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? -- 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:
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)


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? 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,, 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". 17:56, December 30, 2012 (UTC)
The timeline for 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)


Please tell me, where are we getting "LINK" as the theme for PO? 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:
<quote><quote>KonceptKidd posted...
<quote>alexg1989 posted...
• MGS: Genes
• MGS2: Memes
• MGS3: Scene
• MGS4: Sense
• MGS Peace Walker: Peace
The only one lacking a theme is… yeah, Portable Ops.</quote>

Might be wrong here, but wasn't PO's theme "Link"?
Agree with everything else, though.</quote>
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:</quote>
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)

"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. 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)


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. -- 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. -- 21:37, September 6, 2015 (UTC)
He is truly hopeless. I even compiled a megapost showing ALL the evidence that Portable Ops is non-canon and he just refuses to even listen at all. You can find it here. Thankfully, Bluerock finally ruled that Portable Ops should be kept separately from the canonical Main Saga games (found on his talk page): 
Portable Ops and Revengeance content can definitely be segregated from the main saga content on the Wiki, without having to declare it non-canon. If that's the consensus among the user base then I'm all for it. --Bluerock (talk) 00:04, September 4, 2015 (UTC)
I commend him for making this decision now that the evidence is so overwhelmingly in faovr of this stance. Weedle will continue to kick and cry and scream about "contradictions" forever, so its best just to ignore him and let the wiki move on. His autism prevents him from acting rationally in this case. Regards, Doulomb (talk) 22:24, September 6, 2015 (UTC)
Read that again, he specifically stated that the wiki is not declaring the game non-canon. You're still trying to make it seem as though the game is non-canon with your edits. If anyone's being irrational, it's you. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 03:04, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
The game is not part of the canon Metal Gear Saga. It is canon in the spinoff Saga which includes games like Ghost Babel, MGS: Mobile and Social Ops. I'm not making it seem like anything, that is what the series creator has stated as well as wiki staff have decided based on the overwhelming evidence. The only person in disagreement here is you. If you have such a big problem with it, you can think of it as being canon in your own head, but please don't try and force it on everyone else.  Regards, Doulomb (talk) 04:57, September 7, 2015
I like your idea of a "spinoff Saga." I've been calling it alternate canon. To me, it seems as though there's been two canons. One for the 20th anniversary and then one for the 25th when PO started getting left out. I think PO provides one version of how the Patriots came to be, what Zero's motive was (I think it's obvious he was the strategist Gene referred to) and that the SH incident showed how Big Boss had the resources and motivation to establish OH. I think it was a complete "missing link" between MGS3 and MG1. I think PW-V are an alternate "missing link" for the same period. When 4 came out, the PO-based storyline was canon. Now, the PW-V based canon is what's current. Personally, I think I still prefer the original PO-based canon better, but I accept that this isn't what Kojima wants or what will be used from now on. 18:36, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
(UTC)Except Bluerock stated not to say it is non-canon. I'll even make clear for you again:
"Portable Ops and Revengeance content can definitely be segregated from the main saga content on the Wiki, without having to declare it non-canon. If that's the consensus among the user base then I'm all for it. --Bluerock (talk) 00:04, September 4, 2015 (UTC)"
That means we cannot list the games as non-canon. We can list them as side games/spinoffs, sure, I don't disagree with that, but we CANNOT list them as non-canon. That's the thing you're failing to recognize when reading Bluerock's post. And there are plenty of spinoffs that actually are considered canon anyhow. Like Resident Evil 3 Nemesis, CODE:Veronica, the Revelations games in Resident Evil, as well as the Xtreme games for Mega Man X and, heck, the Zero games as well. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 11:59, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
Its not listing the games as non-canon, its simply not including them in the canon Metal Gear Saga. Instead those games exist in the Spinoff Saga with games like MGS: Mobile and Social Ops. These are extra games which are not necessary to understanding the whole series and have events that take place in alternate timelines (for example Ghost Babel and Rising). Face it Weedle, you've lost. I'm sorry you want to put your own feelings for this game over the facts and what is best for the wiki. Regards, Doulomb (talk) 17:01, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
Yes, actually, what you are doing IS listing them as non-canon. The exact meaning of "non-canon" is that something is not canon. I agreed with making them spinoffs, but NOT claiming them to be non-canon, which is what your edits were trying to push that they were non-canon. Non-canon is the exact opposite of canon, after all. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 17:05, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
The games are not part of the canon Metal Gear Saga, they occurr in a spinoff timeline. They are otherwise confirmed to be non-canon. These are the facts Weedle.
