Why I love Metroid Fusion.

2004-02-17 11:12:00 pm

I personally feel that Fusion has been my favorite game in the series.

Certainly, it is more linear than the other Metroids. I know; I have bought every Metroid game as they have been released. It has been one of their strong points, but I feel as if it's been overstated somehow; it is mostly bombing various walls and such to find either power-ups or paths connecting to other areas. Fusion had this just as much as the other games, but it's presented in a different manner. The way it was designed was built around the central theme of the game, and I don't think it's necessarily fair to count that against the game just because it is part of the Metroid series.

What I find fascinating about Fusion, though, is the heavy themes and overtones that no Metroid before it has accomplished. From the very outset there is a totally different feel; you're controlling Samus as something totally different than she's ever been... changed to make her feel more lithe; quicker yet without the mechanical defenses of her normal Power Suit. There's also the way this mission is started; it is not her accepting a bounty, or hunting the Metroids. She's forced against her will to take this mission, and you can feel it in the way she talks and her interactions with the agency. Their hand is always on your shoulder, reminding you that they are the ones in control of this mission, not you. It's especially pronounced when they send you into an area that they know has been infected with something that you are especially vulnerable to in your altered state... and they just kind of say "Hey, be careful. You're still going."

There's also the whole thing with the SA-X and both her connections and conflicts with it. In a way, it's everything she used to be; an almost unstoppable force at full power. When you contrast the SA-X with the new Samus, it's kind of ironic; the SA-X is what she used to be combined with the X parasite, and Samus is what is left of herself combined with the new abilities of the X. It adds both an element of fear (as, when it is first beginning to hunt you, you are totally under it's thumb and can't possibly match it's power), but a hint of primal nature; they are both the same, yet different, and fighting for superiority, playing off each other's strengths and weaknesses that they inhereted from one another. It culminates with the final fight between Samus' full strength with her symbiotic suit, and the SA-X; it's one of my favorite moments out of the entire series. In the end, once it realizes it is inferior to Samus because of the element it could never have, it rejects all her elements entirely and forces all of the X's power to the surface out of rage. Of course, in hindsight, this is not a good idea versus the current Samus. ^_^

I just love everything about the direction. The little glimpses of her self-dialog, her connections to Adam, the way that she is still left all alone because of her fate tied to the Chozo (and, now, the parasitic X)... I feel there is so much more impact to the game than any of the open-ended Metroids. They feel a bit detached (on purpose, surely, to emphasize her surroundings), and sometimes make her look more like an actual killing machine instead of a human (which, interestingly, Zero Mission tries to amend with the new additions to the game).

Plus, I just love how the game plays. The bosses are the most challenging out of any Metroid game I've ever played, the environments are all varied yet stay true to the sterile nature of their artificial habitats, I absolutely love the controls, just the colors and the look of it all. Oh, and the beams look way cooler in this game. ^_-

Thread title:

I personally feel that Fusion  has been my favorite game in the series.

Certainly, it is more linear than the other Metroids. I know; I have bought every Metroid game as they have been released. It has been one of their strong points, but I feel as if it's been overstated somehow; it is mostly bombing various walls and such to find either power-ups or paths connecting to other areas. Fusion had this just as much as the other games, but it's presented in a different manner.  The way it was designed was built around the central theme of the game, and I don't think it's necessarily fair to count that against the game just because it is part of the Metroid series.

What I find fascinating about Fusion, though, is the heavy themes and overtones that no Metroid before it has accomplished. From the very outset there is a totally different feel; you're controlling Samus as something totally different than she's ever been... changed to make her feel more lithe; quicker yet without the mechanical defenses of her normal Power Suit. There's also the way this mission is started; it is not her accepting a bounty, or hunting the Metroids. She's forced against her will to take this mission, and you can feel it in the way she talks and her interactions with the agency. Their hand is always on your shoulder, reminding you that they are the ones in control of this mission, not you. It's especially pronounced when they send you into an area that they know has been infected with something that you are especially vulnerable to in your altered state... and they just kind of say "Hey, be careful. You're still going."

