Do the pages really need to be split? I remember it being agreed TPP and GZ would both be under the "Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain" page.
Hide / Show Replies
One of the moderators, Septimus Heap, was against how the page was originally split by King Clark due to the formatting. I split Ground Zeroes into it's own works pages because I agreed with Septimus and found out that Ground Zeroes was meant to be it's own game in the first place.
Even King Clark believed that Metal Gear Solid V should gets its own page while Ground Zeroes and The Phantom Pain are listed separately.
Wait, so you split the pages without consulting the discussion page first? Even though the pages were original separated and then merged in the first place?
It seems there's a pretty large edit war about Quiet on the YMNV page, between pro and anti-quiet fans deleting each others edits.
Hide / Show Replies
Such things should be reported on Ask The Tropers.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
In-game buddies (D-horse, D-dog, Quiet, D-Walker) CANNOT permanently die in gameplay. EVER. If they take a lot of damage, the player is yelled at by Kaz, and the buddy is automatically fultoned. Every reference to permanent gameplay death for D-horse, Quiet and D-dog should be removed, due to it being patently false.
I'm thinking that something has to be done with the split of the tropes in this page. Either put GZ's tropes on a different page from PP, or just merge the folders together.
I've noticed that despite the division of General/GZ/PP there are a lot of overlapping tropes. This is a partial list of tropes that show up on BOTH GZ and P Ps respective folders.
Bag of spilling
Boring Yet Practical
Callback
Callforward
Collection Sidequest
Cutscene Boss
Cutscene Power to the Max
The Dev Team Thinks of Everything
Diegetic Interface
Escort Mission
Foreshadowing
Gunship Rescue
Limited Loadout
The Mole
Necessary Drawback
Never My Fault
Respawning Enemies
Roaring Rampage of Revenge
Save Scumming
Scoring Points
Videogame Caring Potential
Now that PP is out, it turns out that they kinda are the same game, very much like the Tanker and Plant chapters in MGS 2 are part of the same work. Just to use one trope as an example: The Diegetic Interface trope, its present on both games, but the trope is only mentioned in the GZ folder. Shouldn't it be on the General Folder?
I for one vote that the folder format is removed, and either we have separate pages for GZ and PP or we just have one single list of tropes for both since they are connected and are pretty much the same game and story, akin to the tanker/plant example in MGS 2. (Maybe mentioning when an instance happens in GZ and PP for overlapping tropes).
Sorry if I didn't word this correctly, english is my a second language to me.
Edited by shakduhn
Should Punished Snake's folder be spoiler tagged on the character page? Because the player is supposed to believe that he's a different character from the earlier games, and due to the nature of how Tv Tropes handles it's character pages, the fact that he has a separate folder from said character spoiled that reveal. Yet every time I change it, someone changes it back to unspoiled, so I want to get a verdict on this now.
Hide / Show Replies
Well, will just state my own edit reasons again, beyond the other people who changed it.
This basically comes down to one of the guidelines on Handling Spoilers: "If you have to highlight and read it ... just to see if you want to highlight and read it, there is no point to the spoiler font."
Having a completely whited out folder name means you have no context for what's in that folder other than highlighting it and finding out the folder name. In which case there is no point to the spoiler tag. So that just can't have spoiler tags on it, despite the potential Interface Spoiler.
Edited by ashlay
bigbossbalrog wants to set it up so the MGSV page has two separate sections with their own description headers. I reverted for the moment so this could be discussed.
So: Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain are separate games released at separate times, so it may be quite worthwhile to separate the two. However, I also know having multiple headers is generally not How to Create a Work's Page, and people decided last year to merge two original GZ and PP pages. How do people feel now? Do we want to separate the works into their own pages / halves of the page now?
Hide / Show Replies
I've never liked such soft split pages and would like a hard split, but that's just me.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Well at the time we split the two games were one just with different release dates, and we kept them on the same page for the same reason why Dead Rising 2, Case Zero and Case West are all on the same page despite all of them being separate standalone releases, or how Kill Bill is two film releases but kept on the same page. They aren't separate works; they are one big work spread out over multiple releases.
