Talk:Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Japanese name

I see on the article's history page that there's a minor issue about using the game's Japanese name.

Not only did the name look like a mess as it was (based on this and other edits by セフィロス, I hope he learns about the nihongo template real soon), I don't think the romaji was even correct.

I'm not sure if the Japanese name should be used, because despite the fact that this is a Japanese game, all versions of it just use the English name, and not any katakana or whatever (not even above or underneath the English name on its promotional material/title screen/and so on, as a lot of Japanese games with English titles do). How does everyone else feel about it? - DoubleCross 19:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I decided to stop re-adding the Japanese name until there was a solid source for it. Are you saying the Japanese actually call it "Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater"? -- Steel 19:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

It wouldn't be pronounced the exactly the same as in English (which might be worth noting), but the game titles for each game, in every resource I've seen, including the Japanese packaging and official site, are always written in proper English with Roman letters (except the MGS comic for PSP, which is English and French, but still all proper Roman letters/spelling). In magazines, it may or may not be refered to in kana, but the official game title, in Japan, is spelled Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater. --Le Scoopertemp [tk] 03:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Notice: This is going to become a featured article

I'm gonna point out right now there's going to be a lot of unpopular changes. Lots of stuff is going to have to be removed from the article. Check out other videogame featured articles like FFX and SotC to see the kind of standard we're aiming for. -- Steel 14:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

As I see it, the sections that need to go are: "Snake vs Monkey", "Guy Savage", "Voice Actors" and "Trivia". The philophers/legacy sections will need to be cut down and added to the story section where it's relevant. Comments and suggestions welcome. -- Steel 14:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Same here. A lot of these sections need to be taken out, or slashed significantly and be reinerted into other sections. As it stands now, these sections aren't important enough to have their own sections in the article. --Onlynameicanget 16:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

We probably need to cover the voice cast but in the story summary, and we should probably have a section about minigames (as Snake vs. Monkey has even had independent coverage in EGM). The trivia section needs to be cleaned up, merged, and removed, of course. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 16:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I've removed the sections. It's easy enough to retrieve if we ever need the information though. -- Steel 16:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Merges

Related discussions: Talk:Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty#Merge Proposal, Talk:Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence#Metal Gear Saga Vol. 1, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philosophers (Metal Gear)

I've added MG Saga Vol. 1, as the upshot of a previous discussion was to merge that here if Subsistence was merged here. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 15:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence

The two games are (obviously) closely related, and it might be a good idea to merge the two. There's not a ton of info on MGS3:S's page, and we could use the merge to make this article more comprehensive. What do you guys think? --Onlynameicanget 14:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I personally think that the Subsistence article is too long to be merged. -- Steel 14:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Per my thoughts on Integral and Substance, Subsistence should also be merged. It's likely to be the most difficult, as it is probably the remake with the most added on. --Le Scoopertemp [tk] 15:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Tuspm has this to say last month (from the archive):
They should not be merged. The Subsistence article is too big. I've removed the merging tag you put on Subsistence (link) because of the reason I stated above and you did not put an explaination of why they should be merged at the Subsistence talk page. If you can provide a much better reason on why they should be merged, go ahead and put the tag back on.
Like I said, the Subsistence article is simply too big to be merged. -- Steel 15:05, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

The Subsistence article is a mess, and most of the game-guide nonsense and controls and such could easily be lost, to merge the article here. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 15:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Would anyone object terribly if I just went ahead and merged Subsistence, then reverted myself? Then we'd have diffs to compare, rather than speaking in the abstract. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 15:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Go right ahead. -- Steel 15:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

User:A Man In Black/Yeah if anyone wants to hang over my shoulder and offer comments. Be careful of editing it; you'll likely edit conflict. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 15:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

By the way, whether this is merged or not, Image:Mgs3subbox.jpg needs to be overwritten with a non-watermarked image. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 15:30, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Instead of merging and reverting, I've just merged but not redirected. This diff (based on this version of the Subsistence article) should cover all the major points, while omitting the rediculous amount of detail about Metal Gear Onlie.

