page  <- 1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6,  7,  8,  9,  10,  11,  12,  13,  14,  15,  16,  17,  18 -> <- 1 .. 6 .. 18 ->
^^
vv
List results:
Search options:
Use \ before commas in usernames
StarmanHaxor
2006-03-31 06:59:18 pm
I tried to think and make a thoughtful post about how Dai's skewed logic clearly is wrong, but all that came to me was Spock just sitting there rubbing his temples.  :?
PureAnxiety
2006-03-31 08:17:27 pm
from page 2...

Quote from Dai Grepher:
"... Zero Mission is based on the NES version of Metroid..."

...Zero Mission is merely based on Metroid, not a replacement...



Okay, i don't know about the rest of you, but i have seen movies "based on" books that skip entire chapters, leave out important characters, create new scenes,  and generally screw with the order of events, yet it is still supposed to be a representation of the original medium, tells the same story just through different eyes than those of the original author. Seems to me that this may be a similar case. Wink

oh yeah, thanks for giving me some "Must see T.V."(read: debate post, now that's entertainment Laughing )  The only reason i pay any attention to forums in the first place, people have such a difficult time realizing that what they believe may not be what the vast majority believes or should believe.

oh and why try so hard to force this theory down our throats, you can tell that most of us don't really care that much in the first place.Rolling Eyes

Thank you, and goodnight.    Exclamation
Vertigo
2006-03-31 08:32:17 pm
lvl 28 Magic Leper
Cripes, this arguement is like talking to a brick wall.  Dai the possibility that you are correct is there, Nintendo has been known to withold information.  It is also possible that all of the quotes against your theory were mistranslated or misinterpreted by the readers, I have been told many times that Japanese isn't easily translated.  You could also be right that the different colours in MZM indicate an earlier time than Metroid.

But there is also an equal chance that the text was properly translated and interpereted, Nintendo is not out to get us (all of the time), and that changes in the game have little to no signifigance.

The differences in the two versions can be easily accounted for, since the series has progressed new technology has been released and new techniques have been added to Samus's formidable repertoire.  Nintendo may have simply wanted to integrate these new things into an old classic game, giving the player that sense of nostalgia with the feeling of a new game. 

That would be the common sense method of looking at it.  If you think Nintendo has some elaborate plan for the storyline in Metroid then it is also possible that MZM is listing the true events of what happened in Metroid.  For all we know the first game could have simply been Samus's report to the Federation.  Now I'm not saying I'm right and your wrong but there was that one scientific prinicple that had the word "Razor" in it..... was it "Ocham's Razor"? 

Anyways it said something to the lines of "the simplest theory is often correct".  I can't garuantee that's what it said or even if it's even a real priniciple but isn't it much simpler to simply conclude that the changes were Directorial decisions rather than Nintendo plotting some evil and pointless scheme.  Think of the new Lord of the Rings movie and the old animated one, just because the animated movie sucked and didn't seem like LotR at all it doesn't mean that one movie came before the other in the Middle Earth timeline.

Please, don't be a prior, fight the Ori.... even though you'll just light on fire in the end.
Dai Grepher
2006-03-31 10:41:46 pm
Quote from SABERinBLUE:
Remakes very often contain differences and new material. That is what makes them remakes.


Different games often contain differences and new material as well. I am not saying that these things prove a prequel, but I am saying they also do not prove a remake. We must consider all of the game elements, including storyline, and text media like the box and game information.

Quote from SABERinBLUE:
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.


I do not understand. The letter supports the timeline that features Zero Mission as a new adventure. Though I would not consider NOA proof of anything, in this case they prove that the game is not a remake. I also presented a link to an e-mail sent by an N-sider member stating that the game is not a remake.

Quote from SABERinBLUE:
No one will think less of you if you concede.


The only thing that concerns me in these debates are the facts.

Quote from 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.


Thank you for keeping the topic under control. I greatly appreciate and admire the responcible stance you have taken in the thread in order to keep the discussion peaceful. Whoever made you a moderatior was very wise to do so. Thank you, again.

Quote from nn12000:
I remember being told by NOA that this game is a remake. I just don't see how it is a prequal.


The main thought behind it is that the maps are not consistent with Metroid, and key areas that appear in Super Metroid are also inconsistent. Also, the quotes that state that Zero Mission is Samus' first mission/adventure as a bounty hunter indicate that it is a prequel, since Metroid had many bounty hunting missions take place before it story wise. There are also the storyline inconsistencies with Metroid Prime, a game made to be very consistent with Metroid. Why then would Metroid be changed to be inconsistent with Prime? This leads to the development concept of simply remaking gameplay style, not storyline.

Quote from nn12000:
It has the same basic layouts as the original Metroid, with some minor differences.


That is not true. The differences are vast, and this is not because of graphical updates. The design of the areas is vastly different, and an unbiased look at the areas would identify Zero Mission's as an earlier timeframe than Metroid's.

Quote from nn12000:
Anyone that has played both the original and ZM can tell that both are the same game, ZM with better graphics, gameplay, and storyline.


While I do not question your perception of the games, I must say that there are also many people who played Zero Mission, having played Metroid, and have come to the conclusion that it is a new adventure set before the events of Metroid. I am also one of those people.

Quote from Kejardon:
Until you decide to actually respond coherently to what I say, I claim victory in this debate and am done.


You are free to claim anything you like.

Quote from Kejardon:
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)


I have responded to every point you have made. You simply do not accept my responces.

Quote from Kejardon:
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.


But that is all just your opinion. What you think of my presentation is your opinion. I have proven that I have no theory, only a literal reading of the facts. An example:

Zero Mission is the first mission/adventure, as stated by sources previously listed.
Metroid is not the first mission/adventure, as stated by sources previously listed.

There is no theory there, there is not opinon. Zero Mission is the first mission, Metroid is not. That is a fact. If you would like to debate this fact then you are more than welcome to do so.

Quote from Kejardon:
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.


The timeline status, based solely on the bonus disc and unreadable website, is a subject that can only be explained through different viewpoints. You think that it indicates one thing, I think it indicates another. A literal reading of it would place Zero Mission after Metroid as a sequel, but we know by the facts that this cannot be possible.

Quote from Kejardon:
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.


That is not an accurate description of the outcomes of prior debates. What I have presented is not a viewpoint, it is a collection of facts that support the timeline featuring Zero Mission as a prequel. It is the reason why I and others view the game as a prequel. Also, the fact that people have conflicting views on the issue does not eqate to a failure on my part ot present the facts. This could be contributed to others failing to understand or accept the facts I have presented.

To summarize, you posted no definitions that accurately pertained to my presentation.

Quote from Kejardon:
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.


Yes I have, despite the fact that you have not presented proof that they were overly dramatic in the first place.

The commercial, which is made to inform and intrigue, states that Zero Mission is Samus' first adventure as an intergalactic bounty hunter. This is a direct storyline reference, where the word "game" could not be applied. It is an intentional storyline reference to tell customers that this is the first mission ever.
Numerous statements of "first mission" and "first adventure" also make the possibility that Nintendo worded their information to avoid referring to it as a game unlikely.
There is also the fact that it is poor business to not refer to a product as what it actually exists as. This would be false advertisement and would mislead the fans.

Quote from Kejardon:
Side bit of 'Game' connotation thread: 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.


No I did not. I said that Nintendo is referring to Metroid in that particular e-mail response data. This is clear because the data makes it clear that two games, namely Zero Mission and Metroid, are being compared. Also, it is not correct or intended to call Metroid the first mission, because it is not according to the manual. Calling it the first mission is obviously human error in associating first game with first mission. You must also regard the fact that NOA stated that they do not have all of the information surrounding Zero Mission. It then stands to reason that they do not know that Metroid was not the first mission, and that they think Zero Mission takes place after Metroid since it was released many years later. Therefore, in this case, Nintendo referred to Metroid and that is clear, but what they called it was an error because they do not have all of the accurate information. This is why I do not consider NOA reliable. Though their information does state that the game is not a remake, that information could be inaccurate. That is why I do not use them as evidence to support the prequel side.