I would hold off any decision until The Phantom Pain actually gets released and we see how the two go together. No sense doing any sort of split only for it to turn out that Ground Zeroes is bundled with the final release.
Edited by 27.33.67.126
Yeah, way I see it, MGS 2 isn't split between the Tanker and the Big Shell portions. If we need to split, either due to size or the works being wildly different, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
But the Tanker and Big Shell portions weren't sold or marketed separately. (Case Zero and Case West are similar to Ground Zeroes, but they were released very closely to the main game and had less content than GZ, which makes the issue murkier.)
It doesn't matter if Tank and Big Shell weren't sold separately because even if they were we still would have put them under the same page for the exact same reason why both parts of Kill Bill are on the same page, or both parts of Harry Potter and the Deathly Harrows are on the same page. They aren't separate works, they are the same work in multiple parts.
And at this point we don't even know when The Phantom Pain will come out, let alone if it will be entirely separate or if they will bundle Ground Zeroes in it for the people who waited to get them both at the same time.
As for Case Zero and Case West, both are 2 hours each and together had comparable replay value to Ground Zeroes, making it less murky.
Not to mention, 90% of the Tanker chapter was released separately. Just sayin'.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
Should the title of this article just be Metal Gear Solid V? This page covers both games in this duology, I don't know why it's just named after the second one though.
Hide / Show Replies
It was discussed here
.
So, it was just recently announced that they'll be released seperately (though they're still considered two halves of MGSV).
Personally I still think we should keep a single page, but perhaps give each game its own folder along with a shared one.
In either case, I say keep it one page for now, then we'll see once we get more information/GZ is released.
Edited by 83.94.237.134 Hide / Show Replies
It'll stay one page due to policy. It doesn't matter that it's a multi-part release, since neither Ground Zeroes nor Phantom Pain are standalone works. The same reason why Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 and 2 share a page applies here; they are intended to be taken as one work split into two parts, not two works in a series of works ala Star Wars.
I don't really advocate splitting the page, but I would like to point out that it might be a bit presumptuous to categorically state that the games won't merit separate pages in the future. At what point do we draw the line between "direct sequel" and "two-part installment"? Do we have enough info to confirm that they won't be able to stand as independent works at this point? For the record, the evidence suggests to me that it will be of the "two-part installment" type, but I'm not 100% confident in that assessment with only the prerelease info available, and I'm prepared to go back on that if new info presents itself.
Shouldn't we rename the page Metal Gear Solid V? Since it refers to both Ground Zeroes and The Phantom Pain?
Edited by 84.238.52.28
No, because the name of the combined product is "Metal Gear Solid V The Phantom Pain." Just like how Metal Gear Solid 3 Snake Eater was two chapters with only one being called Snake Eater, but we don't cut out the last part.
Not anymore, they aren't.
Back when they were supposed to be released together their collective name was "MGSV: The Phantom Pain". But now the prologue is refered to as "MGSV: Ground Zeroes" and the main part "MGSV: The Phantom Pain"
It would make sense to edit the title to just be Metal Gear Solid V. Just to avoid confusion.
Edited by 62.44.134.23
What Bongobob said. Should be retitled to just be Metal Gear Solid V.
Currently you'd think by the title of this page that it only refers to the main portion of the game. I also vote for a retitlement to Metal Gear Solid V
I reiterate my point about Metal Gear Solid 3; if the two chapters were released separately we would still be calling it Metal Gear Solid 3 Snake Eater because that is the name given to the whole package. I vote against a rename; Metal Gear Solid Ground Zeroes currently redirects to this page, and the opening paragraph makes it clear it refers to both parts.
Except Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain isn't the name of the whole package. The whole thing is called Metal Gear Solid V, just split into two parts.
Except there is no actual proof of that statement. When announced, both parts were included in the main trailer under Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain. We have no information to support the claim that the whole thing is just Metal Gear Solid V with no subtitle, the whole thing not having a subtitle would put it at odds with every main-game entry since 1 having a subtitle, etc. etc. etc.
