close enough to release that they'd concentrate on the game itself. Either way, wait for kojima productions to say about a demo John.n-irl (talk) 02:16, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't expect a demo- at all. Konami's Head of Marketing said there wasn't one planned to come out before the game, way back in October, and a high-up Konami marketing member repeated that as early as last week at CES. Hyperspacey (talk) 14:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I vivedly remember an episode of the podcast that had someone write in to the show and it said "No Demo, No Purchase". Then Peyton went into detail as to why Kojima are not releasing a demo. I don't remember the exact episode to reference from, but it was the episode where they were at E for All. Xatticus 08:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Amazon.com + MGS4 = June 30, 2008?!

Searching for some Metal Gear merchandising, I've found with this. It's Amazon.com a reliable source? 200.120.110.173 (talk) 04:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not. Better to get the release dates from Konami itself. Eaglestorm (talk) 18:10, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Game sites aren't reliable sources. They all say different dates. Amazon says 6/30, GameStop says sometime in mid June and bestbuy.com says sometime in March. The only date we should post is the date that comes from Kojima Productions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.217.222 (talk) 20:18, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Konami, as the publishing company of the game, is just as reliable as Kojima Productions. Dengarde ► Complaints 22:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The Japanese page says, more specifically, "FY08 Qtr.1 Half-term". I believe that with the Japanese fiscal year that puts it somewhere in May. March is dead wrong, it's not even part of the first quarter, though it would be great if it was coming out that soon... - Narfness (talk) 03:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

One Million Copies

Would anyone object to the removal of the following, "One estimate suggests that the title will need to sell in excess of one million copies at release to recoup its development costs." This statement has been denied by Ryan Payton(the supposed origin of the comment), stating it was taken out of context(I think, ill listen back in the podcasts if anyone would like a source) John.n-irl (talk) 12:28, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

yup, that statement looks like it was false from Reuters, check teh link for info. Somebody should edit that part. http://kotaku.com/354077/million-metal-gear-solid-4-launch-day-quote-is-incorrect 189.160.7.41 (talk) 06:47, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Follow up: Well. I guess they recouped their development costs. It sold 1.3 million on the first day. 142.179.200.76 (talk) 23:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

cover art

Somebody posted what seems to be the cover art for MGS4 yesterday. It has been reverted for copyvio reasons. What do you think of the art? --Eaglestorm (talk) 02:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

In case people don't know, that's a fan-made box art. It's not the real thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.217.222 (talk) 06:16, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

That sure got me fooled. --Eaglestorm (talk) 07:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Photo showing release date

Many people are putting the release date as June 12 because of this photo. I would like to point out that this photo has been confirmed to be fake (you can even tell since the date isn't parallel with the rest of the writing). So, until a release date is announced by Konami, it's best to leave the release date as Q2 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.217.222 (talk) 23:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

that is the release date[1]--24.109.218.172 (talk) 17:49, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Please wait for the official word. Strongsauce (talk) 17:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Where is June 12th Coming From?

I see it slated for June 12th on the internets, but when I read up on the sources they dont actually give that specific of a date. It still is just saying Q208. Does this need to be changed back? 140.198.25.107 (talk) 20:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

There was a situation where a fake image got released and then some Kotaku post where some retailer heard it from a conference. Those dates have since been confirmed on the PlayStation blog [2] Strongsauce (talk) 20:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

The blog only says late q2, putting in specific dates is probably jumping the gun now that we have an official announcement. john.n-irl (talk) 21:09, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

AFAIK the MGS4 bundle is confirmed for June 12th, but for all we know the game is coming out the day, week, month before. Hyperspacey (talk) 22:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

The press release only seems to say Q2? john.n-irl (talk) 22:05, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow I am almost certain that it said June 12th when I went to source that. Now going back to the page it says Q2 2008, very weird Strongsauce (talk) 22:10, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

There seems to be some epic back-pedalling going on. As far as I can ascertain rumours from the showfloor suggested a June 12th release, but the press release itself doesn't specify the date. I think we'll have to check Ryan's Report this week, he'll likely give something more specific. Hyperspacey (talk) 22:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Now we've got an unsourced magazine scan added to the comments... *sigh*. Someone work out if it's genuine and get a cited source, then change the date, or else we've got to wait until tomorrow and get it from Ryan Payton. Hyperspacey (talk) 23:39, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

This whole situation seems very weird, June 12 is the same date as that image that turned out to be a hoax. I looked around for any press releases and found it on PRNewsire which says Q2 2008. I was pretty sure that the original blog post on Playstation.com here originally said June 12, 2008 but it has now been removed to say Q2 2008. Also removed is the box art for the PS3 MGS bundle so they definitely have been editing that post. Strongsauce (talk) 01:00, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

This baby here is either one big elaborate fake, or confirmation, but unless someone can say where it came from we've got nothing to post up... Hyperspacey (talk) 01:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Master_of_Puppets has just semi-protected the page for 1 month. Hopefully by then we will have a more official source. Strongsauce (talk) 05:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

About time this article got locked down. --Eaglestorm (talk) 10:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Japanese Boxart supposedly released

So I expect a flood of people trying to upload and put the boxart into the article. Strongsauce (talk) 02:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I think it's pretty much a dead-cert, but until we get a proper release from Konami confirming it I don't think it's wise to post it up. Konami Europe's PR agency are making a big MGS announcement tomorrow, and I think it's safe to assume it'll be a reveal of the game boxart and release date. Hyperspacey (talk) 21:16, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. From the rumors apparently Kojima has in fact stated in a Japanese magazine that that is the real boxart and the release date is indeed June 12th. Also apparently the website would be updated tomorrow (29th) Strongsauce (talk) 21:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

There is going to be a demo for this game list to the Gamespot UK podcast. A Candela (talk) 23:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

The official site's updated dudes! I'll grab what I can and reference the ass out of the article. Hyperspacey (talk) 00:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Bah, actually, there's nothing especially new just yet. But 12th June 2008 is the Japanese and Western release date, no doubt at all. Hyperspacey (talk) 00:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Somebody posted the box-art just now. I reverted it, because I figure we need to talk this over before posting it. --Eaglestorm (talk) 10:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