What makes the actual box packaging and advertisements different from an e-mail response group at NOA is the fact that those who publish and advertise the game are given accurate information to relay to the public. Also, the box does not state that Metroid is the first mission, where as the e-mail does in its comparison to Zero Mission. The box, commercial, and website all focus on Zero Mission and what it is. Like I stated above, all of those quotes show both reference to the first mission, and the more defined first adventure, which defines the storyline of the game rather than what game it is in the timeline.

Quote from Kejardon:
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.


So you were trolling then?

Quote from Kejardon:
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.


First realize that many of the people that disagree with me are people that have followed my to that board from other forums. Also notice that the common belief is that the game is a remake. Obviously people are not going to throw their long held opinions aside even after reading the evidence. However, many people do not even read the topic. On the N-Side boards there have been people that said they disagreed with me for a long time before they actually read through the evidence and then changed their mind about the game.

Also, though this is unrelated to my presentation, there are those who thought the game was a prequel long before they read over the evidence I found, and that is because they spotted it as well. As a result, many websites still present Zero Mission as a prequel to Metroid.

Quote from Kejardon:
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.


If you do, be sure to include a primary question asking if the prequel evidence has been read over thoroughly.

I believe that if this topic reaches enough people, then it will gain more attention and it will make Metroid fans at least think twice about the games, and that is all I set out to do.

Quote from 13M13:
My apologies. HOWEVER, does this not apply to Dai as well? Because I simply repeated what he said about someone else and directed it towards him.


Of course it applies to me as well, but I never flamed anyone else nor do I ever intend to.

Quote from 13M13:
I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy in Dai's statement.


How was that hypocritical?

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


Thank you for replying. I will try to answer your questions the best I can.

Quote from SkippyJr:
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?


That is a very good question, and it is one that I have studied closely, not just for Zero Mission and Metroid, but for Metroid and Super Metroid as well. The normal response would be that Nintendo just redesigned it all to make a new game. Though this is correct, it is an out of game explanation, and who wants to hear those, right? So, my theory (which is not a fact, but based on facts) is that the Chozo statues have the ability to regenerate the items after they are taken from the Chozo’s claws.

My evidence for this is Metroid. When Samus takes the Long Beam, or to be positive, lets say the Ice Beam, and then leaves the room or replaces the Ice Beam with the Wave Beam, what can Samus go back to find in the claws of that same statue? Another Ice Beam! This means that the Chozo statue would have to have built-in technology that replicates the item set for that statue, which is a fact as seen in Zero Mission. Samus can be recharged with energy, missiles (which is probably just be energy based weaponry), and also some map data (or where to go next). I also think that the Morphing Ball platform works in much the same way.

Some statues are even programmed to protect certain areas or items, as seen in Super Metroid. However, this may be technology installed by the pirates.

The next evidence comes from Metroid Fusion. The B.S.L. researches aliens, organisms, and technology. In one of the rooms early on in the game Samus finds a Chozo statue. It turned out to be an X Core Parasite but the X can only mimic what they sample. It is possible that the X sampled a Chozo statue on SR388 and brought that information to the B.S.L. but then why would the statue be set where it is in Metroid Fusion? It is very possible that the scientists were studying the Chozo statue and the technology within in order to discover ways of replicating. If it were an ordinary statue, then it would have no scientific value at all.

Now, my theory on Energy Tanks and Missiles is that these items are containers that hold energy used to create materialized missiles or armor (repairing damages in Samus’ suit). Energy Tanks I believe reappear in similar areas because pirates replace them. I think this is done for their benefit though. Missiles may provide more power for gun turrets or surface to air batteries located on Zebes surface. They may make the facilities of Zebes run more smoothly or help regenerate creatures used by the pirates in battle. Energy Tanks would obviously power the facilities of Zebes, as well as the B.S.L. and facilities on Tallon IV. As far as Zebes is concerned, I think it is made up of hundreds of Energy Tanks and missiles, but only some are accessible, and those are the ones that Samus obtains. The Chozo also left many other items behind or hidden away, such as the reserve tanks, Power Bombs, etc.

Quote from SkippyJr:
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.)


Anything is possible, but I do not see evidence of that happening. It would not make sense for anyone to go there and leave valuable technology behind there.

Quote from SkippyJr:
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).


Thanks for taking interest in it. It is always refreshing to talk about Metroid elements related to timeline/storyline discussions rather than rehashing similar arguments over and over to people who do not listen. The Wrecked Ship, in my opinion, was operational even after it crash-landed. Sure the monitors did not work and there were live wires everywhere, but it was operational and the Chozo and the pirates searched it. There were Chozo statues in the Wrecked Ship, hidden Chozodian items, as well as Keyhunter Pirates. Lets also not forget Phantoon, who was draining power from the Wrecked Ship and sending it to Mother Brain.

Quote from SkippyJr:
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 never head about any request that Super Metroid be the last game. I think Gunpei always kept the series open on both ends with Metroid having prior missions and Super Metroid ending with "See you next mission."

Quote from SkippyJr:
I would find that the original Japanese game text/booklets/etc. to be far better canon than the English translations.


I disagree. Not only is the Japanese version usually released before the English, thus allowing revisions for the later version, but you must also stick with the version that you can read.

Quote from SkippyJr:
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.


That is a good point. It may give insight as to what the developers were thinking when making the game.

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


I agree, but the items reappearing can apply to Zero Mission in the sense that such a think happening between two games is more likely than it happening between three.

Quote from CorruptedPhoenix:
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.


That is not what a debate is. A debate is merely a lengthy discussion of point and counter point.

Also, it is not my fault that some people do not read the evidence, or consider it to prove nothing. They are not my facts they are Nintendo’s. People are welcome to disagree with what Nintendo says.

Quote from CorruptedPhoenix:
You have also failed to convince anyone.


Also not true. The forum in which I have convinced the most people is the N-Sider board.

Quote from CorruptedPhoenix:
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.


I am merely answer questions that people have, and strengthening my own presentation in the process. None of this would have come about had it not been for people challenging my belief.

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


That does not matter. What matters is that my timeline is consistent with the game facts.

Quote from Chanoire:
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'.


Original has more than one meaning. Ironically it has two definitions that fit both sides of the argument. Original meaning the first, or original meaning one that is copied to make others.

Quote from nn12000:
Nintendo should know alot, 'specially since they made the game.


Perhaps he meant Nintendo Power, which did not make the game. Or perhaps he was being sarcastic.

Quote from PiccoloCube:
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.


According to Sakamoto and all official statements on the game, they made a new adventure and not a remake of Metroid.

Quote from Spine Shark:
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.


Differences are valid because they show where a game is different from another. I do not know how you could consider that invalid.
There was no Grip in Metroid. Also, many areas were changed, omitted, or created in Zero Mission because it was a different adventure.

Quote from Spine Shark:
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...


Perhaps it being a remake of Metroid would be reason enough. How are they going to set out to do a remake then end up designing everything from scratch and putting a completely new story behind it?

Quote from SkippyJr:
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.


You want proof by contradiction? OK, Zero Mission is a remake of Metroid, and Samus’ memory of Zebes in Super Metroid does not match because the designers do not care about consistency, even though they said they do. This is also the case with the storyline contradictions between Zero Mission and Metroid Prime, which was written to be consistent with Metroid. See, remakes make things inconsistent, and since Zero Mission is inconsistent, it must be a remake of Metroid, which was consistent up to this point.

