Metroid: Other M is sexist, inspires even more horribly sexist comments.

Electron Blue wrote:

Not using their best because someone tells them no to feels arbitrarily limiting to the player and takes them out of the experience.

Aaaaaaaaactually the reason why Adam wants Samus working at limited fire power is given right at the beginning, with him not wanting any of his troops to use an unnecessary force that might damage the station which they are there to secure. That and no power bombs because it would have the effect of nuking any trooper nearby even if he was one or 2 walls away and with no radios bar Samus's she could give no duck and cover warnings.

It doesn't explain no grapple beam or varia suit, but a reason was attempted, if poorly.

Somath Cegem wrote:

Electron Blue wrote:

Not using their best because someone tells them no to feels arbitrarily limiting to the player and takes them out of the experience.

Aaaaaaaaactually the reason why Adam wants Samus working at limited fire power is given right at the beginning, with him not wanting any of his troops to use an unnecessary force that might damage the station which they are there to secure. That and no power bombs because it would have the effect of nuking any trooper nearby even if he was one or 2 walls away and with no radios bar Samus's she could give no duck and cover warnings.

It doesn't explain no grapple beam or varia suit, but a reason was attempted, if poorly.

Yeah, that much I could understand. The long-winded blah de blah about thumbs-down at briefings and other stuff, not so much.

gaijinguy wrote:

Link gets whatever the fuck disaster, and so on and so forth.

It is usually a different Link. Only a couple of Zelda games are straight sequels. Avoiding straight sequels is a pretty popular way to get around this issue, actually.

Wolf wrote:

You have a character who is, by context, portrayed as strong and determined,

Wolf wrote:

I write that the personality Samus displays in Other M seems incongruous with everything we're shown previously.

Wolf wrote:

We have a character whose personality was left largely to the interpretation of the audience. Details concerning her attitude and likely reactions to the events in her past (briefly mentioned in any canonical material, if at all) are left up to the audience to determine by context.

Wolf wrote:

You accuse me of saying that her having a personality at all is a bad thing.

In Other M we have a character who is, by personality, portrayed as strong and determined, because at this point in her life, anyone else would start contemplating suicide. You're whining about it not beating you over the head with it. It's called subtlety, and implicit strength.

Wolf wrote:

I'm just pointing out that, except for at the end, none of the games except Other M really try to make Samus's gender a major point. The idea that gender really doesn't matter when it comes to getting something accomplished was something I thought was a positive message, but thanks for missing my point.

In fact, they aren't making it a point at all. To actually show that gender doesn't matter, you need a person, with a personality. Otherwise, it has the same idea about gender as Cool Spot, or any other game that makes sure that its protagonist's gender is in question. Good thing I'm not your reader, that would suck, but thanks for trying.

Wolf wrote:

She has destroyed Ridley on four previous occasions, and he comes back every time. If anything, as a skilled and competent warrior, I would expect her to be the least surprised out of everybody to see him come back yet again, when he has already demonstrated his capability to do so. Who better than Samus knows how resilient he is?

Ridley and Samus are not Bowser and Mario. He is not Team Rocket. How hard it is to understand that a walking trauma reminder that keeps hounding you is not a good thing for your mental state? It's called a Deconstruction of a recurring villain.

Wolf wrote:

I'm sorry my interpretation differs from yours.

Uh, nope. You do not get to play the 'It's my interpretation vs. yours, therefore valid' card. It's canon vs. your crying about the canon.

Wolf wrote:

Please tell me all about the people close to her who died in Metroid, Metroid II, Metroid Prime, Metroid Prime 2 Metroid Prime 3 (and tell me how she was close to the other hunters, and not merely professionally cordial) and Metroid Fusion.

Video game purists need not apply; or speak up.

Wolf wrote:

Except they allow her to participate, and it seems clear that most of them are glad to have her. And while it makes sense to disable some of the tools at her disposal (power bombs, for instance), reducing her to her most basic functionality seems like a ridiculous maneuver that hampers her efficiency and her ability to accomplish the goals Adam sets for her.

The key word being 'most', the guy who calls the shots is Samus' father figure. A disappointed father figure. Some bitterness is probably involved.

Wolf wrote:

Except they don't tell her to leave. They allow her to participate. Does that not make her part of the mission by default, if not by whatever initial plan they had?

No, Adam allows her to participate, Samus' mission is now to prove herself to Adam. Only when she thinks that shit has hit the fan that she stops joking around and activates power ups on her own.