That said I'm not writing that they are "non-canon", I'm just removing any reference that says they are "canon" and replacing that with details about how they are from the spinoff saga. Regards, Doulomb (talk) 17:19, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
Who said anything about Arsenal Gear? I'm talking about his conversation with Raiden, which was in front of Federal Hall shortly after the battle with Solidus. He didn't act like he saw a ghost when talking about Liquid failing to fight the Patriots or give even the slightest hint that he was in disbelief that he was back. And I'm not pulling anything out of my butt, I cited a specific scene in the game, the exact opposite of that. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 21:43, September 6, 2015 (UTC)
 No, Ocelot getting the other half ISN'T a reference to PO, since Ocelot says he passed on the Legacy to Zero "just as you [Big Boss] wanted." The Patriots were already formed by the time Ocelot got the KGB half, directly contradicting PO's line, "I've come for the *other half* of the Legacy." MGSV SPOILER - Skull Face says *he* got the first part of the Legacy for Zero, not Ocelot. Paz tells Skull Face it took Zero ten years to take over his current hiding place from the original occupants, meaning he was already trying to start his organization in 64-65. Them being called "the Patriots" was apparently retconned, too. While they still got the KGB half of the Legacy in 1970, the name change itself didn't happen until it was used as the name of the AI project. Ocelot explains this to Snake as though both of them never heard of "the Patriots" until now. So pretty much every plot point that PO used to be necessary for was covered in V. That it was an Easter Egg in two games means nothing now. The few screens of it in 4 were shown out of context anyway. Perhaps it exists in the MGS universe as a "legend" or something. The mention by Miller isn't a postive one. Assuming it wasn't just 4th wall breaking stuff, there's no need to assume the SH of PW is anything more than the spot on the coast they were at, Kojima re-using the name to make a point, perhaps. It's clear from V that Kojima has his own version of events following Snake Eater. Very likely, he pictures all the stuff about Sigint joining ARPA in the 60s, EVA disappearing in Hanoi in 67/68 (V now says 67 instead), as the slow formation of Cipher starting from 64/65. 04:34, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
HOLY SHIT! That settles it. Portable Ops is no longer canon. It's a shame Sokolov was never reunited with his family. That was the best part of Portable Ops. -- 13:52, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
You're going to have to claim MGS4's no longer canon either, since MGSV also directly conflicted with a LOT of stuff from that game, especially EVA, Ocelot, and Big Boss's reasons for fighting the Patriots, and that's not even counting the bit about MPO being stated to be directly tied to MGS4 to the extent that Kojima actually delayed finalization for MGS4 specifically to allow MPO's story to be finalized. Besides, should we call the MSX2 games non-canon as well? Those had even MORE contradictions to the other games as well thanks to Kojima getting retcon-heavy. Heck, Kojima himself even indicated that MGSV was also a spinoff rather than an actual numbered title, should we dismiss that as non-canon as well, not to mention no longer one of the core 8? Weedle McHairybug (talk) 13:55, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
No we do not have to claim MGS4 is non-canon simply because it makes a small reference to PoOps. For the last f**king time, that tweet is not Kojima calling MGSV a spinoff. Why do you absolutely refuse to listen to reason? People have pointed these things out to you and carefully explained them and then the very next day you go and repeat the same things again like you never learned. Doulomb (talk) 17:05, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
Welcome to my world. -- 17:13, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
It's not just because it makes a "small" reference to Portable Ops (and I really don't see how it being included in a history lecture by Ocelot right before the final boss battle qualifies as "small", anyhow), it's because it's development of its story literally hinged on Portable Ops (Kojima even said such was the case). Heck, I wasn't just thinking of Portable Ops when I mentioned MGS4 is non-canon. Just listen to all the Zero related tapes and also the twist for the game, compare it with what EVA, Ocelot, and Big Boss all said to Snake at various different points, and you'll see EXACTLY what I mean by MGS4 being rendered non-canon by MGSV due to inherent plot problems.
And as far as the last bit, really, why would he say it's not MGS5 but MGSV if he was trying to claim it wasn't a spinoff. You DO realize that there's no real difference between "V" and "5" due to it meaning exactly the same thing, right? So why would he try to claim it to not be 5 right before the game's release? Besides, that person on NeoGAF forums and even TVTropes' trivia section for the game made clear that he was trying to infer it was a spinoff rather than an actual main numbered title. Just look here if you don't believe me. Heck, I'll even quote it: "Lying Creator: Hideo Kojima kept insisting that "Project Ogre" was not, in fact, a production title for Metal Gear Solid 5 prior to the reveal of The Phantom Pain. Turns out, it was. However, this is actually an instance of him being misquoted, because his original statement was in reference of Ground Zeroes at the time. Hideo Kojima also refers Metal Gear Solid V as a spin off and not a numbered entry." Yes, I'll acknowledge that the trope name was called lying creator and implies Kojima was being dishonest, but the point is that there were in fact others who quickly recognized that he was trying to claim it was a spinoff. I even cited a guy from NeoGAF who recognized it, and there were people who responded to it that made clear they picked up on the hint as well. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 17:30, September 7, 2015 (UTC)

