Well, when you compare two of the best games in the series to anything coming after it's hard not to say that. (Although I'd put ZM up there with Prime, Fusion, and Super) I've still got the mindset that ALL of the Metroid games, Hunters and Other M included, have something worth playing them for and are still better than a lot of games outside the Metroid series. I've long accepted that I'm one of the few that sees things this way, but to immediately write off 1/2 to 2/3 of the series because they can't compare to the best ones is kinda stupid if you ask me.
Hm, well, I guess the Mario games survived Sunshine, and that had the most horrid story and dialogue of its series... and then it did a complete 180 with Galaxy, where the writers finally learned some subtlety.
Hm, well, I guess the Mario games survived Sunshine, and that had the most horrid story and dialogue of its series... and then it did a complete 180 with Galaxy, where the writers finally learned some subtlety.
:v but Sunshine was one of the best mario games, who cares about story when the gameplay is solid and fun
Mario Sunshine had nowhere near the level of backlash Other M, or Wind Waker got. hell, even Mario Kart DD had more backlash back in the day and the MK series is at its strongest right now in popularity. i'd say even SMB2-USA had a worse reputation than Sunshine.
heh ... that's funny because i was like 6 or 7 at the time and i had no idea. mario 3 was brand new and my friend's older brother wouldn't let us play it, so we were "stuck with" 2 and of course 1. i don't think i even understood the concept of some games being better than others. it was only many years later that i found out "the truth" about usa mario 2. and of course that diminished it in my mind. it would have diminished it even a few years later, when i was about 8 or 9 and started to think of everything japanese as superior. but it was never about the gameplay or anything. i just accepted everything as it was.
japan is the best country ever because they make anime!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The sequence breaking is all intentional and they still make sequence breaking impossible where they don't actually want you to break sequence, so the whole game is a disgrace... or so the reasoning goes?
But personally, I think the only thing wrong with it is the endgame - y'know, the stealth sequence and the padding in the case of 100% runs.
There is still the acid worm skip, but the fact that there aren't glitches to sequence break doesn't change that sequence breaking is possible intentional or not.
Personally I think when judging whether a game is good or not you shouldn't look at sequence breaks and skips like that. Course this IS a speedrunning forum and all that, but you get what I mean.
I feel that what's important is multiple possible sequences, intended or not. Zero Mission has that. Not nearly as many as Prime, Echoes, and Super, which can legitimately be held against it when comparing it to those games, but it has enough options to make it a great Metroid game, unlike Fusion and Other M. I personally hold Fusion as a solid game in its own right, but it's still an issue it has that Zero Mission lacks.
Now, the thrill of discovering a new sequence break is another matter, but it's hard to justify holding that against the developers and the overall quality of the game rather than just personal enjoyment of it.
For me it's sneaking past all the Pirates and searchlights without getting killed that's annoying. I have never, ever had a problem with the shrine boss thingy.
the other m escape was one of the best parts of the game. at least they nailed that one, unlike retro who can't make an escape sequence to save themselves.