Medal of Honor Hero's 2 Impressions

[QUOTE="han_186"][QUOTE="IRaiza"]Han - Explain to me why it would? They make the campaign then make multiplayer. There is no evidence telling that it would be bad. Besides, Halo campaign is good. Im sorry it is a bit hard for you to understand. More on that, Halo has got a better story, not always bosses. Your just comparing time consuming with fast paced shooting.sonic_rusher

Thats not fanboyish. Halo 2 was retarded because it had a terrible campaign. Halo 3 has a much better campaign but it still had shortcomings and definitely did not surpass the campaign of Halo 1.

That's exactly why the campaign in Halo 3 was so much better than Halo 2's. Because Bungie didn't have to reinvent the multiplayer as they did in Halo 2, they could completely focus on the single-player aspect of the game and just give an updated multiplayer component with it.

online will prob be what ppl buy it for

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="han_186"][QUOTE="IRaiza"]Han - Explain to me why it would? They make the campaign then make multiplayer. There is no evidence telling that it would be bad. Besides, Halo campaign is good. Im sorry it is a bit hard for you to understand. More on that, Halo has got a better story, not always bosses. Your just comparing time consuming with fast paced shooting.Nintendoes

Thats not fanboyish. Halo 2 was retarded because it had a terrible campaign. Halo 3 has a much better campaign but it still had shortcomings and definitely did not surpass the campaign of Halo 1.

That's exactly why the campaign in Halo 3 was so much better than Halo 2's. Because Bungie didn't have to reinvent the multiplayer as they did in Halo 2, they could completely focus on the single-player aspect of the game and just give an updated multiplayer component with it.

[QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="han_186"][QUOTE="IRaiza"]Han - Explain to me why it would? They make the campaign then make multiplayer. There is no evidence telling that it would be bad. Besides, Halo campaign is good. Im sorry it is a bit hard for you to understand. More on that, Halo has got a better story, not always bosses. Your just comparing time consuming with fast paced shooting.han_186

Thats not fanboyish. Halo 2 was retarded because it had a terrible campaign. Halo 3 has a much better campaign but it still had shortcomings and definitely did not surpass the campaign of Halo 1.

That's exactly why the campaign in Halo 3 was so much better than Halo 2's. Because Bungie didn't have to reinvent the multiplayer as they did in Halo 2, they could completely focus on the single-player aspect of the game and just give an updated multiplayer component with it.

It's better than Halo 2's.

8 levels in single player doesn't sound much.Wanderer5

But there are sub levels too.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="han_186"][QUOTE="IRaiza"]Han - Explain to me why it would? They make the campaign then make multiplayer. There is no evidence telling that it would be bad. Besides, Halo campaign is good. Im sorry it is a bit hard for you to understand. More on that, Halo has got a better story, not always bosses. Your just comparing time consuming with fast paced shooting.Nintendoes

Thats not fanboyish. Halo 2 was retarded because it had a terrible campaign. Halo 3 has a much better campaign but it still had shortcomings and definitely did not surpass the campaign of Halo 1.

That's exactly why the campaign in Halo 3 was so much better than Halo 2's. Because Bungie didn't have to reinvent the multiplayer as they did in Halo 2, they could completely focus on the single-player aspect of the game and just give an updated multiplayer component with it.

Well they did add a whole new element to the game multiplayer and campaign. The new funtion with the X button changes strategies alot. another reason why Halo3 was didnt suck like Hallo 2 was that they had a much better development team this time.

[QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="han_186"][QUOTE="IRaiza"]Han - Explain to me why it would? They make the campaign then make multiplayer. There is no evidence telling that it would be bad. Besides, Halo campaign is good. Im sorry it is a bit hard for you to understand. More on that, Halo has got a better story, not always bosses. Your just comparing time consuming with fast paced shooting.sonic_rusher

Thats not fanboyish. Halo 2 was retarded because it had a terrible campaign. Halo 3 has a much better campaign but it still had shortcomings and definitely did not surpass the campaign of Halo 1.

That's exactly why the campaign in Halo 3 was so much better than Halo 2's. Because Bungie didn't have to reinvent the multiplayer as they did in Halo 2, they could completely focus on the single-player aspect of the game and just give an updated multiplayer component with it.

Well they did add a whole new element to the game multiplayer and campaign. The new funtion with the X button changes strategies alot. another reason why Halo3 was didnt suck like Hallo 2 was that they had a much better development team this time.

That wasn't my point. My point was when you completely focus on the single-player aspect of a game as opposed to previous games in the same series, the quality improves tremendously in the single-player experience and it's seen when it's directly compared to single-players of past games.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="IRaiza"]

This game looks awesome. Im satisfied that EA was the one to step up and give us an online FPS. Now thats awesome, 6 maps, no biggy. Well....

Personally, medal of honor multiplayer games always felt weird. I dont know, maybe because I played Metroid and Halo which caused me to feel this way. How? I dont know.

One thing, I will always rant about is the lack of thinking when it comes to lets all play together. Metroid 3, no online. That was a bad idea. There was really no reason to complain if they added it in, heck MP2 has great campaign and multiplayer. The maps kinda stunk but they were doing something new. Metroid could have been a great opportunity. But they skrew it over and say "no online, great campaign"

Im sick of that, even the fans who agree. Good games allow you to enjoy them for over 20 hours not quit after you beat it. Metroid prime 3 had awesome campaign, no doubt. But once you beat it, its over..

Yeah yell at me for saying multiplayer and metroid in one sentence. But for crying out loud, this could have been the best nintendo online FPS out there.

Nintendoes

Well MP2 multiplayer sucked hard, thats part of the reason why they did not add it to MP3. Also abunch of diehard Metroid fans were complete idiots and raised holy hell about not hhaving multiplayer. i mean I understand whyt hey didnt but, if there was one game that everyone saw as a rival to Halo it was Metroid and when they excluded the multiplayer Metroid jumped out fot he race. Kinda of dissappointing.

I just want a kick ass FPS that is complete.

It wasn't even in the race to begin with. Metroid Prime, nor Metroid Prime 2 were First-person shooters. Anyone who compares the two series doesn't know a thing about video game genres.

Say what you like but MS and Nintendo fans alike considered them in a race. once again you dont listen. MANY people saw it that way. When they excluded multiplayer that rivalry ended.

I never said many people didn't see it that way. I'm saying that comparing the two games is like comparing Final Fantasy and The Legend of Zelda. Though they are similar in certain ways, they are in completely different genres and are targeted at different audiences. The games of the two series don't even play the same.

The original Metroid Prime didn't even have multiplayer, so that's another reason for there to be no rivalry in the first place.

Popular demand says otherwise. I never personally compared it. I just mentioned that it was dissapointing for alot of people. I always thought was cool that they were like rivals even if it was not from a genre oriented rivalry but their characters are so much alike. This is how it is dont argue with me about it argue with the hordes of people that started it.

Popular demand just wanted on-line multiplayer with a flagship series for the Nintendo Wii. It had nothing to do with comparing the two series.

OMG I was not the one who made up the rivalry between Metroid and Halo, it was the masses. Even if they dont match as with their game type they make great rivals as just characters. Also one of the main reasons retro excluded online or let alone any multiplayer was that die hard fools wanted to preserve the series and that ruined it for the rest of us.

I never said it was you who made up the rivalry. Retro excluded on-line multiplayer because of how awful Metroid Prime 2's was and that the series was meant to be a single-player experience, a claim backed up by Reggie himself. If they had put on-line multiplayer, it would have either detracted from the single-player experience or they would have had to delay the game even further.

Please stop using hearsay as statistics to your argument.

