• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Nintendo Defends Art Style Of Controversial New Metroid Game

Menitta

Member
In fairness, "this isn't Metroid" isn't a good reason to dump all over it.

Mario has BASKETBALL games on his resumé, Link has crossbow training, Yoshi has cookies. Why can't Metroid have soccer or whatever the heck this is?

Because those games came out when real Mario or Zelda games came out alongside it. This isn't Metroid, yes, but right now, nothing else is either. Imagine if people were screaming for a new Mario game without any (or any good ones) in a few years and they give us Mario Sports Mix.

Edit: Side question: Is Mario Sports Mix good? It looks fun.
 

Socreges

Banned
In fairness, "this isn't Metroid" isn't a good reason to dump all over it.

Mario has BASKETBALL games on his resumé, Link has crossbow training, Yoshi has cookies. Why can't Metroid have soccer or whatever the heck this is?
In fairness to who? I'm not sure what you're responding to. And there are many good reasons to dump all over it, as evidenced by this thread.

As for your question, I thought Neiteio did a good job of explaining:

After all, this is like if Mario hadn't had a game since 2010, and the last game sucked, and then all of the sudden you get a Mario-branded game... starring Birdo... and a garish new art style... and there's no platforming.
 

Pandy

Member
They didn't pay attention to feedback involving Other M, I can tell you that much. They put the franchise on ice, have no new ideas for it. This is a shelved idea that came from when Nintendo was making hand over fist and could afford to come up with something extra.

This game, at this time, in this visual presentation, is the absolute worst thing they could've done with Metroid, but they did it anyway.

Kinda begging for the avatar quote there.
 

Logash

Member
I think it's weird that some people are saying that Nintendo shouldn't have to defend their product. When you put something out to the public, something that is out for customers to buy, then isn't defending it inherently part of selling it? Just because Nintendo is Nintendo doesn't mean that they shouldnt have to sell you on something.
 
In fairness to who? I'm not sure what you're responding to. And there are many good reasons to dump all over it, as evidenced by this thread.

As for your question, I thought Neiteio did a good job of explaining:

Eh for that neiteo quote, I wouldn't say no platforming. More like if the platforming was what you got in super paper Mario where it's technically there but it's nothing like the platforming you'd want.
 
Because those games came out when real Mario or Zelda games came out alongside it. This isn't Metroid, yes, but right now, nothing else is either. Imagine if people were screaming for a new Mario game without any (or any good ones) in a few years and they give us Mario Sports Mix.

Edit: Side question: Is Mario Sports Mix good? It looks fun.

In fairness to who? I'm not sure what you're responding to. And there are many good reasons to dump all over it, as evidenced by this thread.

As for your question, I thought Neiteio did a good job of explaining:
What would be the ideal Metroid game in 2016? I can't help but see the franchise in the same light as Sonic - two distinct gameplay styles and no one being able to decide which works the best to move forward with.
 
Gee, I sure wonder what one could do with an IP like Metroid in the era in which one Metroidvania indie title after the other is blowing up. Oh, I know, some crappy looking chibi party game.
 

Menitta

Member
What would be the ideal Metroid game in 2016? I can't help but see the franchise in the same light as Sonic - two distinct gameplay styles and no one being able to decide which works the best to move forward with.

The ideal one isn't a spin off. Also, Prime and Fusion came out in the same year.

See post above.
 

Neiteio

Member
Also, Prime and Fusion came out in the same year.
Still to this day, the dual release of Prime and Fusion blows my mind.

I remember the Nintendo Power that had those games on the cover. (Well, more specifically it had Prime on the cover, but the issue covered both.) It was an epic issue, twice the size of the standard issue.

That was one hell of a way for the Metroid franchise to return.
 

DekuLink

Member
Yeah no I had absolutely no problems at all with characters not being bulky in MPH, so it should be even less of a problem with the bigger and higher resolution 3DS screen.
 
That's because open world exploration is a massively popular genre and linear TLoZ would was loosing mainstream relevance. It makes more business sense to go the open world direction to attract the masses, and it just so happens that this is what half of the Zelda fans wanted and he is simply taking advantage of that. I'm of course bummed out by the sheer size of the world but I'll live because there are elements in BotW that appeal to me (physics engine, shrines, temples). The point is BotW wasn't the result of "we have listened to our fans!", not even close.

