MZM Timeline Status Discussion

2006-03-29 03:49:01 pm

Look, witty text!

It would seem we now have an irrefutable statement from an official source, in the form of this excerpt from the above-linked email:

Metroid: Zero Mission begins right where the original Metroid game opened, as interstellar bounty hunter Samus Aran infiltrates Mother Brain's massive complex below the surface of planet Zebes.

The same thing that has been obvious to everyone--the same thing everyone has said time and time again--is finally stated as a fact. In plain, simple English, the official Nintendo of America description states that Metroid: Zero Mission is a remake of Metroid.

Any attempt to twist the meaning of any single word in the above quotation would be such a bastardization of reasonable thought that it would render the perpetrator a senseless and moronic fanatic. To refute the source would be to refute all of one's own evidence, the majority of such being of a lesser validity.

Dai Grepher, you have become an important part of Internet history: for all my years of roaming the virtual reality, this is the first time I have ever been aware of any long-lived and pointless debate, such as this one, being absolutely resolved.

Let's break out the champagne--there's hope for this world yet.

It would seem we now have an irrefutable statement from an official source, in the form of this excerpt from the above-linked email:

[i][b]Metroid: Zero Mission begins right where the original Metroid game opened[/b], as interstellar bounty hunter Samus Aran infiltrates Mother Brain's massive complex below the surface of planet Zebes.[/i]

The same thing that has been obvious to everyone--the same thing everyone has said time and time again--is finally stated as a fact.  In plain, simple English, the official Nintendo of America description states that Metroid: Zero Mission is a remake of Metroid.

Any attempt to twist the meaning of any single word in the above quotation would be such a bastardization of reasonable thought that it would render the perpetrator a senseless and moronic fanatic.  To refute the source would be to refute all of one's own evidence, the majority of such being of a lesser validity.

Dai Grepher, you have become an important part of Internet history: for all my years of roaming the virtual reality, this is the first time I have ever been aware of any long-lived and pointless debate, such as this one, being absolutely resolved.

Let's break out the champagne--there's hope for this world yet.

spineshark

2006-03-29 05:26:00 pm

in the name of justice!

Hahaha, like always, I really, really like DZ.

That quote doesn't have the word "when" though!

In all seriousness, it should be interpreted as if the place in time is the same as well...though I have a really hard time believing this hasn't happened before.

Perhaps this is when he makes his mysterious, unanticipated escape from failure!

Dai Grepher

2006-03-29 06:04:35 pm

Quote from Kejardon:

You skipped the entire dictionary thread twice in a row with nothing more than "No, I'm right and you're wrong".

The dictionary quote was nothing more than you stating your opinion about my side of the issue. I cannot and will not try to refute someone's opinion because that is a waste of time.

Quote from Kejardon:

And my insult was relevant to the rest of the paragraph and my previous posts, which contained refutation you just ignored.

You refuted nothing. You simply disagreed with everything.

Quote from Kejardon:

I brought up the insult simply because it was true and applicable. If it were a compliment I would have brought it up all the same.

Try bringing up evidence for a change.

Quote from Kejardon:

And both are times when I'd mentally put a 'game' into the phrase, because Nintendo was being too dramatic to do it themselves.
To be a bit more explicit, do you have evidence that Nintendo would not dramaticize things and reduce their usage of the word 'game'?

You would because you want it to say something different than what it really states. It states that Zero Mission is the first mission of Samus' career.
The proof is in the commercial. There they say, "...her first adventure as an intergalactic bounty hunter". That is a clear storyline reference to the first mission ever, not the first game.

Give it up. If Nintendo wanted to present this as Metroid, then they would have made it crystal clear and would have said "first game" instead of first mission.

Quote from Kejardon:

And it was B. Yes, I did change what I believe, sort of. I explained that in my previous post.
I'm dropping this particular thread and leaving it at 'I believe you don't believe your argument'. You can say what you want.

Though you would never do the same for me, I will leave your mistake in the past and move on.

Quote from Kejardon:

Just because I'm poking fun at you doesn't mean it's not an important point. You admitted Metroid is the first mission.

See? You cannot even leave something I did not say alone. I never said that Metroid was the first mission. I said what Nintendo stated, then told you what that bit of info was referring to when it said, "first mission".

Quote from 13M13:

Is this "debate" going to be your only contribution to the forum?

I contributed the "Gravity Jump" trick in the Super Metroid forum already. However, I plan to make a few more topics.

Quote from Spine Shark:

Okay, now WHAT...THE...FLICKERBAT...According to your argument, that means that Samus still had missions before ZM.

No it doesn't. The prologue of Metroid does not lead into Zero Mission. The Metroid prologue refers to Zero Mission in its reference to mission prior to Metroid. That is why it was put in the Zero Mission manual.

Quote from Spine Shark:

Okay, I'm going to leave it at this: has it ever occurred to you that maybe you're one person who's wrong, and that the hundreds of people who disagree with you might be right?

