Surprise! Japanese Paper Removes Quote About MGS4 on 360

[DoctorFinger]

You may have heard the story (http://www.colonyofgamers.com/cogforums/showthread.php?t=1148). A Japanese news paper printed a quote from a purported Konami executive saying this: We're actively looking into a release [of Metal Gear Solid 4] for the Xbox 360.Well it turns out that may not have happened exactly as reported by Kabushiki. In fact they've gone so far as to remove and replace the entire article, without a correction notice or even changing the publication date. This is pretty clear evidence that the quote was not said by the person attributed to.

Now can we put an end to the 'OMG MGS4 on 360' rumors for a little while? I'm not saying that MGS4 won't be coming to the 360. Just that until we see an official announcement from both Konami and Microsoft you should be wary of any news otherwise.

Source - Gamercyte (http://www.gamecyte.com/japanese-newspaper-retracts-mgs4-on-360-quote); Joystiq (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/10/16/japanese-business-journal-removes-mgs4-on-xbox-360-quote/).

[agentgray]

http://bbq.isgoodfor.us/wp-content/FlyingPigs.jpg

Give it time people.

[Young Al Capone]

Based on the way exclusivity has been working these past few years, I really wouldn't be surprised if it eventually happens.

However, these Kabushiki guys just destoyed any credibility they had in the global gaming community. However, based on kotaku's continued popularity, this really might only help to make them more popular.

[Telefrog]

In fact they've gone so far as to remove and replace the entire article, without a correction notice or even changing the publication date. This is pretty clear evidence that the quote was not said by the person attributed to.

Isn't that jumping the gun? Look, I don't hold any truth to these rumors either, but removing a story isn't "clear evidence" that the story isn't true. It especially isn't evidence of anything since the journal didn't give an explanation.

[DoctorFinger]

Isn't that jumping the gun? Look, I don't hold any truth to these rumors either, but removing a story isn't "clear evidence" that the story isn't true. It especially isn't evidence of anything since the journal didn't give an explanation.I think the newspaper throwing the story down the memory hole without any explanation is a pretty good barometer of it's worth. Some part of the story was so flawed that they couldn't just issue a correction, but instead had to replace it (the same URL and headline, but a completely rewritten story).

[Rune_74]

Desperately searching for a reason it will remain exclusive? Why does it matter if it doesn't....probably the only way I will play it is if it is released for the 360.

Their loss if they don't.

[Telefrog]

I think the newspaper throwing the story down the memory hole without any explanation is a pretty good barometer of it's worth. Some part of the story was so flawed that they couldn't just issue a correction, but instead had to replace it (the same URL and headline, but a completely rewritten story).

I agree that tossing the story is a good barometer of it's worth. Unfortunately, we have no idea if that worth is positive or negative without an explanation. It could be that the story was tossed because it was an outrageous lie or misrepresentation. It could also be completely true but one or more of the involved parties squawked and got it pulled. It has happened before.

As I said, I don't honestly believe that the rumor is true, but removal of a story with no official word indicates nothing other than the editor of the journal had a problem with the article. It could be validation or not.

[J3DI]

Ahem, if I may.

Gin rummy: I always say the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.
Riley: What?
Gin: Simply because you don't have evidence that something does exist does not mean you have evidence of something that doesn't exist.
Riley: What?
Gin: What country are you from?
Riley: What?
Gin Rummy: 'What' ain't no country I ever heard of! They speak English in 'What'?
Riley: What?
Gin: English, motherF$*#, do you speak it?
Riley: Yeah
Gin: So you understand the words I'm saying to you!?
Riley: yeah
Gin: Well, what I'm sayin' is that there are known knowns and that there are known unknowns. But there are also unknown unknowns; things we don't know that we don't known.
Riley: What?
Gin: Say what again! Say what again! I dare you! I double dare you, motherF$%#@! Say what one more time!

DocFinger, don't be Riley. I'd hate to have to F' you up!