When in the showcases they brought up that Zelda 1 artwork for comparison, it was pretty clear that they know exactly what fans are usually talking about. Also, what fans want and what's popular correlates with each other and that's the entire point. Between things like Sticker Star 2, Starfoxes Cripple Controls and Federation Force they are just stubborn about their own dumb way instead of actually looking what makes sense as a good product that sells to fans and on good word of mouth - living in a bubble in which they hallucinate to still have that Nintendogs fanbase from a decade ago, despite WiiU flopping because of that exact delusion. Aonuma had the first reasonable comments from Nintendo since years at this E3 on several topics.
 

Ansatz

Member
When in the showcases they brought up that Zelda 1 artwork for comparison, it was pretty clear that they know exactly what fans are usually talking about. Also, what fans want and what's popular correlates with each other and that's the entire point. Between things like Sticker Star 2, Starfoxes Cripple Controls and Federation Force they are just stubborn about their own dumb way instead of actually looking what makes sense as a good product that sells to fans and on good word of mouth - living in a bubble in which they hallucinate to still have that Nintendogs fanbase from a decade ago, despite WiiU flopping because of that exact delusion. Aonuma had the first reasonable statements from Nintendo since years at this E3 on several topics.

The correlation of what Zelda fans want and what's popular is merely a happy coincidence; BotW wasn't the result of caving in to fan demand (lol). It was a direct response to the popularity of WRPGs, infusing the Zelda series with contemporary design elements to reach all sorts of people, such as those who play obscure steam games with survival gameplay. They just took advantage of the Zelda 1 angle and you fell for it.

How does Super Mario 3D Land fit into your picture, selling 10 million copies and sitting on a 90% metascore, when you have droves of people who hate what 3D Mario has become since Galaxy? You can't just apply this bullshit theory of doing what fans want yields success only on the games that underperformed.
 

Menitta

Member
The correlation of what Zelda fans want and what's popular is merely a happy coincidence; BotW wasn't the result of caving in to fan demand (lol). It was a direct response to the popularity of WRPGs, infusing the Zelda series with contemporary design elements to reach all sorts of people, such as those who play obscure steam games with survival gameplay. They just took advantage of the Zelda 1 angle and you fell for it.

How does Super Mario 3D Land fit into your picture, selling 10 million copies and sitting on a 90% metascore, when you have droves of people who hate what 3D Mario has become since Galaxy? You can't just apply this bullshit theory of doing what fans want yields success only on the games that underperformed.

It WAS because of fan demand. Hence this interview.

Aonuma said:
"I realized that creating this bigger world and letting them freely play may be the solution to all of that."
 

Ansatz

Member
It WAS because of fan demand. Hence this interview.

Are you suggesting that what fans want (which differs depending on who you ask) should be applied on every Nintendo game they make? So whenever Nintendo announces a game you have qualms with, that if Nintendo fixes those things the game will go on to be a success, otherwise it will probably fail?

This seems to be what detractors are arguing for by bringing up famous examples like Sticker Star and Star Fox Zero. It sounds like arguments you're conveniently using to get your will through to me, since it's not logically consistent. Because you know, there is also the case of Nintendo doing the opposite of "what fans want" with extremely positive results.

The reason why Zelda is open world now is because there is mass market demand for open world games, and Zelda is a franchise that is close to that genre so naturally they used this IP. That's how Nintendo works. For example they considered using the Mario IP for the prototype that later became Splatoon, which makes sense given Mario Kart and Super Smash Bros. but ultimately they decided it was better to introduce new characters. This is what they do: they make game prototypes they think people will like and later decide what IP to slap onto them. Basically, the statement "we need an open world game" led to "let's make the next Zelda open world" which led to "we can use Zelda 1 as an angle for PR". They didn't start at "let's make a Zelda 1 inspired 3D Zelda because some fans are asking for it" if that's what you think. In that case we'd have Metroid Prime 4 and Super Mario 64-2 by now, which we don't.
 

Toxi

Banned
What would be the ideal Metroid game in 2016? I can't help but see the franchise in the same light as Sonic - two distinct gameplay styles and no one being able to decide which works the best to move forward with.
Most fans would be more than happy with either a new 2D Metroid or Prime (and I mean a real Prime, not a spinoff). Or even something new that still adheres to the basics of Metroid like Prime was.

An ideal Metroid would be one with an big maze world to explore, hidden power-ups that let you access new areas, fun boss fights, a great alien atmosphere provided by visuals and music, snappy gameplay with mechanics that provide depth for speed running, etc. If it has an old gameplay style, it adds tons of new ideas. If it has a new gameplay style, said gameplay captures the previously mentioned aspects of Metroid that the devoted fans love.