Does anyone mind if I go ahead and redirect Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence here and remove the {{main}} tag from this article? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 16:05, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

It's actually not as long as I thought it would be (now that the fan nonsense has been removed). Looks alright to me. -- Steel 16:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, you're pretty much the entirety of the current objection, so I'm going to go ahead and merge for the time being. If someone objects, they can revert, and we'll revisit this. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 16:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Metal Gear Saga Vol. 1

I've added a merge tag for MG Saga Vol. 1, as the upshot of a previous discussion was to merge that here if Subsistence was merged here. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 15:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I just merged it. It was an easy merge and I was working on that section anyway. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Philosophers (Metal Gear)

The AFD for the Philosphers page was a unanimous merge, although without any consensus on where. I suggest merging it here; per WP:FICT, it's an organization appearing only in this game, and anything you'd say about it would be plot summary of this game. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 16:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Why do the Philosophers have their own (sub)section anyway? Why not just add what's relevant to the story into the story? -- Steel 16:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Same goes for their legacy. -- Steel 16:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea why they have their own section. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 16:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Nah merge 'em to Partiots, they come back in MPO, same goes for the legacy (The Bread 02:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC))

How do you know this? And were you planning to add any info that isn't plot summary? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 13:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

It says it in the MPO page, I dunno if WP is a reliable source though (The Bread 03:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC))

It's not, actually. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 16:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Well there's a steaming pile of insanity (The Bread 04:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC))

Check WP:RS. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Useful references

Recently, I've been working on getting Solid Snake up to at least GA status. The references used there may be useful for this article.

If someone wants to cite MG Saga, here's a ref tag:

<ref name="Saga">{{cite video|title=Metal Gear Saga Vol. 1|medium=DVD|publisher=Konami Digital Entertainment, Inc.|date=2005}}</ref>

If anyone finds anything else that might be useful, links or other info would be appreciated. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Me and Onlynameicanget are using my sandbox as a place for keeping useful links. I did the same for SotC and it proved useful. -- Steel 18:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Price on the Subsistence LE

“ The subsequent rarity of the package has caused its value to increase dramatically over the original MSRP- it is common to see new, sealed eBay copies selling for more than $100. [1] ”

Ex-Nintendo Employee (talk · contribs) has repeatedly reinserted this wording, which is unencyclopedic for a variety of reasons.

1. Wikipedia isn't a price guide. Why list the price for this and not the Japanese LE for the main game, or the price of the games themselves in each territory?
2. The reference is going to rot. eBay pulls completed auction listings after about a month.
3. The info itself is going to rot, as interest waxes and wanes.
4. eBay prices aren't consistent. They waver, based on condition, the conditions of the sale, the seller, the buyer, and a number of other factors.
5. The estimation of prices is original research. I'm looking at that list myself, and there's a lot of deviation around the "about $100", depending on the seller and the buyers.

If someone has reported that the LE is particularly in demand, fine, but an eBay search isn't a source. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 14:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

It would certainly be easy to find references to the LE being rarer than many others. Not sure what is and isn't a source for this, so I won't make the change, but I can say for myself (on this page, anyway) that not all who preordered got it due to short shipments in my area, and there weren't any on the shelves like the FFXII (for example) LEs

Images

Let's be realistic. The two images in the story section are pretty low quality, don't contribute significantly and would be shot down in 3 seconds during an FAC. We do, however, need images to illustrate at least one of the new features in the game (CQC and camouflage). After a quick look around the internets, I propose we use either this image to illustrate camouflage or this image to illustrate CQC. Comments? -- Steel 14:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Or maybe this one to show the stealth aspect. -- Steel 14:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I like this it's pretty good

(The Bread 09:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC))

Trappings

Trappings, as in the intro, means "the details associated with an attribute or quality." MGS3 lacks the high-tech gadgets, setting details, and other high-tech-ness of the previous games. I used that word instead of "setting" because not only the setting but also the story and in-game objects, are different as a result. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd just never heard that word used before, is all. -- Steel 20:51, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Gameplay para

