Conflicting Sources Edit

Okay, I'm reading two things on this page, here they are:

1. However, a recent exchange with a Retro employee has confirmed that the Berserker Lord from Elysia is meant to be a different one.

2. It has been confirmed in the Metroid Prime 3: Corruption Offical Game Guide book, page 115, that this Berserker Lord is the one from the G.F.S. Olympus.

Which one is the real one? Dark Ridley 23:08, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Better late than never, I suppose. Ha Ha. I actually managed to have a short chat with an employee at Retro and he confirmed to me that the Berserker Lord in Elysia is meant to be a different one. I'll give you the link. The chat is located in the comments section of this video. I'm myself, Tuckerscreator, and the Retro employee goes by Darkstrike 111. Here is the link:

As for the guide saying that they are same, I don't know where they got their information from but it sounds to me like they made it up. User:Tuckerscreator 14:47 25 April 2009

Well, think about it. First off, the first one is clearly killed and blown into the vaccuum of space. Second off, it's a Retro employee's word versus some random guide writer's? I'd go with the emp. Dazuro 00:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

How can you be certain that YoutubeUserX is a Retro Studios employee? I don't think most of the team even knows what the intention was for this minor detail. The fact is that is is an officially published source, and they get a lot of information from the developers. There were a lot of things that I didn't even know when glancing through the manual, such as the sub-area names and that you can knock debris off of the walls in the Ridley fall to damage him. What other same-enemy is textured differently for a second appearance in the game, anyway? ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 01:17, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I was able to confirm that he was a Retro Employee because he knew things that only an Employee could know. For example, he was able to inform us of the fact that part of the reason why their is no definative follow-up for Metroid yet is because one of the lead programmers died of cancer, which I was able to confirm after the information was publicly revealed serveral weeks later. One could could consider that perhaps maybe the re-texturing was done to tell people that is WAS a different Berserker Lord, though it accidentaly caused the opposite effect. User:Tuckerscreator 19:25 25 April 2009

the mp3 guide doesn't actually state that the two are in-universe the same individual just that they are 'the same boss' (perhaps in the matter of tactics) (Anonymous)

TC, I heard about the programmer awhile ago too, but that isn't the reason they aren't making another. Every interview simply states that they want to move onto something else for awhile. Anon, we know what it says because it is in the article for everyone to read and infer from. ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 22:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

But it IS the same boss. Just like how people say MPH only had two bosses--though no one's stupid enough (I'd hope) to try to claim all four Cretaphids are a single entity. The Berserkers are separate beings, fought as the same enemy type, hence it refering to it as "the same boss". Dazuro 22:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion i think it's the same because the Lord at Elysia looks pretty mad and vengful and that texture looks a bit damaged,personally i just call it the same.

Page Now Protected Edit

Are you ****ing serious? Protecting a page and citing "official media"? Christ, you get more ridiculous every day. Again, the guide does not say it is the same entity. All it says is that it's the same BOSS, which it is. An employee said otherwise. I cited official information, whereas you continue babbling on asinine crap from a misquoted guide. I'd really appreciate you showing a little more restraint on abusing your ill-deserved powers. Great, and now the page is inaccurate, and no one with a brain is capable of fixing it. Hell, what was wrong with my edit? It even allowed for the possibility of yours being true (even though an employee clearly stated otherwise). Dazuro 23:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Again, that is a YouTube user, not a verified Retro Studios employee. Again, most Retro Studios employees would not be privy to a detail like this. Again, cool down. Not everyone is out to get you. Wikipedia has a stance against edit-warring. While a discussion is commencing, you cannot continually revert a cited statement. If half of the people here behaved the way you are now, we would not get anything done. Personal attacks are not welcome in Wikia, either, so you are fortunate that I don't mind, but I'd better not see you acting this way toward any other users. ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 23:15, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, so maybe he's not an employee. Either way, he is not confirmed to be the same entity. He is confirmed to be the same boss type. My edit addressed this issue, allowing for the possibility of it being both a new monster and the same one. Then you stick your ass in here and force your opinion on the page, despite its only source being a single line in a guide that does not mean what you say it does. I'd love to correct yet another of your idiotic errors, but alas, you somehow convinced people you were capable of being an admin, and thus blocked worthwhile users from being able to correct your mistake.

