oh she'd still kick his ass. Just because she freaks out over Ridley doesn't mean she can't beat the hell out of Master Chief.

I'm putting your post in another thread, as it works readlly well to address the apparent sexism.

Hm, 3 I think. I think I understand what you are trying to say here.

One thing boogles me about the encounter in Other M though. Does Ridley showing up come as a complete surprise to her? Going by her reaction you'd think it did, but that doesn't make any sense to me. Before the fight there are enough signs of Ridley for Samus (who really dislikes Ridley) to become suspicious. Unless her psyche goes into defensive mode and Samus goes into a denial state.

Now if she is in denial wouldn't Ridley suddenly popping out in front of her have an even bigger impact on her mind?

I would still stand by my assertion that that particular scene was a bit over-the-top in terms of portraying her breakdown, but the sentiment behind it is perfectly acceptable.

And it certainly isn't sexist. It only comes through a cultural disconnect, but given all the anime i've watched, there is no gender limit on such emotional breakdowns.

Monkey D. Luffy from One Piece, for instance, has a series of several of them recently in the anime and manga, starting with his total breakdown when Kuma apparently disintegrated his entire crew, secondly when his brother had a hole punched through his chest while trying to protect him, and third when he remembered that particular death (his brother dying because he was too weak)

I would debate portrayal, especially their need to cram a bit of Zero Suit in there, but i do not find it the character-slaughtering tragedy that some think (like the Malstromites who think that the series is now legally dead, and will need a reboot if it ever wants to show its face again)

It shows us that she's human too, and has her moments of weakness. The Luffy paralell is important, because Luffy was always happy-go-lucky first and badass second (think Goku), but when the tables turn entirely on him as well, he is not so unlike the rest of us.

Chronologically before Other M, I've done anywhere between 2 and 6, depending on if you think Primes are canon and if Mecha Ridley from Zero Mission counts. That's the thing that bugs me about this: why have it happen now? Did she not assume Ridley to be dead after her first encounter with him? Was she not surprised by te looming shadow of Meta Ridley? When Meta Ridley was blasted by Chozo Statues (!) did she not think he was dead? If she did, why did she react to him in Corruption the way she did (by goign Gandalf vs. Balrog on him and then shooting him in the mouth)? She had every reason to think he was dead after Corruptioin - when he grabbed her in Super she shot him in the mouth with a barrage of missiles.

Why does her trauma come up now? Why now, of all times, when every other time he comes back from death she responds with more and more pronounced violence? And did the same in Fusion, no less?

But yes, in Other M she's completely shocked by Ridley showing up. I can only assume that this is because she is functionally dumb for not recognizing that lizard thing.

If she had been in denial, se would have mentioned it in monologue. She didn't see it coming at all.

It's not about sexism. It's about it being a bad characterization.

I would say its more about retconning than bad characterization, probably given that this is the first game that really brings in her past outside of the games (i.e., the manga), and shoehorning such things in created these problems

You realize Prime may no longer be canon, right?

Best game in the series

Never happened

Wouldn't Prime have happened way after Other M? I thought the Prime series was later...

Anyways, all of the "bad" characterization you guys are talking about is due to the fact that this is the FIRST time sakamoto has had the chance to portray this side of Samus. He felt the need to include all that he did because it was the first time he was ever able to. He wanted to express to us this side of her, her fear of Ridley. Whether it was a good idea or bad depends on the individual player. It seems like most people I've seen here on VGC who've played it, love the game and find nothing wrong with it. It's fine if you dislike her characterization in this game. It is.

And thank you Khuutra for being the first of the "it's bad" side to say that it's bad characterization, not sexism. Thank you.

Yeah, sexism isn't about this kind of thing. it's fine to like this characterization - I wouldn't hold it against anyone - but it seems to me inconsistent with what I know of the character. It feels like Sakamoto shoehorned in his ideas abotu the character (the process you described is kind of like that) and it was not organic or properly engaging in the context of Metroid.

I do agree completely with that. The vision of Samus that most gamers have been building up over the years is in stark contrast to the vision sakamoto had. So when he has the chance to fully unveil his Samus, many gamers are left thinking "what happened to MY samus..?"

This is why Link should never have a voice. =P I do prefer characters being extensions of my own self. For some reason I enjoy Other M and I'm fine with it, but I would never allow the same thing to be done to Link. I'm weird like that!