Wolf wrote:

Psy-4 wrote:

She has just quit on Adam to become a bounty hunter, and immediately meets him again? Holy shit, is that ever awkward.

Because the actual story of Other M, placed as it is in the timeline, isn't?

What, you never parted with another person(on good or bad terms) only to meet them again five seconds later, realize that you are both going to the same place, and are taking the only path there? You don't socialize much, do you?

Wolf wrote:

Forgive me for finding a little fault with the story and presentation of a game that attempts to expand on the personality of a battle-hardened warrior by revealing her to be panicky and insecure.

Wolf wrote:

three-minute freakout is not the way to go

Wolf wrote:

Close-up on Samus's upper face inside the helmet; wide-eyed anger, sweat;

Wolf wrote:

However, there are certain characteristics that she can be assumed to have after all the things she's done in the series. As mentioned above, confidence, competence and determination are a large part of it.

Wolf wrote:

Samus is a loner

Wolf wrote:

I don't take issue with the idea of Samus being vulnerable. In fact, a measure of vulnerability is necessary if Nintendo is going to sell her as a truly rounded character.

Wolf wrote:

The problem with Other M isn't that it attempts to add depth to Samus Aran's character, though. The problem is that it goes about it in such a ridiculous way.

Wolf wrote:

with the melodrama toned down, this would have been a fair-to-middling "origin" story for a character who is learning to find the confidence and sheer force of will to overcome many more challenges.

Dohoho, look at you, dancing around it. Oh, I don't mind that they want to make her three-dimensional, they're just doing it wrong. I don't mind depth, but it undermines everything about the character!

Do you even understand what a 'depth' is, you ridiculous simpleton? Yes, adding depth means that what you know about the character is a facade, a lie the character fabricated. You pay lip service to Samus being vulnerable and then talk how she should be a cliche action hero. You say you're 'okay' with her having depth and then complain about her being shown to be more than she seems.

Oh, she's a battle-hardened warrior and those don't have actual feelings. Or, at least, they are never melodramatic abou
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Just admit you're a prick incapable of sympathy and go back to playing to whatever shitty game you play, starring cliche two-dimensional action hero/ine.

JESUS WOLF YOU INSENSITIVE FUCK

NOT FELLATING THIS GAME MEANS YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT OUR TROOPS

ETA: GOD DAMN THAT POST GOD DAMN

BRB HAVING TESTERICAL MELTDOWN OVER MY PRECIOUS PRECIOUS VIDEOGAMES

HOW DARE ANYONE IMPUGN THEM AND THEIR FANTASTIC COMPLEXITIES

Somath Cegem wrote:

Electron Blue wrote:

Not using their best because someone tells them no to feels arbitrarily limiting to the player and takes them out of the experience.

Aaaaaaaaactually the reason why Adam wants Samus working at limited fire power is given right at the beginning, with him not wanting any of his troops to use an unnecessary force that might damage the station which they are there to secure. That and no power bombs because it would have the effect of nuking any trooper nearby even if he was one or 2 walls away and with no radios bar Samus's she could give no duck and cover warnings.

It doesn't explain no grapple beam or varia suit, but a reason was attempted, if poorly.

Except the player is likely to not give a shit about what Adam says. The player feels they are being restricted, not the character. When the player character in a videogame does something that seems out-of-sync with what the player would do, it fucks up immersion.

Electron Blue wrote:

Except the player is likely to not give a shit about what Adam says.

Let me stop you right there, if they are not gonna listen to the plot of the game then why play? Hell the lions share of teh time samus is happy to just use her basic gear from the get go (only actually loosing missiles and bombs) everything else she's not using from square one, you can't really feel limited when you've had no real power taken from you.

Psy-4 wrote:

In Other M we have a character who is, by personality, portrayed as strong and determined, because at this point in her life, anyone else would start contemplating suicide. You're whining about it not beating you over the head with it. It's called subtlety, and implicit strength.

No, in Other M, you have a strong and determined character who is not acting strong and determined in a way that they should've acted a long time ago, and at this point they are well past the point where this would happen in a real human being.

You seem to be arguing that faced with great hardship, especially combat, sooner or later someone will be reduced to a gibbering wreck. The thing is, you're arguing with someone who is, well within reason, pointed out that if this is going to happen, it should've happened already. So, by the time it DOES happen (in other words, where Other M is placed in the Metroid timeline) it makes no sense.