I really appreciate that, by the way. You're GREAT for the integrity of this wiki. Now unprotect the damn page before you screw something else up. PS: I'd also appreciate it if you'd stop saying things are disputed when they clearly are not. You say it's the same one. I say it's not. I make an edit saying "it might be the same one, but it might not be, and the game gives no indication either way." You say "hey stop disputing edits" and protect the page.

Brilliant work, detective. Dazuro 23:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

What is up with you two? You sure do argue a lot... The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/contribs/Logs} 23:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Dazuro told me that he was going to work on resolving disputes with proper edicate. I haven't encountered this type of issue with any other users yet, so I suggested that he take some time and do constructive edits as opposed to removing material, because that variety has been relatively controversial. Hopefully, we can look forward to see what he will produce from that.

It'd be nice if we had some other users weighing their opinions in these types of situations, but we haven't really been that fortunate. What do you think about this one, MG? ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 00:18, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

It's funny. Look what I've started. You guys are like the yin to each other's yang!

I'm a little skeptical as to how much information writers of game guides really get when writing the guide. Whenever I've seen testimonies from game magazine writers on writing game guides, they always making it sound like a solitary affair that had little to no contact with the developers themselves. Things like the debris you could shoot at ridley were generally self-researched and self-discovered. Also, game guides have had a nasty reputation of often making erroneous errors, most of them gramatical. for example, i saw a game guide to Metroid Prime hunters that listed the Judicator as the best weapon to fight gorea, but all photographs shown were of the Imperialist. When one reader wrote to them asking about this, the writers admitted it was a printing mistake that caused them to replace all instances of Imerialist with Judicator. The same thing may have happened in the Berserker Lord section. they may have meant it to saw that it was the same boss tactically or it may have been a poor attempt at deduction on their part. I personally feel that, seeing as we have the conflicting words of the guy at Retro and the game guide, but several of us are torn on each sources' veracity, we should replace the statement on the article with a more neutral one that says that there is continuing argrument and conflicting sources regarding the 2nd Berserker Lord's identity. I want to trust Darkstrike on his word and frankly, I can't see how the first Berserker Lord could have survived so many deadly attacks all the same time and still not die. There had to be more than one. User:Tuckerscreator 20:03 27 April 2009

I'll gladly stop fighting with him as soon as he stops being a moron. My edit encompassed every possible option, including his. He reverted it to force his opinion on others, then protected the page to prevent a fair view from being expressed. He doesn't DESERVE to be treated equally. Chozo, you keep saying "you'd better not treat others like you treat me." You'll notice that I don't. I understand that people are fallible, and that the everyday user is gonna screw up once in a while. But you've done nothing but thwart the majority of my attempts to correct information. And on top of that, you're an ADMINISTRATOR. You should be held to a higher standard than the average joe shmoe, and yet despite that, you insist on screwing with things, reverting factual edits, and abusing your powers. And whenever I call you on your bullshit, you conveniently never respond on that page again. Must be nice to never have to own up to your mistakes. I wouldn't know, since I always make sure to apologize and correct them. I've yet to see you do either one of those. And then he calls me a jerk, after acting like this! Can you believe this kid? Sod off, ChozoBoy. Yeah, I've screwed up here a lot too. I attacked you initially over a misunderstanding, I've made quite a few erroneous edits, and such. But the difference here is that A) I can accept and admit that I messed up. I can apologize for it and correct it, not say "HEY LOOK NO ONE CAN EDIT THIS PAGE ANY MORE." And B) I'm not an administrator, so people shouldn't be looking up to me as a role model/community leader/whatever anyway, so my actions have less impact.