“ The emphasis on weapons is higher than in previous installments of the Metal Gear series. In the game, the player has access to a shotgun, pistols, various automatic rifles, and grenades. The player may thus choose whether to focus on simply evading enemies or waging a full-frontal assault. Furthermore, Snake can utilize a range of various close-combat techniques (called "CQC", for "Close Quarters Combat") when the need arises. ”

This needs to be rewritten to place more emphasis on the heavily-promoted CQC system, instead of the merely-incidental weapons. Additionally, I don't see the greater emphasis on weapons; the only major change is the addition of a shotgun and the pistol-and-knife combos (which is a part of CQC anyway). - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Euro release details

Here's an excerpt from a Voltage PR press release on behalf of Konami of Europe, confirming launch month and the title's contents. I'll try to find the damn thing on a referencable source, I can't link to my press resource site naturally.

Subsistence on menu for October release Konami announces three-disc set as Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence gets definite European release date July 14th 2006

Konami Digital Entertainment GmbH is to bring Hideo Kojima’s famed Metal Gear Solid hero Snake to PlayStation 2 for one last, epic outing, with the advent of the three-disc Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence this October.

Designed as the ultimate Metal Gear experience for the format, the three-disc set features an advanced version of the classic Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater; a second disc boasting a wealth of new game modes, including a full online version of the game, plus perfect recreations of the two MSX Metal Gear titles that started it all; and a three-and-a-half hour movie recut from the game’s cinematics on the third disc.

So Europe gets the limited edition as standard to make up for having to wait nearly a year. Yay!

Hyperspacey 21:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

See the date has been changed to September '06 in the main article instead of October. Does the IGN review know something we don't? IIRC it predates the Voltage PR announcement by four months. Hyperspacey 12:56, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter whether IGN has it right. All that counts is that's what IGN says. See verifiability, not truth. -- Steel 13:39, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

One would assume, however, that a Eurogamer article (reference 28, http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=66060 ) which confirms the title for an October release would take precidence, given it is substantially more current? I would post a link to the press release on the Voltage site (they're KCEE GMbH's official PR company, after all) if I had one.Hyperspacey 22:04, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

You're right about the Eurogamer thing. I've changed it back. -- Steel 22:10, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

The Plot

Sorry if this seems like a mad idea, but should the plot section even be that long? No-one who has played the game will want to read it, no-one who wants to play the game would dare read it, and there are certainly enough other places to look for a complete story walkthrough. Would a nice, concise, two-para synopsis be a better idea?

Seems the MGS2 article is similarly burdened with the entire game storyline, labeled as a synopsis.

Hyperspacey 03:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

No, it shouldn't be that long. Reducing it drastically is on the to-do list; it's just an intimidating task. If you want to take a crack at it, it would be appreciated. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:37, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I've got a hatchet with it's name on. Next up after that, MGS1, MGS2 and The Godfather. Whoever wrote that plot summary is going to absolutely kill me.Hyperspacey 03:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

The idea I had in mind was to reduce the length of the entire story section (which includes "Philosophers" and "Philosophers Legacy") into the space currently taken up by the Operation Snake Eater section. In other words, 5-6 paragraphs. I think we need to provide more than just a brief synopsis, but it's current length is just overkill. -- Steel 12:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

It needs a bit of editing, but I think my new version is a bit more like it. Needs work mind. Hyperspacey 01:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree this version still needs work, but it's infinitely better than the old one. -- Steel 11:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Noticed the Formal Language header, and have removed some of my more flowery prose. Hopefully that'll sort it. Someone else want to read over and remove the tag is they feel its sorted? Hyperspacey 17:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I will... later (unless someone does it before me. Either way is fine). -- Steel 17:59, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Story section rejigged with non-tagged summary from the Bog Boss article (kudos to whoever wrote it) with some editing and tagging of key characters and items. I have deleted the Story Section from the To Do list- if it needs work, feel free to add it back. Hyperspacey 23:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Just at a glance, I think the story has now gotten too short. -- Steel 10:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

A very vague mention of the Ape Escape mini-game?