Basically, something like Super Metroid or Metroid Prime.
 

Menitta

Member
Are you suggesting that what fans want (which differs depending on who you ask) should be applied on every Nintendo game they make? So whenever Nintendo announces a game you have qualms with, that if Nintendo fixes those things the game will go on to be a success, otherwise it will probably fail?

This seems to be what detractors are arguing for by bringing up famous examples like Sticker Star and Star Fox Zero. It sounds like arguments you're conveniently using to get your will through to me, since it's not logically consistent. Because you know, there is also the case of Nintendo doing the opposite of "what fans want" with extremely positive results.

The reason why Zelda is open world now is because there is mass market demand for open world games, and Zelda is a franchise that is close to that genre so naturally they used this IP. That's how Nintendo works. For example they considered using the Mario IP for the prototype that later became Splatoon, which makes sense given Mario Kart and Super Smash Bros. but ultimately they decided it was better to introduce new characters. This is what they do: they make game prototypes they think people will like and later decide what IP to slap onto them. Basically, the statement "we need an open world game" led to "let's make the next Zelda open world" which led to "we can use Zelda 1 as an angle for PR". They didn't start at "let's make a Zelda 1 inspired 3D Zelda because some fans are asking for it" if that's what you think. In that case we'd have Metroid Prime 4 and Super Mario 64-2 by now, which we don't.

I'm not talking about all of Nintendo. I'm talking about how you saying BotW is open world not because of fan criticism is false. Aonuma literally said that the criticisms towards SS were what led to a bigger world. You're confusing Spieler's argument with me.

Yeah., it probably wasn't 100% because of that, but if SS didn't happen, I doubt BOTW would be what it is.

Your argument isn't wrong though. While Zelda is going the way of fan outcry, everything else isn't. Nintendo's head is in the sand most of the time.
 

Crossing Eden

Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
What would be the ideal Metroid game in 2016? I can't help but see the franchise in the same light as Sonic - two distinct gameplay styles and no one being able to decide which works the best to move forward with.
Nintendo franchises are great for modern trends. Open world next gen Metroid Prime. Considering the circumstances I almost feel like doing that would be as much as a no brainer as all the design decisions they've made for Zelda:BOTW.
 

Toxi

Banned
I mean, I'm not asking for a game of the quality of Super Metroid, that's fucking ridiculous, but it provides a pretty obvious base for new games. And yet 2D Metroid hasn't really done much to build on said base. Fusion and Zero Mission are good games, but what did they really add to Metroid? Boring exposition-heavy stories? Brief forced stealth sections?

The only new powers in post-Super Metroid 2D games have been

-Freeze Missiles/Diffusion Missiles
-Gripping onto ledges
-Hopping with the morph ball.

None of these impact the gameplay in ways nearly as interesting as the Morph Ball Bombs, Spider Ball, or Speed Booster.

There's so much potential for what a new 2D Metroid could do, and yet I have the feeling we'll never see it.
 

Ansatz

Member
I'm not talking about all of Nintendo. I'm talking about how you saying BotW is open world not because of fan criticism is false. Aonuma literally said that the criticisms towards SS were what led to a bigger world. You're confusing Spieler's argument with me.

Yeah., it probably wasn't 100% because of that, but if SS didn't happen, I doubt BOTW would be what it is.

I think what led to a bigger world is the popular demand for big worlds. After Skyrim reached mainstream success there was no way BotW wasn't happening. Nintendo's goal is to reach the sales level of OoT and TP, not to satisfy core Zelda fans.
 

Ridley327

Member
I mean, I'm not asking for a game of the quality of Super Metroid, that's fucking ridiculous, but it provides a pretty obvious base for new games. And yet 2D Metroid hasn't really done much to build on said base. Fusion and Zero Mission are good games, but what did they really add to Metroid? Boring exposition-heavy stories? Brief forced stealth sections?

The only new powers in post-Super Metroid 2D games have been

-Freeze Missiles/Diffusion Missiles
-Gripping onto ledges
-Hopping with the morph ball.

None of these impact the gameplay in ways nearly as interesting as the Morph Ball Bombs, Spider Ball, or Speed Booster.

There's so much potential for what a new 2D Metroid could do, and yet I have the feeling we'll never see it.

To be fair, though, they did improve a ton on the underlying control aspects that Super introduced, which I think was very much a huge gain.
 