Im not using heresay as statistics, in fact thats heresay right there. Obviously MP2 had a bad multiplayer but that doesnt mean MP3 would have had a bad multiplayer. I know that was one fo Retro's reasonf or excluding a multiplayer and it was retarded on their part. The main reason though was diehard fanboys who wanted Metroid to stay the same and that is also retarded.

They could have easily made an awsome multiplayer. They also could have been the first to make a 32 player online game for Wii. I would rather have a delayed game than one that excludes awsome features like multiplayer. I know these are their reasons and from this point in time we can obviously see it was a mistake.

Yes, you are using hearsay. You aren't backing up any of your claims of the general consensus and are stating unconfirmed facts. Retro did not make a mistake. They considered the option of adding multiplayer and on-line, but they scrapped it and wanted to completely focus on the single-player. Metroid is a single-player game. There are plenty of first-person shooters out there that have single-player and multiplayer. Examples of such games include Medal of Honor and Halo, while Metroid Prime and Bioshock don't have multiplayer are were still great successes, all because they were completely focused on a single-player experience. If you want to buy a first-person shooter with on-line multiplayer for the Wii then buy Meadal of Honor Heroes 2 when it comes out, (which by the way doesn't really have a very fleshed out single-player and isn't trying to have the same single-player experience as Metroid Prime 3 has, meaning that the focus of the game on multiplayer has effected the quality and value of the single-player mode).

"...obviously see it was a mistake."

That's just your opinion and doesn't really matter because obviously the game was not directed towards a person with your interests. If you don't like the direction of the game then don't buy it, simple as that.

"They also could have been the first to make a 32 player online game for Wii."

Actually, since the game was never planned to have multiplayer in the beginning, it probably would have been pushed back into next year in which Medal of Honor Heroes 2 would have been released before then. The Metroid series has always been about a single-player experience focused on exploration. Metroid Prime 2 and Metroid Prime: Hunters broke that formula and their single-player suffered from it. Retro didn't want Metroid Prime 3 to suffer the same fate so they focused on what the Metroid series has always been about.

Wow this is kinda funny. How do i site folklore lol. Its people talking on the forums and people I talk to at school who say this stuff. Its not on a articl????? If you have not heard of this rivalry around here than you are oblivious to your surroundings.

Metroid Prime 3 could have had a multiplayer. They tried it on MP2 it sucked and yes it detracted from the campaign but it was still a great game. Then they tried it on MPH and that worked great, but yes the campaign was not so good. But dont you think we should ask more from some of the greatest devs out there (Retro Studios) who is also published and partially developed by Nintendo. Dont you think we could have asked more than this from them? There are games that have a good multiplayer and single player and an example is Halo CE.

Also i am gonna get MoH2 but the game is not fully fleshed out. It has a short campaign, no local play, and not alot of maps. You cant "oh teh mutiplayer did this" because you make it sound like as soon as they have a multiplayer they lose all quality else where. The games that are able to balance that out are called good games that get AAAs.

So it was a mistake because an accomplished dev like Retro could have done more. Yo can hide behind that crap people say "its an opnion" but its a well defended and a commonly agreed opnion.

BTW I have been playing Metroid games for a very long time so I know what it takes to make a good Metroid game. I am not a died hard fan that never wants the series to evolve. All I heard from fanboys was that they did not like the multiplayer. And yes it was an evolving process that maybe wasnt right the first time but that doesnt mean you just give it up. Games need change and while Metroid Prime 3 hadrevolutionized its controls it didnt do much to change some fo the formula to make it more unique, thats one of the reasons why GS didnt give it an AAA it did not chage the formula.

[QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="IRaiza"]

This game looks awesome. Im satisfied that EA was the one to step up and give us an online FPS. Now thats awesome, 6 maps, no biggy. Well....

Personally, medal of honor multiplayer games always felt weird. I dont know, maybe because I played Metroid and Halo which caused me to feel this way. How? I dont know.

One thing, I will always rant about is the lack of thinking when it comes to lets all play together. Metroid 3, no online. That was a bad idea. There was really no reason to complain if they added it in, heck MP2 has great campaign and multiplayer. The maps kinda stunk but they were doing something new. Metroid could have been a great opportunity. But they skrew it over and say "no online, great campaign"

Im sick of that, even the fans who agree. Good games allow you to enjoy them for over 20 hours not quit after you beat it. Metroid prime 3 had awesome campaign, no doubt. But once you beat it, its over..

Yeah yell at me for saying multiplayer and metroid in one sentence. But for crying out loud, this could have been the best nintendo online FPS out there.

sonic_rusher

Well MP2 multiplayer sucked hard, thats part of the reason why they did not add it to MP3. Also abunch of diehard Metroid fans were complete idiots and raised holy hell about not hhaving multiplayer. i mean I understand whyt hey didnt but, if there was one game that everyone saw as a rival to Halo it was Metroid and when they excluded the multiplayer Metroid jumped out fot he race. Kinda of dissappointing.

I just want a kick ass FPS that is complete.

It wasn't even in the race to begin with. Metroid Prime, nor Metroid Prime 2 were First-person shooters. Anyone who compares the two series doesn't know a thing about video game genres.

Say what you like but MS and Nintendo fans alike considered them in a race. once again you dont listen. MANY people saw it that way. When they excluded multiplayer that rivalry ended.

I never said many people didn't see it that way. I'm saying that comparing the two games is like comparing Final Fantasy and The Legend of Zelda. Though they are similar in certain ways, they are in completely different genres and are targeted at different audiences. The games of the two series don't even play the same.

The original Metroid Prime didn't even have multiplayer, so that's another reason for there to be no rivalry in the first place.

Popular demand says otherwise. I never personally compared it. I just mentioned that it was dissapointing for alot of people. I always thought was cool that they were like rivals even if it was not from a genre oriented rivalry but their characters are so much alike. This is how it is dont argue with me about it argue with the hordes of people that started it.

Popular demand just wanted on-line multiplayer with a flagship series for the Nintendo Wii. It had nothing to do with comparing the two series.

OMG I was not the one who made up the rivalry between Metroid and Halo, it was the masses. Even if they dont match as with their game type they make great rivals as just characters. Also one of the main reasons retro excluded online or let alone any multiplayer was that die hard fools wanted to preserve the series and that ruined it for the rest of us.

I never said it was you who made up the rivalry. Retro excluded on-line multiplayer because of how awful Metroid Prime 2's was and that the series was meant to be a single-player experience, a claim backed up by Reggie himself. If they had put on-line multiplayer, it would have either detracted from the single-player experience or they would have had to delay the game even further.

Please stop using hearsay as statistics to your argument.

Im not using heresay as statistics, in fact thats heresay right there. Obviously MP2 had a bad multiplayer but that doesnt mean MP3 would have had a bad multiplayer. I know that was one fo Retro's reasonf or excluding a multiplayer and it was retarded on their part. The main reason though was diehard fanboys who wanted Metroid to stay the same and that is also retarded.

They could have easily made an awsome multiplayer. They also could have been the first to make a 32 player online game for Wii. I would rather have a delayed game than one that excludes awsome features like multiplayer. I know these are their reasons and from this point in time we can obviously see it was a mistake.

Yes, you are using hearsay. You aren't backing up any of your claims of the general consensus and are stating unconfirmed facts. Retro did not make a mistake. They considered the option of adding multiplayer and on-line, but they scrapped it and wanted to completely focus on the single-player. Metroid is a single-player game. There are plenty of first-person shooters out there that have single-player and multiplayer. Examples of such games include Medal of Honor and Halo, while Metroid Prime and Bioshock don't have multiplayer are were still great successes, all because they were completely focused on a single-player experience. If you want to buy a first-person shooter with on-line multiplayer for the Wii then buy Meadal of Honor Heroes 2 when it comes out, (which by the way doesn't really have a very fleshed out single-player and isn't trying to have the same single-player experience as Metroid Prime 3 has, meaning that the focus of the game on multiplayer has effected the quality and value of the single-player mode).

