Talk:Metroid Prime 3: Corruption/Archive 2

Game Engine

Does anyone know the name of the game engine (i.e., middleware) used in the development of MP3: Corruption? Is it third-party or in-house? Aeonassoc 14:51, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Added Corruption onto the Metroid series template.

Why hasn't this been done yet? Anyway you can jump to this game on the menu. :D OBEY STARMAN 18:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Release Date

June 1st

Twice now the realese date has been changed to june first... gamefaqs is NOT a reputable scource for release dates, as 90% of the "june first placeholder" dates turn out to be wrong. unless ninetendo has realesed some info i dont know about, it stays TBA. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Miked54321 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

June 1st?

Where did the June 1st release date come from? I looked in the history and this has been here for a while. Who confirmed it, and why isn't the confirmation news in the article? ShadowUltra 23:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I just checked out GameSpot, and it claims the game will be released on June First, but it does not provide an actual source or press statement. Even though GS is considered a reliable source, the final word on Video Game release dates is determined by Nintendo or Retro. I guess we should leave it blank for now and maybe add a disclaimer --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  16:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

GS is a rleiable source. So it should go. InvaderSora- The Irken Invader With a keyblade. 03:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

While GS is a reliable source, it does not have any jurisdiction over when the game will actually be released. Best Buy and 1Up are reporting that the game has been delayed to 12/31/07. IGN has yet to make a specific claim as to when the game will be released. [1]--  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  03:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Gamestop just changed their estimated release date to October 1st 2007.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.64.129.35 (talk • contribs)

Something other than June 1st

According to IGN, the release date for Japan is December 31, 2007 and for Europe is September 27, 2007, [2] Neoseeker also gives December 31 for Japan, [3] and a few websites give June 1 for North America. IGN doesn't give any source for this information so I can't tell if they've pulled the dates out of their heads, but is it a reliable source? --WikiSlasher 09:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

December 31 likely isn't, as I've seen IGN put that in often for a title they know will come out in a specific year when they don't know the exact date. They did that for both Final Fantasy V and VI Advance before we found out exactly when they were to be released. Arrow 16:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Now it's August 27

Nintendo delayed it 7 days. It was announced at the press conference of Phantom Hourglass. Should I change it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackbird3216 (talk • contribs)

It's already been done. Arrow 16:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Citation for date?

"but has now been pushed to 2007.[citation needed]" Citation needed? The game's not OUT yet! There, citation by me, it's true. Kingoomieiii 05:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

You're not a reliable source - and for obvious reasons too. ;) See WP:RS, WP:ATT, and WP:OR. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  21:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

This is what we refer to as "common knowledge". It's 2007, as far as I know, although maybe everyone I've ever known has been lying to me... Grandmasterka 20:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

And this is what we refer to as speculation ;)- There's no official release date. For all we know, the game could be pushed to 2008 - See one of the sections on top. Until Retro or Nintendo releases an official statement, do not add questionable facts without proper sources. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  21:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Then say "...at least 2007". Everybody wins. --Geoffron 01:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Official date

August 20, 2007. Source

I'm on a school comp. so i can't check the source (it's blocked) is this date for real...? --TheGreenLink 17:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's real. Several other major websites have listed it as well. Arrow 18:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

GoNintendo.com is not a reliable source - Wikipedia knows this from previous events. IGN has however stated the date already. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  21:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

im having a hard time believing that this is the date that it comes out due to the fact that theirs no new info, nintendo hasnt said anything, and the official metroid site doesnt have anything about corruption on their site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.28.44.221 (talk • contribs)

Nintendo released it through press sources that the common joe doesn't have access to. However, when all the major news sites break the info at the same time and concur on the date, then generally you can believe what they're claiming. Arrow 06:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The Wii Preview said the game is coming out on August 28, 2007. However the official site is still stating August 27. Any input on which one is correct? --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 15:24, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

This requires a distinction between "release date" and "in-store date". A game is released (shipped) from the manufacturer on one date, and it usually arrives in stores one to two days after release. Therefore, both dates are correct, though 8/27 is the release date, and 8/28 is the in-store date. The Wii Preview Channel says "In stores August 28", and the website says that the game will be released on 8/27. So they're both correct. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 21:00, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, all right, thanks for clearing that up for me. :-) --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 22:12, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I really don't see how this could be the case where they give two different dates. They've never differentiated between a release date and an in store date before so I don't see why they would now. They probably just forgot to update their websites that said it was coming the 27th.--68.166.239.243 01:16, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem is in the wording "In stores". Almost everyone uses the phrase "Release date", which means the date that the company ships the game. In this case, MP3's release date is 8/27 (Monday). HOWEVER: Every game released nowadays shows up in stores at least one or two days after the Release date. This has been 100% consistent for all games I've bought or tracked in the last ten years (and before that, it would typically take longer for games to show up in stores after being released). When a game company uses the phrase "In stores" (or similar phrasing, like "On sale", "Available", etc.) to indicate when the game will actually be ready for purchase, the release date has always been one or two days before that.