I mean, I'm not asking for a game of the quality of Super Metroid, that's fucking ridiculous, but it provides a pretty obvious base for new games. And yet 2D Metroid hasn't really done much to build on said base. Fusion and Zero Mission are good games, but what did they really add to Metroid? Boring exposition-heavy stories? Brief forced stealth sections?

The only new powers in post-Super Metroid 2D games have been

-Freeze Missiles/Diffusion Missiles
-Gripping onto ledges
-Hopping with the morph ball.

None of these impact the gameplay in ways nearly as interesting as the Morph Ball Bombs, Spider Ball, or Speed Booster.

There's so much potential for what a new 2D Metroid could do, and yet I have the feeling we'll never see it.

Hopping with the morph ball was already in Super Metroid. And Metroid II, for that matter.
 

NOLA_Gaffer

Banned
Why do some people act like no one has the right to criticize good ole Nintendo ?

-d0hv

Everyone has the right to criticize Nintendo. However, Nintendo shouldn't have to explain or defend themselves.The same way any filmmaker shouldn't have to explain their film, and artist should defend their painting, any musician should defend their music, and so on.
 

Malakai

Member
I could be wrong, but wasn't the first Zelda on NES a open world game? You could travel anywhere and do thing the dungeons any order. Isn't Breath of the Wild is going to similar to the first Zelda than just having a large world to explore?
 

Nerrel

Member
Nintendo shouldn't have to defend anything. Whiny fanboys are being whiny fanboys. It's kind of a shame that Nintendo decided to lower themselves to their level here.

You're right, the game's doing great, no need to address anything.

I don't really see the harm in them making a spin off and the developer has a good track record. One of the most well recieved titles in the series has a similar origin, I don't really see why the backlash is so sharp on this. If it's poorly received it will not sell and you'll never see this type of game again, if it sells well the chances you get another mainline game go up.

Metroid Prime was heavily based around the gameplay of Super Metroid and it's clearly a game that captures the atmospheric exploration the series is loved for, even if it used a different perspective and had a different developer. It was also technically and artistically impressive and is still a great looking game even now. The fact that it received criticism before release does not automatically mean Federation Force is also some masterpiece that's being prematurely judged.

Federation Force is an online team shooter that plays in short missions- meaning the exploration, upgrading or backtracking that make up the series will be absent or severely limited- and makes no serious effort to achieve the kind of atmosphere or style Metroid is known for. I don't give a damn about Tanabe's explanation of the visuals, it doesn't change the fact that this goofy art style is woefully inappropriate for Metroid. Look at this:
tumblr_inline_o3no3hGdTq1sck58m_540.png
Blockier shapes may have served the gameplay, but... why doe the heads have to be comically huge? Why not still try for imagery that can be taken seriously? The sinister, emotional atmosphere these games are known for just doesn't work with this. It doesn't even manage to look good on a technical level; it's very blocky and barren, more like an N64 game than a late 3DS title (not even considering that there's a more powerful iteration). This is the system that had RE: Revelations running on it as a first year game... does this even look like it's running on the same hardware? It started as a DSi game and it looks like it's going to finish as one.

On top of being a bad idea, it arrived at the wrong time and on the wrong hardware. If this is what they had to do to get the game to work on 3DS, they shouldn't have made it at all. It should have been held over for NX or released on Wii U. A concept like this really had to be executed perfectly in order to win fans over, and they pretty much fumbled it in every way they could have. And this is coming right after Other M, which created such a mess that Nintendo wouldn't even talk about the Metroid series for 5 years, not even to acknowledge its 25th anniversay. They were supposed to have been going back to square one and figuring out what they did wrong, what the fans wanted, how to make a good Metroid game... they obviously didn't do any of that. This game proves they haven't been thinking about Metroid much. They deserve a backlash.
 
In fairness, "this isn't Metroid" isn't a good reason to dump all over it.

Mario has BASKETBALL games on his resumé, Link has crossbow training, Yoshi has cookies. Why can't Metroid have soccer or whatever the heck this is?
People have been making this defense since the game was first shown, and it's as silly now as it was then.
Everyone has the right to criticize Nintendo. However, Nintendo shouldn't have to explain or defend themselves.The same way any filmmaker shouldn't have to explain their film, and artist should defend their painting, any musician should defend their music, and so on.
What is this absurd nonsense that you keep spewing out?