"...obviously see it was a mistake."

That's just your opinion and doesn't really matter because obviously the game was not directed towards a person with your interests. If you don't like the direction of the game then don't buy it, simple as that.

"They also could have been the first to make a 32 player online game for Wii."

Actually, since the game was never planned to have multiplayer in the beginning, it probably would have been pushed back into next year in which Medal of Honor Heroes 2 would have been released before then. The Metroid series has always been about a single-player experience focused on exploration. Metroid Prime 2 and Metroid Prime: Hunters broke that formula and their single-player suffered from it. Retro didn't want Metroid Prime 3 to suffer the same fate so they focused on what the Metroid series has always been about.

Wow this is kinda funny. How do i site folklore lol. Its people talking on the forums and people I talk to at school who say this stuff. Its not on a articl????? If you have not heard of this rivalry around here than you are oblivious to your surroundings.

Metroid Prime 3 could have had a multiplayer. They tried it on MP2 it sucked and yes it detracted from the campaign but it was still a great game. Then they tried it on MPH and that worked great, but yes the campaign was not so good. But dont you think we should ask more from some of the greatest devs out there (Retro Studios) who is also published and partially developed by Nintendo. Dont you think we could have asked more than this from them? There are games that have a good multiplayer and single player and an example is Halo CE.

Also i am gonna get MoH2 but the game is not fully fleshed out. It has a short campaign, no local play, and not alot of maps. You cant "oh teh mutiplayer did this" because you make it sound like as soon as they have a multiplayer they lose all quality else where. The games that are able to balance that out are called good games that get AAAs.

So it was a mistake because an accomplished dev like Retro could have done more. Yo can hide behind that crap people say "its an opnion" but its a well defended and a commonly agreed opnion.

BTW I have been playing Metroid games for a very long time so I know what it takes to make a good Metroid game. I am not a died hard fan that never wants the series to evolve. All I heard from fanboys was that they did not like the multiplayer. And yes it was an evolving process that maybe wasnt right the first time but that doesnt mean you just give it up. Games need change and while Metroid Prime 3 hadrevolutionized its controls it didnt do much to change some fo the formula to make it more unique, thats one of the reasons why GS didnt give it an AAA it did not chage the formula.

"If you have not heard of this rivalry around here than you are oblivious to your surroundings."

No, it's just that most people can figure out that the games are hardly similar and really aren't comparable and you happen to be around the people who think differently.

"But dont you think we should ask more from some of the greatest devs out there (Retro Studios) who is also published and partially developed by Nintendo. Dont you think we could have asked more than this from them?"

You could, but it wouldn't make any sense. They released the game because it was in their opinion, perfect.If you disagree with them, don't buy the game.

"Yo can hide behind that crap people say "its an opnion" but its a well defended and a commonly agreed opnion."

It's still just an opinion, which you seem unable to differentiate from fact. The majority of people who buy Metroid Prime 3 realize that the game and the series was always meant to be a single-player game. You may say it's commonly agreed upon but obviously Retro and the majority of people think differently.

"There are games that have a good multiplayer and single player and an example is Halo CE."

Yes, but Metroid Prime 3 has a better single-player than Halo, and that's what differentiates games and their focuses in the different aspects of a game.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

[QUOTE="han_186"][QUOTE="IRaiza"]Han - Explain to me why it would? They make the campaign then make multiplayer. There is no evidence telling that it would be bad. Besides, Halo campaign is good. Im sorry it is a bit hard for you to understand. More on that, Halo has got a better story, not always bosses. Your just comparing time consuming with fast paced shooting.Nintendoes

Thats not fanboyish. Halo 2 was retarded because it had a terrible campaign. Halo 3 has a much better campaign but it still had shortcomings and definitely did not surpass the campaign of Halo 1.

That's exactly why the campaign in Halo 3 was so much better than Halo 2's. Because Bungie didn't have to reinvent the multiplayer as they did in Halo 2, they could completely focus on the single-player aspect of the game and just give an updated multiplayer component with it.

Well they did add a whole new element to the game multiplayer and campaign. The new funtion with the X button changes strategies alot. another reason why Halo3 was didnt suck like Hallo 2 was that they had a much better development team this time.

That wasn't my point. My point was when you completely focus on the single-player aspect of a game as opposed to previous games in the same series, the quality improves tremendously in the single-player experience and it's seen when it's directly compared to single-players of past games.

So when did i disagree with that?

i think this game will be great!!!!!! frosty_shark

Ditto!

sonic_rusher and Nintendoes: Can you please trim your quote blocks down to only one or two? We're all having to scroll way down the page just to read three or four posts. Thanks.

I'm enjoying your debate, though, so keep it up. :)

ya the game is short. Bt Halo 3 is pretty sort too.

sonic_rusher

Yeah, My friends and I beat the game on heroic in about 4 or 5 hours lol.

BTW I have been playing Metroid games for a very long time so I know what it takes to make a good Metroid game.sonic_rusher

I don't think you do. Maybe if you had been making Metroid games for a very long time, you'd know what it takes. I'll elaborate a bit by responding to this:

There are games that have a good multiplayer and single player and an example is Halo CE.sonic_rusher

There's one key factor about game development that you're leaving out: resources. Halo 3 is arguably the biggest project of video game history. That team probably had nearly unlimited resources.

Metroid Prime 3, although a major project, could not be considered in the same realm as Halo 3. Now I'm not arguing about the quality or fun-factor of each game, just the fact that Halo is extremely popular everywhere. Metroid doesn't have nearly the same reputation. Thus, Retro's team probably had much less to work with in terms of resources. They probably still had a lot, seeing as how it's a major Nintendo franchise, but I doubt it could measure up to that of Halo.

My point is that a game like Halo can have such good single- and multiplayer because the team had enough resources for both. The Metroid team simply didn't; their reason for not including multiplayer was to focus all of their resources on the single-player mode. If they did have the resources of the Halo team, then they probably would've included multiplayer just because they could. And it would've been good, despite their claim that multiplayer doesn't fit in the Metroid experience (which I agree with). With more resources (more money, more time, more people), they could've done both without sacrificing the quality of either.

sonic_rusher and Nintendoes: Can you please trim your quote blocks down to only one or two? We're all having to scroll way down the page just to read three or four posts. Thanks.

I'm enjoying your debate, though, so keep it up. :)

JordanElek

Will do.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="Nintendoes"][QUOTE="sonic_rusher"][QUOTE="IRaiza"]

This game looks awesome. Im satisfied that EA was the one to step up and give us an online FPS. Now thats awesome, 6 maps, no biggy. Well....

Personally, medal of honor multiplayer games always felt weird. I dont know, maybe because I played Metroid and Halo which caused me to feel this way. How? I dont know.

One thing, I will always rant about is the lack of thinking when it comes to lets all play together. Metroid 3, no online. That was a bad idea. There was really no reason to complain if they added it in, heck MP2 has great campaign and multiplayer. The maps kinda stunk but they were doing something new. Metroid could have been a great opportunity. But they skrew it over and say "no online, great campaign"

Im sick of that, even the fans who agree. Good games allow you to enjoy them for over 20 hours not quit after you beat it. Metroid prime 3 had awesome campaign, no doubt. But once you beat it, its over..

Yeah yell at me for saying multiplayer and metroid in one sentence. But for crying out loud, this could have been the best nintendo online FPS out there.

