nordlead said: Metroid got the plot stuck in a corner? Who knew? I always figured some metroid needed to be killed, and then Ridley came out of nowhere Sort of like how Gannon always manages to come back. I know there is a huge story in all 3 prime games (if you bother to read everything) but I couldn't care less if the next game forces the story to take a few creative turns.

Samus' fusion with Metroid DNA (hence Metroid Fusion) seems kinda permanent, and then there's the problem of her being an outlaw in any post-Fusion story they would care to tell.

Certainly, they could work around these problems, or potentially work with them, but i think that's the reason why it's been 8 years since Metroid Fusion, with no sign of them thinking about making a game that occurs chronologically later. Other M will supposedly bridge the gap with Super and Fusion, but that's still not making the next leap.

And it's foolish for us to presume that the game will focus on character development at the expense of gameplay, just because the hype leading in to it has focused on character development rather than gameplay. We need to get a clearer vision of it before we worry about Sakamoto destroying the franchise.

I have to confess I am not sure what game you are refering to here.  If it is other M, then reread my post as to why he (and I) are leary of the game (it is because all they are talking about is the story: Samus and her motherly instincts, blah blah blah. Why has there been no talk of the gameplay?).

If you are talking about Fusion, then the story ruined the experience of the game.  Metroid games have been about shooting aliens in an open world.  Fusion was very linear (for a Metroid game) and infused a story that was not needed (seriously, who cared about Adam and his relationship to Samus in the past).  The story ruined the Metroid experience.  

Please don't misunderstand me, I am not saying that Fusion was a bad game (I enjoyed it), but it was a bad Metroid game (it, along with Zero Mission, are the only Metroid games I have not played through more than once).  Also, I am not saying that Other M will be a bad game, I am concerned at the direction this game appears to be heading.  I could be wrong about Other M, and it might turn out to be the greatest Metroid game ever-- we will not know until it releases.  However, I am not optomistic. 

We know nothing about the game -- Malstrom even stated the same. Both sides are getting ahead of themselves. He overreacts to anything that comes off as "gamer god", as evident by his constant ranting and accusations against Miyamoto.

I haven't played Metroid Fusion, but

"Oh Samus...." "Oh Adam...."

WTF is that??!!!

I'm with Malstrom on this one, I don't play Metroid games for the story, but the exploration, gameplay and great music. Now that I know about the story in Fusion I understand he's worried, now I'm too.

Super Metroid

Actually, he didn't pick on Super Metroid all that much.  He mentioned the fact that it appears Metroids grew rather than evolved in Super almost in passing (whereas they appear to 'evolve' in the other games).  The message board members, in my opinion, blew that part way out of proportion.  What he talked about the most in regards to Super Metroid was when Sakamoto stated that the player felt Samus's motherly instinct when the baby metroid saved Samus (I don't know if Super has a plot hole or not-- I don't really care about that, but Malstrom is dead right that most people weren't thinking, 'Wow, Samus must be maternal' when that happened).

I get from your reply that you have not actually read Malstrom's post.  You should, even if you don't agree with him, he brings up some good points and explains why many are having reservations about the game.

No, I didn't read it.  I learned some time ago that he lets his opinion on specific games influence his writing far, far too much.  I picked apart his argument in a piece he called something like 'Mario and his Content'.  He responded by talking around my points instead of addressing them and using factually incorrect data to back himself up.  I think it would probably be a waste of my time to read his biased and wordy opinion piece on this matter.

I think he is great when it comes to the business side of things though.  That's the stuff of his that I read.

I don't get this. Isn't this kind of backwards, purist logic exactly what Nintendo has stood against these last years? Iwata has been talking about filling the gaps in Nintendo's oeuvre for some time now - this new game is likely to be one step in that process. Don't go begging the question by asuming the game will be worse or less appealing because it is headed in an ostensibly different direction - especially since the series was never that popular to begin with.

Also, that is the most ludicrous statement about game art I have ever heard. That's like saying one of the chief aims of an art film is to present the audience with a muddled picture (I know there are films that do this - the point is that they are exceptions). Hell, Metroid Prime is perhaps the most artistic of any Metroid game, and it plays and flows better than Super Metroid, to boot. Great atmosphere, level design, and delivery is what makes for both of the games' immersiveness, and those are the things that - at least I - value the most.

'Cinematic gaming', I think, is the term that you are looking for, and it is something else entirely. Granted, it appears to be the kind of experience Sakamoto is aiming for with Other M, and I admit am worried (for many reasons), but I won't judge the game before it is even out. Perhaps it will pull it off well, as a few games have, or it might be a good game otherwise.

So... I have to post here.

I am not an active VGChartz poster, but I constantly show up to check on sales. But, when browsing the board I most actively participate in, the Metroid Database (or MDb for short), which I am top poster at, this called my attention.

Seriously, don't believe Sean Malstrom. If you just read his blog post (found here), you'll see he doesn't really know his Metroid stuff.

Observe:

"And then I thought, “Whoever made this game screwed up. Metroids do not grow ‘big’. They ‘evolve’ like they did on SR-388 in Metroid II.” Since Sakamoto wasn’t part of Metroid II, I thought Super Metroid was having a ret-con but then the Omega Metroid shows up at the end of Metroid Fusion.

Super Metroid shows how poor a story teller Sakamoto is, not the opposite. Already in Super Metroid, there were contradictions which was hard to make due to how limited the story is."

Anyone who has played the games and understood them know that the Metroid in Super Metroid is big instead of Omega because the conditions and evolution process were different. They 'evolve' in SR-388 (it happened in Fusion because the BSL was made to replicate the SR-388 environment), but not in Zebes.

I don't really believe there's a possibilty of Other M turning out bad. Metroid never got a bad game (yes, I do remember Hunters; it wasn't as good as other Metroids, but still good enough), so I doubt it would happen now.

And how the devil are you gonna say you love or hate an entire game based on a two-minute trailer? Seriously, tell me.

I'll be checking this thread from time to time, but anyone who's in the mood to discuss this, join us at www.metroid-database.com/forum ! We might get nerdy at times, but, as long as you're not completely retarded, a spammer or a troll, you'll be fine.

I'm with Naner on this one.