No, and that is because I am not just one person. There are many others that have believed the game was a prequel ever since it was released. There are many who read my presentation and were convinced that the game is a prequel. Some people I have spoken to were even amazed to find out that there were some people who thought the game was a remake, and wondered how anyone could make that "mistake".

Quote from Dr. Trence:

most likely, he only came here to fight. i dont even care of this topic anymore, since Dai is going to keep debating with his silly hypothesis. and putting commercials over the real thing, making up false statments. etc..

I came here to inform others. Everything you said is false.

Quote from DominicanZero:

I got a direct reply from NoA, and while it doesn't provide for a definitive answer, there are a few quotes around that undoubtedly support the remake statement.

It says that Zero Mission begins where the original did, but the adventure is very different from Metroid. The following comment that the adventure is new also implies that it is not a remake.

Quote from A Silly Goose:

It would seem we now have an irrefutable statement from an official source, in the form of this excerpt from the above-linked email:

Metroid: Zero Mission begins right where the original Metroid game opened, as interstellar bounty hunter Samus Aran infiltrates Mother Brain's massive complex below the surface of planet Zebes.

You cut out the rest of the reply. It then states that this adventure is very different from the first mission, which they mean the NES Metroid. This is evidence that the game is NOT a remake!

Quote from A Silly Goose:

The same thing that has been obvious to everyone--the same thing everyone has said time and time again--is finally stated as a fact. In plain, simple English, the official Nintendo of America description states that Metroid: Zero Mission is a remake of Metroid.

Actually it claims the exact opposite, if you would read it correctly and in its entirety. This following e-mail also proves that Nintendo does not think it is a remake.

http://forums.nintendo.com/nintendo/board/message?board.id=metroid&message.id=369246&view=by_date_ascending&page=30

NOA states that the game is not a remake of Metroid. Even though they support my presentation, I still do not consider NOA 100% reliable.

Quote from A Silly Goose:

Any attempt to twist the meaning of any single word in the above quotation would be such a kraid of reasonable thought that it would render the perpetrator a senseless and moronic fanatic.

They why did you twist the meaning by omitting what was actually said?

Quote from A Silly Goose:

To refute the source would be to refute all of one's own evidence, the majority of such being of a lesser validity.

Then you admit that the game is not a remake?

Quote from A Silly Goose:

Dai Grepher, you have become an important part of Internet history: for all my years of roaming the virtual reality, this is the first time I have ever been aware of any long-lived and pointless debate, such as this one, being absolutely resolved.

Many people consider this an important discussion, but you are right about it being resolved. That happened a long time ago however. Since then it has been an argument to shoot down all remake theories and excuses.

Quote from Spine Shark:

That quote doesn't have the word "when" though!

In all seriousness, it should be interpreted as if the place in time is the same as well...though I have a really hard time believing this hasn't happened before.

You cannot interpret it in that way because it does not say that. The next statement of, "It becomes immediately obvious, however, that this adventure is very different from the first..." clearly implies that these adventures are different! That means it is not a remake even though they both take place in the same areas.

Quote from Spine Shark:

Perhaps this is when he makes his mysterious, unanticipated escape from failure!

I am sure he will stick around and try to say that Nintendo meant something else that was never implied, or make baseless claims that Nintendo has always presented the game as a remake. It is likely that he will just hang around and insult me in an attempt to get the topic locked.

[quote="Kejardon"] You skipped the entire dictionary thread twice in a row with nothing more than "No, I'm right and you're wrong".[/quote]

The dictionary quote was nothing more than you stating your opinion about my side of the issue. I cannot and will not try to refute someone's opinion because that is a waste of time.

[quote="Kejardon"] And my insult was relevant to the rest of the paragraph and my previous posts, which contained refutation you just ignored.[/quote]

You refuted nothing. You simply disagreed with everything.

[quote="Kejardon"] I brought up the insult simply because it was true and applicable. If it were a compliment I would have brought it up all the same.[/quote]

Try bringing up evidence for a change.

[quote="Kejardon"] And both are times when I'd mentally put a 'game' into the phrase, because Nintendo was being too dramatic to do it themselves. 
To be a bit more explicit, do you have evidence that Nintendo would not dramaticize things and reduce their usage of the word 'game'?[/quote]

You would because you want it to say something different than what it really states. It states that Zero Mission is the first mission of Samus' career.
The proof is in the commercial. There they say, "...her first adventure as an intergalactic bounty hunter". That is a clear storyline reference to the first mission ever, not the first game.

Give it up. If Nintendo wanted to present this as Metroid, then they would have made it crystal clear and would have said "first game" instead of first mission.

[quote="Kejardon"] And it was B. Yes, I did change what I believe, sort of. I explained that in my previous post. 
I'm dropping this particular thread and leaving it at 'I believe you don't believe your argument'. You can say what you want.[/quote]

Though you would never do the same for me, I will leave your mistake in the past and move on.

