Talk:Metal Gear Solid: Portable Ops

place in canon
I know the game has always been considered part of the canon but I'm starting to get the feeling that that's no longer the case. With the recent announcements of the HD and Ultimate HD Collections, this will be the only game not available on the PS3. Could this mean that it Kojima doesn't consider it to be canon or is it simply an issue of them not bothering to port another PSP game over?--Soul reaper 18:47, August 15, 2011 (UTC)


 * It's probably still going to count as canon anyways. After all, Metal Gear Solid 4 still has stills of Portable Ops in the cutscenes, and some events from that game were also mentioned in the same game (namely, the fact that Zero and Ocelot were the ones who got the Legacy and used it to create the Patriots, instead of Ocelot and the CIA Director as was originally implied in the stinger for Metal Gear Solid 3, but also Gene's account of The Boss's death being planned from the start, even though Metal Gear Solid 3 originally stated that The Boss's death wasn't planned until AFTER Volgin made an unanticipated bombing of the Sokolov Research Facility.). Heck, even Peace Walker referenced that game with Miller's reference to San Hieronymo as well as Coldman's admission of setting up The Boss to die from the start. Now, unless they, I don't know, rewrite the HD collection version of Metal Gear Solid 4 so that they not only omit any of the screenshots of Portable Ops that were present, but also change the dialogue so that it is more intune with Metal Gear Solid 3, even making it so that the CIA director was the one who founded the Patriots and not Zero, not to mention having the circumstances for The Boss's death be exactly the same as was stated in Metal Gear Solid 3, THEN I could state they made it non-canon. In either case, it's probably just because they didn't want to port another PSP title onto it. Weedle McHairybug 19:01, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * EDIT: In addition, technically, they'd have to remove Guns of the Patriots from canon as well, seeing how Kojima stated that Portable Ops was needed for Guns of the Patriots to be understood, apparently even going so far as to actually prevent development on Guns of the Patriots from being finalized until after Portable Ops was finalized. Of course, then again, GOP being non-canon might explain why Big Boss seemed to react with an odd amount of unfamiliarity with Paz's MGS4 account. Weedle McHairybug 19:09, August 15, 2011 (UTC)


 * Portable Ops was never necessary for understanding the main story, since MGS4 basically reiterated the important points (and besides the "San Hieronymo" comment, Peace Walker blatantly ignores the entire game). Nevertheless, it will remain part of the series' canon until Konami officially says otherwise. --Bluerock 19:29, August 15, 2011 (UTC)


 * Of course it's canon. As Weedle said, stills of the game are shown when EVA talks about Zero. Why was the game blatantly ignored though? --68.37.56.163 20:24, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't forget Liquid Ocelot's history lecture after FOXALIVE was uploaded. In either case, didn't Metal Gear Solid 2 essentially reiterate what Metal Gear Solid stated? And anyways, if I recall correctly, some of the points would have made less sense if one tried to play Metal Gear Solid 3 and then skipped to Metal Gear Solid 4 without ever playing Portable Ops. For starters, most players after watching the ending would jump to the natural conclusion that it was the DCI who founded the Patriots with Ocelot, using the legacy, yet if they skipped to MGS4, they'd be confused about how Zero has ANYTHING to do with the Patriots, especially when it was never hinted even once in the game that he even got the legacy from Ocelot, never mind founded the Patriots with it. Likewise, Big Mama's statement about The Boss being set up to die from the start because the CIA grew fearful of her charisma would also be a huge hangup for players because after playing Metal Gear Solid 3, they'll naturally come to the conclusion that the government never intended for her to be killed off until AFTER Volgin basically ruined everything by firing a nuke at the Sokolov research facility. Weedle McHairybug 00:40, August 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * MGS3 said the US Philosophers changed their name to the Patriots; there was nothing about the DCI himself being involved. Both MPO and MGS4 reveal that it wasn't the Philosophers who became the Patriots, but that they were instead replaced by them.


 * Similarly, Big Mama never said anything about The Boss's death being planned from the start; the "charisma" story was just given as a motive for having her killed, without having to explain the whole convoluted plot of Snake Eater again. There is no mention of when they decided this. Zero's involvement is completely explained in her speech, so any confusion on the player's part would be short lived.