I'm pretty shocked when I was browsing through this article and there was hardly any info regarding of the Ape Escape mini-game (Snake vs. Monkey) in Snake Eater article. In fact, it is just very vague information just like you guys assume everybody in the whole world already knows what is the terminology, "Snake vs. Monkey? (see: Localization and Additional Features) No mention that it is a tribute to the Ape Escape game series and what it is. I'm not saying to write a whole paragraph or section devoted to it because it is just a mini-game/tutorial. However, it is like part of the game and has very vague info in this article who are not familiar with the game. --Oskar Mayer Nguyener 17:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Adding a section on the minigames is on the to-do list. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:10, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

It is? -- Steel 10:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

It was. It probably should be again. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, this is a wiki. If anyone wants it there's nothing to stop them adding it. -- Steel 10:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Heh, thanks for adding the Snakes vs. Monkey info. The reason why I didn't bother to edit is that I don't want to ruin your guy's hard work because I'm too chicken to "be bold." I'm just a casual fan of the Metal Gear series, have limited knowledge, and didn't know where the info should be placed. Anyways, good luck with the Featured article nomination. It probably will pass. --Oskar Mayer Nguyener 02:50, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Subsistence features

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Metal_Gear_Solid_3:_Snake_Eater&curid=613343&diff=73650441&oldid=73640739

Too busy to get it now, but some of these are listed on the back of the Subsistence case. It has to be possible to cite them. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:10, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't have Subsistence, myself (partly due to it not actually being out here), so I can't really do much here. -- Steel 10:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, scratch that last bit there, found the cover on the web.^[2] I'll look around for guidelines on how to cite game covers and ask the CVG if I can't find anything. -- Steel 11:20, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

List of Metal Gear Solid 3 characters merge

I was working on List of Metal Gear Solid 3 characters, and I was finding that after removing the detailed plot summary and paraphrased backstory, that that list could probably be converted to prose and merged into this article. Any thoughts? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

It would have to be cut down quite a bit. </stating the obvious> -- Steel 20:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. I don't think we need a full sentence on most of these, though, like the Cobra Unit members and the DOD official and Johnson/Kruschev. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

The likes of Johnson and Kruhschev (sp?) don't really need mentioning. At the moment the characters section is two short paragraphs, I personally wouldn't expand the section to more than three long paragraphs. I would, however, give each of the Cobras a mention, even if it's as part of a list with a brief 3-word description or something (Like "a legendary sniper"). -- Steel 21:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll fiddle. I imagine J2x4 and Bread will also want to weigh in, as well. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

No thanks, all the other games have there own articles

(The Bread 04:22, 8 September 2006 (UTC))

And? Lots of work needs to be done on those articles, and WP:FICT rightly counsels to keep all the content in one place if possible. I have no intention of merging if I can't make it work. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

You can't make this work, a characters section would make this article too long, and sections that become too long should be split as WP:FICT dictates, It seems Steel's intention to make this a featured article, a longer cumbersome, character section would greatly hinder that (The Bread 09:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC))

So postpone this discussion until I merge the content from the list here, retaining the original article and the {{main}} link? You don't think I can do it, I'm pretty sure I can, but we're both dealing in hypotheticals. I'll go ahead and copy the content here, and if that passes muster, we'll finish the merge. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:34, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Exactly this is all in hypotheticals, so what you do is we have an ordinary Oppose/Merge thing. As everyone does in tons of other articles, actually this wont work, what we've got now (Snake Eater page) is really good, It's a two paragraph overview of all the characters.While the characters page does need tons of work, I am going to de-merge it immediately if you don't wait for other opinions before you merge it. (The Bread 23:15, 8 September 2006 (UTC))

I plan to boldly improve this article using content from the list of characters. After I do so, we can more usefully discuss whether the character list has been rendered redundant. I propose we wait until I've done that rather than arguing about vague hypothetical cases. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Done with the hypotheticals

Here you go.