[quote="Kejardon"] Just because I'm poking fun at you doesn't mean it's not an important point.  You admitted Metroid is the first mission.[/quote]

See? You cannot even leave something I did not say alone. I never said that Metroid was the first mission. I said what Nintendo stated, then told you what that bit of info was referring to when it said, "first mission".

[quote="13M13"] Is this "debate" going to be your only contribution to the forum?[/quote]

I contributed the "Gravity Jump" trick in the Super Metroid forum already. However, I plan to make a few more topics.

[quote="Spine Shark"] Okay, now WHAT...THE...FLICKERBAT...According to your argument, that means that Samus still had missions before ZM.[/quote]

No it doesn't. The prologue of Metroid does not lead into Zero Mission. The Metroid prologue refers to Zero Mission in its reference to mission prior to Metroid. That is why it was put in the Zero Mission manual.

[quote="Spine Shark"] Okay, I'm going to leave it at this: has it ever occurred to you that maybe you're one person who's wrong, and that the hundreds of people who disagree with you might be right?[/quote]

No, and that is because I am not just one person. There are many others that have believed the game was a prequel ever since it was released. There are many who read my presentation and were convinced that the game is a prequel. Some people I have spoken to were even amazed to find out that there were some people who thought the game was a remake, and wondered how anyone could make that "mistake".

[quote="Dr. Trence"] most likely, he only came here to fight. i dont even care of this topic anymore, since Dai is going to keep debating with his silly hypothesis. and putting commercials over the real thing, making up false statments. etc..[/quote]

I came here to inform others. Everything you said is false.

[quote="DominicanZero"] I got a direct reply from NoA, and while it doesn't provide for a definitive answer, there are a few quotes around that undoubtedly support the remake statement.[/quote]

It says that Zero Mission begins where the original did, but the adventure is very different from Metroid. The following comment that the adventure is new also implies that it is not a remake.

[quote="A Silly Goose"] It would seem we now have an irrefutable statement from an official source, in the form of this excerpt from the above-linked email:

Metroid: Zero Mission begins right where the original Metroid game opened, as interstellar bounty hunter Samus Aran infiltrates Mother Brain's massive complex below the surface of planet Zebes.[/quote]

You cut out the rest of the reply. It then states that this adventure is very different from the first mission, which they mean the NES Metroid. This is evidence that the game is NOT a remake!

[quote="A Silly Goose"] The same thing that has been obvious to everyone--the same thing everyone has said time and time again--is finally stated as a fact. In plain, simple English, the official Nintendo of America description states that Metroid: Zero Mission is a remake of Metroid.[/quote]

Actually it claims the exact opposite, if you would read it correctly and in its entirety. This following e-mail also proves that Nintendo does not think it is a remake.

http://forums.nintendo.com/nintendo/board/message?board.id=metroid&message.id=369246&view=by_date_ascending&page=30

NOA states that the game is not a remake of Metroid. Even though they support my presentation, I still do not consider NOA 100% reliable.

[quote="A Silly Goose"] Any attempt to twist the meaning of any single word in the above quotation would be such a kraid of reasonable thought that it would render the perpetrator a senseless and moronic fanatic.[/quote]

They why did you twist the meaning by omitting what was actually said?

[quote="A Silly Goose"] To refute the source would be to refute all of one's own evidence, the majority of such being of a lesser validity.[/quote]

Then you admit that the game is not a remake?

[quote="A Silly Goose"] Dai Grepher, you have become an important part of Internet history: for all my years of roaming the virtual reality, this is the first time I have ever been aware of any long-lived and pointless debate, such as this one, being absolutely resolved.[/quote]

Many people consider this an important discussion, but you are right about it being resolved. That happened a long time ago however. Since then it has been an argument to shoot down all remake theories and excuses.

[quote="Spine Shark"] That quote doesn't have the word "when" though!

In all seriousness, it should be interpreted as if the place in time is the same as well...though I have a really hard time believing this hasn't happened before.[/quote]

You cannot interpret it in that way because it does not say that. The next statement of, "It becomes immediately obvious, however, that this adventure is very different from the first..." clearly implies that these adventures are different! That means it is not a remake even though they both take place in the same areas.

[quote="Spine Shark"] Perhaps this is when he makes his mysterious, unanticipated escape from failure![/quote]

I am sure he will stick around and try to say that Nintendo meant something else that was never implied, or make baseless claims that Nintendo has always presented the game as a remake. It is likely that he will just hang around and insult me in an attempt to get the topic locked.

SABERinBLUE

2006-03-29 06:19:27 pm

Cook of the Sea

Quote from Dai Grepher:

It says that Zero Mission begins where the original did, but the adventure is very different from Metroid. The following comment that the adventure is new also implies that it is not a remake.

Remakes very often contain differences and new material. That is what makes them remakes.