Quote :

In fact, they aren't making it a point at all. To actually show that gender doesn't matter, you need a person, with a personality. Otherwise, it has the same idea about gender as Cool Spot, or any other game that makes sure that its protagonist's gender is in question. Good thing I'm not your reader, that would suck, but thanks for trying.

And in Other M, they harp on the point about Samus being a woman in a way that makes no sense given her history. I'm not talking about other games, I'm simply saying that she's supposed to be a respected warrior. But Other M seems to make her gender out to be a big deal.

Quote :

Ridley and Samus are not Bowser and Mario. He is not Team Rocket. How hard it is to understand that a walking trauma reminder that keeps hounding you is not a good thing for your mental state? It's called a Deconstruction of a recurring villain.

So suddenly it's okay to have a completely unrealistic, out-of-character character if it's a Deconstruction™?

Quote :

Video game purists need not apply; or speak up.

Make up your mind.

Quote :

No, Adam allows her to participate, Samus' mission is now to prove herself to Adam. Only when she thinks that shit has hit the fan that she stops joking around and activates power ups on her own.

This is horseshit, and you know it.

Quote :

Oh, she's a battle-hardened warrior and those don't have actual feelings. Or, at least, they are never melodramatic abou
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Just admit you're a prick incapable of sympathy and go back to playing to whatever shitty game you play, starring cliche two-dimensional action hero/ine.

That picture would bear some sort of relevance if:

A: The US Army didn't ban female soldiers from combat roles, and
B: The above character had anything in common with Samus. Good job spotting WOMAN IN UNIFORM and making a stereotype judgement, though.

Good job grabbing a picture of a random POG to try and make your point for you with the ignorant, too. All you've done is add a picture of a momma who misses her baby, nothing more.

I'm just glancing through this thread but hey

edit: and it seems Penguin got there before me

Psy-4 wrote:

Wolf wrote:

You have a character who is, by context, portrayed as strong and determined,

Wolf wrote:

I write that the personality Samus displays in Other M seems incongruous with everything we're shown previously.

Wolf wrote:

We have a character whose personality was left largely to the interpretation of the audience. Details concerning her attitude and likely reactions to the events in her past (briefly mentioned in any canonical material, if at all) are left up to the audience to determine by context.

Wolf wrote:

You accuse me of saying that her having a personality at all is a bad thing.

In Other M we have a character who is, by personality, portrayed as strong and determined, because at this point in her life, anyone else would start contemplating suicide.

What makes you so certain of this

do you have personal experience with this or something

Quote :

You're whining about it not beating you over the head with it. It's called subtlety, and implicit strength.

Wolf is "whining" because the characterisation of Samus [that you are largely misinterpretating] contrasts the characterisation the audience assumes of her based off of two decades worth of games in a demeaning manner.

Quote :

Wolf wrote:

I'm just pointing out that, except for at the end, none of the games except Other M really try to make Samus's gender a major point. The idea that gender really doesn't matter when it comes to getting something accomplished was something I thought was a positive message, but thanks for missing my point.

In fact, they aren't making it a point at all.

The writers are stereotyping it with the whole "THE BABY" bullshit and her breaking down in front of something she has defeated several times now. They make those stereotypes a major part of her character.

Quote :

Wolf wrote:

She has destroyed Ridley on four previous occasions, and he comes back every time. If anything, as a skilled and competent warrior, I would expect her to be the least surprised out of everybody to see him come back yet again, when he has already demonstrated his capability to do so. Who better than Samus knows how resilient he is?

Ridley and Samus are not Bowser and Mario. He is not Team Rocket. How hard it is to understand that a walking trauma reminder that keeps hounding you is not a good thing for your mental state? It's called a Deconstruction of a recurring villain.

If a strong-willed character encountered a "walking trauma reminder" a testament of his/her's strong will would be in how they react to it. Samus was originally portrayed as a mentally/physically strong protagonist, and in the original games there was no 3 minute long bullshit of her breaking down. Of course, you're going to argue that in earlier games like Super Metroid expanding on protagonists through cut-scenes never would have happened anyway. Plus she was silent up until then. However, they could have reaffirmed the original character she portrayed in earlier games and had her fight him, but no; instead, they changed that aspect of her to better fit in with earlier mentioned stereotypes.

Quote :

Oh, I don't mind that they want to make her three-dimensional, they're just doing it wrong in a degrading manner that conflicts with her original portrayal.

fixed

Quote :

you ridiculous simpleton

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

loolllll

Quote :

Yes, adding depth means that what you know about the character is a facade, a lie the character fabricated. You pay lip service to Samus being vulnerable and then talk how she should be a cliche action hero. You say you're 'okay' with her having depth and then complain about her being shown to be more than she seems.