If you're a creator putting your work out into the public sphere, that means you're opening yourself up to criticism and professional critique. Do you think film critique and literary criticism shouldn't exist? No one is forcing Nintendo to respond to these criticisms, they are choosing to.

If you don't like that, keep your product to yourself.
 
In fairness, "this isn't Metroid" isn't a good reason to dump all over it.

Mario has BASKETBALL games on his resumé, Link has crossbow training, Yoshi has cookies. Why can't Metroid have soccer or whatever the heck this is?

Great game though. Should've been on that new NES system.
 
Metroid Prime Hunters did all the things they said were impossible and they did it on inferior hardware too.

I don't mind FF even though I wont buy it but it honestly looks worse than a decade old DS game. How?
 
What would be the ideal Metroid game in 2016? I can't help but see the franchise in the same light as Sonic - two distinct gameplay styles and no one being able to decide which works the best to move forward with.

Sonic suffers because each game tries something new instead of sticking to consistency. 3D has been a shitstorm of new gameplay styles. Metroid on the other hand, has two completely viable gameplay styles. Metroidvanias and Open-World Shooters are both insanely popular. To be forced to pick one of them is narrow-minded, because it disregards the idea that they could simultaneously develop Metroid games in both genres. The whole idea of "choosing" is weird.
 

Aldric

Member
Sonic suffers because each game tries something new instead of sticking to consistency. 3D has been a shitstorm of new gameplay styles. Metroid on the other hand, has two completely viable gameplay styles. Metroidvanias and Open-World Shooters are both insanely popular. To be forced to pick one of them is narrow-minded, because it disregards the idea that they could simultaneously develop Metroid games in both genres. The whole idea of "choosing" is weird.

l don't get it. What're these two different gameplay styles you guys are talking about? Metroid is Metroid, whether we're talking about classic 2d entries or Prime games. Prime games aren't "open world shooters", they're Metroidvanias, just with a different presentation. The core gameplay loop is the same, the virtuous circle of exploration granting new abilities allowing you to further explore a labyrinthine interconnected map is common to both styles, as well as the platforming, light combat and environmental puzzles.

If you've got these elements you've got a Metroid game, whether it's 2D, 3D, first or third person view. lt's really not that complicated, yet the last two games in the franchise were David Cage's take on the character action genre and now this shovelware co op FPS.
 

Nilaul

Member
3D World is a good game and never attempted to do what Other M set out to do. The result of Metroid Other M is that it's not a good game, the character assassination of Samus and the whole pointlessness of the game is enough to warrant being in a lot of fans' ignore lists, and that's before we get into the mediocre gameplay. No one will deny it's a Metroid game, but it's not good at all and many wish it didn't exist.

Samus doesn't need to be in the game; I would gladly play a game set in the Metroid univerise and I would play a game staring generic Federation tropper; however not like that. Not like Federation Force. I'm sure that In Metroid's universe there is more then just Samus'es story.
 

Dremark

Banned
Metroid Prime was heavily based around the gameplay of Super Metroid and it's clearly a game that captures the atmospheric exploration the series is loved for, even if it used a different perspective and had a different developer. It was also technically and artistically impressive and is still a great looking game even now. The fact that it received criticism before release does not automatically mean Federation Force is also some masterpiece that's being prematurely judged.

Federation Force is an online team shooter that plays in short missions- meaning the exploration, upgrading or backtracking that make up the series will be absent or severely limited- and makes no serious effort to achieve the kind of atmosphere or style Metroid is known for. I don't give a damn about Tanabe's explanation of the visuals, it doesn't change the fact that this goofy art style is woefully inappropriate for Metroid. Look at this:

Blockier shapes may have served the gameplay, but... why doe the heads have to be comically huge? Why not still try for imagery that can be taken seriously? The sinister, emotional atmosphere these games are known for just doesn't work with this. It doesn't even manage to look good on a technical level; it's very blocky and barren, more like an N64 game than a late 3DS title (not even considering that there's a more powerful iteration). This is the system that had RE: Revelations running on it as a first year game... does this even look like it's running on the same hardware? It started as a DSi game and it looks like it's going to finish as one.

On top of being a bad idea, it arrived at the wrong time and on the wrong hardware. If this is what they had to do to get the game to work on 3DS, they shouldn't have made it at all. It should have been held over for NX or released on Wii U. A concept like this really had to be executed perfectly in order to win fans over, and they pretty much fumbled it in every way they could have. And this is coming right after Other M, which created such a mess that Nintendo wouldn't even talk about the Metroid series for 5 years, not even to acknowledge its 25th anniversay. They were supposed to have been going back to square one and figuring out what they did wrong, what the fans wanted, how to make a good Metroid game... they obviously didn't do any of that. This game proves they haven't been thinking about Metroid much. They deserve a backlash.

