I would dearly like to see the two of you lock horns further, given that you fall so radically on different ends of the spectrum (too radically in both cases, i would argue. One sees deeper than most care about, and the other rejects characterization too vehemently)

Continue. Duel for my amusement!

;)

Mechanically I think the game would work well in the hands of Team Ninja, though design decisions (and art, and music, and story, etc.) should be handled by Retro Studios.

Did Miyamoto supervise the first Metroid Prime? I would want him attached, if so.

Wait a second, didn't I just say that I agreed.....?

Yeah, he did, he decided it would be an FPS among other things.

See, there you go.

I just want the composer and artists from the Metroid Prime series to work with Team Ninja, and for there to be only a very simple plot. Characterization should be silent.

Boss battles should be awesome.

That is all I need in my Metroid games.

See, i don't mind the heavier story. What bugged me about Other M was that they dropped all pretense of freedom (even though the game was only slightly more linear than such classics as Prime and Super, who were almost as linear, but did a better job of hiding it). Locked doors that would be opened by plot convenience, authorization, etc. In terms of mechanics, they are the same as other games (doors are openable when the developers wanted you to be able to open them. You recieve new abilities only as the developers approve)

It's a matter of perception, but it's important. It should feel like you're doing these things because of your own efforts.

So i don't care what level of plot development they choose to go for (so long as Treehouse gets more creative freedom in translating and Sakamoto hires a professional writer), as long as the *pretense* of freedom is restored.

The pretense of freedom is really what it's all about. A door being unlocked just because is not nearly as nice as a door which can't be unlocked until you have a gun that shoots the right kind of ammo.

I still hold that Samus is more effective (and more engaging) as a silent protagonist, however.

@Demotruk: What does 'value' have to do with authority? The market can reject a game, yes, but that has nothing to do with Nintendo's authority over its contents. Nintendo can chose to pander to the masses, but they do not have to, nor should they, necessarily. It is a red herring to pretend that authorial intent is (or should be) a product of corporate interests, or vice versa.

As to your second point, I'm a bit lost, actually. My point was that the early Metroid games had some amount of characterization, and that it was meaningful.

This rebutal of yours... Yes? That's one way of approaching the issue (though I think your example is rather poor - Frodo is purposly distanced from the reader at the end of the story). A valid one, but by no means the only one; Lolita being a particularly famous example of a work with a distinctly un-relatable protagonist.

If you didn't mind this particular narrative, no harm done, to you. However, imagine yourself in the position of a player who *likes* the gameplay, premise, setting etc. etc. but finds the story grating.

In that position would you agree that 1) the fact that you can't skip ten minute or longer cutscenes is a nuisance and a waste of your time and 2) that if you did skip them you *may* be bothered by the fact that you now lack context for what is happening/who you are fighting etc.

To the first paragraph: I believe what Demotruk is saying (and he will forgive me if I am wrong) is that Nintendo deviates from the values of its buyers at its own peril. There is no inherent qualitative judgment here, just a statement that if the market rejects Sakamoto's vision of Metroid, then the franchise will begin to suffer.