Quote :

Oh, she's a battle-hardened warrior and those don't have actual feelings.

she never said that, though.

she's merely affronted with the idea of such stereotypical aspects of a character being fixed to Samus [I know I keep repeating myself, but I know how much you hate scrolling, Psy~]

Quote :

Or, at least, they are never melodramatic abou
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

i'm going to bed

gaijinguy wrote:

Raine wrote:

Oh, well that definitely makes sense from a tradition viewpoint then (better than what I thought before). Still, that excuse on not using the equipment is really weak.

Isn't the repower/depower pretty much inherent in these games? Shepard gets killed, Link gets whatever the fuck disaster, and so on and so forth.

well I'm not familiar with those two series too well [just like I'm not familiar with Metroid woop]

this game is basically the equivalent to the next LoZ game being set 4/5 years after Ocarina of Time, when Link is a teenager [I guess? I'm not getting into an argument so nobody fucking give a dense reply along the lines of "Link will be ____ in that particular timeline!" and just roll with my flawed analogy] and giving him a fully rounded character along the lines of "Well, he's a teenager! And they're all mopey and depressed! When he sees Ganon he thinks of all those who have died and everything he went through" and you get the picture. Maybe.

Somath Cegem wrote:

Electron Blue wrote:

Except the player is likely to not give a shit about what Adam says.

Let me stop you right there, if they are not gonna listen to the plot of the game then why play? Hell the lions share of teh time samus is happy to just use her basic gear from the get go (only actually loosing missiles and bombs) everything else she's not using from square one, you can't really feel limited when you've had no real power taken from you.

I'm saying here that the reason it rings false is not because the player doesn't care about the plot, but that they don't believe Adam i.e. Varia suit. It's the quality of the writing, not the mere facts, that will make a player accept these terms, and it's apparent the justification wasn't good enough.

Somath Cegem wrote:

Let me stop you right there, if they are not gonna listen to the plot of the game then why play? Hell the lions share of teh time samus is happy to just use her basic gear from the get go (only actually loosing missiles and bombs) everything else she's not using from square one, you can't really feel limited when you've had no real power taken from you.

Yeah, I'm not sure I get that either. Isn't it set in stone with Metroid that you have work for all your upgrades (finding them in random places)? Do the players want to godmode or the excuse is too flimsy? In the case of the latter, how were other games any less flimsy with their excuses to strip you of your gear? Station falls, you lose all your shit. You lose all your shit, because... fuck you. No gear for you, because we said so. The programmers were the ones denying them before (with no explanation given), this time it's Adam, maybe that's the point and now they have an avatar to actively hate?

Penguin wrote:

That picture would bear some sort of relevance if:

A: The US Army didn't ban female soldiers from combat roles, and
B: The above character had anything in common with Samus. Good job spotting WOMAN IN UNIFORM and making a stereotype judgement, though.

Good job grabbing a picture of a random POG to try and make your point for you with the ignorant, too. All you've done is add a picture of a momma who misses her baby, nothing more.

Well, fuck. Sorry.

Penguin wrote:

You seem to be arguing that faced with great hardship, especially combat, sooner or later someone will be reduced to a gibbering wreck. The thing is, you're arguing with someone who is, well within reason, pointed out that if this is going to happen, it should've happened already. So, by the time it DOES happen (in other words, where Other M is placed in the Metroid timeline) it makes no sense.

Alright, but wouldn't better stuff last longer?

Just Chipper wrote:

What makes you so certain of this

do you have personal experience with this or something

People killed themselves over less. Although, I'm not sure how many people had the misfortune to experience more.

Just Chipper wrote:

she's merely affronted with the idea of such stereotypical aspects of a character being fixed to Samus

And she wants other stereotypical aspects fixed to Samus instead? How is that better?

Penguin wrote:

And in Other M, they harp on the point about Samus being a woman in a way that makes no sense given her history. I'm not talking about other games, I'm simply saying that she's supposed to be a respected warrior. But Other M seems to make her gender out to be a big deal.

Well, hmm, I didn't really see her being disrespected because she's a woman in the present. Adam respects her and Anthony is a friend, the rest are kinda quiet. Maybe she was given shit when she was still a rookie, as in before she became a bounty hunter, I'm not sure.

Just Chipper wrote:

However, they could have reaffirmed the original character she portrayed in earlier games and had her fight him, but no; instead, they changed that aspect of her to better fit in with earlier mentioned stereotypes.

