"== Entirely too much exposition for a game nobody plays ==

This entry's game-plot/storyline is longer than the combined entries for the plot/storylines of all three movies.  A few hundred fans of the game may care about its story, but this sort of overly detailed plot exposition doesn't belong in a Wikipedia article.  Smells like fans trying to save a dying game.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by  (talk • contribs)  
I agree, though before seeing this section I was going to suggest splitting it off into a separate article to satisfy those who disagree. I think we need a little more discussion and consensus before coming to a decision, however.  t 

Honestly I don't there is any need to ""satisfy"" anyone who is not content with it.  The cruft is barely (if at all) notable enough to be in this article.  Never mind its own.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by  (talk • contribs)  

I don't think obvious personal bias against this (or any game for that matter) should be a motivator for any article changes.    —Preceding comment was added at  

The obvious personal bias of a few overzealous gamers is the reason the article's so bloated with trivial data to begin with.  I'm with Ookami, this game just plain isn't notable enough to warrant a chapter by chapter breakdown of its storyline.  That's what fan sites are for.   

Just checked the World of Warcraft page out of curiosity, and even it doesn't have this much detailed story description.  In fact it barely has any, and I don't think anyone can argue which of the two games is more notable.  Also someone further up the page here brought this issue up already under 'generic story', why is this still being allowed?  

I play this game, I could care less that the huge exposition was taken out. That was an absolutely ridiculous story summary; most of the people that play the game couldn't tell you half of it. However, to kill the previous, argument, WoW barely has a story, while the Matrix Online's main content and selling point is the story. We don't need a 20 paragraph summary like before. A mention that there have been past live events, as well as a 4 sentence or so story summary, should suffice. I'd challenge one of you to do it, as I don't think any of you know anything about the game in the current state, besides that it is much weaker than World of Warcraft.   
To clarify my point above, I think the storyline section is very good now, it does, however, need the slightest mention of what has happened.   

Just for clarification, the game's main selling point was not the story itself, but that the players would be shaping the story, which never happened.  And WoW has plenty of story, enough to fill reams of Wikipages, it's just that it doesn't belong here in that great of detail.  This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a novel.  

Well, since there seems to be some rough consensus that this is well overdone, and that there has been no real objection to it, and pending the fact that no one with the adequate experience within the game has stepped forward to trim it down and keep whatever are the key points, I'm going to purge it.Talk|@ 
Per the anon-IP user's objection in the page history of the main article...  It doesn't matter.  Its that simple.  The story is WP:CRUFT, is a broken part of an already barely notable game , and the fact that something cannot be fixed, or that no one is willing to, does not mean you have to keep it in its current state.  Sometimes broken things have to be thro