Quote from SkippyJr:
Assuming that M1 and MZM are the same event seems to cause no problems.


Wait, did you read my presentation or not? The evidence makes it clear that Zero Mission contradicts facts in Metroid Prime, Super Metroid, and Metroid as well.

Quote from SkippyJr:
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.


I am sorry, but your assumption of my position is incorrect. Zero Mission being a previous mission has a solid basis in the textual quotes I mentioned before. The in-game differences also indicate that the game was not made to match Metroid and other games based heavily on Metroid’s story and level design. Also, what the fans think is irrelevant. It is also your opinion that they vast majority hold that opinion.

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


Excuse me? When was NoJ being devious?

Quote from SkippyJr:
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.


This is correct.

Quote from SkippyJr:
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.


Which is something that needs to be explained between Metroid and Super Metroid as well, thus making it a moot point.

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


No, they just have a clear vision of Zero Mission and what it is to the series and timeline.

Quote from SkippyJr:
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 ?).


That was never a claim of mine, and I also do not believe that Nintendo considers Metroid Prime Pinball a canon part of the storyline.

Quote from SkippyJr:
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 is incorrect. Most people were mislead by IGN and other game review sources, not Nintendo. Nintendo made it perfectly clear what Zero Mission was, which is why there are many review sites out there even today that present Zero Mission as a prequel. This is a matter of some companies misunderstanding what Nintendo clearly stated.

Quote from SkippyJr:
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.


I never said that each game they made would be consistent with the series, just that games meant to be placed in the timeline would be consistent. Obviously non-canon games like Pinball or Super Smash Bros. Melee would not be made in a way that would fit the Metroid timeline.

Quote from Super-Metroid-Thingy:
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.


The facts state that Metroid is not the first mission. The NOA information was written without that fact in mind, and it compares Zero Mission to Metroid. Whoever wrote it simply made an error in calling Metroid the first mission.

Quote from PureAnxiety:
Okay, i don't know about the rest of you, but i have seen movies "based on" books that skip entire chapters, leave out important characters, create new scenes, and generally screw with the order of events, yet it is still supposed to be a representation of the original medium, tells the same story just through different eyes than those of the original author. Seems to me that this may be a similar case.


However, even those movies are not what actually happened. They are not the same story. You also have movies or shows that are based on others yet are completely new. 

Quote from PureAnxiety:
oh and why try so hard to force this theory down our throats, you can tell that most of us don't really care that much in the first place.


Did I force you to click on the topic? Did I force you to read it? Did I make you reply? Am I telling you to accept it? Then do not make such accusations.

Quote from Vertigo:
Dai the possibility that you are correct is there, Nintendo has been known to withold information. It is also possible that all of the quotes against your theory were mistranslated or misinterpreted by the readers, I have been told many times that Japanese isn't easily translated. You could also be right that the different colours in MZM indicate an earlier time than Metroid.

But there is also an equal chance that the text was properly translated and interpereted, Nintendo is not out to get us (all of the time), and that changes in the game have little to no signifigance.


There is a chance of that, but it is by no means equal.

Quote from Vertigo:
The differences in the two versions can be easily accounted for, since the series has progressed new technology has been released and new techniques have been added to Samus's formidable repertoire.


Moot point. Super Metroid takes the same design and the same areas and simply makes them better. Zero Mission created brand new visuals from scratch and did not follow any preset pattern.

Quote from Vertigo:
Nintendo may have simply wanted to integrate these new things into an old classic game, giving the player that sense of nostalgia with the feeling of a new game.


Then why was that never expressed? Why does Zero Mission have a completely new backstory and why is it said to be the first mission in numerous comments?

Quote from Vertigo:
That would be the common sense method of looking at it. If you think Nintendo has some elaborate plan for the storyline in Metroid then it is also possible that MZM is listing the true events of what happened in Metroid.


No it is not. If the events in Zero Mission contradict the events in Metroid, Metroid Prime, and Super Metroid, then it is not the true telling of the events, regardless of whether it is a remake or not.

Quote from Vertigo:
For all we know the first game could have simply been Samus's report to the Federation.


Well, no. The first game was Metroid. The first mission was Zero Mission.

Quote from Vertigo:
Now I'm not saying I'm right and your wrong but there was that one scientific prinicple that had the word "Razor" in it..... was it "Ocham's Razor"?


That is not a scientific principal, it is a practical principal and it does not apply to debates like these. The simplest answer is not always the correct one. That is what science dictates. However, the prequel timeline is the easiest to believe because it 1. Matches the facts, and 2. Is consistent with the entire series.

Quote from Vertigo:
Anyways it said something to the lines of "the simplest theory is often correct". I can't garuantee that's what it said or even if it's even a real priniciple but isn't it much simpler to simply conclude that the changes were Directorial decisions rather than Nintendo plotting some evil and pointless scheme.


This is where your true bias shows itself. You have no reason to think that Zero Mission being a prequel is evil or a pointless scheme. Those are just your ideas of the timeline. You may view it as such because you believe your theory is being threatened. I think it would be much healthier for you to just keep an open mind about the issue like me. I am always looking for new information, regardless of what side that information proves correct. I am always prepared to find an interview with Sakamoto saying that Zero Mission is a remake of Metroid and replaces it in the timeline. I am also always prepared to find on saying that it is a new mission and takes place before Metroid. I search for facts, not theories.

Quote from Vertigo:
Think of the new Lord of the Rings movie and the old animated one, just because the animated movie sucked and didn't seem like LotR at all it doesn't mean that one movie came before the other in the Middle Earth timeline.


Well for one thing, the new version was never presented as a new story. However, in this case I believe you could compare this to A Hobbit’s Tale by Bilbo Baggins being released after Lord of the Rings. Just because many of the same lands and characters are in it does not mean it is a retelling of other events. It would be a prequel as well.
13M13
2006-03-31 11:04:55 pm
l'appel du vide
Quote from Dai Grepher:
Quote from SABERinBLUE:
Remakes very often contain differences and new material. That is what makes them remakes.

Different games often contain differences and new material as well. I am not saying that these things prove a prequel, but I am saying they also do not prove a remake. We must consider all of the game elements, including storyline, and text media like the box and game information.

Ahhh, then perhaps you'd be willing to change the title of this thread?
Vertigo
2006-03-31 11:17:29 pm
lvl 28 Magic Leper
I would like to point out that I am not biased on this subject however I do lean towards the idea that MZM is a remake of Metroid, to tell you the truth I was quite interested in your take of it all.  My mention of an "evil and pointless scheme" was however how I do view the idea of Nintendo witholding such irrelevent information.

A Hobbit's Tale and LotR are more comparable to Metroid 2 and Super Metroid in which one of stories is clearly identified to take place before the other.  MZM and Metroid don't qualify for such a comparison as there is no concrete proof that one takes place before the other but... in light of what you've been posting there is some evidence suggesting that you may be right.

Honestly if I acted biased it was only because I have a strong feeling you are biased in the situation, you seem to disregard any evidence presented against you and yet you act as if your evidence is adamant.  Furthermore you seem to twist and turn the meaning of any powerfull evidence against you until it suits your needs. But then again I'm sure to you the vast majority of the people here seem to be biased against you.
Dai Grepher
2006-04-01 03:00:08 am
Quote from 13M13:
Ahhh, then perhaps you'd be willing to change the title of this thread?


No, because like I said, the evidence in the game as well as outside the game all come together to prove it is a prequel. I am saying that the in-game differences are not enough proof alone. Other facts must be considered also.

Quote from Vertigo:
I would like to point out that I am not biased on this subject however I do lean towards the idea that MZM is a remake of Metroid, to tell you the truth I was quite interested in your take of it all. My mention of an "evil and pointless scheme" was however how I do view the idea of Nintendo witholding such irrelevent information.