Just Chipper wrote:

The writers are stereotyping it with the whole "THE BABY" bullshit and her breaking down in front of something she has defeated several times now. They make those stereotypes a major part of her character.

Just Chipper wrote:

Wolf is "whining" because the characterisation of Samus [that you are largely misinterpreting] contrasts the characterisation the audience assumes of her based off of two decades worth of games in a demeaning manner.

Penguin wrote:

So suddenly it's okay to have a completely unrealistic, out-of-character character if it's a Deconstruction™?

I spent more time than I am willing to admit staring at these quotes. How do I argue against this?

Hmmm, nope.

I do not think of Samus any less because she was affectionate towards the metroid. I do not begrudge her freaking out over Ridley. I am not demanding that she be all badass all the the time. I did not find anything demeaning about her behavior. I do not think of Samus any less than I did before Other M. I won't make any demands regarding behavior from a twenty six year old tasked to be a protector of the galaxy.

Hmm, wonder why that is. Maybe I'm too sympathetic towards characters be they fictional or real. Hold on, there's something written on my elbow. "Authorized reseller of Freudian Excuses." well shit

Cyberwulf wrote:

JESUS WOLF YOU INSENSITIVE FUCK

NOT FELLATING THIS GAME MEANS YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT OUR TROOPS

OH LOOK A STRAW COLOSSUS

Psy-4 wrote:

You're whining about it not beating you over the head with it. It's called subtlety, and implicit strength.

No, I'm unhappy that what they are beating me over the head with is that the strength that Samus has demonstrated through her previous actions is suddenly absent. This sort of overt and obvious vulnerability would have made sense with a younger Samus, but she should be fairly hardened at this point. It makes no sense for all of her actions to be quick, decisive and confident at the beginning of her career, and for her to suddenly break down toward the end of her known period as a working bounty hunter (only for it to return to normal in what is chronologically the latest game, Metroid Fusion). I'm fine with introspection and development of Samus's character and her past; I'm probably in the minority for liking the elevator sequences in Fusion for that very reason. Finally, some light was shed on Samus's past! She hasn't lived in a vacuum all her life! This is, incidentally, a time when we get to hear Samus speak in her own words about her past, and what she tells us even in those brief segments seems, to me, at odds with the attitude that is shown in Other M. Fusion gives us the idea of a young woman who is proving herself, seeking respect from her superiors and trying to find her place in the world. Adam in this scenario is providing some of that respect, though with a certain distance. It's been a year or so since I played Fusion start to finish, but that's the impression I got from what the character herself told us about her life. Yet Other M chooses to reduce her to the typical spunky anime action girl, demanding respect instead of attempting to earn it, and defying everyone despite the latent irrationality in such defiance. Yet this is supposed to be depicting essentially the very same period of Samus's life as mentioned in Fusion. How does this not seem even a little bit contradictory to you?

Psy-4 wrote:

Wolf wrote:

I'm just pointing out that, except for at the end, none of the games except Other M really try to make Samus's gender a major point. The idea that gender really doesn't matter when it comes to getting something accomplished was something I thought was a positive message, but thanks for missing my point.

In fact, they aren't making it a point at all. To actually show that gender doesn't matter, you need a person, with a personality. Otherwise, it has the same idea about gender as Cool Spot, or any other game that makes sure that its protagonist's gender is in question. Good thing I'm not your reader, that would suck, but thanks for trying.

Still missing the point, I see. Ideally, one's gender shouldn't matter in the way that Samus's gender doesn't. In a society where genders are equal, no point would have to be made. And again, while I'm totally okay with the idea of Samus feeling compassion for, and even a familial (dare I even say maternal?) concern or affection for the Baby Metroid, Other M goes out of its way to point this connection out several times, harping on a very traditional and cliched idea of femininity in the process. Please explain to me how this is subtle.

Really, as far as subtlety goes, the entire rest of the Metroid series as a whole is more subtle than Other M. Other M is has all the grace and subtlety of an axe murder.

Psy-4 wrote:

Wolf wrote:

She has destroyed Ridley on four previous occasions, and he comes back every time. If anything, as a skilled and competent warrior, I would expect her to be the least surprised out of everybody to see him come back yet again, when he has already demonstrated his capability to do so. Who better than Samus knows how resilient he is?

Ridley and Samus are not Bowser and Mario. He is not Team Rocket. How hard it is to understand that a walking trauma reminder that keeps hounding you is not a good thing for your mental state? It's called a Deconstruction of a recurring villain.