Nintendoes

Well MP2 multiplayer sucked hard, thats part of the reason why they did not add it to MP3. Also abunch of diehard Metroid fans were complete idiots and raised holy hell about not hhaving multiplayer. i mean I understand whyt hey didnt but, if there was one game that everyone saw as a rival to Halo it was Metroid and when they excluded the multiplayer Metroid jumped out fot he race. Kinda of dissappointing.

I just want a kick ass FPS that is complete.

It wasn't even in the race to begin with. Metroid Prime, nor Metroid Prime 2 were First-person shooters. Anyone who compares the two series doesn't know a thing about video game genres.

Say what you like but MS and Nintendo fans alike considered them in a race. once again you dont listen. MANY people saw it that way. When they excluded multiplayer that rivalry ended.

I never said many people didn't see it that way. I'm saying that comparing the two games is like comparing Final Fantasy and The Legend of Zelda. Though they are similar in certain ways, they are in completely different genres and are targeted at different audiences. The games of the two series don't even play the same.

The original Metroid Prime didn't even have multiplayer, so that's another reason for there to be no rivalry in the first place.

Popular demand says otherwise. I never personally compared it. I just mentioned that it was dissapointing for alot of people. I always thought was cool that they were like rivals even if it was not from a genre oriented rivalry but their characters are so much alike. This is how it is dont argue with me about it argue with the hordes of people that started it.

Popular demand just wanted on-line multiplayer with a flagship series for the Nintendo Wii. It had nothing to do with comparing the two series.

OMG I was not the one who made up the rivalry between Metroid and Halo, it was the masses. Even if they dont match as with their game type they make great rivals as just characters. Also one of the main reasons retro excluded online or let alone any multiplayer was that die hard fools wanted to preserve the series and that ruined it for the rest of us.

I never said it was you who made up the rivalry. Retro excluded on-line multiplayer because of how awful Metroid Prime 2's was and that the series was meant to be a single-player experience, a claim backed up by Reggie himself. If they had put on-line multiplayer, it would have either detracted from the single-player experience or they would have had to delay the game even further.

Please stop using hearsay as statistics to your argument.

Im not using heresay as statistics, in fact thats heresay right there. Obviously MP2 had a bad multiplayer but that doesnt mean MP3 would have had a bad multiplayer. I know that was one fo Retro's reasonf or excluding a multiplayer and it was retarded on their part. The main reason though was diehard fanboys who wanted Metroid to stay the same and that is also retarded.

They could have easily made an awsome multiplayer. They also could have been the first to make a 32 player online game for Wii. I would rather have a delayed game than one that excludes awsome features like multiplayer. I know these are their reasons and from this point in time we can obviously see it was a mistake.

Yes, you are using hearsay. You aren't backing up any of your claims of the general consensus and are stating unconfirmed facts. Retro did not make a mistake. They considered the option of adding multiplayer and on-line, but they scrapped it and wanted to completely focus on the single-player. Metroid is a single-player game. There are plenty of first-person shooters out there that have single-player and multiplayer. Examples of such games include Medal of Honor and Halo, while Metroid Prime and Bioshock don't have multiplayer are were still great successes, all because they were completely focused on a single-player experience. If you want to buy a first-person shooter with on-line multiplayer for the Wii then buy Meadal of Honor Heroes 2 when it comes out, (which by the way doesn't really have a very fleshed out single-player and isn't trying to have the same single-player experience as Metroid Prime 3 has, meaning that the focus of the game on multiplayer has effected the quality and value of the single-player mode).

"...obviously see it was a mistake."

That's just your opinion and doesn't really matter because obviously the game was not directed towards a person with your interests. If you don't like the direction of the game then don't buy it, simple as that.

"They also could have been the first to make a 32 player online game for Wii."

Actually, since the game was never planned to have multiplayer in the beginning, it probably would have been pushed back into next year in which Medal of Honor Heroes 2 would have been released before then. The Metroid series has always been about a single-player experience focused on exploration. Metroid Prime 2 and Metroid Prime: Hunters broke that formula and their single-player suffered from it. Retro didn't want Metroid Prime 3 to suffer the same fate so they focused on what the Metroid series has always been about.

Wow this is kinda funny. How do i site folklore lol. Its people talking on the forums and people I talk to at school who say this stuff. Its not on a articl????? If you have not heard of this rivalry around here than you are oblivious to your surroundings.

Metroid Prime 3 could have had a multiplayer. They tried it on MP2 it sucked and yes it detracted from the campaign but it was still a great game. Then they tried it on MPH and that worked great, but yes the campaign was not so good. But dont you think we should ask more from some of the greatest devs out there (Retro Studios) who is also published and partially developed by Nintendo. Dont you think we could have asked more than this from them? There are games that have a good multiplayer and single player and an example is Halo CE.

Also i am gonna get MoH2 but the game is not fully fleshed out. It has a short campaign, no local play, and not alot of maps. You cant "oh teh mutiplayer did this" because you make it sound like as soon as they have a multiplayer they lose all quality else where. The games that are able to balance that out are called good games that get AAAs.

So it was a mistake because an accomplished dev like Retro could have done more. Yo can hide behind that crap people say "its an opnion" but its a well defended and a commonly agreed opnion.

BTW I have been playing Metroid games for a very long time so I know what it takes to make a good Metroid game. I am not a died hard fan that never wants the series to evolve. All I heard from fanboys was that they did not like the multiplayer. And yes it was an evolving process that maybe wasnt right the first time but that doesnt mean you just give it up. Games need change and while Metroid Prime 3 hadrevolutionized its controls it didnt do much to change some fo the formula to make it more unique, thats one of the reasons why GS didnt give it an AAA it did not chage the formula.

"If you have not heard of this rivalry around here than you are oblivious to your surroundings."

No, it's just that most people can figure out that the games are hardly similar and really aren't comparable and you happen to be around the people who think differently.

"But dont you think we should ask more from some of the greatest devs out there (Retro Studios) who is also published and partially developed by Nintendo. Dont you think we could have asked more than this from them?"

You could, but it wouldn't make any sense. They released the game because it was in their opinion, perfect.If you disagree with them, don't buy the game.

"Yo can hide behind that crap people say "its an opnion" but its a well defended and a commonly agreed opnion."

It's still just an opinion, which you seem unable to differentiate from fact. The majority of people who buy Metroid Prime 3 realize that the game and the series was always meant to be a single-player game. You may say it's commonly agreed upon but obviously Retro and the majority of people think differently.

"There are games that have a good multiplayer and single player and an example is Halo CE."

Yes, but Metroid Prime 3 has a better single-player than Halo, and that's what differentiates games and their focuses in the different aspects of a game.

I dont think you understand. People dont understand that it is different esp people who arent Nintendo fans. I know its hard for you to accept it but putting aside the fact that they are different games many people pair them up as rivals because of the charscters not the games. Can you try and understand at least this without repeating your self 50 times over.

Devs should think about their fans probabaly more so than their own reservations. Also its not just my opinion. These threads were flooded with topics about no online for MP3. Being that you seem completely oblivious of what goes on here I felt obliged to let you know. Yes I pretty much do disagree but I still thinkt he game is awsome. Just because I dont like something about a game doesnt mean I think the game sucks overall.

And now that your gonna hide behind opnions the same goes for you. You are one of those fanboys that didnt want the multiplayer and you got your wish and congratulations Nintendo's online plan still remains inert and yes its just an opnion for you too.