Unless someone can actually find an actual announcement by either Hideo or Konami that the whole package is just Metal Gear Solid V sans subtitle then we have nothing to base any decision off of.
EDIT: And if the Game Informer article is true, then Ground Zeroes can be completed in two hours, so the page as it is will be largely Phantom Pain anyway.
Edited by 27.33.67.126
I've actually heard accounts that the game can last as long as your play-style goes - one guy cleared the story in 6 hours, and another guy cleared it in 8. You have to bear in mind that the 2 hour playthrough only completed 8-10% of the content found within the campaign.
Well, we'll have to wait a week on that one. But given that the Ground Zeroes page is already a redirect to here, how short Ground Zeroes is to the scheduled length of Phantom Pain and the existing precedent set by Dead Rising 2 prologues and epilogues go on the same page as the main entry, so we keep the page name as it is. But those are just my two cents.
The page should be retitled to omit Phantom Pain since they are separate releases. It's irrelevant how long one is to in comparison to the other, the full title of the prologue isn't Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain: Ground Zeroes, it's simply Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes. If the game was a single release, fair enough - but it's two releases with distinct names.
Unless we're creating a separate page for Ground Zeroes, the page should be titled as simply Metal Gear Solid V.
Edited by 109.148.43.120
It doesn't matter that they are separate releases, they count as one work, the same way we don't have a Dead Rising Case Zero and Dead Rising Case West page, just a Dead Rising 2 page. And the name of the whole package is Metal Gear Solid V The Phantom Pain. The trailers for that include scenes from both games, and it's most probable that the main game release will include Ground Zeroes with it.
So I reiterate my point about Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater; two parts, one called Virtious Mission one called Snake Eater. Yet we keep the Snake Eater subtitle for the whole game.
For the record, the Ground Zeroes page is a permanent redirect to this one.
Edited by 27.33.67.126
Because the full game is called Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater. It's not two distinct releases, whereas Metal Gear Solid V is.
The actual packaging for the game refers to Ground Zeroes as (And this is a direct quote) "The first part of the Metal Gear Solid V experience."
Note the wording - "Metal Gear Solid V experience" & not "Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain experience" - which dismisses your insistence that the name of the full package is Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain. The Phantom Pain trailers included scenes from Ground Zeroes because it was going to be one release at the time the trailer was made.
There is no evidence that Ground Zeroes will be included with The Phantom Pain upon that game's release, and it's more probable that it won't since Ground Zeroes has been released as it's own full fledged product. This is not a situation where Ground Zeroes was bundled with another game, like the Metal Gear Solid 2 demo being bundled with Zone of the Enders.
The page should be renamed Metal Gear Solid V as it is relating to two distinct releases bearing that name but with different subtitles. The Dead Rising 2 example you keep bringing up is irrelevant on the grounds that both DLC games are not available to everyone who played the main game, which therefore means they are not required - further supporting this, is that Dead Rising 2 gives you a complete narrative.
Reading the discussion, you are literally the only one saying the page should be titled Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain.
Edited by 31.48.64.80
I think we should vote or something, I don't really know how to edit page titles.
You can't edit page titles. You'd have to create an entirely new page, move everything over there, then put a redirect from this page to the new page. And if we get to the release and GZ is included in the package then we've wasted bandwidth on a guess.
Not to mention there is no reason to rename the page title; Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes is already a redirect to this page (which I ran past Ask The Tropers first), and the opening paragraphs make it clear this covers GZ and PP. Nobody is going to get confused as to what this page is covering.
@ Chris DV "There is no evidence that Ground Zeroes will be included with The Phantom Pain upon that game's release"
There is no evidence that it won't be, and being that it's the prologue and absolutely vital to understanding the premise of the main plot it's just as likely to be in it.
Also, Larkmarn's post is in support of keeping the status quo, so "you are literally the only one" is simply not true.
Edited by 27.33.67.126
Poll: now that Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain are in the same page, should we split the tropes into three folders? (General / GZ / PP)
Hide / Show Replies
It's fine as it is now, but maybe we'll do that later as it warrants it.