There's also the whole thing with the SA-X and both her connections and conflicts with it. In a way, it's everything she used to be; an almost unstoppable force at full power. When you contrast the SA-X with the new Samus, it's kind of ironic; the SA-X is what she used to be combined with the X parasite, and Samus is what is left of herself combined with the new abilities of the X. It adds both an element of fear (as, when it is first beginning to hunt you, you are totally under it's thumb and can't possibly match it's power), but a hint of primal nature; they are both the same, yet different, and fighting for superiority, playing off each other's strengths and weaknesses that they inhereted from one another. It culminates with the final fight between Samus' full strength with her symbiotic suit, and the SA-X; it's one of my favorite moments out of the entire series. In the end, once it realizes it is inferior to Samus because of the element it could never have, it rejects all her elements entirely and forces all of the X's power to the surface out of rage. Of course, in hindsight, this is not a good idea versus the current Samus. ^_^

I just love everything about the direction. The little glimpses of her self-dialog, her connections to Adam, the way that she is still left all alone because of her fate tied to the Chozo (and, now, the parasitic X)... I feel there is so much more impact to the game than any of the open-ended Metroids. They feel a bit detached (on purpose, surely, to emphasize her surroundings), and sometimes make her look more like an actual killing machine instead of a human (which, interestingly, Zero Mission tries to amend with the new additions to the game).

Plus, I just love how the game plays. The bosses are the most challenging out of any Metroid game I've ever played, the environments are all varied yet stay true to the sterile nature of their artificial habitats, I absolutely love the controls, just the colors and the look of it all. Oh, and the beams look way cooler in this game. ^_-

Electrometer Prime

2004-02-17 11:13:55 pm

I probably love it more than you.(I finished it 27times with 100%)

nate

2004-02-18 12:00:50 am

until i read the interview with mr. sakamoto about zero mission, i never understood how fusion could be so well put together that we only recently started to find bugs, and yet be based around a kindergarten method of operating a metroid game, event++;.

for the uninformed, whenever you accomplish anything in fusion, be it unlocking security doors, defeating a boss, or acquiring an item, the game calls event++;, which increments an integer called "event" by one. picking up the plasma beam might be event 20, and picking up the morph ball bombs might be even 5, for example. because of this, should you attempt to sequence break and get the plasma beam before the morph ball bombs, for example, the game will give you the morph ball bombs when you pick up the plasma beam instead of the plasma beam, since it just incremented "event" from 4 to 5. speaking from limited knowledge of programming, this is a much easier (and therefore elementary) way of writing the game. sakamoto-san, however, seems to indicate that he told the development team to write it that way, since this metroid game would focus on a plethora of story and character development instead of the dearth the previous three games had had.

i have been playing metroid games for under a year (gasp), and so i didn't really mind fusion as much as some veteran metroid players did, and this now this new revelation pretty much cements it as a "real" metroid game into my mind. metroid does not belong to us; we merely play it for our entertainment. while metroid probably would not exist without dedicated players, the players do not create the game, and nintendo had every right to make metroid fusion, especially now that it appears obvious every bit of that game was completely intended.

...

okay, people, the last paragraph was particularly easy to refute. get to it!

until i read the [url=http://www.gamespy.com/interviews/february04/metroidzm/index.shtml]interview with mr. sakamoto about zero mission[/url], i never understood how fusion could be so well put together that we only recently started to find [url=http://www.metroid2002.com/fusion/techniques_low_height_shinespark.html]bugs[/url], and yet be based around a kindergarten method of operating a metroid game, event++;.

for the uninformed, whenever you accomplish anything in fusion, be it unlocking security doors, defeating a boss, or acquiring an item, the game calls event++;, which increments an integer called "event" by one. picking up the plasma beam might be event 20, and picking up the morph ball bombs might be even 5, for example. because of this, should you attempt to sequence break and get the plasma beam before the morph ball bombs, for example, the game will give you the morph ball bombs when you pick up the plasma beam instead of the plasma beam, since it just incremented "event" from 4 to 5. speaking from limited knowledge of programming, this is a much easier (and therefore elementary) way of writing the game. sakamoto-san, however, seems to indicate that he told the development team to write it that way, since this metroid game would focus on a plethora of story and character development instead of the dearth the previous three games had had.

i have been playing metroid games for under a year (gasp), and so i didn't really mind fusion as much as some veteran metroid players did, and this now this new revelation pretty much cements it as a "real" metroid game into my mind. metroid does not belong to us; we merely play it for our entertainment. while metroid probably would not exist without dedicated players, the players do not create the game, and nintendo had every right to make metroid fusion, especially now that it appears obvious every bit of that game was completely intended.

...

okay, people, the last paragraph was particularly easy to refute. get to it!