First things first, did I skip any major characters? Is there some major detail I overlooked? I added a full list of Cobra unit, and mentioned both Raikov and Johnny. (I don't think the DOD official needs further mention.)

Once the prose is cleaned up if necessary, we can discuss whether the list should be redirected in earnest. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:27, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it hasn't made the characters section in this article too long, which was probably the main concern above. In honesty, I'm quite happy with this. Redirect? Possibly, let's see what everyone else thinks and make sure we're on top of the broken links issue before we do. -- Steel 23:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

You know, at the moment I'm erring the side of don't redirect. Although the characters article needs to be cut down quite a bit, some info which is definitely relevant (voice actors, character design/development info (how The End was originally going to be in MGS2, for example), brief plot summary, etc) is best kept there. -- Steel 00:03, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, we can always cover voice actors here, and the MGS2 article already covers The End. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Keep the MGS3 characters article, as further link it via a {{see}}, adding all the voice actors ect would make this too clunky, but all this is fine (The Bread 03:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC))

Any reason other than the voice actors making it too clunky? I was just about to add them. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Fine then do it, let's see what it looks like The Bread 07:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay, other things have been going on. I've added the voice actors to the characters section. I haven't added them to Raikov or Johnny Sasaki, as they're very minor characters included only because of the links to previous games, or the members of the Cobra Unit, as none of them has a great deal of dialogue. Are there any objections to redirecting the list and doing associated link cleanup, given this? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes (Oppose), the voice actors have made it clunky, I don't see why we should redirect the character article when they can quite easily handle all the voice actor info without a great deal of trouble, also even though the Cobra Unit doesn't have much diolouge (Pain, Fear have about 3 lines each; although the End and the Fury do have rather long dying and arriving monlouges) they still do have voice actors, It would probably prove best to (for now) remove the voice actors and have the {{see}} link at the start of the section. However once MPO comes out we may need to reconsider this discussion as Zero, EVA, Sigint, Raikov, Para-Medic (I think I got them all) will all be either moving to the Recurring page and if the idea that has been floated around that we use the MGS3 Character article for MPO aswell comes to be, you have yet another reason to keep the MGS3 Characters article †he Bread 03:51, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

The problem remains that the character lists are heavy with plot summary, trivia, and fair-use images. A merge would obviate the need for all the plot summary, and the trivia and the fair-use images are going to be gone in either case. If every listing in List of Metal Gear Solid 3 characters looked like Major Zero's but without the image, would you feel similarly? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:58, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

To be honest with you, I wouldn't mind if they all looked like that, but why does the image need to go? †he Bread 00:05, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

The images are just plain unneeded, and fall far short of WP:FUC #3. The list of characters, a subarticle with only plot summary, has more images than the main article, and that's silly. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's silly and I think a lot of other people don't either, I'l take a look at the FUC BS and get back to you

†he Bread 00:18, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Spam deletion accident

Hi. I was browsing through this article, when I noticed someone wrote GARRET IS A BASTARD in one of the articles. I deleted it, but accidentally deleted other info as well! Please forgive me. I belive it was in the multiplayer section. ~Chaos shadow

All has been dealt with, don't worry. -- Steel 09:31, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you.. -- chaos_shadow 09:32, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Added Snake VS Monkey

It needs re-writing as it is a rough draft, a good picture is possibly needed. Cardboard boxA 12:32, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I've reverted. I seem to remember us agreeing that is doesn't deserve an entire section to itself, and that current version was basically just a list of things that you unlock by playing it. -- Steel 15:13, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

To expand on that, if we have to include info on it (and quite a few people seem to want that), I'd give it a short paragraph at the end of the Gameplay section. -- Steel 15:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

The current paragraph mentions that "Snake" appears in the minigame - if I remember correctly, it's Solid Snake and not Big Boss/Naked Snake featured (he talks to Col. Campbell and not Major Zero, anyway). That doesn't really need to be elaborated upon, and would just require a link to the Solid Snake article - but it would need a reference if we're going to add it. Also, do you think we should briefly mention the Snake's Nightmare minigame? --Nick R^Talk 01:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Did any references make mention of Guy Savage (the proper name of the minigame, I believe)? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I think someone somewhere talked about it, though personally I don't think it's worth mentioning. -- Steel 01:31, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

FAC?