What's confusing people here is that Nintendo is saying both. On their website, they say "Release date: August 27th", and most other sites are saying that too now. But the Wii Preview channel advertises the In-Store date, August 28th. This means that they're saying they're going to ship the game on the 27th, and you'll be able to pick it up at your local store on the 28th (1 day of shipping time). As I said above, both dates are correct (as long as they can stick to that schedule), but the official release date is the 27th.

(This would be less confusing if Nintendo had not used "In stores" in their Preview channel.) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 18:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Would you care to cite a source that says that the release date and in store date of video games is two different things because never before have I ever seen a developer differentiate between the two. (at least to the public).--68.166.239.243 03:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

This is gonna be a tough thing to cite, IMO. Anybody who's ever walked into a store that sells video games (or worked at one) can instinctively tell you all about the difference, but where online is it ever talked about? Arrowned 03:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Well you could cite another case where the publisher actually posted two different dates to the public. (at least here, not in the article)--68.166.239.243 03:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

An example to boost my case is Madden 08. Nintendo lists the "release date" for the DS version on the master game list as being 8/14/07 and lo and behold it was also in the stores on that date. Now I know for a fact that they released it earlier then that because Amazon shipped it on the 13th. However in the wiki article for madden we don't bother saying what the real release date was. We just cite the day it was available. Something tells me that if Metroid Prime 3 will be in stores on the 28th it will be released earlier then the 27th. One day lead time really isn't sufficient to distribute the game. I think that the 27th being cited as the release date is a goof on Nintendo's part who overlooked changing all the dates in all the places.--68.166.239.243 03:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the clearest example I can point to here is simply the discrepancy between Nintendo's site (and all the major gaming sites) and the Preview Channel. Seriously, whether there's a precedent or not, the fact remains that Nintendo is saying two different dates, and they have clearly said "In stores on August 28th". Because everyone is saying "Release date: Aug 27th", the logical explanation is that the game is being shipped on the 27th and will be in stores on the 28th. I don't honestly see why this is so controversial or difficult to understand. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 04:06, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

What leads you to believe so surely that the discrepancy is not just something that was overlooked by Nintendo? The date of release of metroid prime 3 was listed in several places.--71.232.158.233 21:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Seeing as you haven't responded to anything I guess you're just content to having a revert war Kiefer.--68.166.239.243 22:56, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I still don't get why this is so hard to understand... If you must have proof, see [4]. And I just thought I'd mention that some huge games, Galaxy and Brawl for example, will be IN STORES on the release date. 65.162.63.128 00:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I've been offline because I have other stuff to do as well, such as designing and improving web sites that have nothing to do with this discussion. Sorry for my lack of response.

Okay, so Gamestop discusses how games are sometimes shipped ahead of time and then released on a certain date, and the product is supposed to be available on that date. That is not common practice, however - note their use of the word "Sometimes". Usually, the main news outlets will mention this. HOWEVER: When such has NOT been mentioned, we can't assume that that's what they're doing, so the more common behavior of "releasing" the game by shipping it to stores, and having it be available in the stores a day later, is the safer assumption. 99% of all game releases follow that model, and Nintendo has given us no reason to believe they're doing otherwise for MP3 (rumors notwithstanding).

As always, if you can find an official source (note emphasis) that states that the game is being shipped earlier than the 27th and is intended for a delayed release on the 28th, then we'll have a credible reason to use the 28th release date. But so far, I have not found one. I see:

• Gamestop.com (same site that you mentioned): "Ships 8/27/07"
• Gamespot.com: Release Date: Aug. 27, 2007
• IGN.com: US: August 27, 2007
• Nintendo.com: Release Date: Aug 27, 2007

And while it's not an official source, the forum at IGN also addresses this with the same conclusion as I've pointed out in this thread. Check it out here.

I don't mean to be rude or overly harsh in this, but there is extremely little evidence to support that Nintendo is actually releasing MP3 on the 28th. All the published evidence I've been able to find so far points to a ship date of the 27th and in-store date of the 28th. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 02:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

That's exactly what I meant... I was on your side. :) 65.162.63.128 03:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hard to tell with all you silly IP addresses. Register so I know who I'm talking to! :) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 03:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh snap, I thought I as logged in. lol Lutherjw 15:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Multiplayer?

We really need to add the skinny on what, if anything, is happening on this front. DavidBeoulve 20:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Boxart and rating revealed

File:Http://gonintendo.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/objecmnt.jpg

I got it from gonintendo.com but the source says it's from the Nintendo Press room.

Can someone add it in?

Also, on the boxart is the ESRB rating so we need to change the rating from RP to T.