I am sorry for jumping to conclusions and calling you biased.

Quote from Vertigo:
A Hobbit's Tale and LotR are more comparable to Metroid 2 and Super Metroid in which one of stories is clearly identified to take place before the other. MZM and Metroid don't qualify for such a comparison as there is no concrete proof that one takes place before the other but... in light of what you've been posting there is some evidence suggesting that you may be right.


Thank you for recognizing that the possibility is there. I see Zero Mission the same way I see A Hobbit's Tale and The Lord of the Rings. The tale is told after the story of Frodo, but the events of the tale actaully take place before the events of Frodo's story.

Quote from Vertigo:
Honestly if I acted biased it was only because I have a strong feeling you are biased in the situation, you seem to disregard any evidence presented against you and yet you act as if your evidence is adamant.


Most of what I see presented against me is not evidence against me. Most of the time it supports my side but it is just being interpreted differently. If someone brings up evidence, I must do my best to explain why it does not disprove the other facts. I have also done this with all of my evidence. I first made sure that all of the facts I found consistently indicated one thing only. It just so happens that the one thing is Zero Mission being a prequel. I am not biased either. I will accept whatever timeline Sakamoto gives us, unless it places Metroid Fusion before Super Metroid or something weird like that.

Quote from Vertigo:
Furthermore you seem to twist and turn the meaning of any powerfull evidence against you until it suits your needs. But then again I'm sure to you the vast majority of the people here seem to be biased against you.


They seem to favor their own theory over the evidence I found. Others do not feel that way. Some are happy that I have brought this to their attention.
Kejardon
2006-04-01 04:20:37 am
Embarrasing Fact: Power suit made by lowest bidder
::checks ZM Forum::
Hmm.. Dai posted again. Let's see here... nope, still no cohesive refutations.

Quote from Dai Grepher:
I have proven that I have no theory, only a literal reading of the facts.

In an interesting bit of irony, a 'theory' could be very accurately described as a 'reading of the facts'. What you're saying is that you have no cohesive view of the facts.
It's nice to know what words really mean instead of just throwing them around and hoping for the best. :P

Quote from Kejardon:
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.

No explanation after this of how you defy casaulity... no need for me to respond.

Quote from Dai Grepher:
Quote from Kejardon:
You have not shown how my response is not based on the definitions of the words.
To summarize, you posted no definitions that accurately pertained to my presentation.

It should not be necessary for me to hold your hand through the dictionary. But I suspect I will have to.
Look up 'quote' and 'infer'. You have quotes, and inferences based on those quotes. A literal reading should only have quotes, not inferences tacked onto the quotes.
And because I know you'll bring this up, interpretting a sentence literally is also an inference. If I said "I eat glitches for breakfast", you will not infer that I literally eat glitches for breakfast.

Quote from Dai Grepher:
Quote from Kejardon:
To be a bit more explicit, do you have evidence that Nintendo would not dramaticize things and reduce their usage of the word 'game'?

Yes I have, despite the fact that you have not presented proof that they were overly dramatic in the first place.

haha... there's plenty of proof that Nintendo likes drama. You really want me to start posting some?

Quote from Dai Grepher:
The commercial, which is made to inform and intrigue, states that Zero Mission is Samus' first adventure as an intergalactic bounty hunter. This is a direct storyline reference, where the word "game" could not be applied. It is an intentional storyline reference to tell customers that this is the first mission ever.
Quote:
Metroid: Zero Mission. Her first [game's] adventure as an intergalactic bounty hunter.

Although this still is NOT evidence that Nintendo doesn't dramatize things (if anything, it helps my case for drama).

Quote from Dai Grepher:
Quote from Kejardon:
Side bit of 'Game' connotation thread: 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.
I said that Nintendo is referring to Metroid in that particular e-mail response data.

It's part of the official product description.
Quote from Dai Grepher:
This is clear because the data makes it clear that two games, namely Zero Mission and Metroid, are being compared. Also, it is not correct or intended to call Metroid the first mission, because it is not according to the manual. Calling it the first mission is obviously human error in associating first game with first mission.

So... you admit that in certain cases 'First mission' should be replaced with 'First game'.
I guess there is a difference you're implying: You say it's unintentional, and I say it's intentional. What evidence do you have that this is an error on Nintendo's part, other than the fact it doesn't fit your view?

Quote from Dai Grepher:
You must also regard the fact that NOA stated that they do not have all of the information surrounding Zero Mission...

Those are from automated or quick-1-minute-response-from-random-NOA-employee e-mails. I generally ignore those e-mails entirely anyways.

Quote from Dai Grepher:
What makes the actual box packaging and advertisements different from an e-mail response group at NOA is the fact that those who publish and advertise the game are given accurate information to relay to the public.

Nice bullet-in-foot action there, you're implying that 'first mission' in the official product description is intentional.

Quote from Dai Grepher:
Quote from Kejardon:
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.
So you were trolling then?

I was poking fun at you.
I had no intention of making you angry and inviting flames. But if you act silly or say something silly, I will poke fun at you (unless I know you take offense at the drop of a feather, but I don't know many people actually like that).
I can see you're more than composed enough to shrug off small pokes like that, so I figured there was no harm in it, even though I don't really know you outside of the ZM argument.
And if trolling weren't a fairly serious problem in my view, I'd probably be making fun of your trolling comment, too. <_<

Nothing in the rest of your post is either relevant to my points or significant for other reasons... I'm done.
BlueGlass
2006-04-01 05:31:56 am
All right, to start off, I will state that I have read all of your evidence, Dai, and have in fact read it twice, so you can't say I didn't

Firstly, something that, in my opinion, almost undoubtedly proves MZM to be a remake can in fact be found in one of the interviews you linked to

Quote:
Q: Metroid Zero Mission is the first remake in the Metroid series, and the most significant addition is the addition of cinematics. Do you see this as a trend in adventure games today, the need for a more fleshed-out storyline?

Yes I am noticing trends to that extent. It's important to have a story to complement the game, and working on the story, in a game like Metroid that doesn't use a lot of language, it can be very difficult to convey the plot accurately and in a way that the player can understand. This time, the one thing we tried to do was, while fleshing out the story with cinematic scenes we retained a certain amount of mystery to the story in order to maintain the player's interest. I do agree that nowadays in videogames, without a story to go along with it, I think it's difficult for gamers to maintain interest.


This is from the IGN interview you linked to in your evidence post.  Notice how the interviewer refers to the game as a remake, but Sakamoto makes no attempt to correct him.

My next comment is about video game commercials.  They are not a good official source of imformation, even if they are from the company that made the game (and by the way, I very highly dobut that Nintendo of Japan (since you don't trust Nintendo of America) would be involved in making commercials at all, especially ones shown inAmerica/Europe (I don't know where that commercial was shown, bu I can safely assume it wasn't Jpan because it was in English with English text)).  As an example (of an inaccurate commercial), look at this commercial for The Legend of Zelda: a Link to the Past.  If we take everything in tis commercial as fact, like you did with the Zero Mission commercial, then just about every character in the game, including Link and various enemies, dances.  Also, Zelda has black hair, even though in the game it is clearly not black.  Also, there is a character in the commercial who I can only assume is meant to be Agahnim, except this character wears black, while Agahnim wears green. 

Next, a comment about video game remakes in general: oftentimes, there are parts of the game that are drastically changed between the original and the remake.  One such example is Final Fantasy and Final Fantasy II versus the two-games-in-one remake Final Fantasy I & II: Dawn of Souls.  In the remake, not only does everything look different, but enemy stats are different, and there are huge dungeons where before there was nothing, and there is a short entirely new game added on to the end of FFII.  Does this make these entirely new games?  No, it doesn't; it makes them remakes.

