Sign in to follow this  
DarkeSword

Metroid Prime 3: Corruption

Recommended Posts

I actually missed that. Can't believe I didn't think about it.

However, one thing I had a great level of fun with was lotsa white writing.

Ohhh, wow I never tried exploding stuff. Which is strange, because i've drained just about everything but a shield. Watching those Wasp things Squirm and try to get away is fun. :-P Is it effective?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You know what I think is undefined now? The genre of 'Adventure'; I understand where Injin is saying there is a sense of adventure in some FPS games... but does that mean that the game is of the 'Adventure' type? No. That means the level designers have crafted a level that manipulates your emotions, instilling a sense of adventurousness in you while you play. I have never played FarCry, but I have seen enough of it to know that the primary use of environment is cover; you explore the scenery to gain a tactical advantage, not to reach the next area to explore.

Then your initial insight on FarCry isn't accurate at all. See, this is where I think an argument against "run and gun FPS" or "you only use environments for cover" is a bit suspect. Because in some FPS games, if you "run and gun", you're going to die plain and simple. Some games put more emphasis on more meaningful exploration aspects that goes beyond just getting enough cover. In games like FarCry, you have a lot more to worry about than just cover. There are entire paths you can venture and you don't even need to fight through 99% of the game if you're good at avoiding enemies and find ways to get through stages without confrontations.

The difference, for example, is exploration in the traditional Metroid sense; the environment, to the basic player, most likely will work against you to impede your path (I say 'basic player' because anyone who has seen Metroid speed runs knows that these people are mutants who don't follow conventional logic). Unless you hit the edge of a map, traditional FPS games, such as FarCry, don't have environments whose main goal is to impede your progress (and before anyone says it, I mean on a deeper level than you have to get the key to a door or find a bridge across a chasm; this is 'adventuring' in a very shallow sense, and certainly the gameplay is not built around you finding keys, unlike the 'adventure' games in the LoZ series; it could also be argued that beam weapons are likened to 'keys' in Metroid games, because they have the secondary function of opening doors and only certain beams may open certain doors, but I digress).

Listen. Nobody is saying which is shallow or not. Let's not start disparaging other games in order to elevate another here. Also, Metroid games in their core utilize power ups to enable you to move from one stage to the next. In a way, it's a more equipment-based exploration game. The game itself doesn't facilitate it like Mercenaries would due to that game's open ended nature itself. Metroid games simply puts a very good illusion of adventure due to a few multiple paths, open passageways and a lot of dead ends and other environmental puzzles. In that sense, Metroid games are more akin to King's Quest than anything else. That game too, was about getting the proper equipment (not just keys, but spells and other trinkets) to be able to explore the world further.

I don't see why one has to be shallow or not. They are just different types of adventure aspects in games such as these.

And, I am glad you bring up Oblivion, because it is the perfect example of the genre-blending that the Prime games experience, which seems to be misinterpreted. Oblivion is an RPG. That is its genre. There is no First-Person tacked onto Oblivion's genre title; this, however, may seem contradictory, as the game is played from a first-person perspective, that is. until you take a deeper look.

The fact that Oblivion is played in the first person is trivial because the object of the game is to level up your character. There is combat, of course, but the combat is there for the express purpose of bolstering your character's abilities. The first person element is primarily for a sense of immersion, which is not the case with first person shooters; it could easily be argued that the reason first person games are played in the first person is to gain the tactical advantage that comes with precision aiming.

Oblivion in the early 90's would clearly have been labeled as a first perspective RPG. "FPS" again, is a catch all term here. And again, I feel that distinction through genres is far too vague and shallow to do each franchises proper justice. But in Metroid's case, you at least shoot. In the most vague term, MP games are therefore FPS games at least in how it is designed from a superficial point of view. Again, if you bother to delve into it any further, it's pretty obvious that it is an adventure title. Really, I think just a general 'adventure' game would suffice. Mixing the term First Person with another genre just sounds overlong to me. Deus Ex is definitely a First Person RPG, and yet who even uses that term even when it is clearly the most correct descriptor? Labels simply do not matter a whole lot here.