Or perhaps simply using your words will get through to you better. "Don't be a jerk, please." Does THAT make more sense to you? Dazuro 03:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Let's turn this back to the original subject. Should we change this page to have a more neutral satement regarding both sides or should we go on the word of either Darkstrike's or the guide? What are your thought? User:Tuckerscreator 20:52 27 April 2009

Not like we get a choice, since the douchebag protected the page to stop me from keeping it fair. But obviously, I support keeping it with an unbiased statement saying "it may be the same, or it may be different and there are conflicting sources", though hopefully better worded than that. Dazuro 05:05, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Your edit was very biased. You removed a direct quote and the opposing source is still questionable in regard to verifiability. This is/was still being addressed when you made the edit and ignored the rebuttal on the discussion page. TC, in this instance we don't have the option of ignoring the problem, even though we are aiming for conflict-aversion.
Dazuro, I told you not to be a jerk on the days when you were calling me out (read: baiting) on discussion pages and your user page. I commented on this occasion because it was relevant to the discussion, otherwise I will follow a policy of Wikipedia, as well as my own, and save myself the trouble by giving you the last word.
I protected the page (as opposed to banning you) for breaking the three revert rule. Being a sysop is not a big deal, and does not put my actions above yours. I just have more responsibility. Unfortunately, there aren't many active admins at the time, so we will all have to bear with the situation until it changes. ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 16:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

MY edit was biased? It allowed for two disputed possibilities. YOUR edit forced your own biased opinion in. And an official source means nothing if that's not what the source says. By your logic, I can make a post saying "Ridley is a fish" and cite page 32 of the Metroid Manga. It doesn't actually say anything remotely similar to that, but hey, I cited a source, so it's okay. Get over yourself. The guide does not say that they are the same creature, and even if it did, since we have a conflicting source, we need to address both sides of the issue--which I did, and you did not. Again. Dazuro 18:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Dazuro calm down...
Now that I got that out, I believe we should say "However, it cannot be determined whether they meant the Beserker Lord on Elysia was the same as the one on the GFS Olympus, or if they were talking about the boss tactics." Or something along those lines.
Now, I shall hope that the arguments shall end... because they cause much more patrolling. The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/contribs/Logs} 00:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Perfect. That's all I ask for--a fair assessment of both sides. Well, that and an apology, but I know he's far too proud to ever do that. Dazuro 00:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

The MarioGalaxy2433g5 {talk/contribs/Logs} looks as though he is going to knock Dazuro silly for flaming. At 00:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

MG, if you don't mind, I'd like to get into the actual discussion instead of ending that along with the dramatics. If the only concern left is the interpretation of the quote (and we can all be civil), I'd like to add a larger piece of the text, which I hadn't felt necessary before amongst all the nonsense:

"As Samus enters the Turbine Chamber, the door behind her seals with a blast shield and a Berserker Lord drops from the ceiling. The Berserker Lord is the same boss you fought back on the Olympus. Start off by..."

Now for a consensus, do you infer from this statement that this Berserker Lord is the same creature, an entirely different Berserker Lord, or that this is somehow vague. ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 01:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

It would be perfectly accurate to say that Cretaphid v4.0 is the same boss as you fought on the previous planet, for instance. That does not mean the Cretaphid survive being obliterated and somehow managed to teleport halfway across the galaxy. The statement clearly, unambiguously states that it is the same boss, i.e. a creature with the same general appearance, weakpoint, movement pattern, etc. Seeing as A) we have a possible secondary source saying otherwise and B) logically, one would assume that a creature with a different design, appearing on a different planet, after the first one got shot repeatedly, got electrocuted, fell out an airlock, and then got hit by a passing starship might just be a different creature. If you feel strongly enough that it's the same one (why?!), there's no real harm in mentioning the possibility (as remote as it is)--but either way, the POSSIBILITIES need to be mentioned, and you locked in only one option. Regardless of the outcome of this vote, the fact that the vote is even necessary proves that people have differing opinions, and that is something that the article needs to document, regardless of your personal bias. I'd also like to point out that the guide says "a Berserker Lord drops from the ceiling", indicating that there is more than one B.L. in the writer's eyes, not to mention the scans saying as much. Dazuro 01:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I wish Darkstike had signed now. The only real way this issue is going to be settled while be if one of us(preferably ChozoBoy) will send him a message and ask him about his veracity about his repeated statements about working at Retro. If we can tell from the message that he's lying, because he is unable to list his credentials or something like that, then the issue will be settled. But if he is able to justifiably list his specific job and credentials, then we'll know that he is telling the truth. It's all a matter of when will be the next time he signs in.