So, what, I guess Miller referencing Snake Eater a few times is just a fourth wall break, then? Because that was the same. And anyways, Kojima still didn't say that Portable Ops was non-canon explicitly, anyhow, not even when Ground Zeroes was released (quite the opposite, in fact, he explicitly stated that the main story for Portable Ops was indeed canon), and that would have been the BEST time to mention it. And besides, there have been plenty of times the games contradicted each other in the plot before. Are we going to say the MSX2 games are not canon, or MGS2 regarding MGS4? Heck, should we state that MGS4 itself is no longer canon simply because MGSV directly conflicted with what EVA, Ocelot, and Big Boss stated about their fights? And for the record, in the Ocelot case at least, the Portable Ops stills WERE used in context, since they were a history lecture regarding Big Boss's fight with the Patriots. Heck, the Database actually included Portable Ops in there. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 11:59, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
No, MGS4 is not non-canon. MGSV directly alludes to it, while retconning it (or, at least our previous understanding a bit). It doesn't contradict the events themselves the way V does with PO. If you think Miller referring to Snake Eater is the same as his reference to PO, then you're not paying attention. They're not the same at all. They're not the same kind of statements, and they're not in the same context AT ALL. The references to 3 in PW and V were to have a basis for building this story. The reference to SH in PW was to sever links to it. His speech also included stills from Twin Snakes, which we know isn't canon in all it portrayed. Even Shadow Moses in the game is based more on the MGS1 than TTS design. Simply put, PO was canon when 4 came out, although 4 retconned PO slightly. That fact simply has changed in Kojima's mind, because it provided him room to tell the story he wanted to tell. You can't use the Database either. It says Big Boss survived Outer Heaven due to the Snatcher project. V shows that this didn't happen in the slightest. 17:16, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
When something of that scale is retconned, it basically IS rendered non-canon (EVA, Liquid Ocelot, and Big Boss's statements formed the backbone of MGS4's story). And previous understanding? They made explicit what went on in the story, there's no "our understanding" about it, it's explicit fact there. That's even one of the reasons why the MSX2 games are currently demanded for remakes right now, as Kojima with his whole retcon-happy nature basically rendered them effectively non-canon. And BTW, non-canon entries cannot be included in canon entries, as the point of a non-canon entry is to be completely segregated from the canon. Lastly, knowing how Kojima is like with games he didn't make, like with the NES Metal Gear, if he really wanted Portable Ops to be non-canon, he would have said it in a way that made very clear that it wasn't canon. Or have you forgotten how even as late as a few years ago, he didn't hold back on ripping the NES Metal Gear a new one? And if you played MGS1, you'd realize that Miller when giving "advice" would directly refer to the player playing a video game. If Kojima wanted to truly sever ties with it, he would have had Miller say "Finally, now we can get away from the crap that was Portable Ops and start the mercenary business for real." As direct and blunt as one can possibly make it with no attempt at misinterpretation, in other words. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 17:30, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
Weedle is seriously so dense that he is not able to realize how "San Hieronymo Incident" could be a euphemism for "Portable Ops". Its so incredibly obvious, but Autism combined with willfull stupidy make it possible to ignore anything. Doulomb (talk) 18:52, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
No, their statements weren't rendered non-canon. We were just given a new way to understand it. E.g., The use of the name "Zero" by Big Mama and others applies to the entire organization/AI system more than the man himself. V does this as well. It's because by being the founder and acting as his representatives, being the result of the wheels he himself got turning, you can call the AIs/the system he put in place/his organization by simply saying, "Zero did x, y, z." Actually MGS4 did this some too. Everyone kept acting like Zero was watching from behind the scenes. Liquid Ocelot's "Do you see this, Zero?" for one. It's not until Big Boss shows up that he corrects our understanding on this. 
The MSX games haven't been rendered non-canon either. Even if the text bubbles have some incorrect information now, their entire events are still canon. Maybe more so, since now there's room to replace Fox's original backstory. Non-canon entries can be included if they were PREVIOUSLY canon. It's not like KojiPro was gifted with future-reading abilities to know Kojima would change his mind. The situation with the NES Gear is different. He didn't have *anything* to do with that, and his hate is based more on the jungle beginning and removing the Metal Gear boss. With PO, it was his own company that made it, and he came up with an outline for the story. He's free to change his mind on it if he wants, without needing to bash it as much. Though, arguably, Miller's line in PW is close to doing that. Why would Miller have to literally name the game in that line? There's only two types of people that wouldn't know SH as an allusion to PO: Those that never played it, and complete idiots. 18:27, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
