Prime is actually more of a spin off series, the prime games bear no weight on the overall story of the main series (most of the time it's like they never happened at all). They took the concept and spun it around to create something new.
The only reason they're set in between 1 and 2 is really just that, because they could be set there without affecting anything else.
The big difference is that they became really popular and beloved by fans (probably even more so than the main series), so calling them spin offs may come off as "insulting" for some (like saying Prime is to Metroid what Crossbow Training is to Zelda), but it really shouldn't. It's a broad enough term.
Prime is actually more of a spin off series, the prime games bear no weight on the overall story of the main series (most of the time it's like they never happened at all). They took the concept and spun it around to create something new.
The only reason they're set in between 1 and 2 is really just that, because they could be set there without affecting anything else.
The big difference is that they became really popular and beloved by fans (probably even more so than the main series), so calling them spin offs may come off as "insulting" for some (like saying Prime is to Metroid what Crossbow Training is to Zelda), but it really shouldn't. It's a broad enough term.
Exactly. If I make a claim that Smash is a spin off, people will find it insulting that its an actual IP when in reality, its more of a crossover game.
I think Prime started off as a spin off but did so well it became part of the main series. Prime is just a sub series now. It is a series within a series lol
People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...
Prime is actually more of a spin off series, the prime games bear no weight on the overall story of the main series (most of the time it's like they never happened at all). They took the concept and spun it around to create something new.
That doesn't really define a spinoff either. Look at Mario, that doesn't really have a story either, are you then going to consider every sequel a spinoff of the original? Heck, even Galaxy vs. Galaxy 2 disproves that notion, 2 is a clear sequel to 1, but its storyline has no impact on the Galaxy series at all, it actually sort of retcons it.
@Bolt_Strike Galaxy 2 is basically an expansion pack of Galaxy. So you're saying that finally making it as its own game becomes a spin off all of a sudden?
Again, I think you're wrong here. Generally, a sequel is a continuous work of an existing project. Prime has sequels so those are called sequels but the actual series itself is a spinoff overall.
Interms of Galaxy 1 & 2, 2 is a sequel to 1 without a doubt. But the Galaxy series as a whole is its own spin off series simply because it does things differently than the typical 64 one. Sunshine can be considered a spiritual sequel since it pretty much uses the elements from 64 but does it differently.
Even the levels that represent 64 in Galaxy are remade so its not like its exactly the same as the original ones from 64 isn't it?
@Bolt_Strike Galaxy 2 is basically an expansion pack of Galaxy. So you're saying that finally making it as its own game becomes a spin off all of a sudden?
No, what I'm saying is that it wasn't related storyline wise to the first Galaxy game despite being a sequel.
Again, I think you're wrong here. Generally, a sequel is a continuous work of an existing project. Prime has sequels so those are called sequels but the actual series itself is a spinoff overall.
What's considered a "continuous work" has a different meaning in video games because gameplay is more central to the identity of a video game than the plot.
Interms of Galaxy 1 & 2, 2 is a sequel to 1 without a doubt. But the Galaxy series as a whole is its own spin off series simply because it does things differently than the typical 64 one. Sunshine can be considered a spiritual sequel since it pretty much uses the elements from 64 but does it differently.
Even the levels that represent 64 in Galaxy are remade so its not like its exactly the same as the original ones from 64 isn't it?
This is such a ridiculous extreme, doing something differently doesn't automatically make it a spinoff. The Prime games did things differently from each other (2 had the light/dark world system, 3 had the motion controls and the PED Suit), and yet they're still numbered sequels in the same series. What matters is that they share the same core formula.
Why would Prime be a spin-off? Who says that?
It expanded the universe. It had solid gameplay. It had exploration. It had a proper story and lore, that stretched 3 games.
Now explain how Other M hasn't been mentioned as a spin-off, yet?
Castlevania SotN and further on is a spin-off then. Excuse me while I go bleach my eyes, thanks to this thread.