Yes it has a wayyy better single play than halo but think how much better ofgame Metroid would be if it had a multiplayer even close to Halo's. I can understand for a game like Zelda, i know that would be a problem to have a multiplayer. But Metroid Prime was an evolving series that was dancing over the lines of First person adventure and first person shooter. For the sake of advancing gameplay multiplayer would ahve been for the best. But whatever I know your just gonna repeat your self so have at it go ahead basicsally copy and paste what you said last time.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]BTW I have been playing Metroid games for a very long time so I know what it takes to make a good Metroid game.JordanElek

I don't think you do. Maybe if you had been making Metroid games for a very long time, you'd know what it takes. I'll elaborate a bit by responding to this:

There are games that have a good multiplayer and single player and an example is Halo CE.sonic_rusher

There's one key factor about game development that you're leaving out: resources. Halo 3 is arguably the biggest project of video game history. That team probably had nearly unlimited resources.

Metroid Prime 3, although a major project, could not be considered in the same realm as Halo 3. Now I'm not arguing about the quality or fun-factor of each game, just the fact that Halo is extremely popular everywhere. Metroid doesn't have nearly the same reputation. Thus, Retro's team probably had much less to work with in terms of resources. They probably still had a lot, seeing as how it's a major Nintendo franchise, but I doubt it could measure up to that of Halo.

My point is that a game like Halo can have such good single- and multiplayer because the team had enough resources for both. The Metroid team simply didn't; their reason for not including multiplayer was to focus all of their resources on the single-player mode. If they did have the resources of the Halo team, then they probably would've included multiplayer just because they could. And it would've been good, despite their claim that multiplayer doesn't fit in the Metroid experience (which I agree with). With more resources (more money, more time, more people), they could've done both without sacrificing the quality of either.

I know it takes resources but before i even go into that. He had not even gone into that yet.

Now that you have here is what I have to say. Has it ever occurred to you that Nintendo is one fo the biggest publishers in the world, Retro is one of the most skilled devs, and the Wii is breaking records. I think that if there was no multiplayer because of "resources" then Nintendo was very foolish to not give this game more. Nintendo did not advertise till the very end and obviously gave it a lower budget than it deserved. Time isnt really an issue either because they give Zelda and metroid the time they need. So if it is resources they lacked then that is Nintendo's fault for not giving this game more credit.

Also i was referring to Halo CE not Halo 3. Halo 3 had a short campaign which may have been better than Halo 2' campaign but no where near the original. Metroid Prime 3 may bot of had a big of a budget as Halo does but it was still enough to get where you need to have a good multiplayer and campaign.and if this is true then the decision to not have multiplayer came from ignorant die hard fanboy that wated a metroid that never changes and always stays the same.

The game looks good, plays good and has online multiplayer. The engine is probably decent since it's a sequel which means they probably debugged most of the multiplayer glitches. 60 fps is no easy feat. It's a WW2 game, I know, but it might be worth it. It's not gonna change your life but it could be cool. Just think about what Call Of Duty 2 did for the Xbox 360.

Once again, for everyone's sake, trim your quote chains!

Metroid Prime 3 may bot of had a big of a budget as Halo does but it was still enough to get where you need to have a good multiplayer and campaign.and if this is true then the decision to not have multiplayer came from ignorant die hard fanboy that wated a metroid that never changes and always stays the same.sonic_rusher

What? You think that an "ignorant die hard fanboy" is making the decisions at Retro or Nintendo? They have industry analysts to gather information and advise them about what seems to be the best route. You make a good point that Nintendo is one of the biggest publishers in the world - they didn't get that way being run by ignorant die hard fanboys. We may not agree with some of their decisions, but we still buy their games and consoles.

It seems to me that your major point of dissent is that Nintendo doesn't listen to its fans. I think your idea of a fanbase is skewed. You seem to equate the "opinion of the masses" with the opinion of internet forum goers. We (as collective body of forum users) make up a very small percentage of the gaming community. And we often disagree amongst ourselves, as evidenced by the many "multiplayer vs. no multiplayer" debates of MP3. "Listening to the fans" sounds so easy, but when there are millions of fans with differing opinions, it's not so easy, especially when the opinon of the loudest voice may not be in the best interest of the corporation as a whole.

Maybe it's a little easier in some cases, such as nearly everyone begging Nintendo to go online during the last generation. Nintendo was listening, but they felt it wasn't the right time to take action. Obviously the time is now. The multiplayer in MP3 issue, however, has not been so nearly unanimous.

8 Level campaign, 6 online maps and a rail shooter mode to help nintendo cash in on the wii-zapper and water down the rest of the game (which is clearly true).

I was very excitted at first and decided to skip metroid for this, but now it seems like it will be a short and disapointing game. So what if it has online? Just 6 maps, it's not like you havent played a ww2 shooter online before anyways, 1942 for pc looks better.

I'd rather go with metroid and have a solid single player experience, than 2 very weak single player and online modes.

What's your take on all of this?

sherbert-lime

how is this game water down ? you don't need to use the wii zapper! you don't need to play the rails mode! so what if it only has 6 maps, if there really good maps it wouldn't matter! like for example in goldeneye there where a lot of maps,but only 2 i liked ! i got metroid and i'm getting mohh2, i think u should give this game another chance.

I dont think you understand. People dont understand that it is different esp people who arent Nintendo fans. I know its hard for you to accept it but putting aside the fact that they are different games many people pair them up as rivals because of the charscters not the games. Can you try and understand at least this without repeating your self 50 times over.

Devs should think about their fans probabaly more so than their own reservations. Also its not just my opinion. These threads were flooded with topics about no online for MP3. Being that you seem completely oblivious of what goes on here I felt obliged to let you know. Yes I pretty much do disagree but I still thinkt he game is awsome. Just because I dont like something about a game doesnt mean I think the game sucks overall.

And now that your gonna hide behind opnions the same goes for you. You are one of those fanboys that didnt want the multiplayer and you got your wish and congratulations Nintendo's online plan still remains inert and yes its just an opnion for you too.

Yes it has a wayyy better single play than halo but think how much better ofgame Metroid would be if it had a multiplayer even close to Halo's. I can understand for a game like Zelda, i know that would be a problem to have a multiplayer. But Metroid Prime was an evolving series that was dancing over the lines of First person adventure and first person shooter. For the sake of advancing gameplay multiplayer would ahve been for the best. But whatever I know your just gonna repeat your self so have at it go ahead basicsally copy and paste what you said last time.

sonic_rusher

Once again, for everyone's sake, trim your quote chains!

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]Metroid Prime 3 may bot of had a big of a budget as Halo does but it was still enough to get where you need to have a good multiplayer and campaign.and if this is true then the decision to not have multiplayer came from ignorant die hard fanboy that wated a metroid that never changes and always stays the same.JordanElek

What? You think that an "ignorant die hard fanboy" is making the decisions at Retro or Nintendo? They have industry analysts to gather information and advise them about what seems to be the best route. You make a good point that Nintendo is one of the biggest publishers in the world - they didn't get that way being run by ignorant die hard fanboys. We may not agree with some of their decisions, but we still buy their games and consoles.

It seems to me that your major point of dissent is that Nintendo doesn't listen to its fans. I think your idea of a fanbase is skewed. You seem to equate the "opinion of the masses" with the opinion of internet forum goers. We (as collective body of forum users) make up a very small percentage of the gaming community. And we often disagree amongst ourselves, as evidenced by the many "multiplayer vs. no multiplayer" debates of MP3. "Listening to the fans" sounds so easy, but when there are millions of fans with differing opinions, it's not so easy, especially when the opinon of the loudest voice may not be in the best interest of the corporation as a whole.

Maybe it's a little easier in some cases, such as nearly everyone begging Nintendo to go online during the last generation. Nintendo was listening, but they felt it wasn't the right time to take action. Obviously the time is now. The multiplayer in MP3 issue, however, has not been so nearly unanimous.