Yes, actually, they WERE rendered non-canon. That's what a "retcon" means, you basically destroy a canon element of a storyline. Their statements were retconned, ergo, they were rendered non-canon. It's as simple as that. And for the record, the visuals made it pretty clear they were referring to Zero himself, not just the group the Patriots he had been running. And if they are made non-canon, that means any rereleases of the games that featured them as canon need to be updated to eliminate them (I don't necessarily mean remakes, just cutting out some footage and replacing it would do just well, like what the rereleases for MG2:SS did, or to some extent what the HD Collections did. For an outside example, the infamous Greedo Shot First incident is another example of this in the rereleases of A New Hope.). Lastly, the idea behind that is to make sure people would understand quite clearly that Portable Ops, not just in events, but the game itself, is rendered non-canon. And if you've played Metal Gear Solid (either original or Twin Snakes, I don't care which one) and you call Miller, his "advice" basically has him giving what amounts to basic military advice, and then translating it to what the player is currently doing. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 19:39, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
No, that isn't what retcon means. Retcon, "retroactive continuity" means something is continuing a plot point retroactively, often by adding to or modifying a prior point. It doesn't *have* to contradict, but it can. MGS retcons often do. Their statements were "retconned" in the sense of being added to. We thought they were mostly referring to the man himself. By the way the proxies and organizations are sometimes referred to by "Zero" in V, this is how it's taken. The AI and the group are supposed to be carrying on his will, so in a sense, it's Zero but in a non-bodily form. The AI that will become the Patriots in V are spoken of as being basically Zero in digital form. JD, mostly likely. If you're referring to his proxies as him, it's okay to use his visual as well as his name. Yes, it can be considered a way of "cheating" to get around it, but Kojima finds little loopholes like that quite a bit it seems to me.
They only took the time to change things in the MSX re-releases because they hadn't been in proper English before (1 was missing messages and 2 had only a fan translation), the images in 2 were of celebrities, and then the added gameplay features. They kept it very limited. They didn't even change information that conflicted with later games- in-game they refer to Outer Heaven as being "3 years ago" and the like. 
Who on earth wouldn't understand that line in PW as being Portable Ops being referred to? SH is a fictional location that only existed in PO and possibly as the crappy MSF hideout in PW. Like I said, you'd have to either be completely unfamiliar with PO or a complete idiot.
What on earth does what Miller says in MGS1 have to do with any of this? o_0
1. Yes, actually, that IS what a retcon means. And in fact, they DO have to contradict. That's the only way retcons actually work. Just look at MG2, for example, and how its plotlines don't even line up with what MGS1 stated. Not to mention how Master Miller's backstory in MG2 was really screwed the pooch in Peace Walker. And yes, what happened in MGS4 via MGSV was basically that, a retcon of destruction, not adding to it (what's there to add to EVA, Ocelot, and Big Boss's statements). Truth only allows for exact variables matching exactly, and if it's false, it's false, no exceptions.
2. That's what I was meaning: That they remove those screencaps of Portable Ops when Ocelot gives his little speech, maybe slightly shorten Naomi's statement specifically to remove the timeline that pretty blatantly counted Portable Ops in there. That's not going to require much work either. If George Lucas can implement the Greedo Shot First thing in the rerelease of A New Hope without much effort, Kojima can do the exact same thing, and BTW, I cited the HD collections of MGS2 and MGS3, where they had text on there that clearly didn't match up with the original game (like how the wheel door was an ad memoriam note to the Marines originally, when in the HD version it was "Metal Gear 4 Guns of Patriots.").
3. Ah, let's see, those of us who definitely would recognize references to events as being canon unless they explicitly make clear that they are stating the game itself is canon?
4. What Miller says is a perfect example of breaking the fourth wall, especially the Kojima brand and how he could have done something like what he does to convey better that Portable Ops was non-canon if that was his intent. That's how it has to do with any of this. Another good example is The Boss stating to use the instincts of a "gamer" after Big Boss acknowledged that he "can't smell," or Solid Snake commenting that the music changed with Naomi later stating that it was Psycho Mantis's mind control music. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 21:43, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
1. NO, it isn't. They CAN contradict, they don't HAVE to. And you seem to have no understanding of representative personhood. Stop being so darn literal. 
2. Maybe IF there's an upgrade of MGS4, perhaps. But, it's not likely. One, those images of PO aren't worth the effort to take down. Most are out of context, and as I said, perhaps they exist in the universe as a legend or tale of Big Boss. There were images and references to Ghost Babel in 2 and 4. Doesn't make it part of this timeline. 
3. Sigh. You can't seriously be this obtuse. Miller wasn't at SH. What would he know about the *events* there? What relevance would that have to do with MSF? Either a fourth-wall break or he knows it as a crappy location. The line's meaning was clear under either of those. "Breaking into the mercenary business for real" means "forget the mechanics of the last game. THIS is how you do a unit-building game." Though I disagree with that, as I prefer PO's mechanics personally.
4. And everyone of those statements can fit the SH line in PW, along with telling me I can adjust options in the menu in that same scene. 22:55, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
