# Talk:Metroid Prime: Trilogy

Proof from IGN, 1UP and even Nintendo
It was recently announced, and overturning the Redirect seems quite necessary in light of this new game. Chiefmartinez (talk) 01:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

There is no new game, it's just a compilation. And just because it exists doesn't mean it should have its own article. -sesuPRIME talk • contribs 03:38, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
This doesn't warrant its own article because it's destined to either remain a stub or violate WP:CFORK. Please see the "Compilations get a separate article?" section at WT:VG and leave your comments there. -sesuPRIME talk • contribs 18:28, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I had uploaded the officially distributed render of the box art, however, it was speedily deleted under section I7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. I don't know what I missed out specifically, as I had copied relevant information from similar articles box art image files. If any one else wants to upload the artwork and have a go at filling in the fair use box better than I did, the source was Joystiq: http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/24/metroid-prime-trilogy-packaging-cooler-than-a-chozo-suit/ but it's also available at IGN: http://uk.media.wii.ign.com/media/143/14352258/imgs_1.html. I just didn't want to crop the image myself.
FabAndroid (talk) 11:39, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up. I don't know what the problem was, but I've uploaded it again. Hopefully this time it won't get deleted. -sesuPRIME 16:33, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

This is a bit of a nitpick, but I'm requesting that the name of the article be changed from "Metroid Prime Trilogy" to "Metroid Prime: Trilogy", as that is how it will be packaged and sold.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by MDB913 (talk • contribs) 20:32, 18 July 2009 (UTC) 

I agree completely. In fact, I did move the page to Metroid Prime: Trilogy on June 24 and then fixed every mention of it throughout Wikipedia, but someone else reverted my edits. Then there was a discussion that basically concluded that Wikipedia shouldn't use the colon version because
the official site doesn't use it (I pointed out that Nintendo obviously hasn't gotten around to updating their site yet, as evidenced by the fact that they're still using the placeholder box art).
the print on the side of the box just doesn't count (I'm still not clear on why it should be ignored).
One user even claimed "we don't know if the symbol used on the side of the box art is a colon. It looks like two dots but we don't know if it's really a colon." Anyway, consensus is clearly against using the colon, so there's nothing you or I can do but deal with it. -sesuPRIME 01:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Well it looks like http://metroid.com/primetrilogy/ was finally updated to say "Metroid Prime: Trilogy" within the brief description at the bottom of the page. I've moved the article and fixed every mention of it that I could find throughout Wikipedia. Major déjà vu! -sesuPRIME 09:33, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess my question would be this. The game comes with alot of special stuff, art booklet, special tin, etc. But I have only seen it in this form. I have not seen it in a standard case or with no extra stuff to come with your purchase. So is it always going to be released with all the goodies our is this just a limited time offer? I hope somebody can understand what I'm trying to ask.Zabbethx (talk) 18:26, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I think I understand. The term "Collector's Edition" implies that there will also be a "standard" edition with less features, but I haven't heard anything about one, so I guess it's possible at this point that the Collector's Edition will be the only edition. We'll know within a few weeks. -sesuPRIME 18:55, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Or it could be that the Collector's Edition is the North American version with all three installments on the same disc, as opposed to each game being released separately in Japan. I think it's a safe bet that the standard Trilogy is just going to lack the "art booklet, and include other undisclosed features." Digitelle (talk) 23:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
From what I understand, there is no "standard edition." It's called the "collector's edition" because it's a collection of the three games, and/or they assume only a Metroid collector would buy the game. It is confusing because, as you said, "collector's edition" should imply a "standard edition," but apparently that isn't the case. ShadowUltra (talk) 19:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Normally the word "Trilogy" would cover the fact that it contains all three games. Of course we can do nothing but speculate what future editions the US may have. It is quite possible that the US will eventually switch to the way Europe (and potentially Australia if the cover has anything to say) is selling their's (it does not contain the words "Collector's Edition). Sarick Lyre (talk) 06:25, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
I e-mailed GameStop, and did some research, and there is no announced "normal" version of the game. Until it's announced, we have no idea. (rct2guy (talk) 22:26, 25 August 2009 (UTC))

In the IGN review (http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/101/1017077p1.html), several differences (beyond the new controls) are pointed out that may or may not be worth mentioning in the article:
Metroid Prime now makes extensive use of bloom lighting.
(Mentioned in the video review) Metroid Prime included a bonus of the original Metroid on the disc, unlockable by completing Metroid Fusion and connecting it to the Gamecube, this bonus is left off the Trilogy, most likely due to its availability on Virtual Console. Completing Metroid Prime and connicting it to Fusion also allowed you to play in the Fusion suit in Prime, I have no idea if this is in the Trilogy, perhaps someone else knows?
MP2: Echoes has had the difficulty of two bosses toned down.
Technical glitches have been removed, making some speedrun techniques impossible.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.172.227.209 (talk) 23:02, 26 August 2009 (UTC) 