The article needs a bit of a copyedit first, though recently it has been given a little bit. I'll attempt to do more myself (attempt because it'll be hard to copyedit stuff I originally wrote) and then I think we can send it though FAC. It's been lying here at near-FA standard for ages. -- Steel 22:32, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I've been copyediting sort of haphazardly, but we still need to figure out where to mention Snake vs. Monkey. Right now, it's conspicuous in its omission, and it's mentioned in the Subsistence section but only in that it has been added to in Subsistence. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:37, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

No-one's objected to my suggestion above (a few lines at the end of the gameplay section) so I assume nobody will mind if I do that. -- Steel 22:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh. I didn't see that. Yeah, that's a good plan. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

My suggestions:

• "Metal Gear Solid 3's cut scenes have been called "visually exciting and evocative, beautifully shot" by Edge." (Is there a source for that or the next sentence is the source for this one too?)
• What about a See also sections with the lists related to the article?
• more external links divided like this example (+ Official sites, fan zones)?

I'm an evil and notorius reviewer but found no fault. I'm amazed how much one can talk about a computer game. :) Great job! NCurse _work 13:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Edge's comment is sourced by the ref in the next sentence, but I've added one anyway just to clear up confusion. I'm not sure we need to go to town with external links, and a see also section would be a bit redundant with the {{Metal Gear series}} at the bottom. Thanks for looking over that, NCurse. -- Steel 14:51, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that this article will have no problem in FAC. You can nominate it anytime. Good luck! NCurse _work 15:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Atomic High-Five to all the folks who've been working on this- I've done a wee bit here and there, but there've been some great contributions all over the place. Well done! Hyperspacey 04:12, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

"Platinum" release info

The Platinum reissue of MGS3 was not released solely in Germany, as the article currently implies. It was also released in Spain [3] and France [4], and might have been released in other European countries too (that's what Ryan Payton said would happen, at least [5]).

I think I'm the one who originally put in the article that it was being released across Europe (due to Payton's interview, and Saga's being rated by the BBFC). Obviously whoever changed it to just "Germany" only ever saw Konami's German page about it.

I can't think of a way to phrase it in an edit ("across Europe"? "several European countries"? etc. etc. etc.). Anybody else have ideas? - DoubleCross 08:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I seem to remember looking for something that suggested it was beaing released Europe-wide and only found evidence for a German release. That Ryan Payton interview is really old, which is a pain. I'm gonna look around a bit. -- Steel 11:33, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Konami have been bothersomely quiet on Subsistence and the Platinum release over official channels (a large number of major retail websites have Subsistence's British release pegged for this coming Friday despite abject silence from Konami PR), but I'll try and get confirmation on this stuff. At present, it certainly appears that the Saga disc only shipped with the German Platinum release of MGS3, despite Paton's claims last year. The Platinum release appears to be widely available in Europe, despite not being released in the UK. Hyperspacey 04:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Subsistence Euro release

Okay, perhaps not the best place for this, but MGS3:S hits Europe this coming Friday (6-10-06), and my prefered independant retailer has confirmed he's recieving shipments of the title by Thursday. I'm updating the article, but until it's on sale, I'm not sure where to find a verifiable (non-retail) citation for the date. Hyperspacey 21:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I've removed that until we've got a source for it. At the moment, I've found sources which say "this week", but nothing that specifically mentions Friday. Something will arise sooner or later though. -- Steel 10:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations

Congratulations on getting the article featured. Excellent work. However, the prose issues remain, and it would be great if they could still be taken care of. Featured articles are meant to display Wikipedia's absolute peak of quality on all fronts, after all. JimmyBlackwing 23:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Deckiller agreed to give the article a good copyedit, but hasn't turned up yet. He might need a nudge. Or you could just sort them out yourself - I wrote huge chunks of this article from scratch so it's hard for me to copyedit it (or maybe I'm the source of the prose issues...). -- Steel 23:18, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I've done nothing, I could do it if you want

†he Bread 03:21, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

If you want to, go right ahead. I'm too busy with other articles to give this a copyedit myself, unfortunately. Otherwise, I'd have already given it a once-over. JimmyBlackwing 12:55, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

ADAM???

why did ADAM not meet snake at the beginning of the snakeater mission? anyone know, its been bugging me..