 * MPO was never really the "missing link" as it was hyped to be: the series functions just as well without it, and Konami apparently thinks so to. Don't get me wrong, I didn't dislike the game, but ultimately it was unnecessary. --Bluerock 08:12, August 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually, I was more referring to the final phone call between Ocelot and the CIA director, which does imply that it was the CIA director who founded the Patriots (for one thing, one of the first things Ocelot says in the call is "with this money, yes, the Philosophers will be revived"). If the players of MGS3 skipped to MGS4 without ever knowing about MPO, never mind playing it, they'll most likely be confused as to how Zero had anything to do with the legacy when the phone call implied that it was the CIA director who created the Patriots.
 * As for the part involving The Boss, they could have kept it short and sweet by stating that "she originally was supposed to retrieve the legacy, but due to complications made by the enemy, America was forced to take her out." That way, it can refer to the original account in the simplest way possible and not hint at anything from Portable Ops. However, the charisma thing would hint at Portable Ops more, given EVA's debriefing pretty much going against any fear of charisma being the motive to wipe her out, instead it being the result due to the original plan backfiring. Yes, MGS3 did have Zero mentioning that the CIA placed various people under housearrest the week prior to Snake Eater, but it was later implied with EVA's debriefing that it was actually intended to sell the act that she betrayed them after the original fake defection plan backfired as a result of Volgin's actions.
 * Even if it was supposed to be hyped up to be this, that still doesn't explain why Hideo Kojima had ordered his production staff to not finalize Metal Gear Solid 4's story until after Portable Ops' story was finalized. Weedle McHairybug 13:24, August 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * One would assume Zero obtained the Legacy from the DCI regardless, considering they were both affiliated with the CIA, and that Ocelot switched loyalties, as he always does. Either way, Zero becoming the series' villain is completely surprising anyway, considering his character in MGS3. Additionally, MPO mentions nothing of the whole "charisma" angle to The Boss's death. Regarding Kojima's comments, he obviously didn't want the two stories to conflict with one another, since they were marketing it as a canon game. That still doesn't mean MPO was necessary for understanding MGS4, even if Konami originally hyped it up to be just that.


 * Getting back to the main subject, this is likely one of the reasons that Konami doesn't feel MPO is worth including in the HD collection. --Bluerock 15:42, August 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * I've never played MPO and I wasn't at all confused by the whole Zero as the founder of the Patriots deal because they explain it all in the MGS4. MGS4's MPO references always came across more as advertising to me, it was like they were saying "Look! We have another relatively new game! You should buy that too!", rather than neccessary plot elements--Soul reaper 08:18, August 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * It would have confused me, at least. And I really don't see how it could have been advertizements, especially seeing how MPO was released approximately two years before MGS4. Maybe if it was the other way around, I could see it, but not right now. Advertizements about a new title are usually done for a title set to be released in the immediate future, not for a title that's already been out for approximately two years. Weedle McHairybug 13:12, August 17, 2011 (UTC)

Lock this page
This page should be locked so only mods and admins can edit it, that way people can't come in here and change the page so it says it's not canon until an official statement that says such. Kornflakes89 01:57, September 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, I wouldn't go so far as to lock the page. Since the vandal is unregistered, I think we could just semi-protect it so that only registered users can edit it. Now, if someone who actually did register ends up doing this, then it's okay to lock the page. Weedle McHairybug 01:54, September 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * I guess you got a point there, but still there shouldn't be any edits made that say the game is non-canon until a source explicitly states the game as such. Kornflakes89 01:57, September 24, 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with your statement, I don't think there should be edits made that say the game is non-canon without sources backing it up, either. Actually, the KP timeline made during Peace Walker's development had Portable Ops on there as well, implying that even they think its canon, at least officially canon if not anything else. Here's the timeline in question:
 * http://www.konami.jp/mg/mgsaga.html
 * Weedle McHairybug 02:04, September 24, 2011 (UTC)


 * That's exactly what I've been looking for, on the site gamefaqs, there's this prick who keeps arguing that MPO is now irrelevant because of a year old article where Kojima says "it happened but it's not a main chapter" trying to use that as evidence along with MPO not being included in the HD collection as MPO being non-canon, he ONLY posts those two arguments no matter what points me and several others bring up to prove him wrong, hell he's probably the same guy who recently edited the page. Kornflakes89 02:20, September 24, 2011 (UTC)

Canonicity?
As great and Metal Gear-ish as MPO is, has it been made noncanon, or is it simply not receiving the attention it deserves? I notice there is no mention of the San Hieronymo Incident on the new MGS timeline, even though MPO is quite important to the series. I know this question has been presented before, but does anyone have a present day answer for this or perhaps a way to contact Mr. Kojima?