Um, Dai.

Come on, man.

You cannot possibly continue to argue your position in the light of that NoA letter. It's one thing to persue logic in all its forms, but seriously, you've got to be realistic.

No one will think less of you if you concede.

13M13

2006-03-29 06:40:54 pm

l'appel du vide

MOD EDIT: Dammit man, I wanted everyone to see that notice, like I said, it wasn't just for you. Don't delete something a mod edits into your post. This is a warning.

EVERYONE, for the second time: Do not flame Dai in this thread, and do not make fun of him by talking about him in third person. If you disagree with him, have the decency to address him directly.

I swear to god 13M13, do not edit this post again.

spineshark

2006-03-29 07:37:55 pm

in the name of justice!

Heh, just read the whole thing, and you've just gotta love any debate that gets decapitated by a form letter.

Yoshi348

2006-03-29 08:39:53 pm

PAGE BREAKER

Ready and willing.

This is worse than a creationist thread.

arkarian

2006-03-29 09:26:39 pm

red chamber dream

Quote from Yoshi348:

This is worse than a creationist thread.

But God doesn't make mistakes. ;(((

nn12000

2006-03-30 12:22:28 am

Mister ...

Amen, Brother! Amen!

I remember being told by NOA that this game is a remake. I just don't see how it is a prequal. It has the same basic layouts as the original Metroid, with some minor differences. Anyone that has played both the original and ZM can tell that both are the same game, ZM with better graphics, gameplay, and storyline.

Kejardon

2006-03-30 01:01:29 am

Embarrasing Fact: Power suit made by lowest bidder

Yay, more avoidance of my points.
Until you decide to actually respond coherently to what I say, I claim victory in this debate and am done. Italicized text are important points you have failed to respond to. (read: I will not much respond to you and assume you've given up and lost, until you adequetly respond to my italicized points)

A quick summary of the threads:

Dictionary thread:
Started with these quotes:

Quote from Dai Grepher:

It is not a theory. It is a literal reading of the facts.

My response:

Quote from Kejardon:

it's a hypothesis, not a theory. It's also not a literal reading of the facts, otherwise you would be posting just the facts and not offering your slant on them.

You said my response was an opinion, I said my response was based on the definitions of the words. You have not shown how my response is not based on the definitions of the words, and I added that your ability to comprehend the dictionary seems poor and your interpretation of 'not necessarily' is also in doubt.
I'd also like to reinforce the main point I intended with my first quote: You are offering a *viewpoint* of ZM's timeline status. You are not reading a definition of ZM's timeline status. People have read the facts about ZM's timeline status and decided that ZM is a remake, people have read your viewpoint that ZM is a prequel and understood you meant ZM is a prequel. Because those two outcomes are not the same, you obviously have not simply stated the facts about ZM's timeline status as you claimed.

'Game' connotation thread:
Started with this quote:

Quote from Kejardon:

Quote:

Metroid: Zero Mission begins right where the original Metroid game opened, as interstellar bounty hunter Samus Aran infiltrates Mother Brain's massive complex below the surface of planet Zebes. It becomes immediately obvious, however, that this adventure is very different from the first mission

How does that second sentence make sense unless 'first mission' is referring to the original Metroid?
As I've said before, 'First mission' often implies 'First game'.

You admitted the text is referring to Metroid, but said it should not have been phrased 'First mission'. You said that many other times it used 'First mission/adventure' correctly. I said that fitting in 'game' in other phrases also made it clear that Zero Mission is a remake. You admitted that was true, but said I was twisting the meaning only to mean what I wanted it to mean.

Quote from Kejardon:

Nintendo seems to like to make the video games more dramatic. Saying 'game' every few sentences hurts the drama a good bit, and so they often omit [or change] it.
What evidence do you have that says that inferrence is incorrect?
To be a bit more explicit, do you have evidence that Nintendo would not dramaticize things and reduce their usage of the word 'game'?

You have brought up quotes where Nintendo says 'First something' and not 'First game', but you have NOT given any evidence against Nintendo being overly dramatic.

Side bit of 'Game' connotation thread:

Quote from Dai Grepher:

However, your quote as it is disproves you just the same. It states that while both games begin in the same place, that Zero Mission is very different from the first mission (meaning Metroid)

Quote from Dai Grepher:

I never said that Metroid was the first mission. I said what Nintendo stated, then told you what that bit of info was referring to when it said, "first mission".