A couple other things are that the Trilogy version of Corruption has the word "damn" censored as you can see here: http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=94951 and you don't need to connect to another game to wear the Fusion Suit, you just unlock it.Kiwisoup (talk) 02:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
According to these people http://boards.ign.com/nintendo_wii_lobby/b8270/184365436/p1 there are actually some missing graphical effects with the arm cannon. Maybe it should be changed from "improved visual effects" to "altered visual effects"? Also they claim the AI, story, and music has been improved. I think the part about the story is referencing the changes implemented in the Player's Choice version. Kiwisoup (talk) 02:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Well we can't use those message board posts as a source as they're not reliable. I'm not sure about the "damn" bit though. Does anyone know if GoNintendo is considered reliable? -sesuPRIME 02:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
GoNintendo is one of the top news sites specifically for Nintendo consoles, and I'm trying to find concrete non-forum posts about this, but it's proving difficult because nobody is reporting on any of this other than consumers. Kiwisoup (talk) 02:46, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
I inquired here about GoNintendo's reliability. -sesuPRIME 02:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Here's the same story on 1up.com http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3175831. As you can see on this wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources#Checklist it is considered a reliable source Kiwisoup (talk) 04:00, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Please start a new line when you have something to add instead of amending your existing comments. It makes things much less confusing and more organized that way. Anyway, yes, 1UP is generally reliable, but in this case they cite GoNintendo as their source. 1UP isn't saying "Nintendo censored Prime 3", they're saying "GoNintendo says Nintendo censored Prime 3". -sesuPRIME 04:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I really think we should merge the Differences from Originals with the Overview. There isn't enough information to make having its own section noteworthy. --LostOverThere (talk) 05:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I did just that, then saw your post! I must be psychic... -sesuPRIME 05:30, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I don't agree at all. It's not them saying gonintendo says this. It's not a matter of who says what-the original source is a video that clearly shows what you for some reason want to keep saying is unreliable? Anybody can pop the game in for 10 minutes and see the censorship themselves...why is this even an argument? I think it's more of a matter of you not wanting a game you like to be slandered rather than you actually caring about the sources. I'm not being biased; I tried to add the improvements made but you didn't like that source either. almost all news comes from other sources...the story is on 1up...1up is considered reliable and that should include their discretion to use another site as its source.Kiwisoup (talk) 07:15, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
So by your logic, if I wanted to say Samus was a blonde female, I would have to reference that with a reliable source? Kiwisoup (talk) 07:27, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
(←) Eh. Your claim that I removed properly sourced information from the article in an attempt to somehow skew readers' opinions is completely unfounded and what is know here on Wikipedia as a personal attack. Look, I personally don't doubt that Nintendo censored "damn" in Prime 3, but what you or I think is true is irrelevant to Wikipedia. The very first line in WP:Verifiability, which is quite possibly the most important Wikipedia policy, is quoted below:

"The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed."
The original source that GoNintendo used was a YouTube clip, and YouTube is the king of all unreliable sources. As for your second post, no, I don't think that Samus' hair color and gender would need sourcing as nobody is likely to challenge that information. If you don't like Wikipedia's policies, then I recommend you go edit Wikitroid instead. -sesuPRIME 23:27, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

(←)In response to the recent deletion of the new category- I realize there are hundreds of graphical/textural/text differences, I was trying to cite game play changes, eg new animations to the US version and planned on keeping the category limited to that scope.  In fact the changes I listed were pretty much all the "major" in game changes made; other than the Omega Pirate can now be damaged with the Power Bomb and Fission Metroids appear outside of the Impact Crater.  
I was also hoping to list one for Echoes later on- guess that idea is down the toilet now.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.33.105.199 (talk) 10:57, 19 October 2009 (UTC) 