Go Nintendo is nowhere close to reliable source. We're better off waiting for the official thing Nintendo or Retro, thanks though --►ShadowJester07  23:58, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[IGN] shows the boxart as well, though Gamespot does not at the moment. Considering the large number of cites from IGN in the article, I assume that counts well enough as a proper source? Arrow 00:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Not when it comes to images, especially when everyone tends to show different box arts. We'll put it up in good time., Nintendo should announce it soon.if the game has an August drop date. :) --►ShadowJester07  00:24, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

That's true but on in the images section on IGN the boxart is also shown meaning that it must be offical, no? Ign never puts anything in the images area unless it's official. Plus, usually when they do put a mock-up boxart usually soemwhere on the picture it mentions it's not real.Kad 01:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Also true, but see WP:NOR. Also, you do not need to write your name by the header ;-) :-p --►ShadowJester07  01:16, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

So do you suggest we don't put any boxart at all? Oh and sorry about that...im kind of a newby at wikipedia. :PKad 01:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

No Prob, In accordance to Wikipedia's policies, I guess it would be alright to just use the logo right now. We can add the image, image:Metroid Prime 3 Corruption cover.jpeg, when Nintendo officially confirms it, which should likely be soon. Until then, the image needs work to meet Wikipedia Fair Use policy. --►ShadowJester07  01:45, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok that's fine by me. You can add the logo if you want.Kad 01:47, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

There have been some interesting developments; GameTrailers.com, Joystiq.com, GameSpy, and IGN are displaying the that MP3 cover. I have yet to see it on 1UP or Gamespot. At this point, it's probably fairly safe to assume that it is authentic. However, there's no way to be certain that's the finalized cover. I guess it would be alright to add the low-res version of the cover to the article, unless anyone else objects. Thanks for being cooperative and patient. --►ShadowJester07  14:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

i dont object, if it turns out to be fake, just upload the new one there, but if it is fake its a pretty good one. Salavat 14:57, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free image use (box cover)

It is not acceptable to use a high-resolution version of the box-cover, since it is very likely to be copyrighted. The version currently uploaded (several times) needs to be deleted and replaced with a scaled down version, in order to qualify as fair use. It also needs to be tagged with {{Non-free game cover}}. --Pekaje 05:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I see someone uploaded a lower-resolution version. It's probably good enough, but I think it would be better if it was only uploaded in the resolution it was used in the article (250px). Someone still needs to add a fair use rationale, though. --Pekaje 08:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of the box cover, should the article note that the three Samuses on it are (top left) Dark Samus, (right) original Samus, and between them another Samus that appears to be oozing from the original Samus? 89.138.167.216 09:29, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Just to clear this up, ive seen 3 metroid prime 3 covers uploaded im isd tagging two and decided that Image:Metroid Prime 3 - Corruption Coverart.jpg is the best one to keep for now as it is low res. Salavat 14:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

That's probably the best of three in terms of fair use. Please be sure to add a Fair Use Rationale --►ShadowJester07  14:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair Use now added. Salavat 14:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, See my the message above. Unless anyone objects, I think we should add the image to the article. --►ShadowJester07  14:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I've switched the image for a higher res version. Feel free to overwrite it with a lower res image, and then tag it with {{furd}}. Do not upload a watermarked image. - hahnchen 18:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Done. --Pekaje 18:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

The rating still needs to be changed

The boxart clearly shows a T rating yet the article says RP. Any objections to changing it to T?

I think someone beat you to it [5] :p --►ShadowJester07  18:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I see some speculation in the article...

The article mentions "that it's expected there will be atleast one hunter from Metroid Prime: hunters" in the game.

That qualifies as speculation no? I say we get rid of that.

"There is also speculation that at least one hunter from Metroid Prime Hunters will make a significant appearance."

You can clearly see in the quoted statement (which is in the article in the plot section) that it's speculation due to the fact it has the word speculation in the sentence... I deleted it but it just got put back up?

Why is that? Can somebody tell me how that doesn't count as speculation? Wikipedia standards say there should be NO speculation in articles.Kad 01:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Multiplayer?

I remember reading for the longest time that "Correuption will have multiplayer but not in the same style as Echoes" or something like that. The game comes out next month and we still have no idea if there's splitscreen multiplayer? Or was this confirmed somewhere and I missed it? ShadowUltra 14:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Judging by the fact that said line is no longer anywhere in the article, I'd guess it was either speculation or a line from an old interview/article that nobody can recall the source of. Either way, no-one at Nintendo or any of the major gaming news sites has said anything about that since. Arrow 20:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Right now the article mentions that Nintendo has confirmed there is no online. Is that worth mentioning? Metroid is an adventure series .Vegasjon 08:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

While the Metroid series has primarily been offline its entire life, Hunters was online, and so it's an important enough topic that I think the line should remain. Arrowned 23:56, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

There is no multiplayer. The game disc confirms this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yellowhat (talk • contribs) 03:19, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

New E3 Information

When will it be added? (75.15.194.87 17:57, 12 July 2007 (UTC))

Not Sure, whenever editors get a chance to. :P --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 18:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Is the cleanup tag still necessary?