IGN has said multiple times that mainstream metroid fans had opted against a multiplayer. I mentioned before that I have talked to many people as well as pay attention to these f orums and not to mention gaming magazines. I know there are fans out there that dont go to any of these scource but they usually these fans dont voice their opnions in a way that Nintendo can observe it any way or most likely they dont care. And with the many people I talked to about this only the small fraction of them did not want multiplayer. Now you can sat its BS but we live in a world of communication where its pretty hard to even ignore what general sentimet is. If this doesnt convince then you have to know that Nintendo ever since the Gamecube have been alot more stubborn and unfortunately have turned a blind eye multiple times to what the fans want. Im sorry but they had to see the hype behind the potential of a good multiplayer for MP3. Even the nintendo rep had to be corrected by one of their counterparts because she mentioned that it may be underway.

Now I am going to list some points:

You say that they did not have the rescources to make a multiplayer-well I say that that is very hard to be lieve and even if it is then thats Nintendo's fault for not giving such a deep game the means to make it what it should have been.

You say it is tohard for a company with such a huge fanbase to see that their fans wanted a multiplayer because there are so many different opnions-well i say that this is a yes or no question, its not like other problems that devs have like finding out where to bring their story. Its either yes multiplayer or no multiplayer and judging by the overwhelming amount of people who wanted it they would have seen it one way or another.

BTW sorry for the long quotes I forgot :).

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

I dont think you understand. People dont understand that it is different esp people who arent Nintendo fans. I know its hard for you to accept it but putting aside the fact that they are different games many people pair them up as rivals because of the charscters not the games. Can you try and understand at least this without repeating your self 50 times over.

Devs should think about their fans probabaly more so than their own reservations. Also its not just my opinion. These threads were flooded with topics about no online for MP3. Being that you seem completely oblivious of what goes on here I felt obliged to let you know. Yes I pretty much do disagree but I still thinkt he game is awsome. Just because I dont like something about a game doesnt mean I think the game sucks overall.

And now that your gonna hide behind opnions the same goes for you. You are one of those fanboys that didnt want the multiplayer and you got your wish and congratulations Nintendo's online plan still remains inert and yes its just an opnion for you too.

Yes it has a wayyy better single play than halo but think how much better ofgame Metroid would be if it had a multiplayer even close to Halo's. I can understand for a game like Zelda, i know that would be a problem to have a multiplayer. But Metroid Prime was an evolving series that was dancing over the lines of First person adventure and first person shooter. For the sake of advancing gameplay multiplayer would ahve been for the best. But whatever I know your just gonna repeat your self so have at it go ahead basicsally copy and paste what you said last time.

Nintendoes

Whether you like it or not this is not a small minority. Your making this little false reality that most people dont want multiplayer. Most people want multiplayer im sorry you cant even argue this. It has been expressly demonstrated by those who love the series that we should not have a multiplayer because it detracts from the main play campaign. Of course as I said befor eit would not detract from the game of they make it right. I dont know how you can think that metroid fans ae a bigger group than the general Wii player that just defys normality but whatever. Now your saying that they ddint do it because of an insufficient online plan. Well then they should not have an insufficient online plan. We have had good online gaming from other scources for more than a decade. You cant hinde behind that either because they should have a goood online plan to begin with and they could have updated their online if that would give us online play for MP3, I dont care about delays if that means a better game for us.

You honestly think people would not buy it if it did/did not have multiplayer. Its not a life or death situation. The game is still really good but obviously could have better. Gamespot would have given it a lower score if it was a bad multiplayer. if it was a good multiplayer it would have gotten a better score. You seem to think that if there was a mutliplayer it autmotically would have sucked. Well if they could have improved upon MPH formula then it would have been legend.

You say i am not getting the point yet all you say it easily refuted with a couple paragraphs of common sense. If you dont want to argue with me dont quote me and you wont have to deal with me. What I am saying makes sense and all you seem to do it keep giving excuses like it would have gotten a bad score or the online plan is bad. We pay good money for these products and you are supposed to demand more of them.

IGN has said multiple times that mainstream metroid fans had opted against a multiplayer.sonic_rusher

Can you give a link for that? It's not that I don't trust you; I just want to see how IGN narrowed all the opinions into a single voice that didn't want multiplayer.

You say that they did not have the rescources to make a multiplayer-well I say that that is very hard to be lieve and even if it is then thats Nintendo's fault for not giving such a deep game the means to make it what it should have been.sonic_rusher

Yeah, I know that's a weak point on my part because I have noidea of the actual resources involved in MP3. It's only an assumption that they might not have had enough resources to make a good single- and multiplayer mode, and you are quite right to be suspicious of it. I do, however, hold to my opinion that the MP3 team had much less to work with than the Halo team. ;)

You say it is tohard for a company with such a huge fanbase to see that their fans wanted a multiplayer because there are so many different opnions. . . .Its either yes multiplayer or no multiplayer and judging by the overwhelming amount of people who wanted it they would have seen it one way or another.sonic_rusher

I thought you said IGN claimed that mainstream (i.e. the majority) Metroid fans didn't want multiplayer?

Anyway, what about the overwhelming number of people who didn't care? MP3 has sold well (again, another assumption, but I think it's safe) despite its lack of multiplayer. It might have been a nice addition to some people, but it might have sucked as well. It all depends on the resources, like I've said before. MP3 probably would've been released sometime mid to late next year if they had implemented an online multiplayer, by the way.

I'm just going to throw this out there as well; make of it what you will - Nintendo is a Japanese company. They also take into account the opinion of their homeland gamers. And I'm sure it's easier for them to judge the overall Japanese opinion. Did the Japanese also have this "overwhelming" desire for multiplayer?

Whether you like it or not this is not a small minority. Your making this little false reality that most people dont want multiplayer.

sonic_rusher

If that's how you view it I can't help it but I never said the majority of people do not want multiplayer. I said the majority of people don't want multiplayer in Metroid Prime 3: Corruption.

You seem to think that if there was a mutliplayer it autmotically would have sucked. Well if they could have improved upon MPH formula then it would have been legend.

sonic_rusher

I gave a decent number of reasons why the multiplayer in Metroid Prime 3 would have been criticized. Right now, all of those reasons are with all Nintendo Wi-Fi enabled games. Prove one of them wrong and I'll listen to your argument.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]IGN has said multiple times that mainstream metroid fans had opted against a multiplayer.JordanElek

Can you give a link for that? It's not that I don't trust you; I just want to see how IGN narrowed all the opinions into a single voice that didn't want multiplayer.

You say that they did not have the rescources to make a multiplayer-well I say that that is very hard to be lieve and even if it is then thats Nintendo's fault for not giving such a deep game the means to make it what it should have been.sonic_rusher

Yeah, I know that's a weak point on my part because I have noidea of the actual resources involved in MP3. It's only an assumption that they might not have had enough resources to make a good single- and multiplayer mode, and you are quite right to be suspicious of it. I do, however, hold to my opinion that the MP3 team had much less to work with than the Halo team. ;)

You say it is tohard for a company with such a huge fanbase to see that their fans wanted a multiplayer because there are so many different opnions. . . .Its either yes multiplayer or no multiplayer and judging by the overwhelming amount of people who wanted it they would have seen it one way or another.sonic_rusher

I thought you said IGN claimed that mainstream (i.e. the majority) Metroid fans didn't want multiplayer?

Anyway, what about the overwhelming number of people who didn't care? MP3 has sold well (again, another assumption, but I think it's safe) despite its lack of multiplayer. It might have been a nice addition to some people, but it might have sucked as well. It all depends on the resources, like I've said before. MP3 probably would've been released sometime mid to late next year if they had implemented an online multiplayer, by the way.