The difference between Oblivion and other first person games is that Oblivion's combat is very shallow in the sense that you either attack or cast spells, but you never have to worry about a tactical advantage with respect to the placement of your character and your enemy because unless you have a spell that allows otherwise (or a good bow), confrontations are always very direct, which is not the case with a first person shooter, where tactical advantages are gained based on weapon choice AND character placement. In Oblivion, strategy is in your abilities; in FPS's, strategy is based on out maneuvering your opponent.

Well, there are ways to exploit the environment in Oblivion too. Such as having a cliff between you and the enemy or even a barrel to maneuver around in a close combat fight. Then there's the cheap trick to just stand on a rock where close combat enemies can't even touch you while you wail away with spells.

This is where Metroid Prime begins to enter grey area, but this can be easily rectified by examining, as AarowSwift did, the priorities of the game. You can easily tell that combat is secondary in Prime (or truly any Metroid) game because the bosses are the only enemies that impede your progress; you never are required to fight a single enemy, which is markedly different in FPS games, where the only thing impeding your progress is the group of enemies in front of you.

I have to disagree there since a LOT of FPS games nowadays offer the ability to sneak through or figure out the best route or method to get by. Even though it's 3rd person, games like Lost Planet, you use the grappling gun to basically avoid needless encounters or to reach the destination more efficiently. Then there are games like Thief where you don't even have to kill anything except for priority targets.

Yes, Prime games are played in the first person. But any REAL analysis of the Prime games betrays the fact that, as AarowSwift said, this detail is trivial.

In terms of what the game tries to accomplish, it doesn't mean a whole lot. If you say it's such a trivial thing, then there is no shame in calling Prime games FPS games at least on their surface due to its mechanics. The same with Deus Ex, it is an FPS game on the surface, but it's hardly a run and gun game either. In terms of what the games tries to accomplish, putting it in a FPS genre is no big deal. FPS is not only a genre, but it's also just the simple mechanics of the games themselves. Is Metroid Prime game a 3rd person adventure/shooter? No. Is it a 2D shooter? obviously not. It is a first person shooter/adventure series. In how the game works.

FPSs aren't bad for that kind of stuff, they just doesn't focus on it like the Prime games. And I think it does matter that these elements are used to differentiate because just because the game contains those elements, it doesn't mean they are big part of the gameplay. Hell, these elements could have been put in by accident.

They can't possibly be made by accident. Even in their earliest years, level designers for FPS games were looked upon like rock stars and look where John Carmack and Cliff Bleszinski ended up. Hell, they still are rock stars of gaming today not just because they know how to make good FPS games in itself, but how they made their names known through making great level designs and putting out a great singleplayer experiences akin to a first person adventure (albeit, mainly about shooting obviously).

There are two problems with this statement. One, just like I said above, sequence breaking is part of the games even if it wasn't supposed to be in there, not designed to be in there, etc. but it is still a part of the game just like backtracking, exploration and etc. are part of FPSs, in design or not. Two, you make it seem like the only types of games that can be non-linear are open-ended, free-roaming games which is wrong. Those types of games are the most non-linear but they aren't the only types of games that are non-linear.

I never explicitly said that any games outside free roaming games can't be non-linear. The exploration aspect of Castletroid games or other FPS games that are heavily adventure/exploration oriented at least give that much of a better illusion of open ended gameplay. Even in Metroid games where the exploration is foremost, there is still always the single path to follow outside the unintentional short cuts and exploitation of the level designs. Just the same, a lot of newer FPS games don't exactly make it specifically clear that the next destination is only a cardkey away. FPS games, like how it is maligned as being straightforward all the time, I think developers are taking cue of that and at least putting in the effort to diversify the adventure aspect as long as the games are largely single player experiences.

Your just making misconceptions about me. If you read my post more clearly, you would know I had said I'm very familiar with FPSs. I play and really like a lot of FPSs. I have played the Half-life series, Doom series, Unreal series, Quake series, Farcry, Halo series, Red Steel, and oh so many others I can't think of right know. Half-life 2, Unreal 2004 and Doom 3 are three of my most favorite games. However, none of those mentioned offered an experience comparable to the Prime games plain and simple. Yet each one of those felt a little similar in some form or fashion.

I wasn't stating whether there weren't similarities or not or anyone's specific experiences with the games. But as I said time and time again, even the FPS veterans don't seem to grasp the design of the adventure aspects in singleplayer experiences of the FPS games. Yes, not too many games are as focused upon them like the Prime games are. I never argued that at all. I never said it is equatable to Halo, which is the whole foregone conclusion a lot of people seems to make with this issue when I don't even see a correlation at all. But the adventure aspects in FPS games are not total no-shows like people seems to make it sound.