1. Representative personhood, you mean multiple perspectives and interpretations to the extent that truth is meaningless as a result? Kojima may be a believer in Friedrich Nietzsche, but I'm not, I do believe in an absolute truth that doesn't allow for perspectives or anything like that. And I do have an idea of representative personhood. Heck, I understood it when Paz said "to our leaders, to Cipher" which the name was used for both Zero and the actual organization he was heading. The problem is, that's NOT what EVA and Ocelot were talking about.
2. The trophy edition WAS an upgrade for MGS4. Where do you THINK the Trophy Edition came from? Yet they still didn't alter things at all, and this is despite altering even background text in the HD versions of Snake Eater and Sons of Liberty.
3. He wasn't at Tselinoyarsk, either. That never stopped him from referencing those events there or talking about Big Boss's prior experience with the fulton despite not actually being there to witness it.
4. Not really, that was a cinematic while the things you're referring to were during gameplay. Not to mention it needed to be a LOT more direct to actually FIT. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 23:07, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
1. Who the fark brought Nietszche into this? I simply mean that something acting in someone's name can be called that. If I have some men I send to someone else to request something, you can say that I went and asked that person for something. That's what much of "Zero did X" in MGS4 means. Doesn't matter that that's not likely what EVA and co meant at the time of release. It's what it means NOW. Don't like that? Too bad. You're not writing the story. And concepts like that give enough room for different perspectives. You like the original story their statements implied? Ignore V and go with that. Want to go with what Kojima has said now? Then you have to take it as I said. Maybe it's cheating, but it's still a valid and possible way to read those statements. Otherwise, you're being too anally literal. 
2. Maybe because the trophy edition was update for, I don't know... TROPHIES? Besides, it's not that important. The only troublesome images in 4 are the painting in EVA's church and ones with Gene. But that's like quibbling that in the stills that showcase TTS, the design of the heliport doesn't match the heliport in MGS4. It's not worth the effort it would take to alter CUTSCENES. In the leadup to V, they had better things to focus on. 
4. And if you can't see how Miller mentioning Tselinoyarsk is totally different, you're either dense or being willfully ignorant. It's made obvious that Snake has told Miller about Snake Eater to some degree. They speak AS IF Miller WASN'T there. Seriously, pay attention. It DOES fit. You're just being stubborn and grasping at straws. 23:57, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
1. Except no one calls them by the person they're working for. The organization, sure, but not their boss's name. That's the problem. Not to mention the Patriots weren't even acting in Zero's name, they made it pretty clear they were in it for themselves, not Zero, not even the original founders of the Patriots/Philosophers, just themselves, so no, that example simply does NOT qualify either. And I know I'm not writing the story, and that I really don't have much influence on it (if I did, let's just say that when I meet Kojima, his body would have fallen off a high rise building so I could take control). And for the record, what it means before is EXACTLY what matters. Otherwise, there's zero point to the past.
2. There was also the update edition for MGS4 released with the Legacy Collection, which, you know, includes the updated materials. And honestly, if they could alter background images even in cutscenes for the HD editions, removing those stills/altering them wouldn't take that much effort anyways. If anything, they had more effort altering the names and portraits of the characters in the MG2 rereleases than that.
4. Not the Fulton bit, though. He sounded like he actually WAS present for that. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 00:19, September 8, 2015 (UTC)
This indenting is getting annoying. 
1. Um, yes they do. Even Strangelove in V says something like "Zero, or whoever is using his name."
They even did it in MGS4 for heaven's sake. "The FOXDIE Zero planted in you is what killed EVA and Ocelot." Using your logic, Zero himself did this, rather than his proxies. No, what it meant before ISN'T what matters now. You can use it that way, V uses that way, and as I've just shown, even 4 ITSELF used it that way. Can't handle that? Then just stop and let those of us who get it continue. Denying what we all understand, and what Kojima wants us to understand is just making you annoying, not insightful.
2. Did they? 8 bit games don't seem like they'd be much issue. Even fans have altered the games before with fan translations. It ain't that hard. Besides, as I said, it isn't worth the effort to remove those. The HD edition didn't remove the bandana off Snake's head in Peace Walker. They don't care as much as you do. I told you why they changed the MSX games. Two different things. 
4. No, he didn't.
Notice how Weedle is only using very very outdated evidence to support his claims? Thats because to everyone else its strikingly obvious that while PoOps may have been considered canon at some point, it is no longer considered so now. on the other hand, almost all the evidence I've presented has been released by Konami/Kojima in the last year alone. He is simply arguing in bad faith. He knows he's wrong, but he is so attached to Portable Ops that he refuses to let go of it. My guess is his autism plays a big role in this behaviour. Anyways, thanks for pointing out the contradicion with the Database. Thats one more piece of evidence on our side. Doulomb (talk) 17:24, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