ADAM is Ocelot, EVA came instead, but you're meant to talk about the article here

†he Bread 02:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Adam did show up to meet with Snake as Ocelot. It is just that Eva showed up earlier and told Snake that Adam is not coming. With that in mind, Snake did not consider Ocelot as Adam when Ocelot showed up later. They ended up fighting instead. Understand that the Major Zero only know the location for secret meeting but not the time, had Eva never shown up, Ocelot would be the first to show up and he would be appear as Adam.

User:Chemicalkinetics 17:21, May06, 2007 (ETC)

Vote on the article

Would you rather that we include VGCharts and make the article bad, or remove it and keep it good?

I vote the latter, no matter how tempting the former may be. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Spelling

This talk page seems to be the appropriate place to bring this up. Normally I wouldn't say something like this, but over a period of a couple of months I wrote huge chunks of this article from scratch, edited to death the sections that were already there, uploaded one and wrote fair use rationales for the images, sourced the entire article (I think there's a grant total of one reference that wasn't created by me), sent it through peer review and single handedly addressed the numerous points there, and sent it through (a relatively painless) FAC. I don't think it's an understatement to say that I'm the reason this is an FA. I'm aware of WP:OWN, but the least you guys could do is let me use my preferred style of English in the article. -- Steel 22:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Which is?

†he Bread 01:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, yeah, it might be a good idea to explain that. British English. -- Steel 01:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Kick ass, that's the one I use so I've got no issues

†he Bread 01:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Even if you created the article, the article no longer belongs to you once submitted. Therefore will come under scrutiny for PROPER dictionary english. --Richco07 16:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Er, "proper dictionary english"? – Steel 16:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Arg, more spelling edits...I guess the only way to settle this is through comparing which countries sold the most copies. Being that more people of those countries will be more likely to visit the site. Opinions?--Richco07 16:03, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I guess this /|\ comment was ignored because the original creator didnt like the idea. Just who's article is this anyway?--Richco07 16:19, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Main Page

Is this thing lined up to be on the Main Page anytime soon?

†he Bread 01:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I haven't nominated it. I've got no objections if someone wants to though, but it will be several months before it appears due to the length of the queue. -- Steel 01:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Alrighty, I'm on it

†he Bread 02:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Done, take a look here

†he Bread 03:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, its not that important. Kinda trivial and stupid of me.

Audio

Added a link to Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater Original Soundtrack page similar to the one on the Metal Gear Solid page. (FF7SquallStrife7 03:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC))

2 column references

So why not use {{reflist|2}} for two columns? -th1rt3en 00:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't see the difference

†he Bread ³⁰⁰⁰ 22:58, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Ekranoplan?

The article for them mentions that they were features in the game somehow. Where was this? Havermayer 19:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

The ground effect vehicle at the lake near the end of the game. -- Steel 21:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

That was a WiG, wasnt it? SuperBorisOnAPlane 18:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Subsistence

Hi all

i recently made a page for metal Gear Subsistence, and more specifically Metal Gear Online.

The page was taken down, as apparently it doesnt need a page of its own.

I've had a look around, and there is a seperate page for EVERY SINGLE SIMS EXPANSION.

Now, if these deserve a seperate page, why doesnt Subsisence?

i put a lot of effort into it, and was updating it at every chance I had.