Imagine if someone compared something like Sly Cooper and Mario directly because of the genre status of them being 'platformers'. And yet both plays a world apart. I'm saying that is the case for a lot of FPS games and games that heavily use the first person aspect as its focal point of telling a story or basing the action upon.

Because Metroid is not a shooter. I know the whole agurement is that games shouldn't have genres, but thats just unrealistic. Genres aren't just simple labels given to things, they are descriptions that inform people of what type of game they might be playing. When people see the FPS tag slapped on Metroid Prime, they are going to try it out because they think it may offer something similar to other FPSs they have played. That is when they get dissapointed and claim its a bad game. Thats why it needs something to differeniate, like the genre FPA.

I think that is precisely why people should not even bother differentiating them by genres. "slapping on" the label of FPS is nonsensical to me. I never said Prime games should be stuck as a FPS game by description in retail. Just in that its mechanics works like any other FPS game with some noted exception of Metroid-style upgrades and gadgetry.

Try this analogy: If someone is given a copy of Unreal Tournament 3 then they get Call of Duty 3, would the experience be the same? Of course not. One is definitely a sci-fi affair while the other is more of a historical/war game affair. Most PC game magazines and other reviewers don't even bother with the FPS labels in their reviews. Because it's often the content that decides what kind of game it ends up being. In that sense, it's not unrealistic at all to wish that people simply not see games through the label of "FPS" outside superficial categorization for superficial people.

Just for your information, Portal is being called a "First Person Action Puzzle Game". This is also what Valve themselves is calling it.

Finally, regardless if you still think the Prime games are FPSs, just know that other people don't see them that way and that should be ok. You don't need to change their mind. Let them view it as a FPA if they want, its not going to change anything. If people think the Prime games are FPSs thats fine, but they better be prepared for the completely different experience they offer.

It's not about changing minds. Metroid is simply structured as any other FPS games are at least in interface and control and the general movement and restrictions associated with FPS games. That is pretty much a fact. Again, I never even delved into the actual point of Metroid games. I mean I consider myself a pretty hardcore Metroid game fan on top of most Nintendo franchises, and I just do not see the relevance of 'slapping on' the FPS label has to do with anything. With ignorant and superficial gamers, they're going to remain ignorant anyway.

PS- Sorry for the insanely long post. I didn't stick to every point, but really tried to discuss it through. And this happens when I reply to everyone at once...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But that bases the definition on superficial elements and is non descriptive of the experience. This oversimplification makes for a poor and misleading definition. A proper definition should describe the focus of the game.

It's first person, and you explore engrossing environments. One would think it's an FPA just by definition.

That doesn't change things. Sure, the Metroid Prime games are more than just a FPS. But that does not exclude it from being an FPS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read through the thread, nor will I risk reading the after this, but would someone PM me whether it would be a good idea to play Metroid Prime 2 before playing MP3? This game sounds awesome, and once I get my Wii repaired, I might consider picking it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I haven't read through the thread, nor will I risk reading the after this, but would someone PM me whether it would be a good idea to play Metroid Prime 2 before playing MP3? This game sounds awesome, and once I get my Wii repaired, I might consider picking it up.

I actually never finshed Metroid Prime 2.....But I thin kI'll go back to it after I finsh Prime 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't stating whether there weren't similarities or not or anyone's specific experiences with the games. But as I said time and time again, even the FPS veterans don't seem to grasp the design of the adventure aspects in singleplayer experiences of the FPS games. Yes, not too many games are as focused upon them like the Prime games are. I never argued that at all. I never said it is equatable to Halo, which is the whole foregone conclusion a lot of people seems to make with this issue when I don't even see a correlation at all. But the adventure aspects in FPS games are not total no-shows like people seems to make it sound. .

Maybe you can't seem to grasp the completely different experience that the Prime series offers. Is that so hard to imagine. Is it that impossible to believe that maybe you might not be grasping the full design of Prime. Its ok for us not to fully grasp FPSs but its just damn impossible for you not to do the same with Prime. Also, why do you assume that your the only one that completely enjoy FPSs.