@KO-Cub I think Prime is a spin-off mostly for being in the 1st Person perspective and having a 3D world, while the Metroid series is a side scroller perspective with a 2D world. Other M hasn't been mentioned because why would it be. People don't like Other M for the most part. (I haven't played Other M)
People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...
@KO-Cub I think Prime is a spin-off mostly for being in the 1st Person perspective and having a 3D world, while the Metroid series is a side scroller perspective with a 2D world.
While we're at it, let's call the 3D Marios and the 3D Zeldas spinoffs too.
@KO-Cub I think Prime is a spin-off mostly for being in the 1st Person perspective and having a 3D world, while the Metroid series is a side scroller perspective with a 2D world.
While we're at it, let's call the 3D Marios and the 3D Zeldas spinoffs too.
While you're at it, call Splatoon a Sunshine spinoff instead of a new IP
@KO-Cub I think Prime is a spin-off mostly for being in the 1st Person perspective and having a 3D world, while the Metroid series is a side scroller perspective with a 2D world.
While we're at it, let's call the 3D Marios and the 3D Zeldas spinoffs too.
I think people missed the earlier post where I mentioned Prime started as a spin-off but became a part of the main series lol
I didn't, but you're spot on. It's the same situation with the 3D Mario and Zelda games.
The 3D games were always designed and marketed to be main entries in the series, they didn't "start out" as a spinoff. They were intended to be next gen successors in a new environment and made every attempt to apply the core formula to it. The 3D games have been treated as one half of the same whole, not as a child series removed from the core experience as a spinoff is.
I think people missed the earlier post where I mentioned Prime started as a spin-off but became a part of the main series lol
I didn't, but you're spot on. It's the same situation with the 3D Mario and Zelda games.
The 3D games were always designed and marketed to be main entries in the series, they didn't "start out" as a spinoff. They were intended to be next gen successors in a new environment and made every attempt to apply the core formula to it. The 3D games have been treated as one half of the same whole, not as a child series removed from the core experience as a spinoff is.
If the 3D games hadn't been met with such critical acclaim, then Nintendo would have quickly gone back to the tried and true 2D perspective and the SM64 and OoT would have been demoted to Zelda CD-i status. The gameplay was a spin-off to their previous works.
I think people missed the earlier post where I mentioned Prime started as a spin-off but became a part of the main series lol
I didn't, but you're spot on. It's the same situation with the 3D Mario and Zelda games.
The 3D games were always designed and marketed to be main entries in the series, they didn't "start out" as a spinoff. They were intended to be next gen successors in a new environment and made every attempt to apply the core formula to it. The 3D games have been treated as one half of the same whole, not as a child series removed from the core experience as a spinoff is.
If the 3D games hadn't been met with such critical acclaim, then Nintendo would have quickly gone back to the tried and true 2D perspective and the SM64 and OoT would have been demoted to Zelda CD-i status. The gameplay was a spin-off to their previous works.
So they kinda started off as spin offs and were so popular they became main series.
People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...
I think people missed the earlier post where I mentioned Prime started as a spin-off but became a part of the main series lol
I didn't, but you're spot on. It's the same situation with the 3D Mario and Zelda games.
The 3D games were always designed and marketed to be main entries in the series, they didn't "start out" as a spinoff. They were intended to be next gen successors in a new environment and made every attempt to apply the core formula to it. The 3D games have been treated as one half of the same whole, not as a child series removed from the core experience as a spinoff is.
If the 3D games hadn't been met with such critical acclaim, then Nintendo would have quickly gone back to the tried and true 2D perspective and the SM64 and OoT would have been demoted to Zelda CD-i status. The gameplay was a spin-off to their previous works.
Obscurity doesn't magically render something a spinoff. Sonic CD, for example, was largely forgotten because it required the SEGA CD add on and even changed the gameplay to be more exploration oriented, but it's still regarded as a main series game.
Forums
Topic: Metroid Prime Federation Force (and Blast Ball)
Posts 701 to 720 of 904
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.