Toozin

2004-02-18 12:04:55 am

Not impossible

just highly unlikely

Just because it was intended to be that way doesn't neccesarily make it a good idea. :)

Fusion is still a Metroid game in it's own right, though. I just hope it doesn't neccesarily build the foundation for future Metroid games. I prefer the non-linear design of the others to Fusion, although, as I have stated in another thread, Fusion has some killer additions to the series.

Id of Ith

2004-02-18 12:38:31 am

Quote from Toozin:

Just because it was intended to be that way doesn't neccesarily make it a good idea. :)

Fusion is still a Metroid game in it's own right, though. I just hope it doesn't neccesarily build the foundation for future Metroid games. I prefer the non-linear design of the others to Fusion, although, as I have stated in another thread, Fusion has some killer additions to the series.

I agree with the latter part there. I think there is every reason in the world to continue the Metroid series in an open-ended format, like Super Metroid. I'm not really sure what you mean by the first remark in reference to Metroid Fusion, though; it's hard to separate what's "good" and what's "bad" when you're talking about subjective matter like this. In general, though, it holds true. I just think that, while it is not within the bounds of a "normal" Metroid game, considering it's purpose is more or less that very thing, it is just as much of a "Metroid" game as any other.

Light of Day

2004-02-18 04:22:01 am

Quote from Toozin:

Fusion is still a Metroid game in it's own right, though. I just hope it doesn't neccesarily build the foundation for future Metroid games. I prefer the non-linear design of the others to Fusion, although, as I have stated in another thread, Fusion has some killer additions to the series.

Form it's current position, I can quite easily see the Metroid franchise doing a 3-way split. We'd have classic-style Metroid games (e.g. Zero Mission), Prime-stye games, and Fusion-style games. Each is fundementally different, and each has its own attractions, yet each is undeniably Metroid.

This brings me to the point: What is a Metroid game? Many would argue that the freedom to sequence-break, to go against the programmers wishes, is what makes a Metroid game feel like a Metroid game. I beg to differ, while the sense of freedom is what makes my favourite Metroid game (Super) my favourite, it is not essential to the series. I'd like to take the time now to point out the startling similarities between the Metroid and Zelda series. Now, before calling me crazy and getting the men in white coats please hear me out. Take a dungeon from a Zelda game. How does doing playing through the dungeon work? You start with several routes available to you. Journey down those routes, and you'll find most of them blocked off. Eventually, down one of the paths, you'll find the means to pass one of these blocks, allowing you to progress further into the dungeon. You'll keep on doing this, eventually finding a special item that gives you a new ability, as well as a mini-boss part way through, and a big boss at the end of it all. Also, the dungeons are filled with monsters, although the monsters usually serve more as moving health and ammo refills than challanging fights, although there are exceptions. What does this sound like to you? A Metroid game on a very small scale? Because that's what it sounds like to me. It sounds like a Metroid game is like a giant, overgrown Zelda dungeon. Except with guns. And missiles instead of keys. And you play a woman who everyone at first thought was a man, instead of a guy who looks like a girl, but that's besides the point. At their core, a Zelda dungeon, and a Metroid game follow very similar concepts. That's not where the similarities end, though. In a Zelda game, there are many optional items you can skip, things like extra health, and the ability to carry more of certain items. These things are mirrored in every Metroid game by energy tanks and missile tanks. Also, in most Zelda games you even have the option of doing dungeons in a slightly different order to normal, thus gaining your new abilities in a different order than expected. This is also something you can do in most Metroid games, but not all of them, the same way it's not possible in all Zelda games (at least not to my knowledge). This part is not key to the Zelda experience, though, and I'd go as far as to say the similarities between Zelda and Metroid mean it's not key to the Metroid experience either. It is merely an optional extra, one that a lot of Metroid fans have gotten used to and think of as a neccessary part, but optional nonetheless. So, with the aid of this comparison, what would I say is a Metroid game? I'd say a Metroid game is a game which offers you a world of branching paths, each path blocked by a puzzle it is up to the player to solve, the intended solutions to which are hidden down other paths. Some paths will be optional, some hidden. These will be secret items scattered around, too. Not neccessary to the game's completion, these will nonetheless give you an advantage in beating the game. This formula is something that all Metroid games, even Fusion, follow. True, Fusion often blocks the path a lot less subtley, and a lot more effectivly, but the intended "find a blocked path, go and do something else/get another item to unblock it" gameplay is the same. Also, in the other Metroid games the puzzles blocking your path will have alternate soulutions, ones never intended to be there, and that the player was never intended to find. These alternate solutions add to the gameplay, an in allowing you to skip the items usually used as the solution increase both the challange and replay value of the game. They are far from an integral part of the formula, though, as they were never intended to be there. In fact, as it is the only Metroid with what we think are intentional sequence breaks all the way through the game, I'd say Zero Mission is a bigger departure from the Metroid formula than Fusion is, even if it doesn't feel that way.