Chozoboy, we'll have to look into the veracity of the guide as well. How much information do they actually get from the developers. Every time I'v heard a testimony about working on a video game guide, they always make it sound like they had to do it all themselves, maybe talk with the director, but that's usually it. Could you cite to us, Chozoboy, a place where we can see for ourselves the varacity of these guides. I've seen erroneous mistakes made in guides before and I'm unsure as to how much "inside" information they really get. User:Tuckerscreator 18:33 28 April 2009

Guys, it doesn't matter who Darkstrike is, or how much information the guide-writers give. The guide says it's one of several. It says a Berserker Lord drops down, after all. Now that we have the full quote in context, it's blatantly obvious what is meant. Dazuro 01:35, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, Samus pilots within the confines of a single cluster in MPH, not the whole galaxy, and then the Cretaphids are in a void/parallel dimension. I don't think it was ever stated that the areas that each were fought in were even different places, but I could be wrong there if they are revisitable.
The purpose of the consensus was to gather opinions, not directly decide a fate. This type of thing doesn't work that way around here. I don't feel that the argument about the BL getting its butt kicked is valid, though I'd assumed we were sticking to addressing the text. Some other opponents have displayed similar (if not exactly paralleled) revivals throughout the series. I did not state that BL was not a species. Metroid Prime 3 Preview shows another being defeated on Norion, and I had even tagged that. This one displays the same skin as the previous one. I don't know about an airlock, but the rest of the damage is consistant with the later encounter.
Lastly, the article does not state that the BK is the same one anywhere in the article, outside of the quote that you claim does not state it is the same creature, so I'm not sure what you've been distressing over. Conversely, the first paragraph still states that they are separate. The intention of the protection was to work on a discussion like the one we are having now. This is why the three-revert rule was put into place. Next time there is a conflict, keep your cool and we will weigh the evidence. Otherwise you lose your credibility.
New Edits:
TC, if it will make you happy you can give the guy my AIM (MagicSeaGaurdian), and I'll see if I can't debunk it. Right now, I haven't heard any good explanation to why you are convinced, but I'll take a minute to question him if he is comforable, though original research is still original from me. And guys, the guide is officially liscences, so we should probably stick with a little more focus to the other matters instead of reitterating. ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 02:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

The article now contradicts itself. The first part flat-out says that it's a different one, and it later flat-out says it's the same one, then goes on to quote a line (that doesn't actually back up what it's saying, but that's not even the problem here). Seriously, man, you've yet to respond a single time to my main point: WHAT was wrong with my edit? All it said was that it might be, but it might not be. Why was that so horrifying for you to leave in? What compelled you to not only revert that, but also protect the page as a result? I fixed the damn page in response to a dispute, and you punish us for it. THAT is my issue here, not the fact that there's a disagreement. Dazuro 02:15, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Dazuro, I know you're on my side, but it feels like you're beating a dead horse right now. To me, the guide looks like it's clearly saying that the author wrote the statement with the intention of declaring the two Berserker Lords were the same entity. But it all depends on the veracity and authority of the seperate authors. Was the guide author making a bad guess, or was he actually told this? Does Darkstrike really work at Retro? Until we can get some information, I atually don't see this debate going any further. So I'm going to look into thse both and I'll keep you aware on if I get any updates. User:Tuckerscreator 19:23 28 April 2009