It has been over a year and the article has improved quite a bit. I suggest that the cleanup tag be removed because of this. Marlith 04:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

None of the items in the To-do section have even been addressed. This article is miles away from anything close to GA status. Roughly half of the article has been polished, while there are some crude spots. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 18:14, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Samus does not speak

"It is currently unspecified whether or not Samus will speak in Metroid Prime 3" I just got the latest issue of Nintendo Power yesterday. In its article on the game, it mentioned the full Voice Acting, but specifically mentioned that Samus would remain silent as in previous games.

I'd like to point out that Samus doesn't have any actual lines, just the grunts and cries that she did in the previous Prime games. Also, the current page is wrong because Jennifer Hale plays absolutely no role in Corruption. Here's a list of the voice actors (taken from the instruction bookelet and confirmed by the in-game credits) -

Lainie Frasier
Grav Haddock
Claire Hamilton
Brian Jepson
Clavton Kjas
Tim Miller
Edwin Neal
Chris Sabat
Ken Webster

Also, neither the instruction booklet nor the in-game credits say who voices what characters. Action22579 07:20, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Trivia Section?

I noticed in the IGN movie of when you start in Samus' ship,that when the computer screen starts to malfunction,you can see the words,"Wii Format" appear briefly on the screen,so I just wanted to know if we should put this anywhere in the article.XLS724 23:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

While I personally don't consider that notable, I'd just like to point out that if it does end up going in the article, it doesn't need to do so in a trivia section. Arrowned 23:43, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Australian Date

Confirmed here... http://www.vooks.net/modules.php?module=article&id=12112 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.135.250 (talk • contribs)

Why was this removed from the article?--Richard (Talk - Contribs) 01:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Series

Now that MP3 is going to launch, is the series going to end and get killed off?? Mr. Mario 192 14:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

The people at Retro Studios have said several times (in IGN articles that the MP3 article actually cites) that the Prime games are only going to be a trilogy, and that #3 will provide closure to the mini-series. Arrowned 17:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

That doesn't mean the Metroid series is done though, just the Primes. Rekameohs 0:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

If I implied that, I didn't mean to. I entirely meant "the Prime trilogy" when I said providing closure. Arrowned 00:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Interestingly, the trailer released this morning says "Step behind the visor // One // Last // Mission", which seems to imply that this would be Samus's final mission. Whether that means the Metroid series as a whole would be over at that point, or if it means that someone else would take Samus's place or something like that, obviously nobody knows. This is all speculation until we have some proof one way or another - closest we have is Retro Studio's word on the trilogy. Probably won't know more until MP3 is released. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 00:34, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Or, ya know, one last prime mission.GreenAiden555 10:10, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Metroid Fusion is last in the Metroid Time line. 24.7.141.45 15:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

For the record, the "bonus" ending that is acquired by obtaining all 100 pickups leaves room for a sequel. Action22579 07:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that sequel's called "Metroid II: Return of Samus" and it's for the Game Boy. ;) I only got 92%, so does the secret ending hint at the return of Ridley and the Space Pirates or Dark Samus? If it's Dark Samus, I will be upset because they're beating a dead horse. - Super Doogles 20:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

No, he's talking about another possible game between Prime 3 and M2. Prime 3's 100% pickup ending has nothing to do with tying into M2. And no, it doesn't involve Dark Samus either; rest easy. Arrowned 20:58, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Reference

Reference #1 leads to a page that says the page you have requested is no longer available. Icestorm815 16:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Nintendo's press site deletes articles more than a month old. I've switched the reference with another one that's functional. Arrowned 18:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Metroid Prime 3 preview channel

A Wii Channel dedicated to a Metroid Prime 3 preview has been added in Wii Shop. Should this be mentioned in the article in some fashion?Youkai no unmei 13:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. We need to update that plot section; its been featuring the same two gigantic quotes for the past several months. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 15:17, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

August 27 release date

http://wii.nintendo.com/software_metroid.jsp Lists the release date as 8/28/07, and the article stated 8/27/07....?GreenAiden555 07:42, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

See [6] The game is going to be released 8/27, and actually put up for sale on 8/28. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 07:53, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Please don't alter the Nintendo quote relating to the date. Just64helpin 22:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Adding the preview channel

Fix it up if it's going back up. The Preview Channel for MP3 is only available in America, so don't make it seem as if it's up for grab for every Wii system. And steer clear of saying how many videos are there. It could be four or five. Even on the shop channel details they said that it will get updated.--ChibiMrBubbles 17:06, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Instead of deleting the paragraph wholesale (and therefore making the article read as though nothing happened), why don't you just fix the issues with the paragraph's wording? — KieferSkunk (talk) — 05:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I think I'll can create a "Promotion" subsection that would accomodate the channel, along with related items. It seems unique and notable enough for the lead (which should never have info exclusive to itself) so I'd assume a separate heading would be appropriate as well. Just64helpin 11:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Because that takes work, the paragraph was mis-worded and was misleading to the reader. It also didn't belong under Develo. sub. If there was a demo, then it would since Retro had to develop a small portion of game to share. Anyway, Make it under "Marketing" (akin to MP2's wiki). Also make mention that because of the release of MP3 Nintendo is running Metroid Month promotion on the Virtual Console.--ChibiMrBubbles 12:52, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll add what my references state, thanks. Contributions should also be based on existing Wikipedia guidelines and policy, rather than what another wikiarticle happens to have. Just64helpin 14:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