Another thing: when two related games are designed by two almost entirely different teams, the two teams are not going to worry about making minor details match up.  Another fact is that game designers almost always place functionaliy (not sure if that's exactly the word I'm looking for, but it's 3:30 in the morning so I don't really care) over consistency.  With this I am referring to your comments about the changes to Mother Brain's room.  The designers redesgined the room, specifically the part where you fight mother brain, to allow players to make use of the Power Grip during the fight.  And while we're on the topic, did you notice that Mother Brain's destroyed room in Super Metroid does not look exactly like Mother Brain's room in Super Metroid?  In Metroid, there is one of those blue platforms extending out from the door.  In SM, there a piece of metal floor extending from the same space.  In Metroid, the platform between the first and second Zebebite is the same size as the othe inter-Zebebite platforms.  In SM it is about half as big as the others.  Also, the platforms in the escape shaft are arranged differently in each game.  Is Nintendo implying that Samus actuall had four missions on Zebes (MZM, Metroid, something else, and SM)?  Along this same line of thinking, wouldn't the fact that the room in RoS where Samus finds the Hatchling looks different in RoS and the SM flashback imply that she actually found two metroid hatchlings?  All of these things are simply stylistic differences becuse the games were made by different people?

About MZM's story not meshing with Prime's: the storyline of Metroid Prime has gigantic plotholes already.  It is highly unlikely that Nintedo cared very much about making sure MZM's story fit prfectly with Prime's, especially when Prime was not made by Nintendo and is not part of the main Metroid story.  Concerning your claims that MZM was Samus's first mission, consider this: you are a powerful government controlling a large chunk of the galaxy.  A certain species intent on destroying your government and taking over the galaxy has come into possesion of a highly deadly lifeform.  Would you even cinsider sending a single person who has never done anything of the sort before to their base alone to stop them?  If the answer is yes I can't see your government lating very long.  When the MZM box says "Samus Aran's first mission", it almost definitely means "first game," but says "first mission" because it sounds better.  As for first legendary adventure, it is quite likely that her previous missions, while enough to make her considered the best bounty hunter in the galaxy, were not the kind of things that would become legends.  About the thing in the RoS manual where it mentions the reactivated Mother Brain, isn't it possible  that the Mother Brain has simply been on Zebes for a long time, just dormant, especially since in the Metroid E-manga, which many people consider canon, Mother Brain was in fact made by the Chozo?  Concerning using the Metroid manual as evidence, it really isn't trustworthy.  The booklet says Samus can throw missiles!  But seriously, I dobut Nintendo considers anything in that manual to be canon anymore.  Sure they wrote it, but they wrote it TWENTY YEARS AGO.  They've made changes to the story since then.  About the present tense in Metroid manual vs past tense in MZM manual, the present tense was probably used to get the player more immersed in the game, because  back then they didn't have awesome graphics and high quality music to help them.  The past tense in the MZM boooklet can be taken as evidence that the game is a remake, saying "here's the game's story, but it's the same as the story for the original, and that game already came out, so this game is just retelling that story, so since it's retelling something that already happened, it should be in the past."
13M13
2006-04-01 06:18:25 am
l'appel du vide
You know...after looking back on alot of this...I'm starting to understand Dai's points...

So, first off...Dai, I'd like to apologize for my absurd remarks.  I'm sorry that I let my emotions get the best of me and for regarding you as insane simply because of my own flawed notions regarding the Metroid timeline.  In hindsight, I can't say I'm really proud of myself...

While I cannot claim I grasp everything you have brought up (it's quite a handful and you've certainly had alot of time to really think it through), I am starting to understand the storyline discrepancies you've pointed out.  The simply fact is this: Nintendo has been rather vague about Zero Mission's relation to the original Metroid.  It is up to us, the fans, to sift through the information given and discover the truth for ourselves...however far-fetched and awkward it may seem.

And we cannot take what's given to us at face value; perhaps Nintendo is being vague for a reason?  In other words, we shouldn't blindly accept the remake theory simply because it's what makes most sense...they've laid out clues for us to find.  We must search for them.  This problem is akin to an easter egg hunt.  Hunting behind nooks and crannys, we strive to find that perfect egg, overflowing with candy and toys...

So howsabout we all set aside our differences and search for the truth together...because after reading his posts again (and as absurd as this may sound), I really think Dai may have come across some good stuff.  Oh, come on...admit it!  He's refuted us pretty darn well!

So...Dai...what I'm trying to say is...

My bad.

And stay true!
Prime Hunter
2006-04-01 09:43:15 am
I have read through your entire presentation and the thread here. Even after reading everything, there is still enough reason for me to believe that Zero Mission is a remake, and not a prequel.

Quote from Dai Grepher:
Quote from PiccoloCube:
MZM and M1 = go to planet Zebes and destroy the Metroids along Mother Brain.

Actaully, in Zero Mission she was sent to investigate rumors of a deadly alien species existing on Zebes.


First off, and I don't think anybody's mentioned this, but how do you explain the Zero Mission loading screens? In them, they have the exact same messages that appear on the Metroid title screen, which are telling Samus to exterminate the Metroid threat and defeat Mother Brain. If they are supposed to be different games, why would the messages be EXACTLY the same? And where would she be getting the messages from in the first place if, according to what I remember you mentioning, Samus didn't work for the Federation in Zero Mission?

Quote from Dai Grepher:
To make a long story longer, as far as game placement goes, I think it is like this:

Zero Mission
(numerous missions)
Metroid
Metroid Prime 1 and 2
Metroid II
Super Metroid
Metroid Fusion

I have not placed Hunters yet.

However, I am open to the possibility of the Primes taking place after Super Metroid...


I know this is supposed to be about ZM and Metroid, but there are a few other timeline issues that I feel need to be mentioned. As we've said before, Prime's storyline already had some plotholes in them. However, there is one Pirate Log that refers to the fall of Zebes due to the Hunter. In it, doesn't it say that they went back to Zebes to rebuild? How can somebody rebuild a destroyed planet?

Besides, for the case of the Prime series, they've already said that they take place between Metroid/ZM and ROS I believe. (With Hunters between Prime 1 and 2) The Echoes bonus disk proves that. It also shows Zero Mission AFTER Metroid, not before. How can it be a prequel in this case? (I assume that it means the extended part of ZM is after Metroid, which is why it's been placed there.)

There are other things that I have wondered about, mostly about the bosses:

Quote from Dai Grepher:
The Kraid in Metroid is a different Kraid. It is of the same species as the Fake Kraids, which are much smaller than the large Kraids.

The Ridley in Metroid is also a different Ridley. The Ridley in Zero Mission was probably the Ridley from Zero Mission, and the Ridley in Super Metroid is likely the one from Metroid.

later...

Different Ridley. In the series there are at least three Ridleys and three Kraids. For Ridley, there is the Zero Mission one, the Metroid one, the Metroid Prime one (which could be the Zero Mission Ridley), the Super Metroid one (which could be the Metroid Ridley), and the frozen one in Metroid Fusion (which must be a new one).

For Kraid, there is the Zero Mission Kraid, the Metroid Kraid, and the Super Metroid Kraid.


Where is the evidence that there are multiple versions of Ridley and Kraid? Sure, Fake Kraid throws part of my Kraid argument out the window, but how can you know for sure that this is the truth? Where does anything say that Ridley is part of a species and not a single entity? He does get resurected multiple times, but that still means he's the same being.

Quote from Dai Grepher:
Lets also not forget Phantoon, who was draining power from the Wrecked Ship and sending it to Mother Brain.

And where did this idea come from? It never says that Phantoon's giving its energy to MB.