That interview made when Ground Zeroes was released is NOT outdated, actually. It was just barely over a year ago. And quite honestly, the time during Ground Zeroes would have been the perfect opportunity to explicitly and bluntly state it is absolutely non-canon, instead of reaffirming that its story happened. And speaking of outdated materials, the MSX2 games are outdated. Why aren't you calling them non-canon, then? Heck, they even WERE removed from a timeline at one point. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 17:30, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
I honestly think that at this point you just need to be banned from editing the wiki, because you are incapable of learning. You are simply too obsessed with Portable Ops to have an objective point of view on it and because of this you will continue to fill the wiki with incorrect/outdated information and harass editors who are just trying to clean up the wiki. You done this with me and various others and frankly its completely immature and shows a lack of respect for your fellow editors. We have tried and tried and tried to reason with you, we didn't want it to come to this, but sadly it has. Regards, Doulomb (talk) 17:43, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
I DID try to reason with you, but you didn't listen, you kept on insisting that we make the game non-canon, despite the fact that it was already made clear to be canon in both Peace Walker and MGS4, and even Hideo Kojima explicitly stating twice that the events of that game's story did indeed happen. I was willing to agree with claiming it as a spinoff/side game and not main games (heck, I even edited the Metal Gear series page and readded in the bit on Revengeance about how it wasn't counted among the eight Kojima-produced games while making clear that it was still canon), but NOT with claiming it to be non-canon. If anything, you were going against what Bluerock stated about stating them to be spinoffs without claiming they were non-canon. Heck, if we used your rationale about how outdated materials should avoid counting the game as canon, that would make the entirety of the MSX2 games non-canon because their stories were significantly outdated thanks to Kojima's compulsive need to retcon. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 17:55, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
It was not made canon by either of those games. Please provide direct examples if you think it was. Hideo Kojima did not state it twice, he gave a nonanswer.He has also since given a more recent interview where he excludes it from the canon list of games in the Metal Gear Saga.I'm glad you have seen the error of your ways and that it is a Spinoff game with no connection to the games of the Metal Gear Saga. My rationale is that I agree with what the series creator says. He says the MSX2 games are canon, so that it what they are then. You on the other hand, seem to think you know more than the series creator.  If you so badly wish for Portable Ops to be canon, then consider asking Kojima to make it canon again. Regards, Doulomb (talk) 18:19, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, actually, it was. When they showed Ocelot's history lesson right before the final battle, it specifically showed among other things the Patriots founders, then Snake Eater, Portable Ops, the MSX2 games, MGS1, and MGS2. Not much point in including those stills if they weren't canon. And bear in mind, they kept those things in the Trophy Edition/Legacy Collection rerelease even when Kojima could have easily just ordered for them to cut them out, like how his HD versions of MGS2 and MGS3 altered some text on the background. And Kojima's statements were "they happened". Last time I checked, "Canon" means they actually happened, while "non-canon" means they didn't. A non-statement would be more like pleading the fifth amendment to use court-case terms. One last thing, I only agreed that it was a spinoff, that doesn't mean I agreed that there aren't connections to the main games. Let me remind you that the Resident Evil games CODE:Veronica and Resident Evil 3: Nemesis were spinoffs, yet they actually were directly tied to the main games. It's possible and in fact demonstrated that spinoffs actually do have ties to the canon. And I don't need to ask him to make it canon again, he said as early as Ground Zeroes that Portable Ops story is canon, no ifs, ands or buts. The only thing he said is that certain story developments would be rendered non-canon. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 19:39, September 7, 2015 (UTC)
He said in his head he makes a division, but the main storyline could be considered part of the main story. He said that was a hard question to answer. The truth is, despite his talk, he really doesn't know much about how the plot of PO turned out. Someone tweeted asking why Fox was called Null in PO, and he tweeted back saying he didn't know, as PO wasn't his story. And the main reason for the SH incident, getting the Legacy, was done in other ways. Skull Face tells you in V that Zero came to him with an idea after Snake Eater, saying that the government wouldn't know how to put the money to good use and that he wanted to "redirect" it. So, first half of the Legacy taken care of. No SH incident needed. Then, Ocelot got the other half *after* the Patriots were formed. Try to work in a story about Snake taking down a renegade FOX group if you wish, but that's about the only thing you could salvage. It's clear that in Kojima's head, PO never happened. For him, it seems, Zero went to work on building Cipher right away, used SF to get the Legacy from Snake Eater, and kept building it up until 1970 when he got the other half and became fully established. FOXHOUND's formation was even mentioned as well, as something Big Boss did after going back to the Army before disappearing from the States completely. That's the story Kojima's presenting now. 21:41, September 7, 2015 (UTC)