You admitted then that Nintendo referred to Metroid with 'First mission'. You must then admit that in certain cases 'First mission' should be replaced with 'First game'. You shot yourself in the foot with that quote.
Granted, I know you didn't mean that Metroid was the first mission, but to read it literally without context, that was the clearest interpretation and I couldn't resist saying it. :P

On an unrelated note: You claim many times that a good portion of people believe you. I've seen this argument on Wikipedia's ZM article, here, and on the MDb, all places full of people who know plenty about Zero Mission. In all three places you are FAR outnumbered, I would guess *maybe* 3 people total believed you (they certainly didn't stand by your side in the arguments), and about 40 people spoke against you.
The only way I can fathom you having any sizable following is if it consists mainly of people who do not have much interest in Zero Mission.
Even though I think popularity contests are stupid, I am sooooo tempted to make a poll just to enjoy the shear landslide in spite of what you say. :P

Kejardon

Yay, more avoidance of my points.
Until you decide to actually respond coherently to what I say, I claim victory in this debate and am done. Italicized text are important points you have failed to respond to. (read: I will not much respond to you and assume you've given up and lost, until you adequetly respond to my italicized points)

A quick summary of the threads:

Dictionary thread:
Started with these quotes: [quote="Dai Grepher"]It is not a theory. It is a literal reading of the facts.[/quote]My response:
[quote="Kejardon"]it's a hypothesis, not a theory. It's also not a literal reading of the facts, otherwise you would be posting just the facts and not offering your slant on them.[/quote]You said my response was an opinion, I said my response was based on the definitions of the words. [i]You have not shown how my response is not based on the definitions of the words[/i], and I added that your ability to comprehend the dictionary seems poor and your interpretation of 'not necessarily' is also in doubt.
I'd also like to reinforce the main point I intended with my first quote: You are offering a *viewpoint* of ZM's timeline status. You are not reading a definition of ZM's timeline status. People have read the facts about ZM's timeline status and decided that ZM is a remake, people have read your viewpoint that ZM is a prequel and understood you meant ZM is a prequel. Because those two outcomes are not the same, you obviously have not simply stated the facts about ZM's timeline status as you claimed.

'Game' connotation thread:
Started with this quote:[quote="Kejardon"][quote]Metroid: Zero Mission begins right where the original Metroid game opened, as interstellar bounty hunter Samus Aran infiltrates Mother Brain's massive complex below the surface of planet Zebes. It becomes immediately obvious, however, that this adventure is very different from the first mission[/quote]How does that second sentence make sense unless 'first mission' is referring to the original Metroid?
As I've said before, 'First mission' often implies 'First game'.[/quote]You admitted the text is referring to Metroid, but said it should not have been phrased 'First mission'. You said that many other times it used 'First mission/adventure' correctly. I said that fitting in 'game' in other phrases also made it clear that Zero Mission is a remake. You admitted that was true, but said I was twisting the meaning only to mean what I wanted it to mean.[quote="Kejardon"]Nintendo seems to like to make the video games more dramatic. Saying 'game' every few sentences hurts the drama a good bit, and so they often omit [or change] it.
[i]What evidence do you have that says that inferrence is incorrect?
To be a bit more explicit, do you have evidence that Nintendo would not dramaticize things and reduce their usage of the word 'game'? [/i][/quote]You have brought up quotes where Nintendo says 'First something' and not 'First game', but you have NOT given any evidence against Nintendo being overly dramatic.

Side bit of 'Game' connotation thread:
[quote="Dai Grepher"]However, your quote as it is disproves you just the same. It states that while both games begin in the same place, that Zero Mission is very different from the first mission (meaning Metroid)[/quote][quote="Dai Grepher"]I never said that Metroid was the first mission. I said what Nintendo stated, then told you what that bit of info was referring to when it said, "first mission".[/quote]You admitted then that Nintendo referred to Metroid with 'First mission'. [i]You must then admit that in certain cases 'First mission' should be replaced with 'First game'[/i]. You shot yourself in the foot with that quote.
Granted, I know you didn't mean that Metroid was the first mission, but to read it literally without context, that was the clearest interpretation and I couldn't resist saying it. :P

On an unrelated note: You claim many times that a good portion of people believe you. I've seen this argument on Wikipedia's ZM article, here, and on the MDb, all places full of people who know plenty about Zero Mission. In all three places you are FAR outnumbered, I would guess *maybe* 3 people total believed you (they certainly didn't stand by your side in the arguments), and about 40 people spoke against you.
The only way I can fathom you having any sizable following is if it consists mainly of people who do not have much interest in Zero Mission.
Even though I think popularity contests are stupid, I am sooooo tempted to make a poll just to enjoy the shear landslide in spite of what you say. :P

Kejardon

13M13

2006-03-30 01:54:17 am

l'appel du vide

Quote from 13M13:

MOD EDIT: Dammit man, I wanted everyone to see that notice, like I said, it wasn't just for you. Don't delete something a mod edits into your post. This is a warning.

EVERYONE, for the second time: Do not flame Dai in this thread, and do not make fun of him by talking about him in third person. If you disagree with him, have the decency to address him directly.

I swear to god 13M13, do not edit this post again.

My apologies. HOWEVER, does this not apply to Dai as well? Because I simply [b]repeated what he said about someone else and directed it towards him[/b].