Why would anyone say "a lord drops down" and that it is "the same boss" with the intention of saying "a clearly dead enemy came back despite being thoroughly killed/electorcuted/airlocked five planets away"? I'm not beating a dead horse here, I'm pointing out the complete absurdity of even IMPLYING that the guide ever even remotely came close to saying it's one creature. Even the guide is on our side here. It has nothing to do with Darkstrike. Don't waste your time. The only thing we need to do now is to convince the loonies in charge to let us fix the page with our obviously correct information, since even his own source backs us up. Dazuro 02:35, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Daz, it looks like you are starting to lose it again. Take a minute to compose yourself. If you want to get back into my motivations (and can then resume the normal discussion), you reverted my added quote a second time, stating: (Let's not do this again, okay? It's been confirmed by an employee, and THE GUIDE DOES NOT SAY THAT.) when I was trying to clear up why the "Retro Employee" is a bad source on the discussion page. The guide certainly does state that, and you pulled it out of the article, also during discussion. After this, I'd like to get back to what was stated above. All in all, I'd like to keep the page ambiguous outside of direct quotes and have any "implied" things stated as "not stated explicitly", as is in the article now.
TC, finding a full length documentary on the making of a particular strategy guide isn't likley. I would like to see how official guides from other countries weigh in on this, though. Isn't Hellkaiserryo12 from Europe? I thought I'd seen him use that type of spelling in the past. Uh... another note, the guide says that the first boss's "health meter is empty" and that he "collides with a passing ship". Seems to dodge "death" pretty well, but let's get back to addressing my above comments. ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 02:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Interesting. That is odd that it seemingly avoids saying death. However, again, it says "a Berserker Lord drops down," not "the Berserker Lord reappears." And, again, as you have YET AGAIN failed to address, the Cretaphids could easily be refered to as "the same boss", yet no one is trying to say they're all the same entity. That statement does not prove anything. It leaves a possibility--as my edit did as well.

Incidentally, you are correct. I made a poor decision in my initial reversion of your edit. However, right AFTER that, I corrected my mistake (something you still have yet to do, by the way): I realized that there IS more than one possibility, so I edited the article to state that, rather than forcing my biased opinion on the readers (something you have still yet to avoid doing, by the way). Dazuro 02:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Dazuro, while I do not appreciate you atacking my character or trying to make me out to be some type of hard-headed oaf when you do not know me very well (I strongly encourage the scientific method and am welcome to hearing out opposing views), I will edit this subject in the article to the fairest of my abilities and then unprotect it after midnight when I finish this Bio work. Then, you can recommend a revision on the talk page if you feel that is necessary and we will work with that. Please try to be less confrontational in the future. ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 03:00, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

See, here's the thing. In general, I'm pretty civil. I have a bit of a temper at times, but I'm working on it--and I'm not ordinarily confrontational like this in the least. I don't like passing judgment on people I don't know. But you keep accusing me of being biased, of making improper reversions, and such--meanwhile, I made the only unbiased revision of the page we've had yet, which you subsequently reverted. Not only is this massively hypocritical, but you've yet to apologize, correct your mistake, or even acknowledge that you screwed up in the slightest. We're all human, we all mess up once in a while--why is it so hard for you to accept that? My first edit was in direct violation of administrative orders. That was dumb. But that's why I fixed it, in the process also leaving open the possibility of other outcomes. Despite this, you protect the page, berate me repeatedly for doing the right thing, and blame me for your own incompetence.

I don't appreciate that one bit. At least we have one thing in common here. Incidentally, I'll stop making you out to be a hard-headed oaf when you stop acting like one. "If you made clothes, I'd call you a tailor."

On the note of quotes. "We are bound by our experiences," as our beloved Ms. Aran once said. My only experience with you has been you making hypocritical reversions and proclamations. No, I don't know you, but when all I know of you is hypocrisy and incompetence, that's all I can judge you on. I'm sure you're a great guy--hell, you helped me out a lot with my Wii. I just wish you'd leave this damn issue alone already, since I'm trying to make it fair and all you're doing is making life difficult for anyone who wants to contribute to an article.