It's funny that this "walking trauma reminder" bothers her this way only now, and never in earlier or later encounters.

Psy-4 wrote:

Uh, nope. You do not get to play the 'It's my interpretation vs. yours, therefore valid' card. It's canon vs. your crying about the canon.

Crying. Right. Behold the tears of sadness as my entire world is dashed apart.

I'm sorry that my making semi-long posts and attempting to reason out my points makes you think my world is coming to an end with Nintendo's revelation of Samus's "true character" or whatever. I'm merely stating my opinion of the story in Metroid: Other M, and explaining why I feel that way. If you're going to launch into a written tirade against me, I'm going to argue back. Anyway, I usually enjoy debating, and it's either do this or surf TV Tropes. Though considering that I'm arguing with you, TV Tropes is looking like a more and more attractive way to kill time. And more productive.

Psy-4 wrote:

Wolf wrote:

Psy-4 wrote:

Also, Samus is most likely a loner by shit circumstances, considering most of the people close to her have a way of dieing.

Please tell me all about the people close to her who died in Metroid, Metroid II, Metroid Prime, Metroid Prime 2 Metroid Prime 3 (and tell me how she was close to the other hunters, and not merely professionally cordial) and Metroid Fusion.

Video game purists need not apply; or speak up.

Sorry, but no. You made an assertion. I pointed out what I saw as a flaw in it, and asked for evidence. Interestingly, the point you originally made is now apparently trivial. Stay classy, Psy-4.

Psy-4 wrote:

Wolf wrote:

Except they allow her to participate, and it seems clear that most of them are glad to have her. And while it makes sense to disable some of the tools at her disposal (power bombs, for instance), reducing her to her most basic functionality seems like a ridiculous maneuver that hampers her efficiency and her ability to accomplish the goals Adam sets for her.

The key word being 'most', the guy who calls the shots is Samus' father figure. A disappointed father figure. Some bitterness is probably involved.

At least my own assumptions about the characters in the Metroid series have been based on something like 20 years' worth of series chronology, as opposed to reading into the ambiguity (whether intentional or the result of a clumsy translation) of a character's behavior in a handful of cutscenes in one installment of a long-running series.

Psy-4 wrote:

Wolf wrote:

Except they don't tell her to leave. They allow her to participate. Does that not make her part of the mission by default, if not by whatever initial plan they had?

No, Adam allows her to participate, Samus' mission is now to prove herself to Adam. Only when she thinks that shit has hit the fan that she stops joking around and activates power ups on her own.

What is it they say on Wikipedia? Oh, right: Citation needed.

Adam allows her to participate, and Samus agrees to play by the rules. She starts activating her power-ups on her own because it seems more and more like she'll have to go against Adam's orders in order to survive, and also because she needs to do so in order to proceed, and can no longer raise Adam on the radio. Any other reason for her actions relies pretty heavily on assumption. It's pretty neat how assumptions are A-O.K. when they're yours, isn't it?

Psy-4 wrote:

Wolf wrote:

Psy-4 wrote:

She has just quit on Adam to become a bounty hunter, and immediately meets him again? Holy shit, is that ever awkward.

Because the actual story of Other M, placed as it is in the timeline, isn't?

What, you never parted with another person(on good or bad terms) only to meet them again five seconds later, realize that you are both going to the same place, and are taking the only path there? You don't socialize much, do you?

I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here. Maybe we're both being too obtuse? All I'm trying to say is that it would be awkward no matter when it happened. Likely more so sooner in the series chronology, but awkward whenever it happens. I don't really understand why this is even a point of debate for you.

Psy-4 wrote:

Dohoho, look at you, dancing around it. Oh, I don't mind that they want to make her three-dimensional, they're just doing it wrong. I don't mind depth, but it undermines everything about the character!

Do you even understand what a 'depth' is, you ridiculous simpleton? Yes, adding depth means that what you know about the character is a facade, a lie the character fabricated. You pay lip service to Samus being vulnerable and then talk how she should be a cliche action hero. You say you're 'okay' with her having depth and then complain about her being shown to be more than she seems.

Oh, she's a battle-hardened warrior and those don't have actual feelings. Or, at least, they are never melodramatic abou
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Just admit you're a prick incapable of sympathy and go back to playing to whatever shitty game you play, starring cliche two-dimensional action hero/ine.