My point, Chibi, was that just because a paragraph may be poorly worded (another assertion I don't agree with in this case) and/or contain incorrect information (also disagree), it's not necessarily the best course of action to just delete it and make someone rewrite it from scratch. Improve content, don't just delete. We should only delete content that is irrelevant, vandalism, or violates WP policies and (in this case) CVGProj guidelines. If it takes work to improve the paragraph, then either do the work or tag the paragraph so someone else can do the work. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 15:47, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, I don't see why putting this information in the Development section is a bad thing. Development covers all the information up to release, which I'd think could safely include promotional materials and announcements as well. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 15:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Chibi isn't "making" me, per se; I just don't want to deal with argumentative reverts. Just64helpin 16:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The preview channel is a promotional channel. Things like audio, delays, etc fall under development, not surplus promotional material. The paragraph leads the reader to the assumption that it can be downloaded at any time (limited time promotion) and is only accessible to all Wiis (Only North American Wiis can download it). That alone is poorly worded and mis-informs the reader. Because the promotional material does not belong under development I took it out. It had no relevance to the development of the game and was once again poorly written. I do concede to removing the entire paragraph, as I should had edited what seem to be misinformation, but I would still have to make a new sub and I didn't want to cause problems.

And of course I'm not making you, I'm TRYING TO HELP editors who choose to add it in. There is no need for such a trollish statement.--ChibiMrBubbles 16:44, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify: I'm not accusing you of "making" anyone do anything, except that by deleting the original paragraph, you basically force another editor to re-add it (potentially leading to a revert war), whether by reverting your deletion or rewriting it from scratch. I understand you're trying to help, and I appreciate that. I'm just pointing out that I think deleting the paragraph outright when it could have been easily improved was not the right course of action. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 19:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I'd also like to clarify that part of the reason I had an issue with this particular situation was that the original paragraph that had been deleted contained a useful citation to an external source. If it had been an unsourced paragraph, I probably would not have made such a big deal about it. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 00:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, i was wondering if we should add something. If you pay close attention at the end of the aurora unit video, doesn't it look like mother brain's "chamber" at the end of the original metroid. Do ya think it is worth mentioning? Wii2-13 15:22, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

It certainly does, but it's being kept intentionally vague, which means any statements of similarity will be classified as OR. We'll probably have to wait for the game to come out before we can make any real connection between the Aurora Unit and Mother Brain, if any exists. I'm pretty certain that such a connection will be more-or-less explicitly stated in the game itself. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 18:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protection request

Just notifying everyone that I've requested semi-protection of this article due to the ongoing revert war concerning the game's release date. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 22:59, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

(grumbles) It would just so happen that when I go to make the request, the admins who normally respond in 5 minutes are suddenly absent... :P — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:38, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Can't win 'em all - Alison ☺ 03:51, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Online play?

[Comment moved from main page - Alison ☺]

After doing alot of research on Metroid Prime Three Corruption I was wondering "will this video game have online play?" Now sadly to my suprise all of the pages I researched said that Metroid Prime Three has been focused on it's single player game play. But for all of those people out there who are Big Metroid Prime fans you don't have to be completely upset because this video-game has not been released yet there is still a little bit of hope. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.248.87 (talk • contribs)

It's already been confirmed by Retro Studios themselves that this game won't have online play, as the article itself cites. Also, this is not a forum for general discussion. Arrowned 04:56, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Rumor: leaked with Bioshock?

Supposedly Toys R Us leaked this game along with Bioshock, but Bioshock's getting the publicity. Someone posted pics of himself playing the game, holding the case, and the instruction manual. I've yet to see these pics, however. ShadowUltra 04:33, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

• Update: I'm also hearing rumors that various Gamestops have become confused and are planning releasing the game on the 20/21, the original release date. ShadowUltra 16:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Update 2: I've heard reports of numerous stores planning to break the release date, and have gotten my hands on hard evidence (a scan of a Real Canadian Superstore ad). I have tons of evidence from people on forums, but they aren't reliable sources, so we'll have to wait for notable websites to announce this before making a big deal out of it. right now I added a little blurb to the bottom of the article. Feel free to delete it if it breaks any policies. ShadowUltra 22:36, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Please find a reliable source for this information before adding it to article. BTW, the correct name is GameStop. Just64helpin 16:14, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's why I added the tag, because I'm not good at research and I was asking others to help find sources for this. ShadowUltra 16:20, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