I'm just going to throw this out there as well; make of it what you will - Nintendo is a Japanese company. They also take into account the opinion of their homeland gamers. And I'm sure it's easier for them to judge the overall Japanese opinion. Did the Japanese also have this "overwhelming" desire for multiplayer?

I couldnt find the article but i found some better stuff:

http://wii.ign.com/mail/2007-09-04.html

http://wii.ign.com/mail/2007-04-18.html

http://wii.ign.com/mail/2007-07-03.html

Furthermore I know Halo 3 obviously has a much bigger budget, if it even had a budget or rather an unlimited supplies of money, but that does not mean that they cant make a good game with the still hefty money supply given to them. You almost make it sound like they are scraping to get by when Nintendo is second to Toyota right now in Japan.

I dont know if i worded it wrong but when I said mainstream Metroid fans I meant the crazy guys that yell at you when you criticize one aspect of the game, in other words the diehard fans, which is a fraction of the population of gamers who bought or supported MP3. They are the most loyal though even if to me they ruined an opportunity.

Yes its not a life or death situation. Im not saying the game sucked, hell I say the game is still great, but putting MP3 aside wouldnt you want the cherry on top??? You say the multiplayer may have sucked. Well I say what if motion sensing would have sucled thats the kind of attitude that limits advancement. its also the attitude that has lazy companies like mS and Sony rehashing their consoles with merely updating the hardware as if it was a computor.

I rather have a more complete game than having it rushed, I dont see the problem with it being delayed if it will be better.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

Whether you like it or not this is not a small minority. Your making this little false reality that most people dont want multiplayer.

Nintendoes

If that's how you view it I can't help it but I never said the majority of people do not want multiplayer. I said the majority of people don't want multiplayer in Metroid Prime 3: Corruption.

You seem to think that if there was a mutliplayer it autmotically would have sucked. Well if they could have improved upon MPH formula then it would have been legend.

sonic_rusher

I gave a decent number of reasons why the multiplayer in Metroid Prime 3 would have been criticized. Right now, all of those reasons are with all Nintendo Wi-Fi enabled games. Prove one of them wrong and I'll listen to your argument.

I know thats what you said thats what im referring to dude. We have been talking about MP3 so why are you just wasting bandwith. And its not true you have to be kidding me. Have you seen the people complain. Once againset your own little reality.

Did you not listen to me? If the online is insufficient then they should fix it. it should not be like that in the first place. They should set their priorities and make it right esp for a game like MP3. Without even acknowledging that Super mario Strikers still gets you playing and its fairly addicitive. Retro could easily make an ExTREMELY addicitive eperience if they improved upon it. If they had a matchmaking system like SMS but also let you invite friends to it then it would be fine and it would not suck. I proved it wrong before and I did it again right now, but of course even if you said you would I know you wont listen.

I know thats what you said thats what im referring to dude. We have been talking about MP3 so why are you just wasting bandwith.

sonic_rusher

Yes, I'm wasting bandwith on purpose. What an argument...

Have you seen the people complain.

sonic_rusher

Yes, I have, but they're still in the minority of people who would have bought the game if it did have multiplayer.

Retro could easily make an ExTREMELY addicitive eperience if they improved upon it.

sonic_rusher

I'm sure, but as we've seen through experience it's at the cost of quality in the single-player.

If they had a matchmaking system like SMS but also let you invite friends to it then it would be fine and it would not suck.

sonic_rusher

I never said it would suck, I simply said that the game would have been criticized for lack of features on-line.

I dont know if i worded it wrong but when I said mainstream Metroid fans I meant the crazy guys that yell at you when you criticize one aspect of the game, in other words the diehard fanssonic_rusher

Okay, that makes more sense. Usually "mainstream" refers to the general, the popular, the majority. In that case, you might be right. But I also see plenty of die hard fans on this site saying that they wanted multiplayer, so you just never know. I'm not sure an IGN editor's opinion is much more important than yours or mine in this case.

You almost make it sound like they are scraping to get by when Nintendo is second to Toyota right now in Japan.sonic_rusher

Oh, I know they're bringing in the big bucks. I don't mean to sound like I think Retro had extremely limited resources; they obviously had enough to make a Nintendo-quality game, which takes more time and effort than most games.

You say the multiplayer may have sucked. Well I say what if motion sensing would have sucled thats the kind of attitude that limits advancement.sonic_rusher

Good point.

I rather have a more complete game than having it rushed, I dont see the problem with it being delayed if it will be better.sonic_rusher

The problem with it being delayed is that sales would also be delayed. Developers can't take too long to make one game (unless it's Rare.....). The publisher wants to see it finished as quickly as possible in order to start raking in the dough. If a game is delayed too much, it will cut into their profits since the development team still needs to get paid for that extra time.

I think we may have gone far enough in this debate. You've brought up some good points, but I'm gonna stick to the theory that it was a matter of resources and maximizing profit.

I dont know if i worded it wrong but when I said mainstream Metroid fans I meant the crazy guys that yell at you when you criticize one aspect of the game, in other words the diehard fans, which is a fraction of the population of gamers who bought or supported MP3. They are the most loyal though even if to me they ruined an opportunity.

sonic_rusher

Both Nintendo and Retro made the decision to not include on-line multiplayer in Metroid Prime 3, not "crazy guys". If any one ruined this "opportunity", it's Nintendo and Retro. Diehard fans can't manipulate the actions of developers.

You say the multiplayer may have sucked. Well I say what if motion sensing would have sucled thats the kind of attitude that limits advancement.sonic_rusher

He's saying this because of what we've seen with the multiplayer in previous Metroid Prime games. He's also saying this because of how much the multiplayer would have been criticised for lack of features as all Nintendo Wi-Fi games have been criticized. These two factors give a very reasonable argument to support the notion that the multiplayer, (if it did have multiplayer), in Metroid Prime 3 may have been criticised for various reasons.

LOL Nintendoes vs. Sonic_rusher

The fight of the century.

LOL Nintendoes vs. Sonic_rusher

The fight of the century.

Duckman5

Indeed.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

I know thats what you said thats what im referring to dude. We have been talking about MP3 so why are you just wasting bandwith.

Nintendoes

Yes, I'm wasting bandwith on purpose. What an argument...

Have you seen the people complain.

sonic_rusher

Yes, I have, but they're still in the minority of people who would have bought the game if it did have multiplayer.

Retro could easily make an ExTREMELY addicitive eperience if they improved upon it.

sonic_rusher

I'm sure, but as we've seen through experience it's at the cost of quality in the single-player.

If they had a matchmaking system like SMS but also let you invite friends to it then it would be fine and it would not suck.

sonic_rusher

I never said it would suck, I simply said that the game would have been criticized for lack of features on-line.

LOL wtf you are just sinking now. I was letting you now how pointless that was. I was talking about metroid obviously not multiplayer in general.

THATS not a minority, the people who wanted no multiplayer are the minority PERIOD.

Yes it does ruin the single player if they dont do it right I hope I dont have to repeat this for you try not to forget again ok.

Lack of features online is basically sucking. If they made it right it would not be lacking features online and therefore would do the opposite of sucking.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

I dont know if i worded it wrong but when I said mainstream Metroid fans I meant the crazy guys that yell at you when you criticize one aspect of the game, in other words the diehard fans, which is a fraction of the population of gamers who bought or supported MP3. They are the most loyal though even if to me they ruined an opportunity.

Nintendoes

Both Nintendo and Retro made the decision to not include on-line multiplayer in Metroid Prime 3, not "crazy guys". If any one ruined this "opportunity", it's Nintendo and Retro. Diehard fans can't manipulate the actions of developers.