You're hostile and aggressive when someone's evaluation of a game doesn't match your own, and you resort to name-calling, colossal point-missing (which I sincerely hope is done deliberately, for the sake of argument; the alternative says nothing favorable about you) and a misinterpretation of my points that is either done out of mental laziness, gross oversimplification, or a calculated (and considering that everybody else who's chimed in seems to have understood my points, whether they've agreed or not, probably failed) attempt to make me look like an asshole. All this, and I'm an unsympathetic prick.

So I know next to nothing about Metroid other than it's a bunch of games with a girl who's a bounty hunter and that people think I should give the series a shot. I've just been reading this thread because my boyfriend was recently playing Other M and I wanted to know why he was playing something that sounded so damn melodramatic. He got a bit upset that I was talking through his cutscenes, naturally.

Guess who that boyfriend is? Oh, yeah. Wolf.

I'm curious to know why there's the automatic assumption that he's female: Is it because he's upset that Samus is apparently strongly adhering to some of the more commonly-protested against female stereotypes in this game? Because we all know no guy could ever be a feminist. I mean, that just goes against all common sense!

gaijinguy wrote:

Raine wrote:

Oh, well that definitely makes sense from a tradition viewpoint then (better than what I thought before). Still, that excuse on not using the equipment is really weak.

Isn't the repower/depower pretty much inherent in these games? Shepard gets killed, Link gets whatever the fuck disaster, and so on and so forth.

Yeah, it is. A lot of developers do try to work around it by creating different continuities, but direct sequels are a pain in the neck. There's nothing that disappoints me more than having played a game with so much effort to get everything, only to pick up its sequel and go back all the way to square one (and it's even worse when the excuse is flimsy). All that effort you took to build up that character and grow with them is completely destroyed. It's an all too-common issue.

I don't mind if the developers have tried to do some work around that issue, but a lot of developers just don't even try - which really sucks because there's been more than enough developers who really have come up with brilliant ideas. One of my favourite games to do with this issue is Banjo-Kazooie and its sequel Banjo-Tooie. It let you keep the majority of your abilities from the original, but they just weren't up to par with the new threat you were facing. You had to go even further than before and improve on the abilities you originally had. That's probably one of the best ways to get around the problem (by creating challenges that utilise a different set of skills to learn). There are a few other developers that do something similiar which is pretty good, but still... there are more than enough developers that expect a player to throw aside all the feelings of accomplishment in the previous game and it kinda hurts.

...Wow, I dunno if I over-thought that.

It's a bad game.

Sparrow wrote:

Guess who that boyfriend is? Oh, yeah. Wolf.

Good to know my gender-radar is still working. I was wondering why everyone was refering to him as a her.

Raine wrote:

Yeah, it is. A lot of developers do try to work around it by creating different continuities, but direct sequels are a pain in the neck. There's nothing that disappoints me more than having played a game with so much effort to get everything, only to pick up its sequel and go back all the way to square one (and it's even worse when the excuse is flimsy). All that effort you took to build up that character and grow with them is completely destroyed. It's an all too-common issue.

That's one of the reasons that Mass Effect to ME2 worked so well- even though you got the reset button hammered like it was going out of style, it didn't feel like it. This is because your decisions (not to mention a portion of your alignment and money) carry over, so you don't feel like you've wasted your time. (Seriously; try playing ME2 without an ME1 bankroll, and then play it again with. Night and day.)

Raine wrote:

I don't mind if the developers have tried to do some work around that issue, but a lot of developers just don't even try - which really sucks because there's been more than enough developers who really have come up with brilliant ideas. One of my favourite games to do with this issue is Banjo-Kazooie and its sequel Banjo-Tooie. It let you keep the majority of your abilities from the original, but they just weren't up to par with the new threat you were facing.

So you keep your abilities, but they don't hack it so you need new ones? I suppose it's less jarring than [RANDOM BULLSHIT DISASTER] but the net effect is the same, and if you want to go for more than two games your character is going to start accumulating a massive backlog of utterly worthless skills.

Raine wrote:

You had to go even further than before and improve on the abilities you originally had. That's probably one of the best ways to get around the problem (by creating challenges that utilise a different set of skills to learn). There are a few other developers that do something similiar which is pretty good, but still... there are more than enough developers that expect a player to throw aside all the feelings of accomplishment in the previous game and it kinda hurts.

...Wow, I dunno if I over-thought that.

