Okay, let me respond to your points.
Plot Element: Yeah, this could've been handled better, but I think they painted themselves into a corner here. They didn't want people sequence breaking, but they didn't know how to do it to where it made sense in the story they wanted to tell. Hence what we got. This is a reason why I suggest that they go more along the lines of the experience system to where you can just make what you have more powerful while finding new weapons that you can use (how many more times are we going to have to reacquire the morph ball before Samus learns to put tethers on her stuff?). But you could've also said that Adam wanted full control over his mission and crew, and didn't want to suffer repercussions of a rogue member of his team (and Samus wasn't exactly supposed to be there to begin with, according to the GF. Why?). I'll get to that "Hell run" in a sec.
But then again, we can also say that it was meant to be mocked at some point, given that Samus shows that she tires of needing to be told, too (did anyone hear Adam authorize the Space Jump before she said "any objections, Adam?" and activated it on her own merit? Maybe that was supposed to tug at your nerves like the mental hospital stuff from Homeland was supposed to make us want to punch the television).
Gameplay Element/Sequence: Yeah, many didn't like the pixel hunts. I'll give you that, but there wasn't too many of these for me to say that they broke the game for me. Again, this game seemed to have used everything the Wii could give to it. It showed through the FMV artifacting (it was minimal, but you could tell that it was there). Maybe if they had better hardware, they could've made those easier because they would've had a better color palette to work with. Not saying they should be there, but if they wanted them, they would have a better chance of making them so you didn't want to go kill yourself over them. I see your point, but it wasn't a deal breaker for me.
Important Event: Going in order of your mentions of them, the "Hell Run" (what you described) is actually referenced in Metroid Fusion. At one point in that game, the AI actually asks Samus if she would follow an order from Adam that would force her to go to a dangerous place, seemly to her death. Her response is one of her understanding of why he gave some rather questionable orders. It might be something that is worth exploring in universe: was she TOO loyal at times, and would her blind loyalty lead to what happened on both the Bottle Ship and in the Fusion game (forget the name of the station she was exploring in Fusion). It might actually be a very important plot device, but not in the way you might be thinking. But in order for that scene in Fusion to make sense (the AI talks as though an event of that type actually happened that it's aware of), the point in which she DOES such a thing must happen. Hence, the "Hell Run".
Secondly, Ridley. Oh, GOD, have we written books about this or what? Here's the thing: you go into a place where you meet your old friends and old memories resurface where they haven't before. You never had to worry about your past in battle because of the "combat high" that MGS coined (you're adrenaline is so high that you cannot really think of anything else other than your job, and you don't care as to the why, how, who, etc.). She might've been able to shield that out. Not sure how to describe how this might feel, but think of it like someone opening up an old scar you had on your body, then throwing an entire pound of salt directly onto the wound and having every last grain enter it before cutting open a brand new wound. That's probably how it felt to her in the story. Suddenly, she has no combat high because she's got all these thoughts that she can't seem to block running through her head. The other theory is that she's always had a problem facing Ridley at first, and because of technical limitations, we don't see the problems she's had (if she beat Ridley before on the first Metroid, then why couldn't she when Ridley kidnaps the baby Metroid in Super Metroid?). We can't factor in the Prime series because of the notion that it's not in the official canon. Plus, the back story was only seen right after the release of Zero Mission. It's hard to introduce a new story line element into an interquel, but it is possible. We could ask these questions in universe, though, and another game could give these answers (did you notice that Adam was somewhat puzzled by her sudden lock up, too? The question might've been by design as we aren't supposed to know "why now" just yet).
As for Sector Zero, what would you do if you saw someone you cared for going to sacrifice themselves when they had too much to still live for, and yet you had the capacity to stop them (even when it's a little violent in nature) and the will to give the ultimate sacrifice yourself? How would you stop them from making a grave mistake? I sure as hell wouldn't hesitate to incapacitate them if I knew they were being foolish. If Adam DIDN'T stop Samus, you think she would have sacrificed herself? Might've not made sense to those that never had to make those decisions, which is why none of us are in the military or have ever been in an outfit where we would have to make such a choice (at least not that I'm aware of, so apologies if someone who's reading this has served).
How a character is portrayed: It's her softer side that makes her hard edge side more believable. We know what she fights for, and why she fights. We know that she's not just a cold hearted bitch, but rather a normal person that's been through a lot, and we see that she is strong because she is able to pull herself together despite her flaws that we no doubt see. I've already explained the authorization thing above, so I won't cover that again. We've already seen that she is tough and independent. We've established that, but in this game, we establish that she has flaws: she has a past that she tried to not remind herself of, she might be too willing to compromise at times, and she might not think all her decisions through before acting on them Every character needs to have some flaws to make them believable. We know of her strengths, but her flaws were left undiscovered. This does a lot of good for the character because we can now appreciate her strengths even more if we know she can handle herself even with the flaws, and it makes us connect that much more.
FMV Presence: If you played Fusion and Zero Mission, it was pretty obvious that we were headed towards a more story driven narrative and delving into her back story a bit more, so it's not like we've never had those in Metroid games before, just not in the scale that Other M had due to it being on what was obviously a much more powerful system. In Zero Mission, we do see a good bit about her Chozo upbringing. Even though I said that the events of Prime might not be official canon, the first game does bring up a lot of how the Chozo's raised her. So why do we have to repeat what has already been told? Like I said before about the "monotones", she only does this whenever she narrates the story in past tense, which is common in many mediums that use this technique. It would be the exception to the rule if she wasn't "monotone". In fact, you could argue that her depression about the events leads her to not be able to show any other emotions. Or that, because she is going to present this to a superior or to a museum or something, that she needs to be as professional as possible when describing the events (think of it as a captain's log in Star Trek: you never hear fluctuating tones in those, do you?).
Like I said before, the entire game felt like it was in rush mode, and it ended too quickly for me. I wish it was longer with them having more time to explain things better, but at the same time, I would rather leave me wanting for them to supply the answers in an even bigger and better sequel. I don't expect them to give me all the answers in one episode of Walking Dead or Homeland. That would be just silly and would not give a reason to have another episode, or to keep viewers guessing, or to make them want to know more. We continue to talk about Other M's plot points one way or another in a manner that tells us we care enough about the plot. That should tell you something about how we took it. However, I think the FMVs by themselves were fine in telling the story and trying something new, which is what we do want storied franchises to do. There are ways to have your cake and eat it too here, and I think my ideas could suffice for some very interesting experiences that could satisfy both sides of the coin here. You were basically calling it an interactive movie, which is the main criticism MGS games tend to have. But it's that same aspect that makes MGS such a great game to play. The FMVs were not out of place for the Metroid games. I was prepared for them and didn't mind them any.
As for critical eyes, I think you might be thinking that I meant everyone. I meant those that choose to go crazy about anyone that likes the game and trolls them or says something that might get them banned from normal forums (i.e.: those comments that Anita Sarkeesian seems to remind us once a week that she received). My gripe there is directed at those that seem to only act immature towards anyone that would disagree with them (this IS the internet, after all). I did find flaws, as I pointed out numerous times, but they were never game breaking to me, and I was able to overlook the flaws to get a mostly enjoyable experience that I hope the devs can expand on and make that sort of experience an even better one.
Log in to comment