Talk:Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2

message: Advanced Warfighter specifically states that the game took place in 2013 yet some idiot keeps changing it to 2014. Advanced Warfighter 2 does not take place one day after Advanced Warfighter. Please do something about the idiot changing things for no reason.
Done. Dragon239 (talk) 00:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Some idiot keeps changing the dates

message: I'm proposing a new layout of the article in terms of structure so the information can be presented somewhat more logically, since the present structure seems to not allow us much flexibility in terms of what we can add. What I'm proposing is roughly along the lines of:
* Preamble / Table of contents
* Gameplay 
** The Cross-Com 
** Weapons & Accessories
* Singleplayer Game
** Plot / Mission Summaries
** Characters (including not only the Ghost team, but also support characters)
** Support Vehicles (since they don't appear in the multiplayer game)
* Multiplayer Game
** Changes from Original Game
** Cooperative Campaign
*** Plot Summary
** Competitive Game Modes
*** Maps
* Platform Differences
** PC
** Playstation 3
** Xbox 360 (gets a unique map and gun)
* Trivia
* External Links
Any thoughts? Is it even worth me starting to do this? (This was me CobaltBlue612 09:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Rework of Article Structure 

message: === Removed Again ===
I've yet again removed the relevant section from the article. I'm going to put this forward again for protection since people keep anonymously putting forward this nonsense when it seems like nothing but a minority of people flaming mixed with a bit of the usual anti-360 virtrol that comes with games for this platform. Until notable first/second party sources such as reputable websites come forward with definitive information (Read: Not simply a 'Wow some people are angry on thos forums') then established Wikipedia policy clearly states that such unsubstantiated information is unsuitable for inclusion in the articles. Please refrain from re-adding this information CobaltBlue612 08:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 'Xbox 360 Issues' Debate 

message: I've yet again removed the relevant section from the article. I'm going to put this forward again for protection since people keep anonymously putting forward this nonsense when it seems like nothing but a minority of people flaming mixed with a bit of the usual anti-360 virtrol that comes with games for this platform. Until notable first/second party sources such as reputable websites come forward with definitive information (Read: Not simply a 'Wow some people are angry on thos forums') then established Wikipedia policy clearly states that such unsubstantiated information is unsuitable for inclusion in the articles. Please refrain from re-adding this information CobaltBlue612 08:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed Again 

message: Ubisoft/Microsoft reps and other users who are intentionally censoring this article by removing any mention of the widespread compatibility issues need to be banned. Please everyone, make sure not to let them censor this public website. If Ubisoft do not like people knowing about this issue, perhaps they should not have released software that includes it. 
* By SteveG: Just to raise issue with you here. Claims such as the ones you made require proof, and unfortunately by all conventional standards linking to a forum thread does not consitute any degree of credibility or notability to the claims therein. Until such time that there is supporting material of sufficient merit, accusations of a coverup (or indeed, the underlying claim that GRAW 2 has such issues) are not suitable for the article. 84.12.100.241 10:30, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unattributed Comments 

message: I'm removing this nonsense from the article. It seems clear to me that unless substantive proof is brought forward that there is an actual demonstrable fault with the game, this is unsubstantiated and clearly qualifies for removal. As an aside, this sounds like the usual bull that comes out whenever a heavy duty game is released. The vocal whining of a few people made it sound like every major game was killing consoles (Gears of War springs to mind, and 4 million units later, the supposed problem has yet to manifest itself reproducibly) and each and every time these accusations have been either debunked as:
* Ventilation issues - People not following the instructions and playing with their Xbox 360 buried in three feet of persian rugs.
* People with existing defective consoles, which while not signifigant numerically, are very vocal about the matter. Microsoft acknowledged that a small percentage of consoles during one of the initial production runs was defective, and has not only offered free replacements, but subsequently extended the warranty on other consoles.
* 'Haters' who are trying make noise about problems that either don't own the game, or even the console.
Until a confirmation that there actually are such 'problems' with GRAW2 that comes from a source with more reputability than a few forum complaints, I will continue to remove this section.
Last but not least, UBI were in no rush to put this game out. Other platforms don't get this for a couple of months so they could have easily sat on it for a tri-platform launch without problems to polish out any issues. Not one magazine or website review has mentioned issues with the game either, many (PC Gamer, IGN and others) have gone to lengths to talk about how much smoother this game is than the previous outing.
- SteveG 84.12.100.241 10:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why I've removed the 'Issues' section 