Unprotect the article and put the statement back to something unbiased, and we can all live happily ever after. You said you'd do that tonight, so it seems you've a shred of common sense after all. But I'd still at least appreciate an apology for all this crap. We both messed up here, but only one of us is apparently man enough to fess up and fix it yet. I'm not trying to start a fight here, I'd just like some closure.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt--perhaps you only read my first edit, and didn't realize that after I reverted yours, I corrected myself. But after I repeatedly pointed out that I did that, you never once said "wait what" or checked the history, it seems, since you continued saying that my edit was biased/an unfair revert. I did a dumb revert, yes, but after that I made a constructive edit. That's the last edit we had before you protected it. No matter how you slice it, you screwed up there, and I don't appreciate you continually dodging the blame. Some of it may lay on me, but not all of it. Dazuro 03:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I wish I could say I'm surprised. Any day now, Dannyboy. Dazuro 06:55, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Err... What exactly are you looking for Eric? The history shows that I'd made the revisions when I said I would, even after your newest tantrums. You aren't exactly being very fair, you know. ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 11:44, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I'd just appreciate it if you'd stop shifting the blame and pretending like you did nothing wrong. Something to the effect of "okay, yeah, I messed up, but it's all good now" would suffice. Again, you still have yet to comment on the fact that you protected the page for no real reason after reverting an unbiased edit and claiming "stop being biased"--and subsequently forced your own biased opinion in, then prevented anyone else from correcting that.

You just keep picking at other things I say, while continuing to ignore my primary point. Then you go off making me out to be some big bad bully trying to pick fights with you or being unreasonable about things. All I wanted was fair representation, and all you did was be a colossal pain in the ass because you wouldn't admit you made a mistake. It's all fixed now, but you continue dodging the blame to this day. I already admitted that it was partially my, on the other hand, just edited things in the background while conveniently avoiding having to comment on your errors. I don't appreciate that.

On a lighter note, how the heck do you know my name? Yours is on your userpage, but mine ain't on mine... O_o Dazuro 18:05, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Because you don't agree with it doesn't make it wrong. I followed protocol because a user was not, and don't see why I need to be convinced to regret it. I've already explained this, and am not going to continue to. While I enjoy talking to the users here, Wikitroid is not a social networking site and I don't have time for much editing, let alone patrolling and this type of thing. I had seen your name when looking up some of the spriting stuff you told me you do. ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 04:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I may be going out on Sunday, and I'll see if I can get a game guide. I don't really know if the guide is different in the UK or not. ChozoBoy, don't you have a scanner or camera you could use? After all its only your word. I am not accusing you of lying, but citation would be useful. Hellkaiserryo12 01:23, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

I totally agree. I feel uneasy using material from others, and at the end of the day, the logbook entries and manual stuff is mostly in that category. I don't have a working scanner or camera aside from my cell phone. I think the reason MdB said they weren't putting scans of guides up yet is because they are still on sale (Which is an issue here, falling under copyright and all that). When quoting text from a book, general procedure doesn't normally require that type of thing for a widely available item. I probably ought to cite it better, though but there's been so much work to do and so few hands. By the way, you thinking about running for sysop any time soon? I'll nominate you if you'd like. ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 10:08, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

To Dazuro: (I actually meant to post this yesterday but my internet went offline) Notice the three guidelines at the top of this page, or any other talk page. You have been rude to ChozoBoy and insulted him on more than one occasion. This is not the way to behave. You also said that admins should set an example to the community. I don't see ChozoBoy throwing rude or insulting sentences. As you also said, we all make mistakes, but please try to be more civil in future.