We dont need to talk anything over. If the boxart is the boxart and its been confirmed then whats the point in trying to hide it? Damien Russell (talk) 12:33, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Well the original poster was posting an image that was blatantly breaking fair-use, and there is/was an issue getting a correct version of the box art. john.n-irl (talk) 18:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots Demo

There is going to be a demo for this game listen to the Gamespot UK podcast. A Candela (talk) 23:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Err, link? Time in the podcast it's said? Transcription of what's said? Hyperspacey (talk) 23:39, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

The link is here http://uk.gamespot.com/pages/features/ukpodcast/index.php and it is 48:42 minutes in. A Candela (talk) 23:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep, seems pretty definite from their part. I'll transcribe the bit in question and post it up as a reference tomorrow. Hyperspacey (talk) 00:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

What time are you going to put it up? A Candela (talk) 11:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Hyperspacey when are you puting it up? A Candela (talk) 21:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Ithought you was puting it up. A Candela (talk) 23:23, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

You can edit the article too you know. john.n-irl (talk) 18:05, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I cant I dont know how to do it could you please A Candela (talk) 19:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

You simply click "Edit this page." What's so difficult about that? Also see WP:EDIT. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.217.222 (talk) 16:26, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

MGO not a seperate game

can someone fix that? the page seems to be locked and I have no intention of registering on wikipedia. http://www.threespeech.com/blog/

The goliath of a title will be hitting European stores on June 12, the same date as Japan and America. According to the press release the Blu-ray disc will include both Metal Gear Solid 4 and its online counterpart, Metal Gear Online, contrary to previous rumours saying the two would be sold separately.

--Bobhead

Bobhead, it says, "According to the press release the Blu-ray disc will include both Metal Gear Solid 4 and its online counterpart, Metal Gear Online, contrary to previous rumours" which does not contradict anything in the Wikipedia article about the fact that they are going to be 2 separate games. All that quote states is that both games will be in the Metal Gear Solid 4 package. Strongsauce (talk) 00:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Cool I cant wailt to get this. A Candela (talk) 00:10, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Canand1, Please keep discussion here on the Talk Page related to editing the article per WP:FORUM Strongsauce (talk) 00:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

It seems this is inaccurate. What does this "starter pack" - exactly? It seems that MGO is not a "component" but another game you must pay-for. Will you have to continually buy something (buy updates to get access to online play (like some MMORPG's do, you buy the latest "update" in order to have access to the online play)).

This section seems intentionally vague. Has Sony/Konami said how this is going to work yet?

Wageslave (talk) 16:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

June 12 - North American or worldwide release date?

I noticed that the article says that June 12 is the worldwide release date. However, you look at both of the sources provided, it says that June 12, 2008 is for the North American release. Should it be changed? --On the other side ^Contribs|@ 19:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC) No its for worldwide and here is the souce http://uk.games.konami-europe.com/news.do;jsessionid=E0E67828534D07AEBBC1C1050C4EC048?idNews=306 A Candela (talk) 19:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

rumble paragraph redo/removal and cut scene info

Couple of things. Can we remove the paragraph about the lack of rumble? It has been reported since TGS (last year I think, or maybe E3) that Metal Gear will incorporate rumble. We could incorporate the initial lack of rumble into a new paragraph explaining its implementation. Also, I added a little to the paragraph about the cut scenes with information from the latest Kojima Productions podcast, but I think the info is a little out of place. Should we have a cinematics/storyline section to cover that information? Firebringervt (talk) 21:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I think I need to reword my paragraph a bit - the part about rumble I was talking about does address the fact that the feature will exist, but it is contradictory at the same time, saying "Due to the lack of a rumble feature..." Firebringervt (talk) 21:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Do not remove. Even if rumble was implemented in lieu of the Threat Ring, it's better to still include it as part of cataloguing the game's development history. --Eaglestorm (talk) 02:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

As a series known for rumble, its initial lack of rumble should be noted since Kojima has stated that he really wanted the game to have it. The threat ring (which will probably be kept anyways) was a solution to that problem. Please keep it since it describes part of the development of the game. Strongsauce (talk) 02:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots Theme Song

Does anybodey know what the theme song is? A Candela (talk) 21:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I know it's in hebrew! Ryan Payton (Kojima Productions Report's Host) mentioned it. It seems that Mr. Kojima listened to Ofra Haza's songs lately... I think the level of translation to hebrew is quite low - the production company could have asked for a israeli-academic translation, japanese-direct-to-hebrew translation... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.94.207.7 (talk) 21:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

So when could we listen to it? A Candela (talk) 11:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

HD Trailers from GameInvasion

Hello Editor(s)!

I wanted to see where you best thought under which section you thought this profile page should go. The site this link is from is GameInvasion and their profile page for MGS4 is really quite impressive. Here is the link to their profile page so you can take a look prior to my post: http://gameinvasion.comcast.net/gameinvasion/show/#1263916_metal_gear_solid_4/profile

Let me know what sectiom you think it would be fit under and I will make sure it gets there.

Best, JPalumbo (talk) 14:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

While a nice looking site, "Profile pages" are not allowed per poss. of favoritism. See: WP:VG/EL Strongsauce (talk) 15:51, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

It also says, "if determined by consensus to be valuable, they may be included". It is up to you my friend. There are a couple other gaming type pages and articles I've seen that could be seen as valuable on the web as well, so let me know and I'll pass them by you. Best, JPalumbo (talk) 14:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Edit request

I have absolutely no idea how to request edits of locked articles, but this part of the article bothered me;

• The game is being designed around the motto, "No Place to Hide!" MGS4 will reportedly be the last Metal Gear Solid game developed by Hideo Kojima, and the last game in the series starring Solid Snake.

If that could be edited to...

• The game is being designed around the motto "No Place to Hide!". MGS4 will reportedly be the last Metal Gear Solid game developed by Hideo Kojima, and the last game in the series starring Solid Snake.

...I'd be happier reading the article. Thanks. 87.96.193.22 (talk) 18:13, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

It would have been easier if you had just pointed out that it was the comma after motto that was bothering you. I still don't exactly see the problem. Strongsauce (talk) 02:15, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's grammatically correct to change it. If you have a quote, you should have a comma preceding it. And in this case, you are quoting the motto, "No Place to Hide!". Therefore, the comma should be present. I'm putting it back unless a higher authority can reject it.(Myscrnnm (talk) 12:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC))

Apparently this IP decided to change this on May 13th [3] with the bizzare edit message, "There are more mottos than one." I have no idea what that means.