Quote from The letter:
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.

later...

This February, Samus Aran will return to her roots and relive the story that started it all -- revealing for the first time full details of her meeting with the Metroids. The plotline will be familiar to longtime fans of the Metroid series, but the challenges are new, the power-ups are plentiful (taken from several games in the series) and the graphics and sound are supercharged. Plus, if you thought that the original Metroid had a surprise ending, wait until you get past the Mother Brain in Metroid: Zero Mission. A new twist provides a deeper adventure than ever before.


If, according to this, ZM begins RIGHT WHERE the original did, how can that prove ZM to be a prequel? My interpretation is that ZM begins at the same time and place, not just the same location. From my perspective, the writer of the letter meant that the gameplay is not all the same when they said it wasn't a remake. (If you think about it, a lot of remakes [Like the Super Mario Advance series] are mostly the same game with updated graphics, so this could be the reason why he said ZM wasn't a remake.) The storyline is, however. They never argue that it's a brand new story, besides what is added to the end of the game. All that it says is that new ELEMENTS were added to both the story and the gameplay in order to make it a better for current gamers.

Besides, how can somebody relive a story if it's never been told before?
Vertigo
2006-04-01 10:33:20 am
lvl 28 Magic Leper
Quote from Dai Grepher:
The Kraid in Metroid is a different Kraid. It is of the same species as the Fake Kraids, which are much smaller than the large Kraids.

The Ridley in Metroid is also a different Ridley. The Ridley in Zero Mission was probably the Ridley from Zero Mission, and the Ridley in Super Metroid is likely the one from Metroid.

later...

Different Ridley. In the series there are at least three Ridleys and three Kraids. For Ridley, there is the Zero Mission one, the Metroid one, the Metroid Prime one (which could be the Zero Mission Ridley), the Super Metroid one (which could be the Metroid Ridley), and the frozen one in Metroid Fusion (which must be a new one).

For Kraid, there is the Zero Mission Kraid, the Metroid Kraid, and the Super Metroid Kraid.


Actually if the multiple Ridley idea is correct (I don't think it is though) the Ridley from Metroid and Metroid Prime would be the same.  As they both lack the head crest that all other Ridley's do have. 

Which is sort of proof that MZM takes place AFTER Metroid because only the later versions of Ridley have this Crest including the MZM Ridley.  But that idea only works if you believe that each Ridley is the same Ridley... wich makes sense because he was obviously revived in MP which wouldn't be necessarry if there were more Ridleys out there.  Of course this sprite change could be dismissed as Director decision.

But what would be the point of the space pirates getting a differen't Ridley each time, he is thought to be a cunning leader (of course we could be wrong) and unless that trait is common to all his species, they might as well as just replace him with a cunning space pirate.  It makes much more sense that the space pirates somehow revive him each time or reclone him and somehow record his old memories back into him.  So unless he was a space pirate, died, got his memories put into a big dragon thing and each time it dies they just record his memories into another dragon, I really don't see why the Space Pirates would go through all of the trouble finding another dragon trained in the arts of war.  Not to mention that this Ridley has a lot of valuable experience fighting Samus.

In fact I've always thought of Ridley as more of a Space Pirate expirement, or a single creature instead of a member of a large species.  Or he may have had a species, but they are all extinct now as he is described in the Metroid Manual as the last of the native inhabitants of Zebes (Taking directly from Wikipedia, so I don't know if it actually says that, I only have the original cartridge and not the manual so I can't go check it out)
spineshark
2006-04-01 12:05:33 pm
in the name of justice!
This whole argument reminds of Sisyphus...but I'm not sure...which side...is which...
Quote from Dai Grepher:
That is not true. The differences are vast, and this is not because of graphical updates. The design of the areas is vastly different, and an unbiased look at the areas would identify Zero Mission's as an earlier timeframe than Metroid's.

Actually, I would say that the plain, flat platforms in Metroid are based on technical limitations.  Unless, of course, you're literally comparing the ground tiles, which wouldn't make any sense to me..."these bubbles are older than those bubbles!"
Quote:
I believe that if this topic reaches enough people, then it will gain more attention and it will make Metroid fans at least think twice about the games, and that is all I set out to do.

You don't seem to be thinking about this a second time, just considering which meanings of the words help your point the most.
Quote:
Quote from Chanoire:
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'.


Original has more than one meaning. Ironically it has two definitions that fit both sides of the argument. Original meaning the first, or original meaning one that is copied to make others.

Huh?  I see that "pun" only supporting the remake argument.  If "original" is the first, then that means Metroid.  If it's the "base," then it's still Metroid.
Quote:
Quote from Spine Shark:
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.


Differences are valid because they show where a game is different from another. I do not know how you could consider that invalid.
There was no Grip in Metroid. Also, many areas were changed, omitted, or created in Zero Mission because it was a different adventure.

A different adventure, yes.  A different story though?
Quote:
Perhaps it being a remake of Metroid would be reason enough. How are they going to set out to do a remake then end up designing everything from scratch and putting a completely new story behind it?

They did not nearly design everything from scratch.  The maps feature enormous similarities. The music melodies are nearly all the same.  Two boss patterns have been taken from Super Metroid (obviously to build your precious "consistency," which I don't think actually exists)...

I really have to say, that I feel like you're taking the similarities, meant pretty much as a little "reward" for loyal fans, and spitting on them with complaints about how doors and holes don't line up, and interpreting a story that was never really more than "blow up the bad guys" based on vague meanings of words that have been translated  from a "hard to translate" language.
Tahngarthor
2006-04-01 01:03:41 pm
Bangaa Bishop
No item that wasnt found in the original metroid exists in ZM in the same way the original items do.

Power Grip - in crateria, not accessible in the original game
charge beam - a mini boss was added to give you this.
power bombs, gravity suit, plasma beam - all after you get your "real" suit which comes after defeating mother brain, which is where the original game is.
Super missles- mini boss added to give you these.

Take all of these things out, and I see a copy of the original metroid, with the terrain drastically altered (but having the same basic structure- compare the shape of the brinstar map in ZM to the layout of brinstar in Metroid) with the same goals, objectives, and bosses (with the same names but souped up- The NES wasnt very capable of having bosses like the kraid and ridley you see here- but they're the same bosses with the same names. ) All the zones have the same names. the mother brain room is almost exactly the same as the original metroid. The INTROs to the game are exactly the same execept ZM has some additional pictures and stuff. The general appearance of the zones is the same (but looks nicer in ZM obviously. Conclusion about the areas: The'yre the exact same freaking place, but redone to accomodate the GBA's better capabilities.

Even going to all the trouble you have gone to, i'm not convinced that ZM is anything but an updated version of metroid designed to have more of the feel of Super Metroid to it, and has additional story after defeating mother brain. It's a lot of fun, and I like it, but it's a remake. Right from the game's introduction, which mimics the NES introuduction, to playing thorugh the game which has areas that, while not identical, bear resembalance and have a similar basic layout, bosses that are the same (the only reason the bosses are tiny and ugly in Metroid is because of the NES limitations- the game was made in 1986, come on!). Samus even says at the beginning that she's retelling her story. Show me all the interviews you want, but right up until the defeat of mother brain, I feel like i'm playing the same game with additional and revised content (that wasn't thought of when they created the game).