That's not what the tag is for; it's for discussing reliably sourced information missing from a wikiarticle. Just64helpin 16:32, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

There has been a video of roughly one hour of gameplay leaked, supposedly.Miles Blues 18:25, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see how that helps, but thanks for the post. Just64helpin 18:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Possible further proof that the game has been leaked, and no need to be rude. Miles Blues 00:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Um, who's being rude? Just64helpin 01:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, seriously, we can't go on just "Supposedly, there might be a video of someone playing the game" to establish any news of leaks or early releases. Please cite a real source (one that isn't just a rumor mill), or else we can't treat it as anything more than a rumor ourselves. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 01:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Archiving

The talk page is getting a bit long - mind if I archive everything through June 07? Miles Blues 00:04, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

This can probably wait till September. There are some important issues which should probably remain on here for awhile. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 07:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Miles, this page is really getting crammed full of descusions. You might want to archive it now before it gets to large and confusing. Just a thought. Zabbethx 8:21 Aug, 30 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zabbethx (talk • contribs) 12:20, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

Metroid Prime 3 Bricking Consoles?

I've heard that MP3's disc will contain and, if needed, automatically install the latest Wii firmware update, w/c could potentially brick modded consoles. Does anyone have a reliable source for this though? Nintenboy01 02:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I haven't heard of anything about this yet, but we'll probably see some news about it once the game comes out if such is true. I wouldn't be surprised if there was something in Metroid Prime 3's code that required a firmware update. But at the same time, I would think that having to install a system update the first time you boot the disc would make people unhappy, so I'm a little weary of this rumor.

This is the sort of rumor that comes up with many big-name releases, unfortunately. Definitely will need a reliable source for it. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 02:51, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

On the one hand, the bulk of 3.0's updates were for online functionality, so I don't see Prime 3 needing much of that to force an upgrade. On the other hand, Super Paper Mario installed 2.0 automatically, and I don't recall much of 2.0's additions actually being anything necessary for SPM either. However, I can't confirm the upgrade, so it's probably a moot point until we get our hands on the game in a week. Arrowned 02:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Pokemon Battle Revolution forced a firmware update when it was first booted up. ShadowUltra 03:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Can't say for sure, but this is probably also one of Nintendo's methods to discourage piracy and console modding, because it's likely even a fake copy of this game would force you to install the firmware update and brick the console in the process. A number of PSP games also install newer firmware if necessary. Well, we'll just wait and see when the game comes out. Nintenboy01 04:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Unlike the update in the Super Paper Mario disk and the usual online updates on the Wii, the last update had a warning that told you that your Wii could potentially cease functioning if you had it modded, before commencing with the update. I suspect that once you insert the MP3 disk into the Wii, a warning message not unlike this one will pop up and tell you what is included in the update. If you've modded your console, bought Metroid Prime 3, and recieved this warning message, and still decided to go through with this update, well you there is just no helping you then. Link's Awakening 04:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Updating on a non-US console with the update does nothing other than add a duplicate weather and news channel, everything still functions fine as does the game. http://psx-scene.com/forums/wiikey/58908-metroid-prime-3-a.html http://psx-scene.com/forums/wiikey/58942-metroid-prime-corruption-pal-wii-wiikey.html scatman839 22:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Nintendo tends to put firmware updates in most if not all of their titles, from my experience. Even Big Brain Academy: Wii Degree contains a firmware update.--4.242.15.124 07:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Wii Connect 24 features & Checkpoint System confirmed by Gametrailers

This video was up on Gametrailers earlier today confirming the features listed in my previous edit.69.243.140.146 20:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWxCyUkZYts

What happened to the trailer on GameTrailers? I see the one on Youtube, but it looks like GameTrailers may have taken it down again? Any ideas? — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Nintendo likely has the information/video under embargo until later in the week; most sites have to agree to those terms to get review copies of games in early.69.243.140.146 20:18, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Yeah, the first 30 seconds or so of the video on Youtube looked like a video review, and generally those have to wait until one or two days before release, at the earliest. I'm thinking that linking to the "unofficial" Youtube version may not be in our best interest right now, but I'm sort of on the fence about this. I'll let others comment as well. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:22, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Released

Okay, now the game is released, maybe someone could get information about the new hunters? --172.159.67.225 14:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

There's one called "Rundas". He's got some kind of ice powers, and he's big and blue. Reminds me of that ice guy from the Incredibles. Dunno about the others. Are they the same guys from the GBA metroid prime hunters game? Avatarian86 00:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Hunters was for DS, and no, from what I've seen in Nintendo Power they are new characters. I'll be playing all day tomorrow so if I find out any more maybe I'll post it here. Eris Discord | Talk 03:56, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The three hunters that show up in this game are Rundas, an ice generating/manipulating creature from the moon Phrygis that is arrogant and considers himself the best hunter out there (prefers solo missions so that he doesn't have to work with others); Ghor, a cybernetic bounty hunter who can merge his body into larger machinery (his personality goes from gentle and calm when normal to aggressive when combined with other tech); and Gandrayda, a shape-changing hunter that prefers stealth/recon missions (age and origins unknown, though she mentally acts relatively young, and she considers Samus to be her biggest rival, hoping to best her eventually).