Portable Ops is NonCanon MegaThread

Unfortunately for those diehard Portable Ops fans out there, the sad truth is that the game is now considered outside the main saga of games by Kojima, Konami and the fanbase in general. For a long time even this wiki was confused about what was included in the canonical saga, but thankfully with the release of The Phantom Pain, the situation has clarified to the point where the wiki admins have decided to group together only the Metal Gear Saga games apart from the spinoff games like Ghost Babel, Portable Ops and the Ac!d series, which are all part of a separate timeline canon. To clear up any remaining doubt, I have compiled a comprehensive list of evidence supporting this stance such that it can all be read in one place. Without further ado, here are the facts:

Exhibit A: The Metal Gear Timeline

Kojima recently released this picture showing the officially recognized timeline of games. Notice that it only includes the Core8 games.

Exhibit B: New Kojima Interview

In a recent interview, Hideo Kojima spoke briefly about this topic and said the following: "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."

Thats right Kojima confirms that the Core8 games are what constitute the single "Metal Gear Saga". This interview is the most recent interview where Kojima discusses the topic, so it obviously supersedes the old interview where he said that it was partially canon.


Exhibit C: Old Kojima Interview was mistranslated

One of the main reasons this myth has been so tough to kill is because of an old interview where Kojima supposedly says that Portable Ops is canon. Even if it were true, it would be moot now anyways since he has since gone on record saying the opposite (See exhibit B). However it actually turns out that this interpretation was in fact caused by an awkward translation.

It turns out that Kojima was really trying to emphasize that he views the major difference to be whether or not the game was "directed/written/designed" by him or simply "produced". He goes on to specify that the former classification are games that fall under the "A Hideo Kojima Game" banner, and that just happens to be the Core8!

Portable Ops does not in fact carry this distinction which is one of the earliest indicators that it was outside the main saga. Compare the box art for POOPS and PW:

PoOps Cover:

Peace Walker Cover:[1].jpg


Exhibit D: Ground Zeroes Deja Vu mission

In Ground Zeroes there is an unlockable bonus mission called "Deja Vu". In this mission every logo from every Metal Gear game ever made was scattered around the map. Using a special gun you could try to erase certain logos. However, ONLYthe Core8 game logos were erasable. Kaz will say certain positive things when you erase a Core8 logo, such as "You can erase the image, but the memories will live on". However when you try to erase a non-canon game he will say things like "Metal Gear... Something Something" and "I don't remember that one."  This is Kojima being a bit tongue in cheek about the status of the Core8 games.