While the game has widescreen mode and the actual gameplay is in the correct aspect ratio, the HUD, scan logs, text, images of buttons, scanning reticule, basically everything along these lines other than the 3D components and main aiming reticule are all stretched in widescreen mode. Should this be mentioned? Kiwisoup (talk) 02:14, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe. Do you have a reliable source backing it up? -sesuPRIME 02:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
In this article http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=94861 although it's comparing textures, you can clearly see that the circles and squares in the HUD are now ovals and rectangles. I noticed right away just playing the game myself. Kiwisoup (talk) 02:48, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Here's a review from Gamepro http://www.gamepro.com/article/reviews/211754/metroid-prime-trilogy/ another verified reliable source that mentions the HUD being the wrong aspect Kiwisoup (talk) 04:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Glad you found that. I added their review score to the article. -sesuPRIME 05:32, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Can we really use a forum post on VGChartz as the only citation for number of units sold? This seems very dodgy to me. I'll try looking for a more reliable source, but I can't promise anything? --LostOverThere (talk) 07:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I've deleted that section for now; VG Chartz wasn't supposed to be used as a source to begin with. Arrowned (talk) 08:16, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Someone added in some info regarding that Metroid Prime: Trilogy will no longer be shipped, but the source the person provided was not reliable. Has this been stated in other sites, perhaps those that are considered or verified as reliable sources? Even so, it's a shame, MPT is amazing IMO. -ACDCGAMER 05:29, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

However, Amazon.com still is receiving copies, as http://www.amazon.com/Metroid-Prime-Trilogy-Collectors-Nintendo-Wii/dp/B002ATY7JE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1266736407&sr=8-1
shows (they were out of stock for about 2 weeks previously)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.139.43.176 (talk) 07:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC) 

This review is transcluded from Talk:Metroid Prime: Trilogy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 19:28, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
I loved playing Metroid Prime 3, but never got around to the other two. Nice to see this in GAN. I'm placing this article on hold, however, to allow issues to be resolved (don't feel disheartened; the large majority is easy to fix). GA acceptance should follow suit.

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
See comments below.
 Pass (1a)
 Pass (1b)
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
See comments below.
 Pass (2a)
 Pass (2b)
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
See comments below.
 Pass (3b)
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
Collaboration between several editors, one revert, but stable.
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
See comments below.
 Pass (6b)
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
Article is placed on hold for seven days in order to address issues pointed out.
 Pass (7) EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:12, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Everything below should be easy to fix, thus why the article is on hold.


#### Prose and MoS
I've copy-edited the article as I read along. Issues I cannot resolve:

"...where the Prime and Echoes remakes were released as standalone games in the New Play Control! collection." -> I'm unsure how to define New Play Control!, and as a result, cannot tell if it should be italicized or quoted. All instances should additionally be consistent.
The main article on NPC has no difference, so I didn't change.
There were still two other instances where the name wasn't italicised. I was bold and did it.
...allowing them to unlock in-game items such as artwork, music, and other features." -> "Other features" should be expanded upon or removed, as it is vague.
Expanded.
The white-space under the first image; I see the point, but I'm debating on whether the article looks better without.
Removed.
"...from Space Pirate Frigate Orpheon." -> Should "frigate" be capitalized? Is it part of a title?
It's the ship type. It's capitalized in most related media (i.e. SSBB), so we just leave that way.
Fine by me.
"It is yet to be seen if Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2: Echoes will be getting a New Play Control release in those regions." -> WP:CRYSTAL; rephrase the sentence to accurately portray the source, or remove the statement altogether.
Removed.


#### References
What makes Nintendo World Report (one instance) and Coffee with Games (two instances) notable?
Replaced and removed.
Refs #3, 5, 8, 11, 15, 25, and 34 have no publisher info.
Included.
I seem to have forgotten #6. Done it myself.
Ref #8, 11 are dead (but oddly, #15 is not).
Metacritic got redesigned, the Cube reviews are MIA. Replaced those two with Game Rankings.
Ref #16 says "pp. 6". This should say "p. 6", as it is not a range of pages.
Done.
Ref #26 has no publishing date, though I can see one at the end of the review. Same with #34 and 36.
Done.
Could Ref #27 and 33 be redone with the Cite template? Their formats are inconsistent with the rest.
It's just that they're "Cite journal" as opposed to "Cite web". But I decided to expand to make they look like the rest.
Sorry about that; I personally don't use the templates (I prefer writing it out the old-fashioned way), so I only knew of the Cite Web's format.
Ref #33 directs me to a Computers and Video Games review, not NGamer.
They are sister websites (there's an "NGamer" icon within the review).
My bad, didn't see it.
NEW: Not going to wait for you to do it, but whenever you get the chance, you should rearrange in-line citations to ascend (e.g., [1][6][13]). I can't find the MOS guideline to quote, but it's not a GA necessity.


#### Criterion 3
3a: Can you find a number for total sold copies (similar to the PDF in ref #16)? If not, it's not a problem.
I tried. The best I could was "number it didn't reach in August 2009".
No problem. I know games do not normally have their sales publicised unless over a certain number.
3b: "...as well as a brief cinematic of the four versions of Samus in combat when loading the multiplayer mode." -> Is this notable?
Removed.
3b: Is the Discontinuation section essential enough to deserve its own section? I recommend cutting it down a bit and merging it with the introduction to the Release section.
Moved.