I'm pretty sure we should do it now. We have information for one game and preview information for the next in the same jumbled mess. Can someone do so?
Where are we supposed to talk about the DLC involving Raiden and the Snatchers from Snatcher?
Hide / Show Replies
It can go on the page normally. When the tropes get separated between the two chapters it should go in the Ground Zeroes section.
So, when should we make separate folders? Might as well get it done now.
Well if the rumours about what Game Informer will report on is true, Ground Zeroes clocks in at....2 hours.
....if that is true then there is not a whole lot of point in making folders.
I know it's exciting, but please try to keep speculation to a minimum and cite things in the edit reasons. Trailers come lacking in context and Trailers Always Lie, please keep these things in mind when adding new tropes.
I've started a short-term project thread to merge this page with Ground Zeroes here. If I don't hear anything from anyone in two weeks I'm going to go ahead and merge the two pages. If someone does raise an objection in the thread we'll keep going until a concensses is reached.
According to the offical Kojima Productions podcast KP Alert episode 3 Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain are the same release, so with Word of God confirmation I'm merging the pages now and putting Ground Zeroes on the cutlist.
I listened to that podcast, they just said the "it's the prologue" thing again, which was already clarified as not confirming if the two sections were going to be released as a single work. Games Radar even posted a clarification after that Examiner story that distribution methods still weren't decided for these two things.
Edited by 216.99.32.42
The only time distribution methods were brought up was by non-Konami news sites speculating as to wether or not they'd be seperate releases. Come back when you have the actual makers of the game making a statement, because as it stands you're arguing that when they say "they're two parts of the same game" they really mean "we're releasing the one we've stopped refering to since the reveal seperately."
Okay, so if I'm understanding you right, the actual point of this merging is that since they're the same story, they should be listed together?
If we don't care that Ground Zeroes could be released considerably earlier than the "main game", what's the point of even keeping the seperate folders then? I think I'm going to just merge the whole thing.
Edited by 216.99.32.42
Fair enough.
Multi-part releases don't get seperated if they're all the one story, hence why pages like The Hobbit is just one page with the tropes organised by movie. Granted, that's more done for length.
Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain together.
Apparently need to work this out too. Okay, per the podcast source (~min 28): "It's different pieces, it's definitely separate pieces... we know you want to know more about formats, but we'll just have to go to the good old 'stay tuned' for now."
So there's no confirmation on distribution methods yet. For all we know, they are still Divided for Publication. There is a reason only the Examiner has reported on this, as opposed to any other news sites. None of this was new info, and none of it confirmed how these portions will be released. Kojima himself just gave an interview yesterday where he said explicitly "We can't talk about how we're going to release it because we still haven't decided yet." So let's just hold off on this entry and similar speculation for now.
This page should be fused with GZ, they're both different parts of MGSV, like the Tanker Chapter and Big Shell in 2. No reason for separate articles.
Edited by SquigPie Hide / Show Replies
http://uk.gamespot.com/events/gdc-2013/story.html?sid=6406157
Ground Zeroes is being released seperately.
http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/84h9k6/metal-gear-solid-v--the-phantom-pain-kojima-interview
Nothing is set in stone for the distribution of Ground Zeroes or The Phantom Pain - it could be done in Gran Turismo 5 style (prologue and then full game), as two separate releases, or some other way. The only thing that is certain is that it will be done on Hideo Kojima time, sorta like Valve time.
Edited by ssfsx17
Can we just fuse the pages and keep the trope articles kind of separate, for example:
Tropes appearing in Ground Zeroes:
Tropes appearing in The Phantom Pain:
The whole 'is it two games or is it one big game?!' thing is rather confusing but in either case Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain are two parts of a bigger game, regardless of whether they come in two different boxes or not, and I feel this would be the best way to cover ourselves in the face of upcoming developments.
Agreed. Considering that they're "two halves of the same package" that would make the most sense.
So, who's up for it? I tried, but I made a mess of things.
Edited by SquigPie
I myself would try but I'd probably also mess it up.
Any takers? Any competent takers?