In the Act VI section, the sentence, "Snake returns to Shadow Moses Island, where REX has remained in the nine years after the events of Metal Gear Solid, to stop Liquid from stealing it" would be more correct if it said, "the events of the Shadow Moses Incident (Metal Gear Solid)" or some other more accurate wording. The game contained the story, keeping with the events of the STORY being the point of reference, not what took place in the MGS game. Just a thought. -->ogredeschniqueOgredeschnique (talk) 02:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Could be "Guns Of The Patriots" inspired by the 60's movie title?

In MGS3, Para-Medic tells Naked Snake about a film called The Guns Of Navarone. Could it be that this title what the inspiration for the MGS4 title name? We can go even further and assume that it has some resemblence with the movie title's SYNOPSIS APPROACH...

Anyway, I think it's worth a mention in the article itself...

Is this just because they both have the word gun in them? Or am I missing something? John.n-irl (talk) 14:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Kojima references films pretty often, so it's possible, if not confirmed. Hyperspacey (talk) 13:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I haven't heard of anything specifically making the connection, but of note, I do believe that the original Metal Gear's gameplay was conceived from The Guns of Navarone. ^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs} 17:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I recently watched a movie called Force 10 From Navarone, starring Harrison Ford and Robert Shaw, which had soldiers in it dressed similarly to members of the Ocelot Unit. So I guess it's possible.(Myscrnnm (talk) 01:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC))

The latest issue of EDGE magazine (the one with Snake on the cover) says that the title has to do with something in-game. Strongsauce (talk) 13:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Medina, Middle East

Even if you take a quick glimpse over one particular gameplay's video, you could learn that the officialy labeled MIDDLE EAST location in the game is actually...

AL-MEDINA, Saudi Arabia.

Here's the video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=nyWI68d5WIA&feature=related

Pause the streaming at 00:18 - on the down-left of the screen, there will be caption as follows: MIDDLE EAST RED ZONE MEDINA

A possibility, isn't it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.94.207.7 (talk) 21:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

A medina is a central market square. Such places exist in many, many towns and cities in the Middle East. Due to the confusion, they're changing it to "Market" in the final version. I'll dig out the KojiPro Report where they discuss it. Hyperspacey (talk) 13:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Still waiting for that KojiPro Report.(Myscrnnm (talk) 04:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC))

Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots

Can somebodey please sorght the page out. A Candela (talk) 19:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Covers

So if the game does have different covers, which one should wiki go with? Is there a rule for that kind of thing? John.n-irl (talk) 01:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I say go with the Europe one. A Candela (talk) 01:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

The Japanese or North American cover should be used for consistency.(Myscrnnm (talk) 02:58, 6 April 2008 (UTC))

I'd say Japanese cover since Konami is Japanese. John.n-irl (talk) 03:56, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I can't believe you guys are actually asking what game cover to use. It has to be the Japanese cover because that is the country where it was made. And if people are still complaining add the other two on the bottom of the page in the image boxes, with the Japanese one taking piroity in the main section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.57.38 (talk) 23:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I was mearly asking if there was a precedence on the issue, and I didnt have the time to search through the project pages or anywhere similar. Thanks though. John.n-irl (talk) 18:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah can you please put the Europe and USA Box Art up. A Candela (talk) 19:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

USA or Europe because this is the english page of the game.--Playstationdude (talk) 19:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree. It's ethnocentric for people to use the Japanese cover simply because the game is Japanese. All the other Metal Gear Solid pages use the American covers. And like you said, this is Wikipedia ENGLISH, and the United States is an ENGLISH SPEAKING country. And as I said before, it will be consistent if we use the American cover. Although I've got to admit, that Japanese cover looks better than the American one.(Myscrnnm (talk) 03:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC))

I've removed the "gallery" of box art since that is really unnecessary. However I was going to put the NA cover onto the infobox. However I cannot find any verification that it is indeed going to be the cover. This post on Kotaku says the source is from Amazon. But even Amazon now does not have that cover. Strongsauce (talk) 11:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't be removing the gallery. Just make the thumbnails smaller.(Myscrnnm (talk) 21:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC))

Dozens of games (and in fact almost all Japanese games) have different covers for the same game for different regions or whatever the reason. There isn't exactly anything special about MGS4 in that regard. Strongsauce (talk) 21:53, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Let's all look for a source that says it is official. First one to find it post it here.--Playstationdude (talk) 19:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Could do worse than the official Konami Europe blog: http://uk.gs.konami-europe.com/blog.do Hyperspacey (talk) 20:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thats just the EU cover, so should we use that instead of the Japanese one until more clarification is given? John.n-irl (talk) 23:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I think a verified EU cover is more worth having up that a possible US cover... Hyperspacey (talk) 10:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

That is so true. Unfortunately these guys will never listen.SchumiChamp (talk) 18:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks like Tom Selleck is indeed the cover for the NA release of MGS4. Plus more additional details about the bundles. [4] Strongsauce (talk) 19:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Also looks like the NA bundle will be in a white box, no the blackbox shown.

Would anyone object to using the Special Edition North American version, i believe that it better reflects the art style of the MGS series and is more in keeping with what is on other pages. John.n-irl (talk) 20:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

The special edition is only at gamestop. That wouldn't be that clear if there isn't a gamestop in the readers town. Meaning they would only see the standard in their stores.--Playstationdude (talk) 23:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Forgot about the gamestop deal John.n-irl (talk) 23:33, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

And the European cover was once again deleted? What's wrong now?!SchumiChamp (talk) 12:55, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

What exactly is wrong with the North American cover? The Wikipedia articles have consistently used the NA covers for the Metal Gear series. Strongsauce (talk) 17:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

So? It's not as if North America is better in any way.SchumiChamp (talk) 15:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

