Talk:Metroid Dread
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Computer and video games, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| No | This article is on a subject of no priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. | |
|
CVG To-do:
|
||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Nintendo, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Nintendo related merchandise and video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
|
Nintendo To-do:
|
|
Contents |
[edit] Early Details
Could someone provide a reference the details in the article? Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:11, 2005 August 29 (UTC)
- Done; at least, I hope so. I don't know the exact issue number, but I know the rumors started in Game Informer. As for any further sources, I don't have any. Hence, why I'm surprised this article exists; what proof do we really have? --Shadow Hog 22:56, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
- Um, the fact that Nintendo was the one who confirmed it?
[edit] Cancellation
Before anyone gets the idea to delete the article based on its supposed cancellation, note this... if you believe that the game was, in fact, a rumor, think again. In fact, the exact opposite is true. Unless we can actually know what so-called source gave N-Next the information that it was cancelled, we cannot verify their claims. The only websites other than it who reported on its cancellation based it solely on the N-Next article, thusly creating a false "widely known fact" by every single website reporting on its cancellation. Not only that, Nintendo has never even commented on this cancellation. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:53, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Unreferenced information
To the users who keep adding information from supposed insiders and Nintendo representatives: please provide sources. Details about the product are scarce, so I'm not going to let the article turn into a rumor bin. Any information needs to be backed up with sources — in the form of URLs if it was obtained online. "A GameFAQs user", "a Nintendo insider", and "Nintendo of America representatives" are unverifiable sources; provide names. If you don't know how to format the references correctly in the article, post it here on the talk page and I or someone else will do it for you. Thanks. --Poiuyt Man talk 23:49, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- Actually, the Metroid Deadly email came from GameFAQs, but since they purge threads there daily, the actual topic with the email was deleted long ago, so it's unverifiable, which is why I added the Rumors section. The Nintendo Representatives bit, don't remember where I heard it, could have been from someone that actually went to E3. As for the rumors section, it should be returned since the entire buzz about Metroid Dread's cancellation is all just rumors. The site that started it wouldn't even reveal the sources it claims it had (if it even did that), so the entire thing is unverifiable, and should be moved to that rumros section. Claude 04:15, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Does this exist at all?
Apparently, a recent Game Informer also stated that Metroid Dread was cancelled. Because no proof exists that it was even confirmed by Nintendo, the rumor materialized from Game Informer, and now another one has surfaced by the same publication...
It's safe to assume that it didn't exist at all.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was another 2D Metroid, but if there will be another, it will most likely NOT be Dread, nor will GI have discovered it first. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.212.234.121 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 2006 January 17.
- To claim that it doesn't exist at all would be a moronic lie. You'd have to completely ignore the fact that it was on Nintendo's E3 records and scheduled to appear. Even if it was cancelled, it still existed at one point, and there's no telling if the cancellation rumors are true or not, or even if they won't start up the Dread project again in another few months. To say that the game "never existed because it was cancelled" would be a contradiction. To acknowledge that it was cancelled would mean to acknowledge that it was planned in some form and thus existed at one point. Claude 00:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] A better question.
A better question is "What is the current status of the game?" We cannot say it is cancelled for that has not been confirmed, though saying it is in development is also difficult. Thoughts? Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 05:41, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- How 'bout something that is a compromise between those two? Because GameInformer claimed it was cancelled, but I really doubt it. Or maybe it's just because I have an unhealthy obsession with 2D metroid games *stares hypnotized into gameboy screen*. Anyway, I think that maybe this entire article should be deleted until there is more news. Because it is essentially (no offense) a list declaring 'Cancelled' 'Not cancelled' back and forth. Which is entertaining, to be sure, but I'm not sure that it is so useful. --RedZion-- May 12 2006
-
- The article doesn't need to be deleted because the game is acknowledged to be in existence or to have existed at one point. Beyodn that, there isn't much else that can be said.--Claude 03:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Images
Any pictures for this article?
- >x<ino 18:46, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
No picture has ever been released. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 09:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] A little speculation for ya...
This is my take on the game's status: They probably wanted to finish the Metroid Prime subseries first. It makes perfect sense! Metroid Prime 3: Corruption is the final game in the subseries, so once they release it, then they resume work on Metroid Dread. That way, they've completed the Metroid Prime subseries, which fits in between Metroid and Metroid II: Return of Samus, and they can directly continue the series! I do hope that Dread has a less-dark feel than Fusion, though. The Metroid Prime games really, especially Metroid Prime, totally got it right. --Gaming King 05:27, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- Speculation has no place in the article. I have removed it. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 06:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- This also makes little sense as the Prime series has been entirely US-developed (with supervision from NCL), while Dread would almost certainly be developed in Japan, most likely with Fusion staff. They're separate. It could be as simple as the director having another project - 2D games are made on smaller budgets and shorter schedules, that's why we still get our glorious 2D. Pellucidity 04:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
@ CyberSkull: I didn't add any speculation to the article. Good grief!
@ Pellucidity: Well, it's not like Nintendo of Japan is oblivious to what Nintendo of America and/or Retro Studios are doing. Why would they release Dread at this point, when they're just about to wrap up the Metroid Prime trilogy? It makes more sense to release Dread, a game that comes after Fusion, after they've closed the gap between the original (Metroid/Metroid Zero Mission), the Metroid Prime trilogy (MP, MP2, MP3, plus MPH), and the Metroid Elimination Trilogy (that's my name for the games where Metroids drive the story or play the biggest role in the plot; Metroid II, Super Metroid, Metroid Fusion). That kind of closure provides a perfect opportunity to finally continue the story, starting with Metroid Dread. (Wow, I'm totally obsessed with Metroid. :P ) --Gaming King 06:36, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
- The Metroid Prime Trilogy is a prodution of Retro studios. Therefore it would not afect Dread, a Nintendo production. While you have a point, that wouldn't prevent Nintendo of Japan from at least begining to develop Dread, which if needed could be held untill the correct time. I will admit that you have a good idea though.--Mit kebes
-
- But remember that Retro is a 2nd party. NOA could've just told NOJ to wait for Retro to finish the Prime trilogy. --Gaming King 22:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- But so far, NOJ hasn't cared so far about putting out Metroid games during the Prime trilogy (such as Metroid Zero Mission), and if they did... why wouldn't they start developing it? --Mit kebes
-
-
-
-
- Retro is a first party Nintendo bought the company a few years back. If you don't believe me go to the Wii Article access archive 11 and read the Second Party/First Party section. That should clear up any confusion. --Edgelord 19:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Name/2006 Release
A post from a Nintendo employee on the Gaming-Age Forum refer to a 2006 release for Metroid Dred. --Stx 12:38, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
- Typo. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- That was back in February. It's listed in the article that way. ~ Hibana 02:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] not being released?
Aaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwww. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.247.235.10 (talk) 07:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC).