Extra-agreed
I might do it... this Saturday... if War frame or Dead Island don't suck me into Steam land first
Maybe it'd be better to wait until the game is out? Or at least until we have some real info on the structure and content of the games? Making sweeping changes to work pages based on hearsay and speculation is not sound editing procedure.
Also, if two works are released separately in a series where each installment is treated as a separate work, by definition and by the standards of this wiki they are separate works. Combining two of them when the rest are organized separately makes no sense.
They're both Metal Gear Solid V. And Kojima says that they're both two halves of the same game. They're not treated as separate works then. Are they?
Also, a question for illegalcheese: do you think that Pokemon Red and Pokemon Blue should have separate pages? Or that Gran Turismo 5 Prologue and the Grand Turismo 5 release should have separate pages?
@ssfsx17: Pokemon Red and Blue have significant overlap in gameplay, development, and writing, so no I do not believe they should have separate pages. MGSGZ and MGSV do not seem to have overlapping content.
I don't know the specifics of Gran Turismo 5's prologue and Grand Turismo 5's proper release, or of the series in general, but if they each have distinct content to warrant individual release (I would posit 5-8 hours minimum gameplay), then yes, I would advise splitting the two.
Of course, we would also take into account the precedent set for the series on this wiki. If the Gran Turismo games each have individual pages, that would warrant looking into separating the prologue and Gran Turismo 5 as I said before. However, if multiple games share pages, say by story arc or discrete series/reboots, than we would be justified in following that template and keeping them on the same page as you suggest.
—
My issue with treating Ground Zeroes and V as the same game is that by the standards of the Metal Gear series articles on this site, they are distinct installments. Treating them as the same game would be similar to treating Peacewalker and Ground Zeroes as the same game, as Peacewalker could be considered to be a prequel to Ground Zeroes, since the latter is confirmed to be an Immediate Sequel.
My issue is that until we have more information, then it's best to stick to the default for now, since leaving the possibility of merging pages for later seems a lot more considerate than leaving the potential for future readers being confused by having to track down Ground Zeroes due to it being unlisted.
I'm not trying to discount Kojima's own words. It's obvious that Ground Zeroes and V will be two parts of a whole. But unless there is further confirmation that they are connected from more than a plot perspective, I just don't see a point to putting the tropes on one page. Keeping them separate isn't ugly and keeps things organized more precisely.
To be clear, all I'm advocating is that we wait for concrete information before merging pages. All we have is pre-release info with very little detail. If we knew for certain, say for instance, that V will use save-game data from Ground Zeroes, then there would be more justification for merging the pages. But we don't. We will soon though, at which point everyone in this discussion will be more informed.
Edited by 216.99.32.44
It's like saying the Tanker chapter of MGS 2 and the Virtuous Mission of MGS 3 should have separate pages.
Dead Rising: Case Zero and Case West are part of the Dead Rising 2 page since they're part of the overall story and gameplay. Both Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain will have the same type of new gameplay and the former leads into the plot of the latter, something which the other MG games don't directly do.
I do think we shall wait until they come out, but I think both articles should be merged when they do.
"Pancakes. Oh, I blew it." - Joel Hodgson Nobody better lay a Butterfinger on my 3DS!
Agreeing with the motion to merge and have created a topic on the matter to get it done now. Also illegal cheese's comparison is faulty; Peace Walker is it own full game, Hideo confirmed that Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain are the same game and make up the same plot, whereas each other game had it's own self-contained plot along with the overarching one.
Further more going back through the series, both Metal Gear Solid 2 and Metal Gear Solid 3 had seperate sections that took place in different time periods. Yet we don't give the plant section of Metal Gear Solid 2 it's own page nor do we have seperate pages for the Virtuous Mission and Operation Snake Eater.
So I'd stick with the Dead Rising 2 situation where despite Case Zero and Case West being seperate releases that didn't need the main game to be played, because both are essentially a prologue and an epilogue to the main story they get put on that page.
What does the Voodoo Shark entry even mean? I thought that the ending resolved quite a bit of plot holes. The voodoo shark entry seemed like it was just a single troper's own confusion about the plot.