[quote="Toozin"]Fusion is still a Metroid game in it's own right, though. I just hope it doesn't neccesarily build the foundation for future Metroid games. I prefer the non-linear design of the others to Fusion, although, as I have stated in another thread, Fusion has some killer additions to the series.[/quote]
Form it's current position, I can quite easily see the Metroid franchise doing a 3-way split. We'd have classic-style Metroid games (e.g. Zero Mission), Prime-stye games, and Fusion-style games. Each is fundementally different, and each has its own attractions, yet each is undeniably Metroid.

This brings me to the point: What is a Metroid game? Many would argue that the freedom to sequence-break, to go against the programmers wishes, is what makes a Metroid game feel like a Metroid game. I beg to differ, while the sense of freedom is what makes my favourite Metroid game (Super) my favourite, it is not essential to the series. I'd like to take the time now to point out the startling similarities between the Metroid and Zelda series. Now, before calling me crazy and getting the men in white coats please hear me out. Take a dungeon from a Zelda game. How does doing playing through the dungeon work? You start with several routes available to you. Journey down those routes, and you'll find most of them blocked off. Eventually, down one of the paths, you'll find the means to pass one of these blocks, allowing you to progress further into the dungeon. You'll keep on doing this, eventually finding a special item that gives you a new ability, as well as a mini-boss part way through, and a big boss at the end of it all. Also, the dungeons are filled with monsters, although the monsters usually serve more as moving health and ammo refills than challanging fights, although there are exceptions. What does this sound like to you? A Metroid game on a very small scale? Because that's what it sounds like to me. It sounds like a Metroid game is like a giant, overgrown Zelda dungeon. Except with guns. And missiles instead of keys. And you play a woman who everyone at first thought was a man, instead of a guy who looks like a girl, but that's besides the point. At their core, a Zelda dungeon, and a Metroid game follow very similar concepts. That's not where the similarities end, though. In a Zelda game, there are many optional items you can skip, things like extra health, and the ability to carry more of certain items. These things are mirrored in every Metroid game by energy tanks and missile tanks. Also, in most Zelda games you even have the option of doing dungeons in a slightly different order to normal, thus gaining your new abilities in a different order than expected. This is also something you can do in most Metroid games, but not all of them, the same way it's not possible in all Zelda games (at least not to my knowledge). This part is not key to the Zelda experience, though, and I'd go as far as to say the similarities between Zelda and Metroid mean it's not key to the Metroid experience either. It is merely an optional extra, one that a lot of Metroid fans have gotten used to and think of as a neccessary part, but optional nonetheless. So, with the aid of this comparison, what would I say is a Metroid game? I'd say a Metroid game is a game which offers you a world of branching paths, each path blocked by a puzzle it is up to the player to solve, the intended solutions to which are hidden down other paths. Some paths will be optional, some hidden. These will be secret items scattered around, too. Not neccessary to the game's completion, these will nonetheless give you an advantage in beating the game. This formula is something that all Metroid games, even Fusion, follow. True, Fusion often blocks the path a lot less subtley, and a lot more effectivly, but the intended "find a blocked path, go and do something else/get another item to unblock it" gameplay is the same. Also, in the other Metroid games the puzzles blocking your path will have alternate soulutions, ones never intended to be there, and that the player was never intended to find. These alternate solutions add to the gameplay, an in allowing you to skip the items usually used as the solution increase both the challange and replay value of the game. They are far from an integral part of the formula, though, as they were never intended to be there. In fact, as it is the only Metroid with what we think are intentional sequence breaks all the way through the game, I'd say Zero Mission is a bigger departure from the Metroid formula than Fusion is, even if it doesn't feel that way.