If you're referring to the timeline on the new Metal Gear site, I don't think its absence indicates anything about whether its non canon or canon. For starters, the decades keeps MGS off, as well, and in the years section, it also, besides MPO, also omits the two MSX2 games, despite their being an essential part of the Metal Gear Solid franchise, not to mention their inclusion in Subsistence. Heck, the months part hasn't even gotten finished yet (case in point, if you get to 2009 under Months, its completely blank, despite a large portion of MGS2 taking place in 2009). Weedle McHairybug 00:46, December 14, 2011 (UTC)

If you put the mouse on the 90's and 2000's it will mention the Outer Heaven Uprising, Zanzibar Land Disturbance and Shadow Moses Incident, though no such mention is given to San Hieronymo.

Well, they (the MSX2 games) certainly weren't actually shown on them like MGS, MGS2, MGS3, MGS4, and MPW were. Anyways, I doubt they were removed from canon. After all, they appeared in MGS4, which, had they removed it from canon, the very first thing is to actually remove any stills from it from the game, not to mention the timeline shown during Peace Walker's development including it. Weedle McHairybug 02:27, December 14, 2011 (UTC)

EDIT: Sorry for editing a dead topic, but I want to address this: The events of Portable Ops are definitely included in the timeline in the same manner as the Outer Heaven Uprising and Zanzibar Land Disturbance. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 18:09, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

Proven non-canon... not really
So I was reading some things on the Metal Gear Solid forum and I came upon this. Go ahead to the part where someone finds a Japanese website. According to him, it isn't on the list, even as a footnote, so that means it must have been dropped from canon. But I have to agree with the user Seagoat, just because it's excluded doesn't mean it's non-canon. It's been excluded from other lists. Anyway, what should we make of this? 71.0.172.247 17:46, December 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * If that Japanese site you're referring to is by any chance the Japanese Konami site's Metal Gear 25th Anniversary section, that's already noted in this article. Also, Portable Ops isn't the only Metal Gear game to be excluded from a Konami timeline. Heck, even the MSX2 games were at one point excluded from one of their timelines (Specifically the one posted on the Konami site during Peace Walker's development). Besides, metalgearsolid.com, which is under the authority of Kojima and maintained by Kojima Productions, retains Portable Ops on the timeline even as a footnote. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 17:53, December 30, 2012 (UTC)


 * The people on the forum are arguing that the timeline that mentions San Hieronymo is outdated, and that Kojima saying that it happened on that podcast is no longer true. The Japanese site is something about "MGS 25th Anniversary TRUTH". 71.0.172.247 17:56, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
 * The timeline for metalgearsolid.com actually allows people to add in their own memories to the timeline, plus it's explicitly referred to as an "interactive timeline", which implies that it constantly undergoes modfications by the users, so if it was outdated information, they would have removed it by now. And yes, I just checked and yes, the events of MPO are still listed. Also, that site you're referring to is already mentioned in the article anyways in the appropriate section. Heck, there was a similar discussion on GameFAQs. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 18:02, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

LINK
Please tell me, where are we getting "LINK" as the theme for PO? 166.137.88.15 04:16, May 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * Apparently Kojima had posted on his Twitter account that LINK was the theme for Portable Ops, although considering the only source for this, alexg1989, was also someone who hated Portable Ops to feel it shouldn't be canon even when evidence is stacked against him, I'm not sure whether it counts. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 04:46, May 22, 2013 (UTC)


 * If it can't be verified, remove it. I've only ever heard Kojima give one-word themes for MGS1-4 and Peace Walker. --Bluerock (talk) 09:37, May 22, 2013 (UTC)
 * Found the post in question:
 * KonceptKidd posted...


 * alexg1989 posted...


 * • MGS: Genes
 * • MGS2: Memes
 * • MGS3: Scene
 * • MGS4: Sense
 * • MGS Peace Walker: Peace


 * The only one lacking a theme is… yeah, Portable Ops.


 * Might be wrong here, but wasn't PO's theme "Link"?


 * Agree with everything else, though.


