Topic: Metroid Other M or Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess

The Gamecube version of Twilight Princess.

I agree with Other M being good. You can wait until Skyward Sword releases to get your Zelda fix.

I disagree. Prime doesn't let you completely avoid damage by pressing a button, and locking on is nowhere near as broken as Other M's gameplay. Other M almost never lets you explore, it doesn't give you any reasons to explore, and obstacles don't require you to think. The combat is something I can forgive, but not if there's nothing else to the game.

I'm not sure how you figure that. Prime is pretty much Super Metroid in 3D.

Anyway, Twilight Princess is really underrated. It did a lot of things right that previous games did wrong, and it improved/added lots of things that should have been in 3D Zelda games from the start. It's a great game in general, and it's definitely got more content and replay value.

and by that you mean no one likes Majora's Mask at first (RPG and anime worthy in terms of rapidly improving after the beginning) or Wind Waker's triforks hunt and Twilight Princess does nothing similar that can ruin a game for some people regardless of the quality of the game.

both deemed by many as the weakest entries in their series, they are very good in their own ways. flawed perhaps, but they are not as bad as the critics have made out. i like twilight princess, especially the art style whereas other m's gameplay is good for a standard game but not as good for a metroid game, IMO.

I'm a huge advocat of Other M but, come on. Twilight Princess is one of the greatest action-adventure games of all time.

hahahaha, brilliant.

@Adam: I agree with Rift. Prime 3? Sure. But Prime 1 felt insanely similar to Super Metroid. The combat was okay, but the emphasis was on atmosphere, exploration, and minimal story telling — this holds true with both games.

Other M was the complete opposite. Emphasis on combat, basically no exploration (certainly not on the scale of the original games), no atmosphere, and a lot of story telling.

Twilight Princess definitely. If you're planing on getting any Metroid for Wii it's the Metroid Prime Trilogy you want. Metroid Other M is skippable.

Twilight Princess on the other hand is an amazing game. Not the best game in the series but still an amazing game overall.

Twilight Princess is amazing. It's an experience, just as OOT was in its early years.

On the other hand there's Other M. I haven't played that one, but I know for sure: Trilogy is much better. Other M has a few things which weren't needed or are too messy.

Other M is....wel okay. Twilight princess was dark but it was pretty epic, so yeah, twilight princess

the prime trilogy was just fantastic but as the developers were retro studios, you knew they could carve out a really great game, which team ninja didn't do so well with other m. twilight princess's boss end battles were also more heavy-handed and longer than other M's.

Both TP and Om are terrible games. Just further proof that the Wii has failed at furthering their core franchise games.

Now, I realize TP is essentially a ported Gamecube game....but I also look at games like Super Paper Mario and Kirby's Epic Yarn and see more weakness.

(At least they got it right with Super Mario Galaxy, it's sequel, .....and hopefully Skyward Sword.)

http://www.metacritic.com/game/wii/metroid-other-m
http://www.metacritic.com/game/wii/the-legend-of-zelda-twilight-princess
Um, in your opinion?

MY opinion, of course....what's crazy is I know lots of other gamers with the same opinion! (Shocking, I Know!!!)

I enjoyed TP.

I did not enjoy Other M, aside from the opening and the whole Ridley stuff.

That's not what I meant at all. Lots of gameplay/game design concepts are based on something in the other games, but Twilight Princess does them in a way that works better and makes more sense.

(And I never had anything against the Triumph Forks hunt. The people who got bored and quit missed the most amazing ending to any Zelda game.)

Yeah, I hear ya. I was just a bit irritated how you vehemently asserted what you said as fact. And, I think the use of the word "terrible" was silly. A terrible game is one that completely fails to either accomplish its goal and/or that is broken entirely. Fireplacing is a terrible game. Play with Birds is a terrible game. Neither of the games you mentioned can reasonably be called broken in any department. I think you were looking for "disappointing."

@pixelman Couldn't be more different to me. Super Metroid doesn't tell you where to go and is significantly less linear. I know there is an exploit in Prime to get space jump early, but I mean the game as intended. There's no sense of exploration unless you like the idea of spending three hours to back track for one minor power-up, or being sent on an artifact collection quest halfway through the game.

The power-ups are more interesting in Super Metroid, where the beams aren't all glorified door keys. Super Metroid doesn't aim for you. Super Metroid was all about poking and prodding the room for secrets while Prime was more about elaborate and oddly out of place puzzles. And when you do need to bomb something in Prime like the old games, I seem to recall an obvious crack on the wall/floor that was basically a Bomb-Me sign. (Hated that in Link to the Past, too.)

Samus handles like a tank in Prime and clumsily manages the most basic platforming, very much unlike Super Metroid. Switching to 3rd person thankfully fixed that in Other M, though Other M is still nothing like Super Metroid but basically Fusion with auto-aim and a less interesting story.

I haven't played the game in forever, something I'll have to change someday, so I may have left out some other discrepancies I felt while playing or invented/exaggerated others, but I don't recall ever once getting the remote impression that it was like Super Metroid, personally.

Not all of those changes are necessarily bad, either. The puzzles for instance are really neat in Prime 2. The scans in Prime were pretty awesome as well, especially since they were optional.