You have done a lot of research and I commend you for working so hard to prove your beliefs, but I don't agree. the tourian base has been blown up once, and the entire planet has been blown up once.
Though the game itself has changed, the story underlying the game is the EXACT same story as the original metroid, plus more after the end. The fact that the original story (The whole story is described in the mission orders) is EXACTLY the same (plus more) tells me it is the exact same timeframe. I don't intend to flame you at all, but the evidence supporting a remake is far more obvious and more pronounced and more clearly "There" than your evidence, which is clips and cuts and pastes from interviews, other people's forum posts, and your -views/interpretations (not facts)-  are little tidbits gathered together, strategically positioned to form your argument. It's very skillfully done, and what you have written  technically supports your argument, but your argument itself is what is flawed. In all of your digging and researching, you have overlooked or ignored the obvious facts.  You aren't a bad person or anything and I dont mean to offend. Playing the game tells most everyone it's a remake, Nintendo says its a remake, everyone who hasnt been swayed by your carefully manipulated "facts" thinks it's a remake. And it's a remake.

I will post no more on thiis (Though I will continue to read it). I wish you luck in finding some more, concrete, clear, visible, unmanipulated evidence where you arent playing with semantics, that reinforce your argument and make it appear less flawed.

The guys at M2K2 are experts when it comes to anything metroid, heck they probably know more about metroid than nintendo itself does (/em points to sequence breaking secret worlds etc.) I'm inclined to take any of their words over almost anyone when it comes to metroid games.
Super-Metroid-Thingy
2006-04-01 01:08:57 pm
Quote from Dai Grepher:
Quote from Super-Metroid-Thingy:
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.


The facts state that Metroid is not the first mission. The NOA information was written without that fact in mind, and it compares Zero Mission to Metroid. Whoever wrote it simply made an error in calling Metroid the first mission.


If your admitting that people can make errors, such as overlooking storyling details, isnt it very possible that when making zero mission, the developers simply changed things such as  the map positioning because they thought it would make the game better, and they didnt care too much about the small details in the storyline? Also, isnt it possible that when zero mission was called samus' first mission, the fact that it is not her first mission, but a remake of her first game, was overlooked?

the only reason zero mission doesnt connect with other games in the series, like super metroid, is becuase that game was made before zero mission existed.  they made super metroid connect with NES metroid because that was the only game they had about samus' mission on zebes.  when they made zero mission, they changed the landscape becuase they wanted to give samus more abilities, and that requires different terrain to make these abilities useful.  A map with changes and inconsistencies to change the gameplay does not prove that zero mission is a different mission.  Nintendo simply prefers to make the gameplay better rather than make all the games in the series consistent, at least with metroid games.  The metroid series is not about the series' overall story, it is about its gameplay.
SABERinBLUE
2006-04-01 02:21:03 pm
Cook of the Sea
Quote from Dai Grepher:
They seem to favor their own theory over the evidence I found. Others do not feel that way. Some are happy that I have brought this to their attention.


No, we prefer our interpretation of the evidence to your interpretation of the evidence.  You can't get away with a statement like that, implying that yours is the only legitimate claim to evidence while all we have is a theory.  Play fair. 

Dai, you cannot continue to arbitrarily attack the credibility of sources.  You cannot say that "oh the NoA letter was written without X in mind" when you have no idea if this is the case.  This is a letter from Nintendo of America.  These are people who know far more about the games than you do.  Because they work for Nintendo. 

I'm trying to keep people from unfairly being asses at you just because of your opinion here, but you're not doing a good job of being reasonable here.  The letter from NoA would have gotten any clear-headed person to back down.  It's a letter.  From NoA.  With words in it that contradict what you are saying.  In the case of You vs The Letter From NoA, the letter wins, because it's from Nintendo.
Supuh
2006-04-01 02:31:28 pm
1. i did read this topic entirely, the arguement from Dai Grepher is made up entirely of flawed logic

2. i read the topic he pointed out in the first post. complete bullshit is my opinion of it.

3. since you have read the other topic posted in this forum, and even ADMITTED that there was only one view on the issue, which was "boy, this guy's a moron", you essentually have called yourself an idiot

4. everyone in the other topic said your opinion was crap, so why would you come here and point your issue out to us in a forum in which all your points made fun of?


Quote from Dai Grepher:
Actually, there were many people in the G4 thread who agreed with me, or said they had known that it was a prequel ever since they played it. Those that argued against me were proptly disproved by the facts. Many of those who disagreed simply did not understand what I was telling them or what the facts were.



...wait, hold on a second here.... what FACTS? all i saw was opinions! "the mother brain battle was different, its a prequal! BBBBBBZZZZZZTT! WRONG! as already stated in this topic, the battle was probably redone on purpoise to make the battle harder.

and as someone (im too lazy to find the exact quote) once said something along these lines here,
Quote from ???:
Metroid MZM is a retelling of the original metroid, think of it as from different points of view.

as an example, ill put MZM in samus's view
samus: man, i totually owned those space pirates, i took down mother brain, ridley, kraid who was HUGE and should have won, and even when i was stripped of my power suit, i still owned them!

with the original metroid as space pirates view
Pirate: Samus went and whipped through our base in an hour flat, she didn't encounter much resistance at all, kraid was tiny and incomplete, ridley's wing was damage, and mother brain couldn't fight back! and she certainly didn't take down one of our space cruisers and use one of our sperm shuttles to escape!


now, that isnt an exact quote, since im too lazy to find it, but that is basically it. WE HAVE SEEN YOUR OPINIONS, and just like boo-fish, WE DO NOT APROOVE!

...ohh, and does this seem like what Bag_Of_Magic_food said in RT-55j's sig?
Tahngarthor
2006-04-01 04:30:09 pm
Bangaa Bishop
(ok I lied about saying no more) :D

Quote:
In the case of You vs The Letter From NoA, the letter wins, because it's from Nintendo.


QFT. :)
ajbolt89
2006-04-01 08:00:05 pm
lol no way
I'm going to have to second Saber here, because all I've really noticed in your arguments is selective hearing. If something doesn't support your argument, it's not real proof, because they didn't have something in mind? I don't understand where you draw the line as to what is real evidence, and what isn't... because there is absolutely no way that you can infer anything from these NOA letters and texts on the box.
Also, you've done a good job of pretending that the majority of Kejardon's arguments aren't there, and I'll commend you on your pretense, but to any outsider who's flowing the argument, whether it be on paper or in their heads, you're clearly leaving a lot of things unanswered and that simply pisses me off. As a highschool debator I've lost too many rounds to people who think they can get away with ignoring arguments, or by making up lies and hoping the judge won't realize what they're saying, or by making statements and not backing them up.

For example:
Quote from Dai Grepher:
Quote from nn12000:
I remember being told by NOA that this game is a remake. I just don't see how it is a prequal.


The main thought behind it is that the maps are not consistent with Metroid, and key areas that appear in Super Metroid are also inconsistent.


That doesn't make any sense. Whether the maps are consistent with Super Metroid or not has no bearing on whether or not MZM is a remake of Metroid 1 or not, because Metroid 1 had way too many dissimilarities to Super Metroid. Furthermore, as stated by various people, graphical limitations of the time can more than account for why the, er, graphics look different, or why the exact placement of the platforms is different. Ignoring the mere possibility of that Nintendo maybe wanted to also make the experience exciting/worthwhile so people might, I don't know... buy their game, you're simply ignoring the idea that it could have been the system limitations that led to MZM looking differently from Metroid 1.

Quote from Dai Grepher:
Quote from Kejardon:
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.


Yes I have, despite the fact that you have not presented proof that they were overly dramatic in the first place.

The commercial, which is made to inform and intrigue, states that Zero Mission is Samus' first adventure as an intergalactic bounty hunter. This is a direct storyline reference, where the word "game" could not be applied. It is an intentional storyline reference to tell customers that this is the first mission ever.
Numerous statements of "first mission" and "first adventure" also make the possibility that Nintendo worded their information to avoid referring to it as a game unlikely.
There is also the fact that it is poor business to not refer to a product as what it actually exists as. This would be false advertisement and would mislead the fans.