It would be nice if this article would include other cover pictures than just North American ones. Hey, this game is released in PAL (United Kingdom fits in English -version of wikipedia?)and JAPAN areas too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.152.123.41 (talk) 20:31, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Whether North America is better or not has nothing to do with whether it should be the cover or not. The NA was posted first and keeps with the consistency of the other articles. Unless there is something specifically wrong with North American cover then you reverting it to the European cover has no real merit. If you feel this is untrue then please state your reasons here in the talk page rather than fight with other editors over the cover art. Strongsauce (talk) 17:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I personally believe for the English Page of Wikipedia, that we should use the North American cover.However if the British release uses the EU cover than that presents a problem since US and UK citizen both use English. For the cover photo of this page, we should use the logo of Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots, like the wikipedia article of the PSone game Metal Gear Solid uses it's game logo. Then, we have a little gallery on the bottom of this wikipedia article that shows the North American cover, the Limited Edition cover, the EU cover, the Japanese Cover, the PlayStation 3 Metal Gear bundles and so on. I think this is legitimate to do to add a photo gallery as thus, since this game is a very big, historical release for the Sony PlayStation 3 Console. However, if the UK uses the North American cover, then we should definitely use that as the cover photo for the English article of MGS4. Vilmosgelb 19:23, 22 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vilmosgelb (talk • contribs)

Having all covers is not a good idea. Which is why I hate the gallery in its current state since it just encourages people to add all these covers citing bias in the article as the reason for adding them or other nonsense. The fact of the matter is there is a precedent for using the North American cover. And since a large majority of the world's English speakers live in North America, the NA cover is the one that is most recognizable. Even if you don't agree with those two reasons the fact of the matter is there isn't anything wrong with the North American cover at all so there doesn't need to be a revert. Strongsauce (talk) 22:23, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Yo don't get me wrong, I actually really like the North American cover. It fits the mood of the game the best of all the covers. Snake is exhausted but resolute in the photo, showing that he is ready to face death. Plus it shows how detailed the game will be. I was just trying to put an offer on the table for all the d-bags who keep reverting the picture back to the Japanese cover which makes no sense to do for an English article.Vilmosgelb 23:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vilmosgelb (talk • contribs)

It's really sad to see how the English Wikipedia is dominated by Americans who are willing to accept nothing but their own. Clearly it should be the European cover. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SchumiChamp (talk • contribs) 16:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

So? What's your point, and please drop the racial-whining act. You're sad, huh? right, you should be because wikipedia's about consensus, and you're one dissenting voice against many who would rather prefer the NA cover on the infobox. It would be appreciated if you stop changing it back to the EU version. Thank you. --Eaglestorm (talk) 18:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

It's really sad to see how you've dumbed this argument down to "American" bias. Please stop being disruptive. Strongsauce (talk) 13:28, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for meddle in this really two-sided discussion but i cannot let that racial crap go by. I`m mexican, english is not my natural lenguaje and i have to deal with the american society because i live just in the border and while is true that the USA can get really self-centered that doesn`t mean that you should put that as an argument, Here we all are wikipedians who want the best for Wikipedia and the consensus is the most important thing. The NA version is not only for the US, all America get that version just like the EU version. I think that the NA cover should stay and the gallery of the other covers too. Zidane tribal (talk) 20:18, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I remembered something: since the EN MGS4 page has European and Japanese counterparts, why not put the appropriate covers in their respective infoboxes, so people like SchumiChamp can shut up about the NA cover taking precedence in this page. I think that option would work best. Thanks for hearing me out. --Eaglestorm (talk) 06:32, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

The general WP:VG rule of thumb on this is that the first English-language cover posted prevails unless there is a pressing reason why one cover should be favored. This is the general rule for American versus British English, and it works as well as anything here.

I don't know (or particularly care) which cover was posted first, just a heads up. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 10:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

"And since a large majority of the world's English speakers live in North America" - That's actually incorrect. The largest majority of English speakers is in the Commonwealth (Current and former states) (particularly India and Pakistan), and most of them use Commonwealth English. The largest number of native speakers is indeed North America though, although Canadian English is very similar to British English. A lot of Europeans use English too, and I'm willing to bet that in the EU there are almost as many English speakers (native or not) as in North America. The cover being the most recognisable argument is out of the window. More PS3s are owned in Europe than anywhere else too. 92.11.159.27 (talk) 16:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

By the way, specious and largely unfounded arguments about where the major of English speakers live do not constitute a pressing reason to favor one cover over another. This line of argumentation is entirely irrelevant. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 13:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

About the bundle

Does anyone know if this box art is still the official one? I was reading Kotaku, and they say the MGS4 bundle will have different boxart than was previously thought.

They also say the steel ps3 won't be Japan-only. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 04:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The black box is for Japan, the white one for U.S. Steel PS3 will be available in U.S but in very limited numbers. John.n-irl (talk) 14:18, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

This was provided as the citation for the information on the bundle. If you read that FAQ, it doesnt say a word about the bundle.

It seems [5] may be a better source.

Wageslave (talk) 22:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Preparations for release of the game

I thought it would be a good idea to list out things to do once the game is released in 2 months. Mostly because I know that most editors will be playing this game once it comes out and will either neglect the page or shy away from editing because of possible spoilers.

• Request page protection for the inevitable flood of vandalism that always seems to occur for big game releases (See: Halo 3). Don't jump the gun on this though since that will probably just annoy the admins watching that page. Just request it once the vandalism starts.
• Create a new article, List of Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots characters, and link that article to this one. Personally I think the intro paragraph should stay while we should move the Foxhound and Beauty and the Beast section to the new article. Cast should eventually be merged into the new article as well.
  • As a side note: a lot of the character pages will probably have to be revamped: Mostly List of recurring Metal Gear characters and the other character pages for the other games in the series.
• Most editors watching this page will most likely be playing the game for the few days after the game is released. Perhaps we should ask WP:VG for editors with no interest in the game if they would be willing to monitor the page for the first few days?

Just thought I'd throw these out for discussion. Strongsauce (talk) 13:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Metal Gear Wiki has a portal for the release - Metal Gear Solid 4 Portal--24.109.218.172 (talk) 20:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, work on what can be done for now Strongsauce. Let's coordinate with the WP:VG people on this. Thanks. as for the anon, it doesn't matter if some wiki has release portals, we ought to get our stuff from Konami. --Eaglestorm (talk) 16:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The Grave

First of all, why isn't Snake saluting the grave in the trailer mentioned? Second, as those bastards in PSM3 have revealed whose grave it was, should that be put in too? 140.203.12.240 (talk) 10:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

No, it shouldn't be put in, since it is still speculation. PSM3 isn't all too reliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.217.222 (talk) 16:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

To the threadstarter: It's irrelevant to the article. Please see WP:TALK on the things that can and can't be discussed in talk pages. Thanks. --Eaglestorm (talk) 16:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

New criticism section and Kojima's comments

I've added the criticism section for Kojima's comments. With the game finished, reviews (which will bring criticism will be coming in. Kojima's own comments are certainly worthwhile for such a section.