Try this analogy: If someone is given a copy of Unreal Tournament 3 then they get Call of Duty 3, would the experience be the same? Of course not. One is definitely a sci-fi affair while the other is more of a historical/war game affair. Most PC game magazines and other reviewers don't even bother with the FPS labels in their reviews. Because it's often the content that decides what kind of game it ends up being. In that sense, it's not unrealistic at all to wish that people simply not see games through the label of "FPS" outside superficial categorization for superficial people.

.

Thats not true. They may have different settings, feel, environment, and design but they still offer a very familiar experience, especially in the multiplayer sense. You go around fragging people, and thats mostly it. You might need to accomplish something else along the way like capturing a base or something similar but you still frag people.

It's not about changing minds..

Then stop arguing already. So what if you think Prime is an FPS, we can all see that already. By continuing arguing this point time after time, you make it seem like you want to change peoples minds on the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That doesn't change things. Sure, the Metroid Prime games are more than just a FPS. But that does not exclude it from being an FPS.

I've said this a few times before. Yes, shooting has always been a element of the Metroid series. But if you took away Samus' gun and replaced it with say, a sword, the overall experience of the game would not change. Only the combat element would be altered and even then it wouldn't be a dramatic difference. The game would still sit squarely in the same genre, the Action Adventure genre. Most combat is trivial. You walk and shoot a bug, swiping it with a sword wouldn't change the experience. Most combat is at close quarters with minimal cover. Engaging directly with a melee weapon wouldn't change this. Only the bosses would be handled differently. In fact, the main instances where samus needs the long range attribute of a gun..is for manipulating the environment.

But if you took away the guns in any true shooter, you'd fundamentally change the way these games are played. Melee combat requires a different approach, different tactics, different uses of the environment. Shooters would necessarily be moved into a different genre because the main play element they are built around had been replaced.

Edit: To I-n-j-i-n, you seem more concerned with extolling the various attributes incorporated into shooters as your main argument for Metroid as a shooter. I don't think anybody here is saying shooters haven't a great deal of variety and offer different shooter experiences. But whether they're frag fests, tactical, or stealth based, they're still shooters. That's the foundation all of their elements are built upon. Shooting things and avoiding being shot is the essential experience of these games and can not be replaced without changing the game's very foundation. That's the one thing they have in common, and Metroid just does not share this common thread. Metroid would still retain its foundation elements if Samus didn't have a gun at all. Metroid is not dependent on its shooting combat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't read through the thread, nor will I risk reading the after this, but would someone PM me whether it would be a good idea to play Metroid Prime 2 before playing MP3? This game sounds awesome, and once I get my Wii repaired, I might consider picking it up.

I actually never finshed Metroid Prime 2.....But I thin kI'll go back to it after I finsh Prime 3.

From my experience, its better if you play MP2 before trying MP3.

1. Because the controllers are totally different.

and

2. Because you'll be missing a chunk of the story line.

maybe even

3. Because that game is substantially harder, so MP3 will be a walk in the park compared to MP2. (from my experience)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Edit: To I-n-j-i-n, you seem more concerned with extolling the various attributes incorporated into shooters as your main argument for Metroid as a shooter. I don't think anybody here is saying shooters haven't a great deal of variety and offer different shooter experiences. But whether they're frag fests, tactical, or stealth based, they're still shooters. That's the foundation all of their elements are built upon. Shooting things and avoiding being shot is the essential experience of these games and can not be replaced without changing the game's very foundation. That's the one thing they have in common, and Metroid just does not share this common thread. Metroid would still retain its foundation elements if Samus didn't have a gun at all. Metroid is not dependent on its shooting combat.

i said this briefly a couple pages ago, but since noone seemed to listen and you elaborated on it a little more, im quoting this for truth/emphasis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've said this a few times before. Yes, shooting has always been a element of the Metroid series. But if you took away Samus' gun and replaced it with say, a sword, the overall experience of the game would not change. Only the combat element would be altered and even then it wouldn't be a dramatic difference. The game would still sit squarely in the same genre, the Action Adventure genre. Most combat is trivial. You walk and shoot a bug, swiping it with a sword wouldn't change the experience. Most combat is at close quarters with minimal cover. Engaging directly with a melee weapon wouldn't change this. Only the bosses would be handled differently. In fact, the main instances where samus needs the long range attribute of a gun..is for manipulating the environment.

