Topic: Nintendo 3DS Discussion

[alegoicoe]

i got my AR cards to work on a flat black surface, although it was a bit wonky, but the effects are cool, i dont think it has lasting value other than to show off the system 3d to friends.

[Enner]

Nintendo 3DS Conference 2011!
http://www.nintendo.co.jp/n10/conference2011/index.html

"The game maker Nintendo announced that it will stream its Nintendo 3DS Conference on its website and on the Ustream and Nico Nico Douga services on September 13 at noon in Japan (September 12 at 11:00 p.m. EDT). The conference will announce new products to the press and game industry, and Nintendo will hold it at the Tokyo Big Sight convention center, two days before the start of the Tokyo Game Show at the Makuhari Messe center."

I like watching streams. I wonder what will be revealed.

[Adrock]

I'd be very surprised if Metroid and/or Zelda wasn't revealed. If Nintendo wants to get people's attention, they need to show big games. Majora's Mask 3D is a likely candidate for release next year though a brand new Zelda would certainly help their cause more. Metroid Dread would also generate buzz even if fans lost faith in Sakamoto after Other M. I'd rather see a 2D Metroid with HD sprites on Wii U but for the purposes of this example, a new 2D Metroid for 3DS would be great for the platform. It starts with games, not redesigns or new colors. Those things are great and all, but hardware is only as good as the software it plays.

[ejamer]

... It starts with games, not redesigns or new colors. Those things are great and all, but hardware is only as good as the software it plays.

Worth repeating.  Especially with slow-ish sales and games being delayed/cancelled, announcing more software (and good software instead of just filler) would be the fastest way to help improve the 3DS.

[nickmitch]

I would much rather see a new Zelda than a MM port. I'm curious as how they'll design the game because the DS way wouldn't work as well since the action wouldn't be on the 3D screen. And a 2D Metroid is a must for the 3DS. We've had a good run with the 3D Metroids, but it's time the series got back to its roots. We already got Mario on there, all that's needed now is a solid release schedule. This will hopefully include more VC games, maybe from other handheld systems.

[TJ Spyke]

Just because a series started in 2D doesn't mean it needs to be in 2D, I would argue that the Prime games were by far the best in the series and wish they would go back to them (but don't let Sakamoto anywhere near them or he will ruin them).

[Ceric]

Just because a series started in 2D doesn't mean it needs to be in 2D, I would argue that the Prime games were by far the best in the series and wish they would go back to them (but don't let Sakamoto anywhere near them or he will ruin them).

Argue that Metroid Prime and Fusion was the height of the Series and then its gone down ever since.

[noname2200]

Just because a series started in 2D doesn't mean it needs to be in 2D, I would argue that the Prime games were by far the best in the series and wish they would go back to them (but don't let Sakamoto anywhere near them or he will ruin them).

No need to worry, Sakamoto won't touch the Prime series. Shoot, it seems he likes to pretend the trilogy never existed. Just like I prefer to pretend that Other M never happened.

[nickmitch]

Just because a series started in 2D doesn't mean it needs to be in 2D, I would argue that the Prime games were by far the best in the series and wish they would go back to them (but don't let Sakamoto anywhere near them or he will ruin them).

But we can't let 2D gaming die! Besides, the main series has been 2D. It's not like with Mario or Zelda where the main series transitioned to 3D. The Prime series was a spin-off, and while it was great fun, I'm ready to see something they can call "Metroid V."

[TJ Spyke]

The Prime games were not spin-offs, they were main entries in the series.

[King of Twitch]

Burn him.

How there can be a side series when the plot is just 'smokin hot bounty hunter goes on an adventure involving Metroids and Space Pirates.'

We all know the next big thing, now that 2D, 3D, and 2D revived have been done to death, is going to be co-op Metroid... whether it makes sense or not.

[Oblivion]

Now we need a literal 3D 3D Metroid game.

[nickmitch]

The Prime games were not spin-offs, they were main entries in the series.