Wageslave (talk) 18:10, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone removed the new edit for this "reason":

"Removing this for now. The game hasn't been released yet, so lets wait to post any potential criticisms for then. Plus, Kojima's remarks could have easilly been chalked up to pre-release hype.) "

Kojima's comments are just that, Kojima's comments, its not wikipedian's job to speculate why he says what he does.

Wageslave (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Right, which is exactly what you're doing by putting them under "Criticism". Lets wait for the game's release or at the very least a full review of the game before this section goes up.

HitotsuOne (talk) 18:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Should be put in now, and it can not be called anything other than crtiticism to be honest, this would be a strange way to build up hype... John.n-IRL 19:19, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

It's hype. Kojima says the exact same thing every time he releases a new showcase Metal Gear Solid title. There are numerous interviews that can attest to this. Either way, this addition really seems like adding criticism for the sake of adding criticism alone. It doesn't really contribute anything to the article, as the game is still in production and hasn't been fully reviewed yet.

It is ONLY a direct quote from Kojima, and it is Criticism. Their is no need to arbitrarily wait for some future thing, it exists now. He has already said these things. It contributes the critical views by the game's own maker.

Wageslave (talk) 22:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Criticism is a bit harsh of a title for the section. He's not exactly criticizing the game or the system. He is merely saying that the game uses the Cell engine "to it's limit" and that the game and system was underpowered for what he envisioned. This would probably go better under the development section. Strongsauce (talk) 23:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Its pretty clear he's being critical, of both the end-result of the game and the system's architecture. Did you read the article? He's speaking of the finished game, not development per-se.

Wageslave (talk) 23:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you even have the magazine? Yes I did indeed read the article. If anything, this is more "disappointment" that the PS3 wasn't more powerful to live up to his graphical vision of the game and that the fault lies in the fact that they didn't have the specs of the PS3. So no it's not really criticism of the game or the system. At that point the interview is given the game is finished but the section is discussing their development of the game and how it didn't reach its potential. Strongsauce (talk) 23:54, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Added information upset surrounding the "2 additional IDs" necessary to play MGO that has come to light at the MGO beta.

Wageslave (talk) 23:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Now your kinda stretching the section, and that would belong in the MGO article, not here. It could go in development, however I would be of the opinion it should be "Crticism", even though its unusual to include in any page. John.n-IRL 00:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

MGO is MGS4 is it not? They arent two games. And, this wouldnt be a "dev" issue because the "extra ID" will be required after launch.

Its really two issues A) One required ID for beta and B) the fact that you'll always need a "second id" for online play.

perhaps mention about the beta-login should go in the Development section, but the (B) problem isnt development related.

Wageslave (talk) 00:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

They seem to be marketed as two seperate products, and they currently have two pages. I was actually referring to Kojimas comments when saying it could go in the dev sections, apols for confusion.John.n-IRL 01:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be better to follow form of the videogame industry and avoid trying to follow Konami/Sony's marketing aims. Wageslave (talk) 01:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

The game being same/separate is not the issue here, the place for MGO related content is currently here. As for Kojima's comments, they should be in the article, however the exact location is debatable. John.n-IRL 03:31, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Wageslave, get a life. We've all seen your contributions; every edit is an attempt at making the PS3 look bad, and the 360 look good. You edit while misquoting sources, using outdated sources, using no sources, removing sources that criticize Microsoft (not just on 360 pages, but also pages related to Apple). Your actions are enough to warrant an RFC. Please stop. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 05:13, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

As I had to mention in another discussion page, you're accusations are inaccurate, and a clear violation of WP:AGF and WP:PA. Wageslave (talk) 17:55, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, please dude. Don't quote me policies, because you are in violation of much, much more. See WP:NPOV, WP:RS, WP:V, WP:TALK, WP:Honesty, WP:CRITICISM, WP:OR, WP:OWN, WP:POINT, WP:COI, WP:CON, WP:NOTE, among others. So with so many violations, it's extremely hard to assume good faith with you, when it is quite clear that you are hear to disrupt Wikipedia. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 01:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, I have moved Kojima's comments to the Development section, as that is where it belongs. Please read this. Frvernchanezzz (talk) 05:13, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that. John.n-IRL 05:25, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

While I agree with Wageslave about no personal attacks, it's really hard to assume good faith with Wageslave when his user page says he is part of the XBOX project and is attempting to inject severely one-sided criticism of its main competitor, the PS3. It just seems to be a lot of POV pushing. Also naming ref tags as, "FAIL", when the referenced article has no mention of that seems to be some sort of snub at the game or the PS3 system. You also seems to be misinterpreting the Kojima interview since Kojima never says that the PS3 was underwhelming, just that his vision of the game exceeded the PS3s specifications. See the part of the interview where he says, "I'm not criticising the PS3 machine." Strongsauce (talk) 20:40, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

These are Kojima's own comments. Not my OR or opinion. They are Kojima's opinion. I am not "misinterpreting" what Kojima said. It is very clear. Here is what another news outlet reported regarding Kojima's interview about MGS4:

According to Kojima, back when Playstation 3 was first announced, it was a "dream machine" which inspired them with lots of ideas, but "when we actually started developing the game, we realized there were a lot of restrictions and so it turned out how you see it today. The original vision was to go ten steps further; the reality was just one step, which isn't to say we didn't progress."

http://megagames.com/news/html/console/kojimadisappointedbymgs4graphics.shtml

Wageslave (talk) 00:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Why is their a criticism section for a game that hasn't been released yet.

Zarth4 (talk) 10:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Because the game is finished, and the critic is the Game's Director/Producer.

This material should go in a "Reception section" instead of Criticism.

Wageslave (talk) 00:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

The game isn't finished and it hasn't been released. You're assuming things and trying to push a negative slant on yet another Metal Gear article by adding nothing but even the most insignificant of criticisms, regardless of their context or meaning. If you want to continue this discussion, only do so once June 12th has passed and full reviews have been written and released.