message: A simple browse of the internet would have shown you how widespread the compatibility issues are. Many articles contain sections that make statements about public consensus and other topics that are not, or cannot be, referenced at the time. This does not mean that they are not real issues, which you would have found out if you put as much effort into researching this issue as you have in doctoring this article. The issues section must stay, because it is a real problem that consumers must be aware of. Wikipedia is about the spread of knowledge, not an advertising channel to be policed by fanboys. 
* I'm not a fanboy of Microsoft, UBI or anyone. The factuality of the additions you make is the sole issue here. Please refrain from making controversial edits without identifying yourself in any way. Volume of forum activity does not constitute proof of anything. This section is, and always has been in every incarnation an unencyclopedic and unverifiable piece of heresay. Until a notable source is found that 'confirms' these issues, stop adding it back in. There is no definitive way to demonstrate based upon those threads if it's a minority of people with unrelated issues, or even if it's just the same person posting repeatedly under multiple aliases notwithstanding the widely agreed upon non-notability of public-posted commentry in forums. Wikipedia policy has repeatedly, consistently required a standard of proof higher than forum topics. Grand claims require grand proof, and this section will continue to be, quite correctly, removed until notable sources are found. -SteveG 84.12.100.241 17:58, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Validity of Issues Section 

message: A user keeps adding a weapons list to the article, Weapons lists are in violation of WP:NOT, and more specifically the Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games guidelines. I've removed it twice and told the user about a website where weapons lists are welcomed. If anyone thinks there should be one for some good reason just say so. --DanMP5  |  contribs 03:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weapons list 

message: Hi! It's an anon here. According to GamePolitics and the El Dario, mexican politicians will be seizing copies of GRAW2. I didn't add this in myself because I'm worried that with all the intricacies of good sources and stuff I'll mess the page up.
http://www.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.diario.com.mx%2Fsecciones%2Fseccion_a%2Fnota.asp%3Fnotaid%3D223ad2b765eebda22a19eaa80958ee1a&langpair=es%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8
I agree. Better to wait and see if it actually happens. 70.68.55.148 04:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confiscation in Mexico? 

message: Come on guys, I know it's not all of you, but can we please proofread before we edit the page? I've been making grammatical and spelling corrections to the G.R.A.W. 2 page almost daily. I just ask that you give your addition a good read through before you add it to the Wiki.
--Smashtennis 16:29, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proofread 

message: Why isn't there a boilerplate telling people this article is protected?  68.88.78.89 20:20, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No need anymore as that template was mainly used to categorize protected articles as such. Agathoclea 20:23, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Protection 

message: Can someone check the validity of the quote, "Son, I can't ask you to do this?" under the Plot section? The way that quote is worded just doesn't sound right. --Smashtennis 02:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quote 

message: I've removed the "Goofs" section in the article for the reason that the so called "goof" can be explained logically. The "US ARMY" printed on the side of the stryker most likely mean that the stryker is, in fact, from the US ARMY. The pilot is Mexican, that doesn't mean he isn't a US army soldier. --Smashtennis 16:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of "Goofs" Section 

message: Need to be more richful and explain better the end of the game.
To see it: 
Also it will be good puting more links —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.227.34.178 (talk) 01:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that how it is now is just fine, especially for those who haven't played the game (or have not yet finished it). Although...I don't know if it's been changed since you posted this (I recently "discovered" Wikipedia...) Venku Tur'Mukan (talk) 22:26, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  HEY! the Plot part... 

message: About the ending, btw, I wrote most of the ending, anyway, to the point, about that bit with Parker off-screen, I watched the ending on youtube, I lent my copy of GRAW 2 to a friend, and I didn't see anything about Parker's supposed off-screen thing. However, Lt. Rosen says part of the Parker's supposed line. for this reason, I'm going to change that, and also, just a line here. If anyone has played GRAW from beginning to end, they will notice that Lt. Rosen is the Ghost Chief Training and Logistics officer and is played by a different character and looks considerably different, he is wearing a similiar helmet to Bud's, and never takes it off.
Lawnmowers Rock! 06:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ending 

