Talk:Mercenaries: Playground of Destruction

message: The plot section had ExOps labeled a "professional mercenaries service", which (while true in a literal sense) reeks of bias to me, so I changed it to "private military company", which matches the page it links to. Spartan198 (talk) 20:23, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming 

message: I'm not too great at editing Wiki, so I'm sorry if I mess anything up. I noticed a few more influences scattered throughout this game. One is that the layout of the AN Base seems to be based on the real life Joint Security Area between North & South Korea located at: 37.956,126.676806 The wiki page is also here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Security_Area. If you check it out on Google maps you can notice the similarity right off.
Another influence would be the fake buildings in "Propaganda Village" which are a representation of the structures located in real life in Kijong-dong which are represented in the game. These are located at: 37.945278, 126.655556 on google maps and the wiki link is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kijong-dong
One more I noticed is the Arch of Reunification which is really depicted in the game. Here is the Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arch_of_Reunification.
There are tons of things scattered throughout this game the are influenced by real places in Korea. Hope somebody who is better at editing than me can add them some day. Sorry again if I messed anything up.  76.3.144.213 (talk) 23:57, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Influences 

message: I would like to see more info in the controversy section I believes it is important --Psi Edit
--Anon 23:58, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy 

message: How do you get each weapon that you are using to appear in your P.D.A.
--Mike 14:56, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weapon Information 

message: Actually, I used a spell checker. Most of the edits YOU did where incorrect grammer. I fixed it, but then you reverted it to it's incorrect form
Mike 14:58, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: And don't forget it's.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.202.94 (talk) 14:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits 

message: I did my best to decipher the in-game terms for most vehicles/weapons and link to the correct Wikipedia article. If anyone finds any mistakes in my work, please let me know. I just reverted some apparently mistaken and unexplained edits to my work, which were falty.
-Albrozdude 22:02, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine- and you're correct, the 'covert smg' is a silenced MP5, which is where I linked the "Sub-machine gun (supressed)". If you want to make the "unsupressed submachinegun" link to a generic submachinegun article, that's fine. I just think that the firearm I linked to, the PPS-43, resembles the in-game smg... (if that makes any sense) -Albrozdude 02:35, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weapons/Vehicles 

message: Just a small change. --Smell? 19:27, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Added release date

message: a sequel was anounced so i think this should be on the page.
::Source? -Albrozdude 22:02, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sequel

message: I was under the impression that the Su-25 air strike came from Russia, not China. I don't think China uses Frogfoots, does it say in the game that the air strikes from the Su-25 comes from China? --Skyler Streng 09:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Su-25 air strike 

message: This list is not only very detailed but also very long. Should it have its own page? It's likely that Mercs2 will have the similar weapons (plus added new ones of course) so a Weapons of Mercenaries could tie into both games. Bufflo 15:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weapons and Vehicles of Mercenaries: Playground of Destruction 

message: In the vehicles section, there is a "goldfish truck". Can anyone confirm if this is real, or if it is simply vandalism? Russian F 01:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't remember seeing a goldfish truck in the game.  I will have to play the game (since I own it) and check to make sure. RobJ1981 18:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goldfish truck 

message: I removed all uses of "you" in the article (or I think I did) so I will take down the "inappropriately using first or second person" notice. I also changed the "we'll leave the method for figuring it out up to the avid player" comment as unwikipedian and provided the method in question. Thedoorhinge 01:50, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Second Person

message: Several entries in the weapons/vehicles section contain OR and/or unverified claims.  Real world names have been paired with weapons/vehicles that are not identified in this maner in the game. Iepeulas 04:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research, unverified claims 

message: I've merged in the NPC part from the page Choi Song. Someone with more knowledge may want to remove redundant information.  As someone who has never seen this game, I find an area with NPC's helpful rather than just having them mixed into the fictional history, so I suggest we keep this new subheading.Obina 11:11, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Choi Song 

message: I heard this ran on a updated version of the Star Wars: Battlefront engine, is that true? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jon God (talk • contribs) 11:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battlefront Engine? 