Quote from I:

Quote from Dai:

I am sure he will stick around and try to say that Nintendo meant something else that was never implied, or make baseless claims that Nintendo has always presented the game as a remake.

I am sure you will stick around and try to say that Nintendo meant something else that was never implied, or make baseless claims that Nintendo has always presented the game as a prequel.

I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy in Dai's statement. If your edit wasn't solely directed at me, why edit my reply? I think it would have been far more appropriate to create a new post. Just sayin'...

[quote="13M13"][color=red]MOD EDIT:  Dammit man, I wanted everyone to see that notice, like I said, it wasn't just for you.  Don't delete something a mod edits into your post.  This is a warning.

EVERYONE, for the second time:  Do not flame Dai in this thread, and do not make fun of him by talking about him in third person.  If you disagree with him, have the decency to address him directly.

I swear to god 13M13, do not edit this post again.[/color][/quote]
My apologies.  HOWEVER, does this not apply to Dai as well?  Because I simply [i][b]repeated what he said about someone else and directed it towards him[/i][/b].  
[quote="I"][quote="Dai"]I am sure he will stick around and try to say that Nintendo meant something else that was never implied, or make baseless claims that Nintendo has always presented the game as a remake.[/quote]I am sure you will stick around and try to say that Nintendo meant something else that was never implied, or make baseless claims that Nintendo has always presented the game as a prequel.[/quote]
I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy in Dai's statement.  If your edit wasn't solely directed at me, why edit my reply?  I think it would have been far more appropriate to create a new post.  Just sayin'...

SABERinBLUE

2006-03-30 02:10:52 am

Cook of the Sea

Your post consisted, in its original form, solely of a flame directed at Dai. Dai's words were at the end of a long post with debate content. I originally edited your words out because they were explicitly a flame in their current form, and I edited them out the second time because you edited my words out to put your improved version in, even though the improved version wasn't explicitly a flame.

It's how the ball bounces. If you have any further problems with this or want further clarification, you're perfectly free to PM me now that there's a face attached to the modding.

SkippyJr

2006-03-30 01:57:11 pm

Hello. Long time reader (of this thread at various locations), first time poster.

I have found the analysis of the game locations between the various games (M1, SM, MZM) to be quite interesting. Under the assumption that Nintendo takes it's presentations and chronologies of the games very seriously (more on that in a bit), I have a question which has been confusing me. In each of the three games which take place on Zebes, Samus collects Chozo suit enhancements. How are these redeposited between M1 and SM? If MZM and M1 are unique missions, then why do they reappear yet again? Who would put them there? The Chozo? Samus? Does that also imply that the Space Pirates lost and then regained control of Zebes at least twice under the hypothesis that M1 and MZM are distinct events? (Assuming that no-one would leave Chozo relics there, let alone go there if evildoers made it their home.) If someone was actively on Zebes at these various times, wouldn't they also take the time to clean up the ancient wrecked ship? I'm curious about your thoughts about the reappearing Chozo relics, and Zebes caretakers or inhabitants (or possible lack thereof).

I'm assuming that an answer along the lines of "it's just a game" would not make sense under the above assumption about Nintendo. As that would imply that they have a loose "vision" of the series. That in turn would imply that they would not set two distinct games in the same location without making it painfully obvious that they were different (e.g. SM v.s. M1). As evidence that there is a loose vision, Gumpei Yokoi requested that no Metroid game be set after SM in the timeline. However, after his death, Fusion was released.

I would find that the original Japanese game text/booklets/etc. to be far better canon than the English translations. It may be quite telling to see what the word choice was to originally describe M1 and MZM. That would be a further area for which to seek evidence supporting or refuting this hypothesis. As you have already put in quite a great deal of time analyzing these games, you might find that endeavor useful (and would learn a useful skill in the process).

Hello.  Long time reader (of this thread at various locations), first time poster.

I have found the analysis of the game locations between the various games (M1, SM, MZM) to be quite interesting.  Under the assumption that Nintendo takes it's presentations and chronologies of the games very seriously (more on that in a bit), I have a question which has been confusing me.  In each of the three games which take place on Zebes, Samus collects Chozo suit enhancements.  How are these redeposited between M1 and SM?  If MZM and M1 are unique missions, then why do they reappear yet again?  Who would put them there?  The Chozo?  Samus?  Does that also imply that the Space Pirates lost and then regained control of Zebes at least twice under the hypothesis that M1 and MZM are distinct events? (Assuming that no-one would leave Chozo relics there, let alone go there if evildoers made it their home.)  If someone was actively on Zebes at these various times, wouldn't they also take the time to clean up the ancient wrecked ship?  I'm curious about your thoughts about the reappearing Chozo relics, and Zebes caretakers or inhabitants (or possible lack thereof).