If anyone wants to try and incorporate that info into the article, feel free. I'd do it myself, but MP3 cramped my hands after 5 hours of play, and I'm getting tired. Arrowned 04:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Reception: Nintendo Power

In the Metroid Prime (first) article, it says Nintendo Power gave it 10/10 which makes a claim in the Reception section of this article false. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.98.180.3 (talk) 06:02, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

It is actually not false. While the Prime did receive a perfect score Nintendo power was not using the current 10 point system at that time which goes by a 0.5 increase each time. The first Prime game recveied 5 stars out of 5 which also increased by 0.5. Since they switched to the current 10 point system this is the only game ohter than RE4 get a 10/10. Heres a link [[7]]. It would also not make sense to directely compare the two scores because under the old syetem the second hightest score could be a 4.5 on 5 (90%) and under the current system a 9.5 on 10 (95%). This means that we cannot know if the first game would have received a perfect score under the new system because the second highest score was greater than it used to be. --70.48.108.229 02:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Silly. I remember reading the RE4 review when they used the "star-system". So all games listed as reciving (sp?) 5 star are 10/10. 76.170.11.100 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.170.11.100 (talk) 16:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Plot Summary

You all probably are aware of this, but the plot summary needs to be updated now that the game is out, and now that several people have beaten then game. Just posting a reminder. (124.121.93.216 12:09, 30 August 2007 (UTC))

Final Boss

Has anyone beaten this game yet? I simply must know who the final boss is! Is it just some Aurora Unit? To avoid spoilers you can post the answer on my talk page. I'm sorry, I just haven't been able to get a copy yet, but I don't mind getting spoiled. Nintenboy01 21:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

I've beaten the game already (I'm bad with rushing new games these days), so I went ahead and detailed the final boss on your talk page. Disaster Kirby^Talk 21:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Plot Summary

You all probably are aware of this, but the plot summary needs to be updated now that the game is out, and now that several people have beaten then game. Just posting a reminder. (124.121.93.216 12:09, 30 August 2007 (UTC))

Should the thing about Sylux's Ship (alledgelly) being seen at the 100% ending be included in the plot synopsis even though it just speculation at this time? Hyperfan 02:43, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Unless you heard it from a legit source, It's probably not a good idea to add it (see WP:NOR). The plot synopsis section already needs enough help as it is :-p. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 03:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I dunno if that particular information will be confirmed until we see a teaser or at least a few screens for the next game (not something I'm going to see anytime soon, that's for sure). For now, it should probably be taken out of the plot synopsis. Maybe a "Sequel" or a "Speculation" paragraph would be a better place for it. Hyperfan 04:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I have not really read the plot section, as I have not played the game yet :-p. If its there, please take it out ;-) --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 04:46, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Done, and done. Pleasure doing business with you (and disregard my e-mail too, sorry about that). Hyperfan 04:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Good luck though. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 05:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed title of the section. When you have a very large monitor and it still takes up the entire screen, it doesn't qualify as a plot synopsis anymore. Hyperfan 05:16, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't you add spoiler warnings to the plot summary? I don't think the plot is different to, say a movie or a book. Let me know what you think. Icestorm815 05:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Methinks the Plot section is unnecessarily detailed and steps into WP:OR. As presented in the game, Samus starts off by heading off the Pirate invasion on Norion, then receiving her orders to go to the other planets and rid them of the Phazon corruption. The bit about Dark Samus commanding the Pirates and them attacking Norion in retaliation for the "stolen" Phazon from Aether isn't revealed until pretty late in the game, so it should be mentioned in in media res fashion, rather than in chronological order. ("Samus learns that the Pirates...")

Overall, the plot of the game is pretty simple and straightforward, and much of what's described in this Plot section is backstory. — KieferSkunk (talk) — (I could have sworn I signed this.)

Not all of the plot described is backstory. The parts about Samus' interactions with the other hunters and her actions after destroying the leviathans are unknown to someone who hasn't played the game. Icestorm815 06:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I know that. I just mean that a significant portion of it is backstory that should either be described later in the summary, or not at all because it's only peripherally relevant to the game itself. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 17:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

