Has Nintendo written Metroid into a corner?

[nintendo_fanboy]

Many people are saying in this thread that Nintendo doesn't care much about stories and timelines. This is true, but it can't be said about the Metroid series. The reason why Nintendo usually doesn't care about these things is because Shigeru Myiamoto doesn't start a game with the story, but with other things, and he doesn't think it is very important.

Now for Metroid, Shigeru has never been as important as for series like Mario, Zelda or Donkey Kong. Metroid was never made by EAD, but by R&D and other studios. So I think the people responsible for the Metroid series are actually caring about stories. Just the fact that there is a clear timeline and that they already stated where Other M takes place in this timeline should make clear that story and timeline is important for Metroid.

Now I have never played Fusion (I'd like to, but I don't know where to get it...) but from what I read in the OP, I don't think that it is too difficult to continue the story. I mean, how many games or movies have started with the main character being an outlaw? There's a gazillion of possibilities with such a start, like having the federation chasing Samus, but she finds out about some conspiracy and is finally able to show the federation she is one of the good guys.

I think after Other M, the story will be quite complete. There are no holes in the story inbetween Metroid 2 and Super Metroid, and the hole following after Super Metroid will be filled by Other M, while the hole after the original is already filled by the Prime subseries.

Anyway, where a game is placed in the timeline doesn't harm or help its relevance in any way if you ask me, so while it is very funny to have debates about such aspects, it is only fanboyish talk and not relevant to the reception of the game.