I disagree with your claim, but that's irrelevant - here we have a gun, and so it's still an FPS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree with your claim, but that's irrelevant - here we have a gun, and so it's still an FPS
So if she had a bow, it'd still be a FPS, right? What about throwing knives? Got you there. [/silliness of mine]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree with your claim, but that's irrelevant - here we have a gun, and so it's still an FPS

But why is that the one element you are focusing on to define Metroid? To label its genre? Do you also label the Legend of Zelda titles as Hack and slashers because Link carries a sword? Is Mario 64 a Beat'em'up because Mario can punch goombas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree with your claim, but that's irrelevant - here we have a gun, and so it's still an FPS

so because samus has a gun in every other metroid, are all other metroids considered shooters?

hint: no. you wouldnt compare metroid to gunstar heroes or contra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, we're not saying that Metroid is just a shooter like any other. That's obviously untrue. But Metroid has had shooter elements since the NES. Samus does a lot of shooting. The shooting may not be the primary focus of the game, but you have to at least admit that shooting occurs with some frequency and is a key function in the Metroid series.

Can a game really not be a shooter and an adventure at the same time? The notions that Metroid is "just a shooter" or "not a shooter at all" sound equally absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look, we're not saying that Metroid is just a shooter like any other. That's obviously untrue. But Metroid has had shooter elements since the NES. Samus does a lot of shooting. The shooting may not be the primary focus of the game, but you have to at least admit that shooting occurs with some frequency and is a key function in the Metroid series.

Can a game really not be a shooter and an adventure at the same time? The notions that Metroid is "just a shooter" or "not a shooter at all" sound equally absurd.

I think we can all agree that the Metroid series incorporates shooting elements to greater and lesser degrees depending on the specific game. There's no question about that. Where the debate comes in is the genre label. All I'm saying is categorizing Metroid as a shooter because of its shooting elements is not as accurate (and can be misleading to the uninitiated) as calling Metroid an Action Adventure game, or a First Person Adventure if you feel the perspective needs to be noted.

Another reason I dislike the Metroid Primes being mis-labeled FPS games is this seems to cause certain factions of people to immediately make direct comparisons between Metroid and Halo (or whatever shooter, but mostly Halo), and demand multi-player frag fests in Metroid. But Metroid and Halo are not in the same genre, and demanding a focus on shooter elements in Metroid is missing the point of the games. See what happened to Echoes. Retro made the mistake of adding a shooter multi-player bonus to Echoes and more or less were criticized for their efforts because it failed to be up to shooter standards. What did anyone expect, really? Metroid is not a shooter. And Metroid Hunters tried to focus on the shooting element, and ended up a rather poor Metroid game. Because Metroid is not a shooter. Metroid is at its best when people stop trying to make it into a shooter. Metroid is at its best when the shooting element remains one lesser part of the robust Action Adventure whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But Metroid has had shooter elements since the NES. Samus does a lot of shooting. The shooting may not be the primary focus of the game, but you have to at least admit that shooting occurs with some frequency and is a key function in the Metroid series.

samus does more shooting at doors than enemies, and thats to open them, not kill them. can you enter combat and shoot things, yes, but that in no way defines the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who gives a flying fuck what genre it is? This is the Metroid Prime 3 thread, not the Pointless Debate thread. It's a game in which you solve puzzles, shoot monsters, and collect stuff. Call it "run around and collect shit and shoot monsters" game for all I care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But why is that the one element you are focusing on to define Metroid? To label its genre? Do you also label the Legend of Zelda titles as Hack and slashers because Link carries a sword? Is Mario 64 a Beat'em'up because Mario can punch goombas?

I'm not saying it's the only genre it's a part of. But it definitely is one of it - denying it is silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who gives a flying fuck what genre it is? This is the Metroid Prime 3 thread, not the Pointless Debate thread. It's a game in which you solve puzzles, shoot monsters, and collect stuff. Call it "run around and collect shit and shoot monsters" game for all I care.
When the first one in this series came out, the game company labeled it with as a FPA(First Person Adventure). Apparently, they thought it was important to make shit up. I think Blizzard did something similar with Warcraft III, dubbing it not a RTS but some other conjured acronym. Oddly enough, I dislike both games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why pidgeon-hole the game into one of the two genres at all? It doesn't belong exclusively in either one, so what is the point? This issue seems more pointless with every page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this