#### Images
The image in the infobox doesn't seem too sure about the copyright owner. I'm fairly sure it is Nintendo, so just remove the words "is believed" from the description.
There's no problem with those words, it's just something the rationale template puts.
Gotcha.
The fair use image used in the article should have a caption which reflects on its fair use rationale.
Done.
I meant the other fair use image in the prose. It should give a quick description of the "new features added to the Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2: Echoes portions of Metroid Prime: Trilogy, including widescreen support and a targeting reticule indicative of the retooled controls", as the Fair Use rationale states it's there for.
Now it's done, I misunderstood... rewrite the caption if needed. igordebraga ≠ 01:39, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I skinned it a little bit, if you don't mind, because it was quite a long caption for such a small image. If you want, you can try placing it to the right instead of the left, purely for aesthetic purposes.
Strike off as you complete them. Feel free to question them or reply as well, as I'm watching the review page. Regards. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 21:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Do any of those points still stand, or there's anything else? igordebraga ≠ 03:52, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I acknowledge your changes, but you'll have to give me about an hour and a half from now to check on them, as I'm busy IRL (only checked this out because you posted on my talk page). It shouldn't take long to review, either, so I'm sure it will pass. Should be back with an update at around 18:30 UTC, max. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 16:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Final point to manage and it should be about it. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 19:01, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Congrats! EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Metroid Prime: Trilogy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150202042005/http://mmgn.com:80/wiiu/news--wii-games-coming-to-wii-u-as-downloads-austra to http://mmgn.com/wiiu/news--wii-games-coming-to-wii-u-as-downloads-austra
Corrected formatting/usage for http://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2923/p/604
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.1up.com/features/best-worst-video-game-compilations?pager.offset=1
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:39, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Metroid Prime: Trilogy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111017032726/http://metroid-database.com/news-post.php?id=465 to http://metroid-database.com/news-post.php?id=465
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:56, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

There is comment asking not to add Wii U as a platform because it is merely a re-release. I don't think that's a good reason not to add the Wii U as a platform. Care to elaborate? --Neuhaus (talk) 11:24, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

A lot of people have been asking things along the line of "If this is a collectors edition where is the normal version?" or "Why is it so expensive" 
The answer to these is fairly simple
1.The game is a collectors item altogether so there is no "standard" version, reason being that the item was made to be a collectors item so a normal version doesn't exist, the reason it is a collectors item is because a.It contains all 3 games from the previous console b. It has revised graphics c. It is steelbook. so there is no reason that there would be a standard version of it as that would go against its creation.
2.Its fairly pricy for many reasons
a.Its steelbook
b.Its all around hard to find.
c.The game is no longer produced in the physical form 
d.While a fairly large amount of copies of this game does exist it still is a collectors edition and is still (depending on where you live) hard to aquire
e.It contains new features and revised controls the previous game didn't have

That's all if you have any further questions feel free to ask, I know this is vague but I just wanted to address common questions, if you need specification please feel free to ask me!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueSpotTheGamingCat (talk • contribs) 15:25, 23 November 2020 (UTC) 

Trilogy can be bought (not for long any more), downloaded and played on WiiU, why should this not be listed in the Infobox?
Why does it matter that this is another release? every release on another platform is obviously another release or re-release.
What matters for the infobox is to quickly look up on which platforms the game officially is or was sold and is playable, again, at least the official ones. There are hundreds of games on Wikipedia with all their (re-)releases on their respective platforms listed as they should.
Okarina Of Time lists the GameCube and iQue Player as official platforms in the infobox, which is nothing more than a (re-)release of an unchanged rom file, therefore the iQue player shouldn't be mentioned in the infobox anymore. (even though it should)
One can clearly see this official WiiU game with the own eyes on the WiiUs very own WiiU-eShop to officially buy and download, which is not accessible on a normal Wii in any way.
But Wikipedia somehow claims it does not exists there, feels so grotesquely weird and almost reality-denying strange.
The reason "well, its a re-release" explains nothing. "Its a re-release, therefore it doesn't exists/and or is not purchasable/playable there, even though it is", is a terrible reason. The files or rom doesn't even have to be changed for it being another official release on another official platform.
I might be wrong about this, this surely has been discussed elsewhere so I would appreciate a link to the discussion to understand the reasoning behind it, I couldn't find much about this on my own.
Carnifexx (talk) 19:34, 22 February 2022 (UTC)