Here's an example of an inference you've made without any logical backing. Let's first get out of the way that you say that the commercial is there to inform and... gasp, intrigue? But you also state that Kejardon has not given any proof of where they're overly dramatic. This problem is solved by yourself, by stating that they're using the commercial to intrigue, by adding drama. I also imagine that the deep voice and flashy visuals might also be evidence of Nintendo being dramatic, but I suppose I'd be wrong there, too, because... well, only some things are actually evidence, and only if they support your argument.
Your idea that Nintendo didn't use the words "mission" and "adventure" to avoid using the word "game", is simply rediculous. You state that it's an intentional storyline reference? Who told you that? Did NOA tell you, or NOJ, or... maybe you just made that idea up?
This argument should be dropped simply because you try way too hard to make things seem like fact when they're really just inference. It's not healthy for the debate, and not healthy for peoples' opinions of you... which in turn biases them against you. Though I guess you don't really need to help them with that.

Quote from Dai Grepher:
What makes the actual box packaging and advertisements different from an e-mail response group at NOA is the fact that those who publish and advertise the game are given accurate information to relay to the public.


WHAT?! Wait, how do you know? Your evidence is CLEARLY the right evidence, because, through some unseen, unnamed forces, one group is getting more data than another. This is a fact people, and you know why? Because Dai said it was. That's the reasoning that makes this a fact.

>_<

Following all of this, you attempt to answer a  question SkippyJr asked about why the items in MZM/M1 are in the same locations, but in M1->SM, they're not. You answer it by giving a theory that the chozo statues can regenerate items over time, and support it with this idea regarding the BSL station in Metroid Fusion:
Quote from Dai Grepher:
The next evidence comes from Metroid Fusion. The B.S.L. researches aliens, organisms, and technology. In one of the rooms early on in the game Samus finds a Chozo statue. It turned out to be an X Core Parasite but the X can only mimic what they sample. It is possible that the X sampled a Chozo statue on SR388 and brought that information to the B.S.L. but then why would the statue be set where it is in Metroid Fusion? It is very possible that the scientists were studying the Chozo statue and the technology within in order to discover ways of replicating. If it were an ordinary statue, then it would have no scientific value at all.


First you state that they research technology, and end the paragraph by stating that if the statue were... ordinary, it would have no scientific value at all.
I guess this makes sense, because, erm, archaeology isn't a scientific field of study or anything like that.

In an attack against your whole theory regarding Chozo statues and their means of replication or technology, and why you think your theory is right... look man, you're ignoring the question.
You do not state anywhere, throughout your whole explanation, why the item locations in MZM/M1 are so similar, but aren't the same in Super Metroid. You just go off on a wild tangent about crazy technologies that haven't been explained to the player yet... look, it's great that you're getting your creative excersize, but it doesn't pertain to the debate at all.

Besides that, you explain the missile canisters/energy tanks to possibly be there for use by the Space Pirates. Then you make the following statement:
Quote from Dai Grepher:
Anything is possible, but I do not see evidence of that happening. It would not make sense for anyone to go there and leave valuable technology behind there.


What what whaaat?! I sense an incongruency! Explain this to me.



Alright, I'm done arguing, but I also want to mention that I really, really resent your obvious buttkissing. Look, it's great to be nice to people, but when you're so cold to everyone else and randomly decide to be nice or make a statement that could be read as polite, it's way too obvious that you're not doing anything but trying to make yourself look good, so that people might take your side. For example:

Quote from Dai Grepher:
Thank you for replying. I will try to answer your questions the best I can.
(In response to SkippyJr mentioning that he's a first-time poster).

Quote from Dai Grepher:
Thanks for taking interest in it.
(SkippyJr's taking interest in your ideas).

Just... don't. We're not discussing what kind of person you are, nor are we anticipating a possible long-term relationship with you here on these forums, so be who you are, let it all out. Don't try to hide yourself behind these little attempts at chivalry. It doesn't work. It's like if I were to tell you I'd like to hang out with you outside of this Metroid board.
>_>
Supuh
2006-04-01 08:20:48 pm
Quote from hejira:
I have a far more likely explanation for the vast differences between Metroid and ZM. (It's been sitting on my hard drive for at least a week.)

Metroid

Space Pirates: Yeah, Samus did kick our butts, but Ridley and Kraid were about the same size as her and did not fly or tower over her, so they kinda had it coming. Oh, and she didn't even have a full energy tank when she arrived. What kind of bounty hunter enters an area unprepared? She most certainly did not set off the self-destruct on a space pirate ship, and she did not commandeer one of our sperm shuttles in order to escape. In fact, we doubt she actually HAD a ship.

Metroid: Zero Mission

Samus: Except for the butt-kicking, total bollocks.


there you go, thats exact quote. and a perfectly resonable theory about MZM, FACE IT,, YOU ARENT RIGHT BECAUSE YOU MADE A THEORY
13M13
2006-04-01 08:53:48 pm
l'appel du vide
Guys, guys...sheesh.  Do y'all always get so defensive?  Face it!  Dai has some extraordinarily valid points and the rest of you are too blind to see it!  Your bias has built a wall around truth!  And truth is knocking...never stopping, always knocking...

Will you continue to ignore her desires?
Tahngarthor
2006-04-01 08:59:00 pm
Bangaa Bishop
Quote from 13M13:
Guys, guys...sheesh.  Do y'all always get so defensive?  Face it!  Dai has some extraordinarily valid points and the rest of you are too blind to see it!  Your bias has built a wall around truth!  And truth is knocking...never stopping, always knocking...

Will you continue to ignore her desires?


I hope this is sarcastic... it sounds like it but im not 100% sure.
13M13
2006-04-01 09:18:40 pm
l'appel du vide
Tahngarthor
2006-04-01 09:48:53 pm
Bangaa Bishop
he dosen't haev valid points, she manipulates the information, ignores anything that counters his points and sucks up to people. I really hoped you were being sarcastic, because those aren't "truths." they are flawed judgements  that are biased to his own point of view, despite much to the contrary.

Ajbolt hit it right on the nose, and i'd quote him if it wasnt the 2nd biggest wall of text on this page :)
A Silly Goose
2006-04-02 12:54:16 am
Look, witty text!
Dai Grepher, it would seem I underestimated you.  Your capacity for ignorance--through twisting of meaning, selective use of "literal interpretations," and evasion of the points brought up against your argument, all done apparently unwittingly--is indeed far below anything I ever would have anticipated.

For example: your proposal that Nintendo has, for no conceivable reason, deliberately deceived its customers, over the course of nearly twenty years, as to the true nature of a storyline portrayed using a medium that even now is hardly considered a legitimate art form (let alone twenty years ago), has caused my perception of you to be of the sort of mental calibur that is common to absurd conspiracy theorists.

Another example (and evidence of your apparent beliefs as stated above) would be your hypocricy:
Quote from Dai Grepher:
Dai Grepher: The point still remains that Nintendo intentionally confused their fan base.

This quote can be found here.

In this post, however, you state the following:
Quote from Dai Grepher:
Quote from SkippyJr:
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 is incorrect. Most people were mislead by IGN and other game review sources, not Nintendo.

Obviously, your ideas were not well-formed from the very beginning; otherwise, you would not have fallen into such contradictions in your reasoning.  This is quite a serious blow for your argument, since it suggests that your "logical conclusion" is actually nothing more than some odd notion, which you had not bothered to research until you had already started a heated debate that demanded supporting facts for your claim.




I believe SABERinBLUE is quite correct in saying that no one will think less of you if you concede; in fact, such an act would be somewhat redeeming in my eyes.








Oh, and that wasn't a bad April Fool's joke you pulled there, 13M13...  I actually thought you were serious for a moment--then it dawned upon me that I should check the date of the post, heh.