Id of Ith

2004-02-18 05:10:47 am

Excellent post. Could have used a couple paragraphs, but a couple highlights took care of that. :P

I couldn't agree more... this kind of departure happens rather often in the world of video games; just take a look at the Super Mario Brothers series, or the Castlevania games. Things constantly change around the core gameplay mechanics, but that very core persists through all the "main" games in the series, and Metroid Fusion is no different. The main mechanics of the game still exist (and many are even expanded or improved upon) within Fusion, they are just presented in a different manner. I think maybe it was how pronounced that fact was made by the designers that made it seem so different; it required more of a progression within the story rather than the item gathering to open up more areas, but that key mechanic remained the same nonetheless. Even all of the hidden missile/power bomb/E-Tank expansion mechanics remain the same... I just don't see how it is so widely looked down upon just because it does not adhere so strictly to the established formula set forth by Super Metroid. I may be in the minority here but I do not want another Super Metroid, and I'm not naive enough to think that another one could ever possibly come down the line, just as there will never be another Kid Icarus or Super Mario 64. I'd rather they explore possible game mechanics in the here and now, because that's where true innovation comes from; Super Metroid would not be what it was if they were constantly worried about how "true" it was to Metroid or Return of Samus. Doing so only means you've lost that chance for something creative; those few games we remember like Super Metroid are so fantastic because of that very thing. It was what it was... when it was.

Excellent post. Could have used a couple paragraphs, but  a couple highlights took care of that.  :P

I couldn't agree more... this kind of departure happens rather often in the world of video games; just take a look at the Super Mario Brothers series, or the Castlevania games. Things constantly change [i]around[/i] the core gameplay mechanics, but that very core persists through all the "main" games in the series, and Metroid Fusion is no different. The main mechanics of the game still exist (and many are even expanded or improved upon) within Fusion, they are just presented in a different manner. I think maybe it was how pronounced that fact was made by the designers that made it seem so different; it required more of a progression within the story rather than the item gathering to open up more areas, but that key mechanic remained the same nonetheless. Even all of the hidden missile/power bomb/E-Tank expansion mechanics remain the same... I just don't see how it is so widely looked down upon just because it does not adhere so strictly to the established formula set forth by Super Metroid. I may be in the minority here but I [b]do not want[/b] another Super Metroid, and I'm not naive enough to think that another one could ever possibly come down the line, just as there will never be another Kid Icarus or Super Mario 64. I'd rather they explore possible game mechanics in the here and now, because that's where true innovation comes from; Super Metroid would not be what it was if they were constantly worried about how "true" it was to Metroid or Return of Samus. Doing so only means you've lost that chance for something creative; those few games we remember like Super Metroid are so fantastic because of that very thing. It was what it was... when it was.

nate

2004-02-18 10:40:38 am

now i want to play a zelda game.

chinchillax13514

2004-02-18 01:44:42 pm

Actually, the reason I probably like Metroid is because I like Zelda. I have to agree with Light of Day. And, I probably wouldn't have starting liking Zelda without liking...Pokemon. Yeah, Pokemon. And since there's this one friend who showed me Pokemon and got me hooked on it...I owe my love of Metroid to him. Funny really, since I never talked to him again a year after that...yeah, but anyways, I noticed many similarities between Metroid and Zelda. Now which do I like better...well, I'd have to say it's barely Zelda, mainly because of Ocarina of Time and the lack of Metroid games on N64. If there was just one game on N64 then I might like Metroid better.

Chozo-Ghost

2004-02-18 02:51:03 pm

Quote from Light of Day:

And you play a woman who everyone at first thought was a man, instead of a guy who looks like a girl

rofl,
Nintendo/Japans have a blast Laughing

... but I really like Zelda. There are indeed major similarities between these two series imho.

And still, Nintendo and their 2nd parties make the best games...

hermantheowl

2009-07-02 02:19:10 am

Metroid and Zelda are so similar becasue they are both action adventure games. I've seen zelda described as a combination of puzzle solving and combat. The designers must have had a similar goal.
For example, A Link to the PAst has posibilities for "sequence breaking" (dungeons that can be played in differnt orders) while others may have dungeons that have to be played in order. There are still maze-like dungeons to explore. Fusion still has metroid-style areas with hidden stuff and I ususally found myself going out of my way to get it. Samus still needs to be built up. A purist may not like only weapons and energy being hidden but Samus still starts needs hidden missles and what not. THe OTHER element is action (boss fights). Also Fusion environments change over the course of the game. (TRO worms become cocoons, ARC floods, power goes out, PYR goes critical). The greater focus on story makes this possible. Some games in this genre are more story driven than others.