They can't be main entries in if they all take place in between two titles in the main series. The Metroid games are numbered. Fusion was 4 and there has not be a 5.

[TJ Spyke]

Um, there has never been any indication there are not main entries.

[nickmitch]

Except for the fact that they all take place between Metroids 1 and 2 and that the others were infact numbered 1 through 4. Look, can't I just have my 2D Metroids back?

[TJ Spyke]

But that is your speculation they aren't part of the main series. Not that it matters either way, I like the Prime games better anyways.

[Adrock]

It's pretty odd that the main series makes almost no mention of the Prime games. The end of Zero Mission seems to be a nod to Meta-Ridley but that's about it and not official by any means. Prime 3 tried to bridge the series with the Aurora units but the numbered series and Other M don't reference Prime 1-3 at all. Maybe it's just me but Samus destroying the ecosystem of an entire planet, decimating an entire species, storming the home world of her sworn enemies and almost dying due to radioactive poisoning seem like important enough events that would most likely come up in later adventures especially when a different doppelganger shows up and starts fucking **** up.

Sakamoto kind of pretends these events didn't happen or that they aren't worth mentioning which is silly and hurts the cohesion of the series. Then again, Other M and Fusion don't make sense in the same timeline even though they're supposed to. According to Nintendo, there's certainly a canon in which all the games belong. It just sucks. Nintendo doesn't care enough to handle it responsibly. That's their prerogative but it's no less shitty for fans trying to piece it all together. I acknowledge the existence of a timeline/canon but I tend to view the games individually for my own enjoyment. They don't have to fit into a nice package for me to find them fun.

[nickmitch]

Metroids 1 through 4 fit in very well together. Samus has to stop the space pirates who are using Metroids to take over the universe or something. Then in 2 she has to kill all of the Metroids because they're dangerous, but saves a baby. In Super, she has to stop the space pirates again because they kidnapped the baby, who then saves her life. Lastly, because Samus killed all the Metroids, their prey starts running loose, fucks her **** up, steals her suit, blah-blah explosions. It's really only when you factor in the spin-offs does **** not make sense. Although, at least Other M added some background to the Adam character who was just so damn important in Fusion.

[TJ Spyke]

The only spin-offs' are Pinball and Hunters.

[Adrock]

Other M makes Samus seem like she's suffering from amnesia. The whole Metroid cloning thing is used in both Other M and Fusion. Samus makes no mention of the events in Other M just like she makes no mention of the events of the Prime games. I suppose that's the problem with interquels. However, as mentioned earlier, Nintendo doesn't care enough to handle the timeline responsibly and then you have stuff like Fusion and Other M basically both being Metroid 4.

Anyway, I'm curious how Hunters is a spin-off when the Prime games are somehow not spin-offs. To my understanding, Hunters is officially a part of the Prime series and thus a part of the Metroid mythos. I don't know how you're deciding what is and is not a spin-off. Moreover, I'm not sure why this even matters. As far as Nintendo is concerned, everything counts (possibly even including Pinball which plot-wise is just the first Prime though I need to double check). Sakamoto is in charge of the series and shits all over the Prime games and shrugs his shoulders when things don't make sense.

[TJ Spyke]

Anyway, I'm curious how Hunters is a spin-off when the Prime games are somehow not spin-offs. To my understanding, Hunters is officially a part of the Prime series and thus a part of the Metroid mythos. I don't know how you're deciding what is and is not a spin-off. Moreover, I'm not sure why this even matters. As far as Nintendo is concerned, everything counts (possibly even including Pinball which plot-wise is just the first Prime though I need to double check). Sakamoto is in charge of the series and shits all over the Prime games and shrugs his shoulders when things don't make sense.

Hunters is a spin-off the same way Halo 3: ODST is not part of the mainline Halo games, even though it's part of the Halo canon.

Sakamoto was in charge of Other M, not the series overall. And his opinion means **** to me since he is not good at what he does. Nintendo needs to realize that the series is better off when his involvement is minimal at best (like the Prime games).