message: 1. While there is not a section for the article on this. On the Xbox 360 Online Multiplayer, it is widely known and ackknwledged by Red Storm Entertainment that there is a wide spread glitch that will prevent players from hearing other players while playing online. 
2. There is no section that gives information on the exclusive Campaign weapon(FAMAS) or the GRAW1 Map Nowhere that is available to download if you own an Ubisoft.com account. The Exlusive Weapon can be unlocked for the Quick Mission mode if you enter to profile name, GRAW2QUICKFAMAS. 
3. If you have a save/achievement of either Splinter Cell Double Agent or RainbowSix Vegas you will unlock 2 headgear options for each game for a total of 4 unlockable headgear. 
4. While I have no hard evidence other than the hope that people might believe me(which I doubt will happen). There is going to be a future Download Content Package release in the near future. It will contain maps from Xbox version Ghost Recon 2, Ghost Recon 2: Summit Strike, and the Xbox 360 version of Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 1. I obtained this information from Christian "Serellan" Allen, the Creative Director for the MP Portion of GRAW2. A newsletter will be going out soon via e-mail to all who subscribe the the Ubisoft.com newsletter. 
While I doubt I will be able to add 4 do to lack of "hard" proof. I believe both 1, 2, and 3 deserve to be mentioned in the article. If I get a few approvals I will make the necessary changes along with a few other revisions soon.
Semaj7, April 16th, 2007. 4:33 PM EST Time
Answers
# There is already some rejection to a "Issues" section, so I would not put this in the article.
# Maybe a brief mention in the Gameplay section (no codes though).
# Also a brief mention in the Gameplay section.
# No mention
Semper Fi, Carry on DanMP5  |  contribs 01:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mind If I Add The Following 

message: In the 360 version, when Mitchell and his team are pinned down while awaiting extraction by Humvee, in the level after that where the Humvee blows up, what happens to Mitchell's team in between? Lawnmowers Rock! 08:54, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But if there's a medevac on the way, why wouldn't Mitchell just wait there with his team and extract with them on the same bird? Spartan198 (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ghost Team in Mercenary Level 

message: Made some modifications to the Plot part, and I see that still the article seems incomplete.
Correct me if I wrote something wrong. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.227.34.178 (talk) 01:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I have.... 

message: Colonel Jimenez and General Martin aren't really that important to the game, so I will be removing they're images from the character section, anyone mind if I do?-- DanMP5  Semper Fi, Carry on 20:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character pictures 

message: Okay, when you reach the level Codename Farallon the first building you see in the game is the Plaza Hotel. The Cylinder shaped building next to it (El Paso Civic Center), is not there. (It is a block away from it). There are NO dams in El Paso at all (the FICTIONAL Caballo Butte Dam [a mixture of Elephant Butte Dam {T or C, New Mexico} and Caballo Dam {under develoment}]). Also there are no U.R.G.P in El Paso. There is the El Paso Museum of Art, but is a couple of blocks away from the Plaza Hotel and the Civic Center. Also it is missing some buildings (Wells Fargo Building, Chase Bank Building, County Court House [Distance], County Jail [Next to court house bus was never shown], O. T. Bassett Tower ect). There is, however a large canal (Franklin Canal) near the Rio Grande. Yes, there are alligator statues, and a alligator fountain in El Paso, but they are not scattered. Yes all of the streets NAMES are real. All of the signs in El Paso are green, not blue. El Paso dosen't have THAT many buildings. ect. 
Mannyjr95 16:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goofs in El Paso 

message: Well I think since the Humvee Driver got a bit of a Bio, I might as well give the man wh saved Mitchell afterwards some credit too. Lawnmowers Rock! 12:47, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding a bit more about Cpl. Ramon Vega 

message: Who said Mitchell isn't coming back? Can someone please provide a link to a trusted site about this matter. Lawnmowers Rock! 08:11, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scott Mitchell's last appearance? 

message: The PC game box for GRAW2 says "PC Exclusive" on it (at least at Best Buy stores). Clearly, it's available on other platforms. It didn't say "PC Exclusive Bonus _____ Inside!" or anything like that and it was just in a circle on the front without any follow-up information. Could someone clarify this? Just what is the PC Exclusive? I know that GRAW1 had significant gameplay differences in the PC version, so, while theses were nothing worth calling the game itself an "exclusive," could it be similar differences that this label refers to?
72.15.73.29 22:01, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In short, yes. The version itself is "exclusive" to the PC, as the map layouts are completely different, the camera is in first person only, and the plot is majorly overhauled. It'ts a very weird way of describing it, but you are right: it's very similar to how they treated the first game. I hope this helps. 85.66.43.191 (talk) 10:52, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  PC Exclusive? 