I dunno. Take Painkiller for instance- when you move from Act 5 to Act 6 (the expansion pack) you lose all your weapons aside from the Painkiller and all your gold- however, you keep all the Black Tarot cards you've acquired, with one single exception, Divine Intervention. This is to allow carryover from the last game without trivializing the expansion- if you started with a full load of weapons or gold or Divine Intervention, you'd be able to load up and just blast your way through all 10 new levels without breaking a sweat- and this isn't even considering the new weapons and cards you can get to break the game even more ridiculously.

The point I'm getting at in a very roundabout way is that the reset button can be good, or at least necessary to keep the game engaging and fun.

From the sound of it, though, the problem isn't so much with the reset itself, just the way it was handled. It's a perfectly reasonable scenario when taken in the abstract.

Adam Guy: "You can be part of this mission, but you need to do things our way. That means locking up your World Sodomizer in the armory like everyone else in observation of safety regulations."
Samus: "OK."

However, apparently instead of "OK," Samus went "*~[DADDY ISSUES]~*" and therein lies the problem.

gaijinguy wrote:

From the sound of it, though, the problem isn't so much with the reset itself, just the way it was handled. It's a perfectly reasonable scenario when taken in the abstract.

Adam Guy: "You can be part of this mission, but you need to do things our way. That means locking up your World Sodomizer in the armory like everyone else in observation of safety regulations."
Samus: "OK."

However, apparently instead of "OK," Samus went "*~[DADDY ISSUES]~*" and therein lies the problem.

That's the long and short of it, no more no less.

I shall leave this here for the odd Metriod defender to stumble over...

gaijinguy wrote:

The point I'm getting at in a very roundabout way is that the reset button can be good, or at least necessary to keep the game engaging and fun.

From the sound of it, though, the problem isn't so much with the reset itself, just the way it was handled. It's a perfectly reasonable scenario when taken in the abstract.

The reset button can be okay, even a good move sometimes depending on the situation, but yeah, it's the execution that either makes or breaks it.

gaijinguy wrote:

So you keep your abilities, but they don't hack it so you need new ones? I suppose it's less jarring than [RANDOM BULLSHIT DISASTER] but the net effect is the same, and if you want to go for more than two games your character is going to start accumulating a massive backlog of utterly worthless skills.

Hmm... it didn't really feel that way in BT since you weren't exactly acquiring new skills - more like augmenting the ones you already had. It worked pretty well in that instance, though I'm sure there's been other games where that's turned out the way you've stated too.

Somath Cegem wrote:

gaijinguy wrote:

From the sound of it, though, the problem isn't so much with the reset itself, just the way it was handled. It's a perfectly reasonable scenario when taken in the abstract.

Adam Guy: "You can be part of this mission, but you need to do things our way. That means locking up your World Sodomizer in the armory like everyone else in observation of safety regulations."
Samus: "OK."

However, apparently instead of "OK," Samus went "*~[DADDY ISSUES]~*" and therein lies the problem.

That's the long and short of it, no more no less.

I've always been under the impression if Samus wanted to do something, she was going to do it her way and vaporize whatever got in her way. Maybe it's just every other Metroid game I played she was on her own with nothing else to do but kill every Space Pirate she could find in whatever manner she pleased.

But seriously, what idiot is going to say "I don't think the bounty hunter who has killed ENTIRE PLANETS can do this as well as we can, I should boss her around"?

People still watch Yahtzee reviews? Huh. Don't even have to click the link to know he hated it; he hates everything on the Wii specifically because it's on the Wii and he has admitted to hating the Wii on ideological grounds his Extra Punctuation columns. Even if he didn't, he makes bank on how much he rags on a game's flaws. Sooooo, even as an appeal to authority he isn't a very good source.

That said? Psy-4, you are giving the writers way too much credit on this one. Within five minutes of starting the game I already despised Samus' voice-over narration. The script is awful and shows nowhere near the depth and sophistication you seem to be reading into it.

Speaking of awful decisions, who thought it was a good idea to slip insta-death quicktime events into a Metroid game? I want to scoop out the brains of whoever made that call and skullfuck them until the only thing going through their head is my steaming load.

TheHermit wrote:

People still watch Yahtzee reviews? Huh. Don't even have to click the link to know he hated it; he hates everything on the Wii specifically because it's on the Wii and he has admitted to hating the Wii on ideological grounds his Extra Punctuation columns. Even if he didn't, he makes bank on how much he rags on a game's flaws. Sooooo, even as an appeal to authority he isn't a very good source.

None of that changes the fact that he spends most of the review talking about the writing. Gameplay is basically mentioned in passing.