I'm assuming that an answer along the lines of "it's just a game" would not make sense under the above assumption about Nintendo.  As that would imply that they have a loose "vision" of the series. That in turn would imply that they would not set two distinct games in the same location without making it painfully obvious that they were different (e.g. SM v.s. M1).  As evidence that there is a loose vision, Gumpei Yokoi requested that no Metroid game be set after SM in the timeline.  However, after his death, Fusion was released.

I would find that the original Japanese game text/booklets/etc. to be far better canon than the English translations.  It may be quite telling to see what the word choice was to originally describe M1 and MZM.  That would be a further area for which to seek evidence supporting or refuting this hypothesis.  As you have already put in quite a great deal of time analyzing these games, you might find that endeavor useful (and would learn a useful skill in the process).

SABERinBLUE

2006-03-30 02:01:58 pm

Cook of the Sea

I'd really prefer it if we kept general timeline discussion in the General Metroid forum and keep this thread solely about ZM.

CorruptedPhoenix

2006-03-30 06:06:25 pm

A debate is meant to persuade someone into thinking that your side of the argument is correct. If one is able to persuade someone, it obviously proves that their logic and/or points presented are legitimate.

Dai, the argument you have presented, though well-researched, is incorrect. Attacking two or three words spoken by a single person and how a door is in the wrong place/not there is not a legitimate argument, and that is what yours is composed of all through-out.

You have also failed to convince anyone. And you do not succeed "by making people think about this", because one, your constant rebuttles show that you WANT to convince people that you're correct, and two, all you do is the continuation of people thinking you're incorrect about the debate in discussion.

Dai, you have failed in convincing anyone at this forum, as well as any other forum you have presented this too.

I apologize for any poor grammar and my inability to quote someone properly.

Chanoire

2006-03-30 07:50:42 pm

Incidentally, I was flipping through the January 06 NP and saw on p. 40 (part of their Top 200 feature) that ZM is listed with the comment: "This game did a beautiful job of retelling the original Samus adventure." Just sayin'.

arkarian

2006-03-30 08:15:03 pm

red chamber dream

Bah, what does Nintendo know? Rolling Eyes

nn12000

2006-03-30 10:07:20 pm

Mister ...

Nintendo should know alot, 'specially since they made the game.

Chanoire

2006-03-30 10:25:11 pm

Nate, any progress on implementing that "sarcasm" tag?

Zeke

2006-03-30 11:48:05 pm

Time bomb set get out fast!

Oh yeah, sure. Nate's gonna implement a sarcasm tag. That's gonna happen. Yep, any time now.

UchihaSasuke

2006-03-31 12:09:33 am

my umbrella goes directly to Bankai

it's incredible how the MZM developers don't know that their game is a prequel even though they made the game and were remaking M1.

transience

2006-03-31 03:16:46 am

twenty eight fifty

i have come to one conclusion - this is the worst april fool's day joke ever.

on a side note, i thought only zelda kids cared about the "timeline".

spineshark

2006-03-31 08:44:00 am

in the name of justice!

I don't care about the timeline; I was hoping this argument, which got chased to the icy north like Frankenstein's monster, could finally be ended.

I read a bit of the Wikipedia debate, and let me say once again that using differences (not "inconsistencies") in the art is not a valid basis for this argument. For one thing, what happened to the Norfair "ORB" room (the one where you can't get through without the Grip) in Metroid, according to you (to be fair, I don't remember what it looks like, or even if you can get there...but there are other "secret" rooms that obviously don't exist anymore.

From a game design standpoint, I see no reason that an artist should put up with having to copy exactly the art from a ten-year-old game, and no reason that an employer would want them to...

If I were to go to a Fire Emblem board with pics of Manfloy in Fire Emblem 4 and 5, claiming that because he looks different in 5 than in either half of 4, 5 comes after 4...that would be stupid. But I feel like your "art" argument is no different.

I don't care about the timeline; I was hoping this argument, which got chased to the icy north like Frankenstein's monster, could finally be ended.

I read a bit of the Wikipedia debate, and let me say once again that using differences (not "inconsistencies") in the art is not a valid basis for this argument.  For one thing, what happened to the Norfair "ORB" room (the one where you can't get through without the Grip) in Metroid, according to you (to be fair, I don't remember what it looks like, or even if you can get there...but there are other "secret" rooms that obviously don't exist anymore.

From a game design standpoint, I see no reason that an artist should put up with having to copy exactly the art from a ten-year-old game, and no reason that an employer would want them to...

If I were to go to a Fire Emblem board with pics of Manfloy in Fire Emblem 4 and 5, claiming that because he looks different in 5 than in either half of 4, 5 comes after 4...that would be stupid.  But I feel like your "art" argument is no different.

SkippyJr

2006-03-31 05:48:33 pm

Direct evidence for both claims have been looked at. From a logic point of view, it is also the case that one could make the assumption that either claim is correct and see if that makes sense. That was the idea of my previous post - to work towards a "reductio ad absurdum", better known as proof by contradiction.