HitotsuOne (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 01:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

These are Kojima's comments, can we accept his POV is neutral?

The WP policy says that "a game that isnt released to the public cannot have comments of reception/criticism"?

Wageslave (talk) 15:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of Kojima's history knows that he is a perfectionist with a tendency to spice his statements with a hearty dose of hyperbole. Regardless, adding a "criticism" section to the wiki of an unreleased game makes little sense. HitotsuOne (talk) 04:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Kojima's comments are his own. They are relevant and clear. Trying to guess hidden meaning is irrelevant. When the Reception section is added, these comments should be moved there (from their present location in Development). Wageslave (talk) 16:44, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

There has been enough discussion on this already and any further edits regarding this tidbit is not really constructive past a few sentences regarding the quote. The only reason this has gained any attention at all is because one gaming news site decided to carry the story and the rest of the sites followed since they didn't want to lose out on any coverage. That article was out for well over 2 and a half weeks here in Europe and no one deemed it to be that important of a point to include into the Wikipedia entry. It is fine as it is now, correctly sourced in the correct section with a neutral POV tone that lets the reader decide what Kojima's words mean. Strongsauce (talk) 17:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots Age Rating

OK konami-europe it says Minimum Age: 15 and the website is here http://uk.games.konami-europe.com/game.do?idGame=176 A Candela (talk) 14:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Young snake at the end of trailer

Going back a while to that young snake that appears in octocameo at the end of the TGS 06 trailer is there any new information on him or confirmed facts User:Kami-Sama

I think there's some new information on him. Check this out: http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2008/05/01/classic-metal-gear-solid-gets-revived-in-mgs4/. People have speculated that it's fake. But if it is, it's very well done. Personally, I'm hoping it's real.(Myscrnnm (talk) 04:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC))

Name of one of the PMCs?

This trailer released about a month ago seems to make mention of the Praying Mantis corp. Strongsauce (talk) 11:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Europe to get MGS4 bundle too

SCEE boss David Reeves has confirmed Europe will be getting a Metal Gear Solid 4 hardware bundle.

Similar bundles have already been announced for the US and Japan. There, however, the console included is a special steel grey colour. Judging by the packaging shown at SCEE's PlayStation Day this afternoon, the European bundle will include a 40GB machine in plain old piano black.

As previously announced, Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots is launching on 12th June worldwide. A Candela (talk) 19:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid 4 Guns Of The Patriots Artical

I think you should lock it becuse of all the vandlelisam on it. A Candela (talk) 01:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

What vandalism? Page protection is used when there's a heavy amount of vandalism on a certain article. The vandalism on this article can easily be dealt with without page protection. When the game comes out, then yes, page protection will be considered as there will likely be tons of trolls roaming about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.217.222 (talk) 02:01, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Videos?

Just wondering, why aren't there any references to the two videos that came out on April 1st and May 1st? The May 1st could mean classic missions for MSG4. The other one may have been an April Fool's joke, but it I think it should be in the article.

Was the May 1st video the one showing Snake approaching Shadow Moses? I was under the impression that was a dream sequence - though it plays out very differently to the way I recall the initial approach to the facility - and a cut scene at that.Nearly famous writer (talk) 13:18, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

PMC names

The names of the five PMCs in the game were revealed via "recruitment videos" on the new website. They are:

• Otselotovaya Khvatka ([оцелотовая хватка, lit. "Ocelot's Grasp"] Error: {{Lang-xx}}: text has italic markup (help))
• Praying Mantis
• WEREWOLF
• Pieuvre Armement (French: lit. "Octopus Ordnance")
• Raven Sword

They each clearly match up with a boss (Liquid Ocelot, Screaming Mantis, Crying Wolf, Laughing Octopus, and Raging Raven). Not sure where they should be worked into the article(s), but I figured it'd be nice to put them here nonetheless. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 10:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Since they're inherently related - with the obvious exception - to Beauty and the Beast, it might be possible to work them into the appropriate section. Also, Babelfish was translating "оцелотовая хватка" as "The Ocelot's Grasp" or me, but it's moot point as "grip" and "grasp" are synonymous. I do believe they're Japanese TV spots - and certainly as weird as the Fruity Oaty Bars commercial in Serenity (The Ocelot's Grasp was the only really good one; Praying Mantis and Pieuvre Armament were plain bizarre) - so I'm not really sure of their relevance to the article.Nearly famous writer (talk) 13:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

They're actually, from what I understand, a small sampling of the game's 17-minute-long opening sequence, which was designed by LOGAN, the design house responsible for much of the iPod advertising. Each is a recruitment ad for the five Private Military Companies owned by the parent company, Outer Haven, that act as the enemy forces throughout the game (throughout the trailers, you can see the PMC soldiers in the Middle East have the Praying Mantis logo on their body armor, for example). So they do play a fairly major role in the game. Also, I like your translation of "grasp" better than "grip". WtW-Suzaku (talk) 22:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

The mother company is Outer Heaven, not Haven.

I don't know where people are getting Haven from, just because Liquid mentioned it in a trailer doesn't mean the name of the company changed.

Listen to the second voice clip from Campbell on the new official site, it confirms the mother company is still called Outer Heaven.

90.205.26.14 (talk) 16:37, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

As far as everyone's concerned, the new name is Outer Haven and until we can verify your information with a reliable source, the name stays the way it is.

No, Outer Haven is the name of the Arsenal Gear commandeered by Liquid Ocelot. Outer Heaven is the corporation that owns the PMCs. I think I'd know, I have the game.(Myscrnnm (talk) 02:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC))

Myscrnnm is correct, the company is called Outer Heaven, and the Arsenal Gear prototype is called Outer Haven. I just finished the game last night, and double-checked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guitarmasterpwn (talk • contribs) 20:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Continuation

Exactly from where are we getting the mentiones possible continuation, can we confirm the statment from Kojima-sama that the saga will continue without Snake Zidane tribal (talk) 20:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Was added in and added to by disruptive editors. Probably referencing something Ryan Payton said. Strongsauce (talk) 11:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

If they are trying to help its not disruptive...wp:agf. :)

Of course, but kind of hard to when he gets into a revert war and makes edits like these [6]. Strongsauce (talk) 13:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks like Kojima-sama did said that "Metal Gear will always be around" http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/adventure/metalgearsolid4/news.html?sid=6191744

May be we should put back the section Zidane tribal (talk) 18:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a link but they did touch on it at the 20th anniversary. -Joseph —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.79.157.50 (talk) 21:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Reception

Isn't it a bit too early for this section? Only various Playstation magazines have reviewed the game thus far. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.90.171.156 (talk) 05:47, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Can Someone sort the reception for the game properly please. Zarth4 (talk) 13:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

IGN gave it a 9.9/10 http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/877/877611p3.html adj209 —Preceding comment was added at 14:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

PMC section???