Ya but they did let themselves known also let people speak for themselves.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]You say the multiplayer may have sucked. Well I say what if motion sensing would have sucled thats the kind of attitude that limits advancement.Nintendoes

He's saying this because of what we've seen with the multiplayer in previous Metroid Prime games. He's also saying this because of how much the multiplayer would have been criticised for lack of features as all Nintendo Wi-Fi games have been criticized. These two factors give a very reasonable argument to support the notion that the multiplayer, (if it did have multiplayer), in Metroid Prime 3 may have been criticised for various reasons.

Just about everything you say that is against online MP3 suggest aiming low. You are supposed to ask more from companies like Nintendo and Retro. The online is lacking because they did not do it right. MP3 could have been the one to break the ice. So no its not a reasonable arguement esp when each online Wii game gets better than the next one even if its slow.

BTW stop speaking for other people you have enough to worry about with your own posts.

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]I dont know if i worded it wrong but when I said mainstream Metroid fans I meant the crazy guys that yell at you when you criticize one aspect of the game, in other words the diehard fansJordanElek

Okay, that makes more sense. Usually "mainstream" refers to the general, the popular, the majority. In that case, you might be right. But I also see plenty of die hard fans on this site saying that they wanted multiplayer, so you just never know. I'm not sure an IGN editor's opinion is much more important than yours or mine in this case.

You almost make it sound like they are scraping to get by when Nintendo is second to Toyota right now in Japan.sonic_rusher

Oh, I know they're bringing in the big bucks. I don't mean to sound like I think Retro had extremely limited resources; they obviously had enough to make a Nintendo-quality game, which takes more time and effort than most games.

You say the multiplayer may have sucked. Well I say what if motion sensing would have sucked thats the kind of attitude that limits advancement.sonic_rusher

Good point.

I rather have a more complete game than having it rushed, I dont see the problem with it being delayed if it will be better.sonic_rusher

The problem with it being delayed is that sales would also be delayed. Developers can't take too long to make one game (unless it's Rare.....). The publisher wants to see it finished as quickly as possible in order to start raking in the dough. If a game is delayed too much, it will cut into their profits since the development team still needs to get paid for that extra time.

I think we may have gone far enough in this debate. You've brought up some good points, but I'm gonna stick to the theory that it was a matter of resources and maximizing profit.

The general sentiment among the purists was no online. Also sorry I am tired as hell right now and I type like crap when I am tired.

I know it takes money to make these games and there is a time limit. But the elite games can really break the rules. The director of LoZ: TP said that there wasnt really restraint on how much time for a game like that. Im sure the same went for Halo 3. Other games that are able to get into the "trend" are able to bend the regular industry rules. For example Half Life, not many games can have episodes like they do and make it successful, its really mind boggling. This brings me to be live that Metroid Prime 3 may not have had the flexiblity of Zelda but it still could have done it even if that meant delays.

Which brings me to my final which is the fact that Retro said in early inerviews that they were contemplating multiplayer nd possibly may had started some preliminary builds of a multiplayer. Also when devs plan games they basically know from the begining if they are gonna have a multiplayer which would mean that delays would not have been that bad.

Honestly I don't have high hopes for MoHH2 at all. It has potential, but they could do better. How so? I think a Battlefield-esque game would better not to mention a better fit for the system with motion sensing and gyroscopic controls. How hilarious would it be to be in the middle of battle as a repairman, swinging your nunchuku or wiimote up in down or twisting the wrench on a tank? :lol: Or what about thrusting the controller to stab someone? LOL.

Battlefield 2 isn't a heavy game by PC standards at all except it's hungry for RAM, of which can be scaled on the Wii pretty easily. It's honest in my opinion a much more satisfying and interesting, not to mention unique formula in the venue of multiplayer games that many are now emulating but never replicating as well in other games......like Halo's Territories MP, or Enemy Territory: Quake Wars or even Warhawk. Sure the console versions of BF are not that great, but the PC ones are freaking awesome.

JHOO JEE JHOO JOWRA KHAN CHIOTA

Honestly I don't have high hopes for MoHH2 at all. It has potential, but they could do better. How so? I think a Battlefield-esque game would better not to mention a better fit for the system with motion sensing and gyroscopic controls. How hilarious would it be to be in the middle of battle as a repairman, swinging your nunchuku or wiimote up in down or twisting the wrench on a tank? :lol: Or what about thrusting the controller to stab someone? LOL.

Battlefield 2 isn't a heavy game by PC standards at all except it's hungry for RAM, of which can be scaled on the Wii pretty easily. It's honest in my opinion a much more satisfying and interesting, not to mention unique formula in the venue of multiplayer games that many are now emulating but never replicating as well in other games......like Halo's Territories MP, or Enemy Territory: Quake Wars or even Warhawk. Sure the console versions of BF are not that great, but the PC ones are freaking awesome.

JHOO JEE JHOO JOWRA KHAN CHIOTA

TacticalElefant

Instead of replacing Battlefield for MoH they should have noth because Wii lacks quantity in FPS.

[QUOTE="TacticalElefant"]

Honestly I don't have high hopes for MoHH2 at all. It has potential, but they could do better. How so? I think a Battlefield-esque game would better not to mention a better fit for the system with motion sensing and gyroscopic controls. How hilarious would it be to be in the middle of battle as a repairman, swinging your nunchuku or wiimote up in down or twisting the wrench on a tank? :lol: Or what about thrusting the controller to stab someone? LOL.

Battlefield 2 isn't a heavy game by PC standards at all except it's hungry for RAM, of which can be scaled on the Wii pretty easily. It's honest in my opinion a much more satisfying and interesting, not to mention unique formula in the venue of multiplayer games that many are now emulating but never replicating as well in other games......like Halo's Territories MP, or Enemy Territory: Quake Wars or even Warhawk. Sure the console versions of BF are not that great, but the PC ones are freaking awesome.

JHOO JEE JHOO JOWRA KHAN CHIOTA

sonic_rusher

Instead of replacing Battlefield for MoH they should have noth because Wii lacks quantity in FPS.

I was letting you now how pointless that was.

sonic_rusher

Yes, if only I cared about your opinion on my comments.

THATS not a minority, the people who wanted no multiplayer are the minority PERIOD.

sonic_rusher

Sales obviously say different...

Yes it does ruin the single player if they dont do it right...

sonic_rusher

Which they never have...

Lack of features online is basically sucking. If they made it right it would not be lacking features online and therefore would do the opposite of sucking.

sonic_rusher

It would have had a lack of features, therefor by your definition sucking.

The general sentiment among the purists was no online. Also sorry I am tired as hell right now and I type like crap when I am tired.

sonic_rusher

You're actually typing better than you normally do.

BTW stop speaking for other people you have enough to worry about with your own posts.

sonic_rusher

No, I don't. Arguing with you is pretty darn easy. All I did was use common sense to obviously see the point he was trying to make

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

BTW stop speaking for other people you have enough to worry about with your own posts.

Nintendoes

No, I don't. Arguing with you is pretty darn easy. All I did was use common sense to obviously see the point he was trying to make

LOL you keep thinking that but you still havent adressed about half the things I said so how is that using common sense/

[QUOTE="sonic_rusher"]

The general sentiment among the purists was no online. Also sorry I am tired as hell right now and I type like crap when I am tired.

Nintendoes

You're actually typing better than you normally do.

Ya because when I am tired I dont type well. I have a busy day and go in and out fo my dorm/

You can insult me but it does not change the fact that you still have not efuted what I have said were it a formal debate, it would have been done a long time ago.