message: This might just be me but i dont think the LHX Attack Chopper is actually the Commanche. i think its the Japanese Kawasaki OH-1. The OH-1 looks more like the chopper in the game.198.82.114.65 06:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commanche 

message: There were two seperate star wars points in the trivia, so i just merged it into one.--Markdashark1212 22:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Star Wars References

message: The manual mentions "President Choi Kim" and "General Choi Song", but also says General Song is the son of "Kim Song", a name that's dropped once with no context and never repeated. I believe the game specifically says General Song is President Kim's son, so I've assumed that "Kim Song" is a misprint and edited accordingly. Can anyone who's played more recently or has a better memory verify this?
Similarly, I just changed "Major Young Kim Park" to "Lieutenant Yung Kim". The latter is how he signs his in-game mail, but I can't swear the former isn't mentioned at some point. Phasma Felis 17:53, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name confusion 

message: This page needs to be trimmed down. No need to have sections for every NPC in the game. Яussiaп F 19:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Theres no such thing as too much information, loser --69.124.57.51 (talk) 23:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too.. much... information... 

message: I removed the section until a better written one could be put in. The section implies that the game was reviewed very poorly which in fact it was not.  It does not provide citations for the "poor" reviews and overall sounded like POV complaints from a disgruntled gamer.
On Gamerankings it has an overall score of 84%, hardly poor.
Here are some of the reviews listed on Gameranking's site.
GameSpy    1/8/2005  4.5 out of 5  90.0%
GameSpot    1/12/2005  8.8 out of 10  88.0%
 
IGN    1/10/2005  9.1 out of 10  91.0% 
Electronic Gaming Monthly     2/1/2005  8.67 out of 10  86.7%  
GMR Magazine     2/1/2005  8 out of 10  80.0%  
Official Playstation Magazine     2/1/2005  4.5 out of 5  90.0%  
GameZone    1/25/2005  9 out of 10  90.0%  
Gaming Age    1/17/2005  A  95.0%  
Game Revolution    1/30/2005  B+  85.0%  
Worth Playing    1/12/2005  8.9 out of 10  89.0%  
--66.240.89.45 (talk) 18:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section. 

message: As is common in many video games, the weapons in the game resemble real-world weaponry but are never referred to by their real-world names for legal reasons.  I have removed all the instances I have found in the article that refer to these weapons by the names of the weapons they resemble.  A section that lists what the in-game weapons resemble would be OK, but referring to them by their real world names as opposed to what they are called in the game itself is inaccurate.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.40.5.69 (talk) 21:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weapon Name Cleanup 

message: This game has several political messages in it if you look close enough. Let me name a few that I perceive:
*China is portrayed in a negative light. China is depicted as an arrogant imperialist nation.
*The AN is depicted in a negative light. The AN are depicted as just as inefficient, bogged down, seeped in regulations and restrictions, as well as trough rules of engagement as the U.N. They are the most powerful, but can never really use their hardware due to politics, much like real life American, British and U.N. forces. 
*Media is depicted in a negative light. The media in this game are depicted as doing more harm than good. This is another reason why the AN troops are severely limited in options, much like real life American, British and UN forces.
*Privatization of the military, I.E. mercenaries, are depicted in a positive light as being the only solution to most of the games problems. This is in contrast to MGS4's anti-PMC message.
*South Korean forces are depicted in a negative light as being incompetent, possibly as a message of incompetence of local anti-communist forces such as the South Vietnamese or real life South Koreans. The game reflects this by having the SK forces having the hardware, but are just too incompetent and worthless in the game without your support. They will lose almost everytime in a firefight against any faction and cannot get anything done without your help.
*The mafia in this game are depicted in a positive light. They can actually get things done because they have no rules, as well as serving as the comic-relief characters. 
*Black market is depicted in a positive light, as shown above.
*North Korean forces are actually depicted fairly accurately. Neutral I guess, but since you supposedly work for money, and yet you cannot work for the NK, it could be interpreted as negative. --68.207.156.253 (talk) 18:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's all well and good, but your personal perceptions aren't relevant to the article. Spartan198 (talk) 20:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political messages?