Should we,i mean it seems that each of them are pretty deep. cause they're like Army ads,advertising them for hire.--Oribas4th (talk) 19:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Right now? No. When the game is released? Maybe. There's very little information regarding the PMCs. The information we have now on them isn't enough to warrant their own section. When the game is released, hopefully more info on the PMCs will become available and then maybe they can have a section in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.217.222 (talk) 20:35, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Crying Wolf

could someone change the voice actor's name from debra wilson to Maura Gale? I can't seem to do it as the article is "semi-locked". she is listed as the voice for crying wolf on the new official MGS4 site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.246.255.106 (talk) 00:54, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Debra Wilson is still the voice of Crying Wolf. I just checked the website and it says "Debra Wilson Skelton". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.217.222 (talk) 01:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Reaction section

Sorry for biting your head off, there, but I get miffed when stuff I'm adding gets scrubbed without comment. ;) I agree that it's a long way from being a genuinely neutral review section, but I don't have Official UK PlayStation magazine to hand and the reviews I have read were mostly interesting for their criticisms. Sockatume (talk) 17:35, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Look I can find reviews from websites it's not that hard to find information, but I find it hard to believe that the game won't attract new fans I don't purchase games based off reviews I usually buy a game and If I enjoy it I'll keep the game or if I don't I'll take it back to the store and get a refund. I've played the metal gear games and I've owned more than one console, so I take everything that people say about games with a grain of salt before I try them. zarth4 (talk) 1:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I do wonder if Eurogamer's predictions aren't a little harsh. After all, it's supposed to be a summation of the series, and it has a new control scheme, which would seem to make it an easy entry point for newcomers. I'll have to keep my eyes peeled for more optimistic reviews with regards to that aspect.77.97.229.16 (talk) 20:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion to Change Reception Section content

Would it be possible to change the first sentence in that section to say the following "Metal Gear Solid 4 has received near-universal acclaim from video game critics." Metacritic instead of saying "Metal Gear Solid 4 has so far received very positive reviews." I think that would be a more accurate statement than the current one that's on there now, correct? Sceeuk (talk) 01:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

What you suggesting is very POV. sceeuk? hmmm, that user name sounds familiar. --Eaglestorm (talk) 12:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I was just suggesting a statement that is more accurate and in-line with the reviews. The same exact statement i suggested is the same one that is used currently for Grand Theft Auto IV on wikipedia and that can also be considered very Point of View. By the way, what do you exactly mean by POV? Moreover, what does my username have anything to do with what i was suggesting? I was just making a suggestion that would make the MGS4 wikipedia page more accurate. It's not like i am demanding and whining about it like how some other users are pissed off that MGS4 got an 8/10 by Edge and Eurogamer. Sceeuk (talk) 16:18, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

What POV means is "Point of View." All articles must be written in a neutral point of view and not show any bias. This is a very important Wikipedia policy. See WP:NPOV for more details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.217.222 (talk) 22:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I see that it has been changed to "positive" rather than "very positive". Whats the difference and what was wrong with stating that it was "very positive"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.90.94 (talk) 03:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Broken release date and spoilers

[7] Considering Konami acknowledged the fact that some players got their copies of their game earlier, is it alright to allow MGS4 spoilers on the articles or should we keep waiting until the June 12 date? Jonny2x4 (talk) 05:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Definitely not. Don't you want to experience the game for yourself like everyone else including me? Why would you want to spoil it for others including me? Sceeuk (talk) 14:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This article is going to spoil the game for someone. I recommend not reading it if you don't want it spoiled for you.

I can understand arguments to not spoil the game before release, but the answer to "Why would you want to spoil it for others?" is "So we have a complete encyclopedia," and this argument was resolved a while back. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. The spoilers aren't the real issue here per se, but rather the legitimacy at posting them. Konami didn't intend for people to get the game before its street date and posting any spoilers when most of us can't get their copies of the game yet seems unethical to me.Jonny2x4 (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, personally I think if you're worried about spoilers for the game you should avoid all information of it until you actually play through it yourself. It happens all the time. A couple months I was getting into Lost Odyssey and and came into the discussion board only to find out a main character was killed. It pissed me off, and it's almost as bad as Otacon betraying Snake, he was a Patriot all along. So, really if you're coming on here it's at your own risk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.207.117.248 (talk) 22:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Any detailed plot spoilers are unverifiable and thus constitute original research until the game is openly released to the public on June 12th, making them against Wikipedia guidelines regardless. End of discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EBwiz (talk • contribs) 00:48, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

What about spoilers sourced to the strategy guide, which came out earlier than the game? Jonny2x4 (talk) 01:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Is there a strategy game already available for this game? I haven't heard anything about that. I guess in that case, then yes as long as the source is included, though it still seems unethical... Though unethical does not necessarily mean against the rules. Unfortunately, all of the spoilers I've been taking out of this category are malevolent in nature, only posting unverified claims about particuarly parts or characters that are of high importance without updating anything else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EBwiz (talk • contribs) 01:30, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Well yes. It seems some stores received the guide earlier and are selling them by request under the counter. Jonny2x4 (talk) 03:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

As long as there is a reference you should put it on with the spoiler templates in the plot section.--Playstationdude (talk) 01:40, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Spoilers are fake.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.139.165.58 (talk • contribs)

Nope! They're real. They're from the final retail version of the game that will eventually be released in stores. Some people simply purchased their copies via mail order and got their copies earlier than expected. Jonny2x4 (talk) 09:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

But there are no way to know if the people that got their copies are in fact the ones adding the spoilers, so i think the spoilers are fake too Zidane tribal (talk) 08:07, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Full Voice Cast from credits

Here's the full voice cast for the English version taken directly from the credits, in order as they appear in credits.