As to the proposition to nominate me for sysop, I accept! :) Hellkaiserryo12 12:36, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

All I ask for is an apology, because he fucked up and continues to act like he's perfect and I'm some evil instigator for calling him out on it. Yes, they should set an example--by, say, following their own rules, not abusing their administrative powers, and not generally being assholes. And then he goes around acting like I'm a huge slacker for "halfassing" jobs, when every single time there's been a legitimate reason for me not "finishing" jobs. I've been harsh to him because he deserves it, but either way, I'm not an admin. I'm not "looked up to." That doesn't excuse it, but I don't regret one bit being a douche to someone who completely deserves to be treated like shit. I'll respect him once he does something worth respecting. I've taken repeated steps to try to stop this ridiculous feud, and every time he either completely ignores me or pretends I broke some nonexistant rule (while conveniently ignoring his own breaking of rules). Dazuro 16:29, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh for christs sake!!! Would you all just SHUT UP! Dazuro, you really need to get anger management or something, because honestly! I can understand an argument in person, but on the internet, you can read the post, actually think "hm, I wonder why their saying this about me?", check the tone that your post has, and write calm, reasoned, responses. Instead, you seem determined to tick everyone, even the people who agree with you, off. Not that you people are doing any better. All you had to do was make one post that had what you thought the subject matter meant, and completely ignore any rudeness that may or may not have been the comment. Honestly. The COMPLETELY hypocritical (yes, I know.) DekutullaZM. Thank you. 20:59, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Dude, let it go. This happened before either of us joined. It's over! It's finished! Don't start this up again... DoomZero 22:19, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

I'm just saying. I mean, come on. An admin and an important contributor fighting like there's no tomorrow! What a wonderful example for new users. Here a wikitroid, we are polite and civil...except when chozoboy disagrees with dazuro. Then we're worse than rabid dogs! :) They better be done is all I'm saying...

Not attempting to stir up the War Wasps' nest again here, but I've found a few more YouTube videos by this Darkstrike fellow (specific links available if needed), and (s)he seems to say fairly consistantly that he is a moderator for Retro (Payed or volunteer, in-building or web-only, doesn't say...). (S)He does seem very authentic in his/her tone and knowledge of the Metroid Prime universe- if (s)he is a fraud, (s)he is a very good one, as opposed to your standard semi-literate troll... I for one would like to determine once and for all if Darkstrike is to be considered a canonical or semi-canonical source, both to deal with this particular snag and also because (s?)he states that the Ing are direct descendants of the Phaz-Ing that were exposed to Dark Aether's atmosphere.--AdmiralSakai 23:28, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

PED trooper vs. B-lord Edit

Say, I just remembered way I was here in the first place. Is there a link (somewhere in the wide, wide Universe...) to where that is shown? --DekutullaZM 21:07, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

You mean the video from the Metroid Prime 3 Preview? ChozoBoy [ADMIN] (Talk/Contribs) 16:56, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks. --DekutullaZM 00:38, November 5, 2009 (UTC) Hey, by the way, next time Dazuro picks a fight, ignore his insults and merely talk about the subject matter.

Stilleto fighter? Edit

That didn't look like a stiletto fighter to me. When I saw it, it looked like an unknown space pirate ship. There's a picture of one on the phaaze page. It had the big engine on the side and everything.

Plus, there's the irony of having a pirate get killed by their ally.

Good eye, I just stop-motion screencapped it and you're completely correct. Dazuro 23:07, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Morph Ball attacks Edit

I recently remembered that the Berserker Lord uses new attacks if you enter Morph Ball mode. I know that one of them is grabing you and slamming you into the ground, and I THINK the second one is sucking you into its mouth then spitting you out, but i cant honestly be sure of that particular one, so i didnt make any mention of it in the article. Does anyone here remember if it had a second anti-morphball attack? (Latinlingo 20:57, July 12, 2010 (UTC))

I just thought the Berserker Lord on Elysia and he does perform that second attack if you enter morph ball. I've fought that boss so many times but I've never seen that attack until now. LadyinCrimson9 17:21, August 22, 2013

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.