 * This is something Kojima himself tweeted. There was no "link" and besides, if that's referring to PO being the missing link in the series, then that must be something that might have been advertised when it first released and the months leading up to it. It's certainly not relevant especially also since PW was also billed as the missing link... which it wasn't, really. That's what MGSV is going to be, I'm sure.
 * PSN ID: psvitagamer89 God is fake, isn't it obvious?
 * Read my blog: http://www.artisticexpression.wordpress.com
 * Read my blog: http://www.artisticexpression.wordpress.com


 * Of course, I might have grossly misinterpreted the first sentence of the main post (ie, the "This is something Kojima himself tweeted."), and if so, I apologize for wasting time. However, the way it was worded made it seem as though the Link part was something Kojima tweeted some time before. Also, sorry if it looks bad, but I don't know how to quote things forum-style on a wiki other than on the forums. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 12:49, May 22, 2013 (UTC)

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/03/04/kojima-says-metal-gear-solid-v-the-phantom-pain-is-the-last-metal-gear-solid

"I always say 'this will be my last Metal Gear,'" Kojima said, "but the games in the series that I've personally designed and produced -- Metal Gear on MSX, MG2, MGS1, 2, 3, 4, Peace Walker, and now MGSV -- are what constitute a single 'Metal Gear Saga.' With MGSV, I'm finally closing the loop on that saga."

>Metal Gear on MSX, MG2, MGS1, 2, 3, 4, Peace Walker, and now MGSV

This is it, PO and Rising are not canon. It's official. 46.48.157.200 20:22, March 6, 2015 (UTC)


 * Not exactly. Kojima only said those were games he contributed to. Besides, MGS4 already heavily referenced MPO anyways especially with EVA and Liquid Ocelot's speeches in Acts 3 and 5, and even Peace Walker briefly alludes to the events of Portable Ops anyways (heck, even Ground Zeroes briefly alluded to the ending of Portable Ops), meaning its impossible to make it non-canon. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 21:08, March 6, 2015 (UTC)

MGSV and PO
Should we change anything to the canonicity section?

V contradicts Ops to the point that calling it "canon" still seems a bit inaccurate now.


 * By that logic, literally any game that's made would be a bit inaccurate to call canon because there have been plenty V contradicts (to say little about how some games contradict each other even BEFORE V, most notably how MGS2 contradicted MGS4 regarding whether Solid Snake was even aware of Liquid possessing Ocelot). It's already been referenced in Peace Walker at least once and MGS4 heavily alludes to it, so it STAYS canon. Not to mention even V made clear that Ocelot trying to find the other half of the Legacy was canon as well, and made clear he was trying to find it for Zero, which is a clear reference to Portable Ops (remember, MGS3 originally said he was looking for it for the DCI, NOT Zero). At best, you can move it to side game instead of a main game. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 11:29, September 6, 2015 (UTC)


 * For God's sake, STOP saying that what Snake said in MGS4 contradicted MGS2. All he did was reveal that he's still shocked that Liquid "survived." Nothing more. Nothing less. How many times do I and Bluerock have to explain it to you? Get over it and move on. Now if you want to say what EVA said about Zero contradicts MGS4, that's another story. As for leaving Portable Ops in the canonicity section, that's Bluerock's call. --173.65.72.6 20:11, September 6, 2015 (UTC)


 * Snake's exact words when Roy Campbell revealed Liquid Snake was behind the latest incarnation was "I watched him die...", and considering that Snake never showed any indication that he was shocked the second time Liquid took over Ocelot (if anything, it's implied in the ending he accepted he was back and even reasoned that Liquid's going to fail in finding the Patriots anyways because Ocelot was likely given a dummy location), he really shouldn't be shocked this when learning this from Campbell. That's why it was indeed a contradiction. If they wanted it to line up, Snake still should have acted like he'd seen a ghost regarding Liquid overall rather than calmly acknowledging he was back in the ending. Anyways, my point was there have been plenty of things that conflicted with past games, and if those weren't enough to cause the games to be considered non-canon, this most certainly won't for Portable Ops (and believe me, MGSV alone contradicted far more for the overall saga other than possibly MGS3 than MGS1 did for MG2). Weedle McHairybug (talk) 21:29, September 6, 2015 (UTC)


 * You are truly hopeless and pulling things out of your arse. What he did on Arsenal Gear doesn't mean anything. --173.65.72.6 21:37, September 6, 2015 (UTC)