Assuming that M1 and MZM are the same event seems to cause no problems. Indeed, the majority of individuals already believe that MZM is a retelling of the events in M1 and have not been perplexed by the differences.

For the rest of this post, I will assume Dai's position. This should be a cleaner version of the ideas in the previous post.

Assumption: MZM is a mission previous to M1.
Observation: The games are not dissimilar up through the escape.
Observation: The booklets are not dissimilar in the discussion of Samus and the missions.
Observation: The vast majority of knowledgeable Metroid fans believe that MZM is M1 retold because of these things.
Conclusion: The confusion caused by Nintendo is deliberate.

Non-remake games in a series have vastly different storylines and locations. Dai would need to explain why NoJ was being so devious.

Previous Conclusion: The confusion caused by Nintendo is deliberate.
Observation: Dai has pointed out the progression of the pirate base from MZM -> M1 -> SM.
SubConclusion: Nintendo is keeping a high attention to detail for this series.

We might guess that a "strong" timeline exists, where events really matter in the series. Even if not, there is still an issue with why the Easter Bunny keeps hiding Chozo artifacts on Zebes.

SubSubConclusion: Nintendo has an explicit vision of the series and its future.

Explain the recent tarnish of the pure series which is Metroid Prime Pinball. Other important series such as Zelda have not been subject to offshoot games (LoZ: Golf ?).

The idea here was to assume Dai's position that MZM came before M1, and to look for consequences that did not make sense. We have a game company which has gone out of its way to confuse its customers. That does not make sense. We have a fanatic company which either has an explicit and in depth timeline, or else certain gameplay elements have been added willy-nilly. The latter would not make sense. We have a company fanatic about its series, which throws aside the vision of its creator (by creating post SM game Fusion) and also makes an offshoot (Pinball). That does not make sense.

The arguments tend to get weaker as we move further away from MZM =/= M1, but I'm hoping that it is a new angle to approach from for people wishing to debate either for or against Dai's side.

Direct evidence for both claims have been looked at.  From a logic point of view, it is also the case that one could make the assumption that either claim is correct and see if that makes sense.  That was the idea of my previous post - to work towards a "reductio ad absurdum", better known as proof by contradiction.

Assuming that M1 and MZM are the same event seems to cause no problems.  Indeed, the majority of individuals already believe that MZM is a retelling of the events in M1 and have not been perplexed by the differences.

For the rest of this post, I will assume Dai's position.  This should be a cleaner version of the ideas in the previous post.

Assumption: MZM is a mission previous to M1.
Observation: The games are not dissimilar up through the escape.
Observation: The booklets are not dissimilar in the discussion of Samus and the missions.
Observation: The vast majority of knowledgeable Metroid fans believe that MZM is M1 retold because of these things.
Conclusion: The confusion caused by Nintendo is deliberate.

Non-remake games in a series have vastly different storylines and locations.  Dai would need to explain why NoJ was being so devious.

Previous Conclusion: The confusion caused by Nintendo is deliberate.
Observation: Dai has pointed out the progression of the pirate base from MZM -> M1 -> SM.
SubConclusion:  Nintendo is keeping a high attention to detail for this series.

We might guess that a "strong" timeline exists, where events really matter in the series.  Even if not, there is still an issue with why the Easter Bunny keeps hiding Chozo artifacts on Zebes.

SubSubConclusion:  Nintendo has an explicit vision of the series and its future.

Explain the recent tarnish of the pure series which is Metroid Prime Pinball.  Other important series such as Zelda have not been subject to offshoot games (LoZ: Golf ?).

The idea here was to assume Dai's position that MZM came before M1, and to look for consequences that did not make sense.  We have a game company which has gone out of its way to confuse its customers.  That does not make sense.  We have a fanatic company which either has an explicit and in depth timeline, or else certain gameplay elements have been added willy-nilly.  The latter would not make sense.  We have a company fanatic about its series, which throws aside the vision of its creator (by creating post SM game Fusion) and also makes an offshoot (Pinball).  That does not make sense.

The arguments tend to get weaker as we move further away from MZM =/= M1, but I'm hoping that it is a new angle to approach from for people wishing to debate either for or against Dai's side.

Super-Metroid-Thingy

2006-03-31 06:03:01 pm

Quote from Dai Grepher:

Quote from A Silly Goose:

It would seem we now have an irrefutable statement from an official source, in the form of this excerpt from the above-linked email:

Metroid: Zero Mission begins right where the original Metroid game opened, as interstellar bounty hunter Samus Aran infiltrates Mother Brain's massive complex below the surface of planet Zebes.

You cut out the rest of the reply. It then states that this adventure is very different from the first mission, which they mean the NES Metroid. This is evidence that the game is NOT a remake!

If i remember correctly, one of your main points in your original argument was that the NES metroid was not samus' first mission, but "one after countless others" or something. Therefore, if your argument were correct, "this adventure is very different form the first mission" cannot mean it is different from the NES metroid.