BioSpark

2009-07-02 02:53:49 am

hermantheowl, please don't bump old topics, especially really old ones like this.

however, you put some effort into your post and if people want to discuss it they can.

hermantheowl

2009-07-02 01:40:08 pm

I didn't see the date, sry.

UchihaSasuke

2009-07-03 04:21:23 am

my umbrella goes directly to Bankai

daaamn. this a very epic bump. i hadn't even played more than 1 metroid game from start to finish at that point (my only beaten metroid game was fusion back then and i hadn't even purchased ZM yet since it was available in my country 1 month later)

this game has a unique atmosphere and feeling. that's what i like about it the most.

TheGreenManalishi

2009-07-03 04:44:49 am

One of the reasons I don't like Fusion as much as ZM is not being able to do the bosses in a different order, but then, in ZM it's only really Ridley and Kraid (unless you count minibosses) and you're basically told to do that by the SBs the game throws at you.

Bugsey

2009-07-03 07:50:53 pm

Annoying

The only complaints I have about Fusion is the wall jump and that you can't skip cutscenes. But it's enough for me to drive me nuts from boredom by playing it.

BioSpark

2009-07-03 08:04:19 pm

imo the walljump is fine. a zm style walljump isn't really necessary. also, i'm assuming by cut scenes you mean the adam conversations. in the japanese version you can skip the opening scene (though most people don't have the jap version).

Tonski

2009-07-04 12:16:55 pm

I hate it how the route you're supposed to be in is WAY TOO STRICT. Like you can barely go out of the route you're supposed to be in, there aren't too many options. If you're supposed to go to place X and you out of curiosity want to visit place Y at this point in the game, there's an unshootable door or some mega-X in the way so that you absolutely can't try anything new.

I kinda feel the same way about ZM's grapple skip, I really do.

UchihaSasuke

2009-07-04 02:37:41 pm

my umbrella goes directly to Bankai

sucks that nintendo hates SBs like they're a disease or something.

Opium

2009-07-04 03:04:50 pm

Quote from UchihaSasuke:

sucks that nintendo hates SBs like they're a disease or something.

I'm sure sequence breaks were anticipated in Super (but not to the extreme that they were taken) and in ZM they were actually encouraged. So nintendo doesn't hate sequence breaks, they really just chose not to go there with Fusion. As for Prime, I think retro had a lot more to do with the game than nintendo did so I doubt the decision to include any real sequence breaks was not so much nintendo's decision.

I'd like to think that team ninja understands how sequence breaking is a phenomenon that was born in this series, as was speed running. Both of those elements are important to metroid fans, and I hope they have the time and the brains to make it a part of other M.

BioSpark

2009-07-04 03:10:44 pm

er, it's not like they want sequence breaks to be available. they try to prevent it. there's a difference between sequence breaks and allowing players to go in different orders. however, creating a non-linear and open game makes it easier for players to find sequence breaks.

Opium

2009-07-04 03:52:09 pm

This is getting off topic, but I think in the case of super and especially in ZM they DID want sequence breaks. For example in Super they showed you in the title demo how bomb jumping was possible and therefore showed you it was possible to go to places without hi-jump. They also added shinepsark jumps and wall jumps to the game, neither of which are necessary when items are obtained in the intended order. ZM is much easier to argue for since there are places designed in the game specifically for the purpose of sequence breaking and for no other reason at all. AND in both super and ZM they programmed the game so that picking up any item at any time was OK and it worked, unlike in fusion where you only get PB's once you get the first INTENDED PB tank.

Only when you start to sequence break in Prime do you truly have to do things that the designers obviously tried to prevent you from doing.

BioSpark

2009-07-04 04:00:17 pm

actually, there was a long discussion whether the stuff in zm could actually be considered sequence breaking. they obviously intended it, and the usual definition of sequence breaking is something that was not intended. i guess it depends on how you define sequence breaking.

arkarian

2009-07-04 04:04:19 pm

red chamber dream

that said, i don't understand why many fans think the "sequence breaks" in zm are lame or whatever. i have no problem with "intended sbs"; alternate routes are good whether the developers knew about them or not.

Opium

2009-07-04 04:14:21 pm

Quote from arkarian:

that said, i don't understand why many fans think the "sequence breaks" in zm are lame or whatever. i have no problem with "intended sbs"; alternate routes are good whether the developers knew about them or not.

I agree.