SPOILERS

Character	Japanese	English	Motion Capture Actor
Old Snake (Solid Snake)	Akio Ōtsuka	David Hayter	Ryoji Okamoto
Hal "Otacon" Emmerich	Hideyuki Tanaka	Christopher Randolph	Shumei Kawashima
Sunny	Kikuko Inoue	Christina Puccelli	Yasuyo Nabeshima
Colonel Roy Campbell	Takeshi Aono	Paul Eiding	Takashi Kubo
Drebin	Keiji Fujiwara	Khary Payton	Takashi Kubo
Meryl Silverburgh	Kyoko Terase	Debi Mae West	Eriko Hirata
Johnny (Akiba)	Jun Fukuyama	Beng Spies	Kazuki Muramatsu
Liquid Ocelot	Banjō Ginga	Patric Zimmerman	Taro Kanazawa
Naomi Hunter	Hiromi Tsuru	Jennifer Hale	Haruna Aimoto
Raiden	Kenyū Horiuchi	Quinton Flynn	Takeshi Yoshioka Eiji Morisaki
Vamp	Shinya Tsukamoto	Phil LaMarr	Naoki Saito
Big Mama (EVA)	Mari Natsuki	Lee Meriwether	Mao Yuuki
Mei Ling	Houko Kuwashima	Kim Mai Guest	Yumi Kikuchi
Jonathan	Hideyuki Tanaka	James Sie	Motosada Mori
Ed	Shōzō Iizuka	Dave Fennoy	Shigeyuki Horita
Rosemary	Kikuko Inoue	Lara Cody	Haruna Aimoto
Little John	TBA	Jennifer Hale	TBA
Local Boy	TBA	Colleen O'Shaughnessey	TBA
Beast	TBA	Fred Tatasciore	TBA
Laughing Octopus	Haruna Aimoto	Paula Tiso	Haruna Aimoto
Raging Raven	Yumi Kikuchi	Nika Futterman	Yumi Kikuchi
Crying Wolf	Eriko Hirata	Debra Wilson Skelton	Eriko Hirata
Screaming Mantis	Mao Yuuki	Andrea Zafra	Mao Yuuki
PMC Commander	TBA	Bob Joles	TBA
Enemy Soldiers	TBA	Bart Flynn Crispin Freeman Mark Hildreth Richard Steven Horvitz Andrew Kishino Nolan North Robert Wu Brian Bloom Peter Lurie Roger Craig Smith Erica Mann Barranco Kimberly Brooks Marisol Ramirez Kris Zimmerman Salter Sarah Sido Sylvia Villagran Kari Wahlgren	TBA
Voice of God	TBA	Hideo Kojima	TBA
Warning voice of Gekko	TBA	Kris Zimmerman Salter	TBA
Psycho Mantis	TBA	Doug Stone	TBA
Ocelot	TBA	Josh Keaton	TBA
Revolver Ocelot	TBA	Patric Zimmerman	TBA
Vulcan Raven	TBA	Peter Lurie	TBA
The Sorrow	TBA	David Thomas	TBA
Cyborg Ninja	TBA	Rob Paulsen	TBA
Genome Soldiers	TBA	Doug Stone Peter Lurie	TBA
Big Boss	TBA	Richard Doyle	TBA

And no, I'm not kidding about the Voice of God. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Anyone else notice two former cast members of Mad-TV are in the game? 170.69.248.21 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:24, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Content STOLEN for a fansite!

Wikipedia Content has been COPIED! An old and broken down site Metal Gea Net has come back. And the content is being copied word-for-word from Wikipedia! Please addess this issue. The story prologue and the gameplay is copied from here. All the character stuff is taken from the official web. This site is seriously ripping content off and passing it as their own!

http://metalgear.planets.gamespy.com/series/mgs4/index.html

After the game release, most of the content will be rewritten. :). --SkyWalker (talk) 14:56, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I would still address the issue with the site owner. Even if you re-write it, don't you think it'll be copied over again as he "updates" his site? Seems to me that he will just use Wikipedia content to update his site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.161.203.12 (talk) 15:00, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Has you know people are free to copy wikipedia contents as long people follows this license. --SkyWalker (talk) 16:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

So then there is no violation? Once can just copy/paste the text into their site, pass it off as their own, and you guys have no problem with that? Interesting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.161.203.12 (talk) 16:53, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Have you read the license?. --SkyWalker (talk) 17:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

That's not my point, and yes, I have. What's the point of having that license if people can basically take the info from here and pass it off their work, on their site? Wikipedia isn't given credit for the information even though it is copied word for word. What's the point? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.161.203.12 (talk) 17:41, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

There`s no limit to what a man can do if he doesn`t care who gets the credit Zidane tribal (talk) 19:00, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you guys don't care then you don't care. I was just bringing it to your attention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.161.203.12 (talk) 19:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

PMC Advertisement

Advertisement has been released for the games PMC organizations, released locally for where the companies are based in the game (Russian company in Russian)

videos here [8] at ign can be viewed

it would be nice for someone to add this in the MARKETING section of the MGS 4 page, or that the powers that be will unlock so I can do it myself

hopefully no more idiots (like the "MGS 4 not exclusive by friend said so!" guy will muck up the page

72.86.124.12 (talk) 04:40, 10 June 2008 (UTC)Archnite

There is not such thing as an idiot in Wikipedia. Be polite. Zidane tribal (talk) 08:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Opening sentence for "Reception" section

Ok, there has been some edit warring over the way to word the opening sentence of this section - some want it to only say "positive", some "very positive", some "universal praise" etc. I've just changed it so say "universal acclaim" which is what it says on Metacritic's page for MGS4. I think we should leave it at this because
A) Metacritic takes into account those two eights, and
B) Metacritic is the de facto standard for aggregate review scores
So when more reviews come in, and if/when the score goes down, we could change it to say "very positive" or "generally favorable", or whatever Metacritic has it ranked as. Agree? Disagree? Alice Mudgarden (talk) 10:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Disagree, as Metacritic gives all games above 90 the description "Universal Acclaim" based on their average. Their interpretation of "universal acclaim" (critics generally liked it) is different to the standard interpretation (all critics liked it). I've changed it to "high praise", which I think is fairly neutral. Fin©™ 11:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Keep in mind that eventually Game Rankings has more reviews than MC so I wouldn't call them "de facto". Stabby Joe (talk) 12:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)