message: I was sure that the game he played in the movie was GRAW, and for some odd reason, he was playing a single-player map online, how this is possible, I do not know. I know it was GRAW 1 for sure, Scott Mitchell was wearing his Crye Precision Camouflage, which he only wore in GRAW, and he was playing a night map, I think the one where you laser-designate the Power Supply.
Lawnmowers Rock! 01:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disturbia 

message: Under platforms it says Wii, Why?Rlk89 23:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, looks like it doesn't anymore. Thanks to whoever changed it. Venku Tur'Mukan (talk) 22:16, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Wii

message: :Image:Supportelements.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:39, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Supportelements.jpg

message: Release date in Japan is November 8th, 2007 for this game, but I don't know how to change the code. Would someone mind changing that? --Bakarocket 15:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Was it changed? For what system? Ominae (talk) 03:32, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It changed for the PS3 for sure. I'm not sure about the other platforms. --Bakarocket (talk) 14:08, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Japanese Release Date

message: Have made some changes to the plot as parts were not true, don't expect a reply, I won't be visting again.JTS.L 3:03 19 October 2007  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.212.111.103 (talk) 07:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Story Changes 

message: Hello all. This is my first edit in Wikipedia. This new gameplay information is based on my experiances with the game and developer interviews found on the GRIN website.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by =FTK=jonathan.li (talk • contribs) 20:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: PC game play

message: IT says in the article that 48 hours of the story take place what it should say is two days.Also it says that the second game take place two days alfter which is not true because it says that the year in the second is 2014. What i think is that it would of have to be in decamber because it could have been New years two day alfter the frist game.-- sponge6  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sponge6 (talk • contribs) 02:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  editing 

message: I believe somewhere during Campaign, the General guy makes a reference to Third Eschelon.
:You're probably right. Most Tom Clancy games are tied in with one another at some point. The up and coming Tom Clancy's End War will features characters and plot elements from all 3 Clancy games...JOK3R (talk) 14:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third Eschelon reference 

message: Any glitches noticed throughout the campain in both games games should be listed here. Please delete this comment after the first glitch reference is posted. Spartanaj97 (talk) 18:14, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glitches 

message: we still love ghost recon 2 but we still would like the 3rd part.  And yes third person view. Question, everyone who plsys ghost recon 2 have the option to play first view but chooses not to. call of duty 4 yes its nice I admit to but its still first person view. Do the same for ghost recon 2 but with the option of third view and you'l have some thousand of players loving that.  I myself luv 3rd view, we the players and the multiplayers that play online agree. Here's still hopeing for the 3rd part.  For now I'm a true Ghoxt Recon 2 player.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.91.102 (talk) 20:19, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ghost recon 3 

message: I know for a fact that Tom Salta produced the main theme song for GRAW 1 and GRAW 2 along with many other songs. Yet I fail to notice he is not mentioned at all in neither of the articles! I feel as that he should be included or at least mentioned. Here's the link to his website as a reference.   Also, you can check his article on Wikipedia too, along with other links listed , like his website, as a reference. I'll will also add this soon to the main article. --LCoolo (talk) 02:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tom Salta 

message: Now granted my PC copy was bought in 2007 in Australia, but there are some MAJOR changes in the plot and gameplay between my game and what's described in this article. If any contributer/editor who has played/finished both versions is reading this, your input is desired.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.73.41 (talk) 12:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Xbox version the subject of the article? 

message: I think it's time we had a page on scott mitchell given his appearance over multiple games. after all people in other video games over much shorter storylines have pages to them or maybe atleast a page on charecters in Tom clancy's universe with sections for Ghosr recon/ HAWX, splinter cell etc. any idea? Tca achintya (talk) 21:28, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article on Scott?? 

message: Made a new section labeled "Crosscom 2.0"
I largely copy-pasted the features of it from the Xbox 360/PS3/PC gameplay description paragraphs. I also reworded a sentence or two.
This was done as I wanted to show the 'features' of Crosscom 2.0 (a large component of the gameplay), and I didn't know how else to effectively show it; it was described in the PC section of gameplay but this made it sound as if it was all exclusive to the PC version of the game, which it is not. Dragon239 (talk) 00:04, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crosscom 2.0