←Okay, I've cleaned up the plot. It's still very long and probably contains more detail than it needs to, but it more strictly follows the flow of the game and no longer contains OR about the backstory. At this point, we should be able to focus on condensing the detail to be more like a summary. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 19:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't we can condense this much more and still have it make sense. Hyperfan 04:03, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Again, is it wise to put the Sylux thing at the end of the plot section? While we all know it's probably him, I still don't think he should be in the section. Hyperfan 04:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I've helped out to trim that plot significantly. (It's not so important to describe each Hunter aspect or seed aspect individually - it's the Corruption part that's important); when you do that, that trims the plot by loads. --Masem 05:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I personally think that it should be mentioned that the ship resembles Sylux's Delano 7. It's mentioned that a ship follows Samus at the end of the 100% ending, so why not specify what it looks like? It isn't speculation that it looks like Sylux's Delano 7, it looks nigh identical to it. It might not be Sylux because his ship is stolen blueprints from the Galatic Federation, but it still looks like the Delano 7. So it should be mentioned the ship RESEMBLES Sylux's Delano 7. Shyrangerr 10:04, 15 September 2007 (EST)

The plot summary is starting to get really crufty again. Does someone feel like tackling it? — KieferSkunk (talk) — 00:21, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

C buttton

"The C button (located on Nunchuck) morphs Samus to her Morph ball form, the Z trigger locks on and scans targets."

Well, duh... We know it is located on the Nunchuk. It is ovious it is on the Nunchuck. I'll remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.133.194.120 (talk) 14:53, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I wonder if a detailed description of the controls is necessary at all. It's important to describe Samus's abilities, and in a general sense describe how the Wiimote and Nunchuk are used to exercise those abilities. But describing which buttons do what goes into game-guide material that is better suited for a gaming wiki. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 05:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Screenshots

This article could be improved with some screenshots, can someone who has the game take a few good ones (I hear it can take and email them in-game?) -Leif902 23:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

You can take them, but you can only e-mail them to other Wiis unless some mad genius finds a way to get them to the computer. And if you do, tell me. - Super Doogles 23:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Trivial matter to hook up a Wii to a recording device (camcorder, etc.) that can record in hi-def and can transfer its video and images to a computer. I don't have the equipment to do this myself, but I'm sure someone does. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 05:54, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I could do that, but how do you get a camcorder to record something from the TV? As for a mad genius coming up with a way to send screenshots to a computer, couldn't you have a computer send an e-mail to someone's Wii, and then have that person reply to the e-mail and attach a screenshot with their reply? 24.117.164.51 03:16, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Reception section

There needs to be a balance of pros and cons and at the moment it is to positive, one person even said without citation is could be game of the year which is just biased. Of cource we can keep what there already is but add on some cons to retain neutrality. Stabby Joe 14:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Interesting... someone deleted it all together... thats not what I meant. Stabby Joe 22:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Archiving

Please don't archive discussions that are as recent as the past week or two. Miles Blues 03:22, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

That's not a rule. If discussions are dead, there's no point to add them. Wikipedia is not a forum of any sorts. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 03:25, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Chozo artifacts

“Samus travels between the planets of Bryyo and Elysia, and the Pirate Homeworld, finding Chozo artifacts to further improve her powers.”

"Chozo artifacts" is misleading. This needs to be replaced with "upgrades to further upgrade her suit." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.135.128.121 (talk) 21:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

And mention the energy cells and GFS Valhalla as well.172.135.128.121 21:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The ship that follows Samus in 100% Ending

It needs to be said it resembles Sylux's Delano 7. [8] That is a picture of Sylux's Delano 7 and [9] that is a picture of the ship from MP3. They don't look identical, that could easily just be because of the graphical differences or an in-game reason like it's not Sylux's exact ship or maybe it's the final version of the prototype he stole. The fact still remains though that both ships DO look incredibly similar. Both have that main body, with a 2 sets of arms coming out from the corners then straightening out with the front two being blocky and the back two be long and pointed. I'm saying it should be said the ships look similar, not that they're the same ship. Anyone of a sane mind that sees pictures of both would say they look at least semi-similar. Shyrangerr 00:09, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

This reminds me of the Billy Coen/Chris Redfield debate in the Resident Evil 5 article. Unless you have official documentation, a producer/director's quote or some other form of official and indisputable evidence, I am afraid that we will not be able to add the bit about Sylux's ship per WP:NOR and WP:A. --ShadowJester07 ► Talk 00:19, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, so I see now that it's against Wikipedia's rules. I didn't know that before. The thing that bothers me about is that they do look similar. The first time I heard of the ship I saw a side by side comparison of the MP3 ship and the Delano 7 and thought they do look incredibly similar. So why I want it said they look similar is to give a visual image of the ship because they do look similar, not to try and say that they're the same ship. At the very least we should add in a picture of the ship from MP3. Shyrangerr 00:35, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

There isn't really any point to doing that, though. It's a special ending to the game, it's intended to be mysterious in nature, and Wikipedia is not a place to explain or speculate about fan material. Regardless of how similar the ships are between the two games, no official explanation has been given as to who the ship belongs to or why it's following Samus's ship. Any statement other than what is strictly given to us in the game and from Nintendo's publications is original research, and it goes beyond the scope of WP.

That said, I agree that there is a strong resemblance, and material such as this would go excellently on Wikitroid, StrategyWiki, etc., where the rules about such things are much more lax. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 00:04, 27 October 2007 (UTC)