Here is a pretty funny video showing this part of the game: (if the time url doesn't work the time is 1:51:13)

Exhibit E: MGSV Guide Book

The recently release MGSV guide book was personally approved by series creator Hideo Kojima who provided input for many of the books sections. In particular there is a section that discusses the history of the game series and has a detailed timeline. The timeline makes no mention of Portable Ops other than a reference under 1970 about Ocelot securing the other half of the Legacy. However no mention of the San Hieronymo Incident or any other details from PoOps are present.

Additionally there is a page detailing the devents of the early 1970s, when PoOps is said to have taken place. However, the article makes absolutely no reference to PoOps at all, confirming that it is not included in the timeline of the series.

Timeline Image:

1970s Page Image:

Exhibit F Metal Gear Solid Legacy Collection

PoOps is not included in the MGS Legacy Collection, which is advertised as containing all canonical games in the series at that point in time (hence it does not contain MGSV) Doulomb (talk) 19:51, September 7, 2015 (UTC)

Bluerock specifically stated that you can state something is a spinoff WITHOUT claiming it is non-canon, and that thread proves that you've completely ignored Bluerock's order. The game is still canon, and besides, The Wikia Editor and other users have pointed out how Portable Ops is still very much canon even WITH it being a spinoff. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 19:58, September 7, 2015 (UTC)

Locked page

Fantomas, when you deleted that content and locked the page I was in the process of overhauling the "Stance In Canon" section to reflect the most up to date information. I was actually just adding the information from my megapost found on this very talk page and simply formatting and inserting it so it would fit the wiki standards. All the information therein is sourced and valid and highly relevant. On the other hand  several users were trying to delete all the hard work I put into it simply because they disagreed. I think the best thing is to reopen the article after things calm down a bit. Regards, Doulomb (talk) 17:26, September 12, 2015 (UTC)

Nope. We discussed this in my "Thoughts on Canon" thread that you were pretty blatantly picking and choosing what you wanted to hear to back up your argument. Kojima never out-right said it wasn't canon, being intentionally vague every time someone asks him about it. We're not going to plaster a banner at the top every page saying "Hey, Portable Ops ain't canon!" just because you think it isn't. We're going to treat it the same way Konami/Kojima actually treat it: as a slightly less important, but still relevant part of the timeline. --Fantomas (talk) 17:35, September 12, 2015 (UTC)
I have to go to an appointment, but I'll post a proper reply tonight when I get back. Regards, Doulomb (talk) 18:32, September 12, 2015 (UTC)
Don't worry about it! I've made my stance on the matter perfectly clear, so a reply is not necessary. --Fantomas (talk) 18:39, September 12, 2015 (UTC)
There definitely is room for discussion. There always is. If you want to be passive aggressive like that, then thats your choice, but it reflects poorly on you if you refuse to even discuss the topic with an open mind. I'm not your enemy, in fact quite the opposite: we are on the same side. Its obvious that we both love this series dearly and want only the best for it as well as this wiki. That said, we have nothing to lose and everything to gain from collaborating and sharing our thoughts with each other. We just might learn a thing or two and be better for it. Regards, Doulomb (talk) 19:45, September 12, 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, it seemed like you didn't care to have an actual discussion and we're only interested in repeating the same point over and over again from the list you had already slapped together, so I decided to cut my losses and put my foot down. We've had this discussion over and over again for nearly a decade now. It's tiring. It's time to represent the games as they are and let everyone decide for themselves. At the end of the day, it's not like it really matters and wasting time arguing about it will get us nowhere. --Fantomas (talk) 22:33, September 12, 2015 (UTC)

PS Vita and PS TV releases


We're going to need to mention on the article that Portable Ops is getting a rerelease for PlayStation Vita and PlayStation TV. Source:

Weedle McHairybug (talk) 09:58, June 2, 2016 (UTC)

Also, we're going to need to post this trailer on here soon, so, long and the short is, we really need to unlock this page. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 13:50, July 1, 2017 (UTC)
Ah, hello? We need to unlock this page so I can add some trailers and possibly also one other thing to the page. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 11:27, July 18, 2017 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.