Answers, please? SuperBorisOnAPlane 18:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

A while back it was decided by certain influencial parties amounst the Metal Gear page editors that Intergral, Substance, and Subsistence (which is essentially MGO) should be merged with their respective original versions. Twin Snakes survived because it's a total remake and not a simple expansion

†he Bread³⁰⁰⁰ 02:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Hasnt really answered my question though. The Sims games, which just have a few extras, have their own article. Subsistence, with a whole new game, doesnt. Theres so much information you're missing out on just because a few people said they should cram them into one. SuperBorisOnAPlane 15:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

What information have we missed out? – Steel 15:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, let's rephrase that. What encyclopedic information have we missed out? – Steel 15:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, you cant just say something exists in an encyclopedia, the whole idea of it is to detail. Eg. in an article about Hitler, you couldnt just put "He was a nazi. Thats that". You have information on it. Which is why i suggest having a page on MGO. SuperBorisOnAPlane 17:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

What is there to say about MGO that's encyclopedic but hasn't been mentioned here? – Steel 17:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Information about the game, gameplay types, maps, characters used, the MGS3league, the fact that the Japanese server has shut, the American server is due to shut, complaints of glitches, theres a ton of stuff you havent put in.

The SCOM pages have a large section about the online mode. The Gears of War page has a large section about the online mode. Even Killzone has. So, why does this page only mention the fact it exists?

You're not even putting any effort into expanding it.

SuperBorisOnAPlane 18:22, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

• Information about the game: Already got some.
• Gameplay types: Unencyclopedic. This is not a fansite or GameFAQs.
• Maps: See above.
• Characters: See above.
• MGS3 league: I don't even know what that is.
• Japanese server: Link? We can add a line about that.
• American server: Already included in the article.
• Glitch complaints: Likely to be Unattributable.

Anything else...? – Steel 18:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

1. Information about the game: Already got some. - Yeah, a tiny bit.
2. Gameplay types: Unencyclopedic. This is not a fansite or GameFAQs. - See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multiplayer_gametypes_in_Halo_2
3. Maps: See above. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socom_2#Online_Maps
4. Characters: See above. - Cant find anything for this.
5. MGS3 league: I don't even know what that is. - And you still think it doesnt deserve a page? You dont even know all the information!
6. Japanese server: Link? We can add a line about that. - It was on the news section of MGO when you log in. Kojima even personally changed all the voice comms on the final day. There were over 1000 people online.
7. American server: Already included in the article. - Good.
8. Glitch complaints: Likely to be Unattributable. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOCOM_3#Cheating_Online

How about you give something a chance before saying it doesnt deserve to exist?

SuperBorisOnAPlane 20:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Metal Gear Solid 3 is a featured article. You can't claim it should have unencyclopedic information just because a lower-quality article does. In an ideal environment, the information on those pages would be removed. Additionally, lack of knowledge in one individual does not warrant a separate page; that's nonsensical. --Teggles 18:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

What the hell are you talking about?

People who come here are looking for information on the game. You're stopping people from getting that information, just because you're too prud of your precious "featured page". Thats the only reason you dont want it changed.SuperBorisOnAPlane 21:14, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is designed to accurately summarise the content of videogames films, albums, political movements, lives of famous people, not be a complete and all-conquering source. There are at least three other wiki-based projects providing an all-your-base videogame-info source already. Hyperspacey 03:16, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

This is preposterous.

Do you seriously call the current page "summarising"?

Just face it, the only reason you people dont want an MGO page is because youre too damn proud of your "Featured page", you dont want anything removed from it, therefore you dont want any new MGS3 pages.

Its pathetic.

MGO is entirely different to MGS3, and yet you give it a mere mention in the main article. Im doubting any of you people have even played MGO. If you had, you would understand why it deseves its own page.

SuperBorisOnAPlane 14:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and the music from the game desrves its own page, but the online mode doesnt? SuperBorisOnAPlane 14:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The music is a separate album, and it should probably be merged here anyway.

Now, if you've got enough encyclopedic, sourced content to give us a sufficient article on Subsistence, we can split it off. Stomping your foot and shaking your fists and filling this talk page with invective isn't going to do this. Go do some research. It's over a year later. Has MGO influenced later games? Has it been a continuing subject of commentary? Has additional info about the conception or design been released?

Don't get angry; get busy. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 14:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2