[Adrock]

Hmm... In that case, I think the point of contention is that the Prime games are not part of the mainline series (since the Prime games do not affect and are not referenced in Metroid 1-4 and Other M), they are spin-offs even though they're part of the Metroid canon. I don't really understand your reasoning. Based on your example, if Hunters is a spin-off, then the entire Prime series is a spin-off.

And Sakamoto has directed every main entry Metroid title since Super Metroid. He's every bit in charge of the Metroid series as say Hideo Kojima is in charge of Metal Gear. Disagree with his direction all you want (I think we all disagree after Other M but that's besides the point), but he's still running the series. Nintendo owns the property and can do what they please, but as long as the higher-ups are letting Sakamoto do what he wants with the series, he's running the show. Otherwise, someone at Nintendo would have backhanded him and demanded he explain why the **** he was curbstomping Samus' character and shoving more symbolism down people's throats than The Great Gatsby. If they thought he was doing a shitty job, I'm sure they'd give him the boot and until that happens, he'll keep making more "Are You There God? It's me, Samus" games.

[TJ Spyke]

How? ODST is a spin-off of 3, so your reasoning says that 3 is a spin-off. Hard for Prime to be referenced in the other games since I-III came out before it. There is no evidence there are spin-offs, and I would not consider them spin-offs at all. They are more in-line than Other M.

Sakamoto did not direct the Prime games, so it's wrong to claim he direct every main entry. He directed the 2D main games, not all of the main games (but I don't think we are gonna agree on this), only Sakamoto thinks they aren't. And after the way Other M was received, I think they will restrict his role in the next game. Other M would have been even worse if Team Ninja hadn't stood up to him and told him how it would have been a terrible idea to do things like make it a on-rails game.
Kojima created the Metal Gear series and given full charge of it. He doesn't do stuff that pisses off the fans of the series (he does things that annoy non-fans though).

[Adrock]

How? ODST is a spin-off of 3, so your reasoning says that 3 is a spin-off.

Your previous post was vague. The way I understood "Halo 3: ODST is not part of the mainline Halo games" is that it's a side game that's part of the canon, but not part of the Halo 1-3 storyline. That's pretty much how I view the Prime games, including Hunters.

For the purposes of this discussion, here's the terminology I'm using: Main Series = Metroid 1-4 and Other M, Prime Series = Prime 1-3, Hunters. I'm not asking you to agree with it, just acknowledge that this is what I mean to avoid confusion.

Hard for Prime to be referenced in the other games since I-III came out before it. There is no evidence there are spin-offs, and I would not consider them spin-offs at all. They are more in-line than Other M.

Hence, "I suppose that's the problem with interquels." Besides, it's not that hard. It's called planning. However, acknowledging that the Prime series was not planned beforehand, why put it in the same canon? Due to poor planning, the Prime series fucks with established facts. The Prime games could have easily been an independent series and I wish it was so it could be free of the confines of the Main Series. If the Main Series and the Prime series don't reference each other, neither benefits from being in the same canon.

The Prime games are not more in line with Other M because Other M specifically references previous Metroid titles, namely Metroid 2 and 3. The Prime games make no direct plot references to the main series. The Aurora Units are suggestive of a link, but no direct relation is made. Therefore, it's one sided. Other M had a perfect opportunity to bring it full circle and didn't.

Sakamoto did not direct the Prime games, so it's wrong to claim he direct every main entry.

I don't consider the Prime games to be main entry titles.

Kojima created the Metal Gear series and given full charge of it. He doesn't do stuff that pisses off the fans of the series (he does things that annoy non-fans though).

Sorry, you're wrong. Example: Raiden in MGS2.

[Shredder565]

Is there anyway to delete some of the squares when you click on the 'Eshop' link?   It's just confusing as hell having to navigate to seven or so screens that have no interest to you just to see the Virtual Console one..