Metroid Prime was a drasticly different direction for the series and changed the entire genre. The game was made because they used the flexibility of a spin off to do it. Even it being successful didn't stop them from making mainline games, mainline games bombing stopped them from making them.

I don't really understand why this series is treated like it's super serious when you have a fan service heavy sex object as the lead and things like pinball games in the series. If you're not interested in the game by all means don't buy it, but I don't see why you guys get so bent out of shape over it.

If you really think this sort of backlash where you caused the head of the company to apologize for disappointing you from his deathbed is justified, I think you're taking this *way* too seriously.

And also keep in mind this sort of backlash against the last game probably got Sakamoto to give up on the series and lead to what you're currently getting.
 

Nerrel

Member
Metroid Prime was a drasticly different direction for the series and changed the entire genre.

It was still based on the same core gameplay and in a lot of ways almost played like the Super Metroid in first person. It was that faithful to what the series was about that even the dramatic shifts you're talking about didn't alter the spirit of the series. FF isn't in the same boat at all; it's a mission based online team shooter. It has little connection to the series other than the control scheme and characters.


I don't really understand why this series is treated like it's super serious when you have a fan service heavy sex object as the lead and things like pinball games in the series.

They may have some goofy missteps here and there, but the Metroid games generally are serious by nature and are probably the darkest main series Nintendo has. Their inspiration was Alien- an intensely serious film- and at times they can be frightening or violent games. It's not often that you see an enemy's face melt off in a Nintendo title:
de85d20aa226cb23dce409527e6c54eb-d799h1d.gif

One of the main hallmarks of the series is isolation- feeling lost and alone on a hostile world. It's that kind of tone that people play these games for. What they're doing with FF isn't really appropriate for the series- you're not alone, you're not exploring, and the presentation is way outside of the realm of this series- and it demonstrates that Nintendo still doesn't understand what the series is about at its core or what the fans expect from it.

Imagine a modern FPS-style Mario game where the characters are using actual guns and killing each other; it may be a fun game on its own if it's designed well, but it would be terribly inappropriate and just wrong to do with that character and series. The style of FF, both in terms of the visuals and gameplay, makes me cringe every time I see it. It was just a bad idea, and obviously fans weren't asking for a game like this.


If you really think this sort of backlash where you caused the head of the company to apologize for disappointing you from his deathbed is justified, I think you're taking this *way* too seriously.
...What?

And also keep in mind this sort of backlash against the last game probably got Sakamoto to give up on the series and lead to what you're currently getting.

You can't blame the fans for this situation. That's on Nintendo. They received an incredible amount of complaints about Other M not having real Metroid exploration and gameplay, about being too story based, about not having much atmosphere... and Nintendo's response was to release another story based Metroid without exploration and atmosphere, but this time on a handheld with cartoony graphics. It came about because Tanabe wanted to make a game to flesh out the lore behind the troopers, and the gameplay stemmed from that. It's unbelievable that after Other M this idea was pitched and Nintendo apparently said "yeah, sure, go nuts."

You could say "what's it to you, just don't buy it," but I care a lot about the series. The time they spent developing this could have been spent on a Metroid game people would actually have been asking for- we could have gotten the first new 2D Metroid in 11 years, for instance.


None of this means that FF is a bad game on its own merits. It could be a really fun game, but that doesn't change the fact that it was a really bad Metroid. And, based on all the videos and hands on accounts we've seen, it doesn't really look that great even taken on its own merits. It's slow and clunky, and generally seems pretty cheaply made. I could turn the question around on you and ask why you're being so defensive about the game... does it really look that great to you?
 

Dremark

Banned
It was still based on the same core gameplay and in a lot of ways almost played like the Super Metroid in first person. It was that faithful to what the series was about that even the dramatic shifts you're talking about didn't alter the spirit of the series. FF isn't in the same boat at all; it's a mission based online team shooter. It has little connection to the series other than the control scheme and characters.

They may have some goofy missteps here and there, but the Metroid games generally are serious by nature and are probably the darkest main series Nintendo has. Their inspiration was Alien- an intensely serious film- and at times they can be frightening or violent games. It's not often that you see an enemy's face melt off in a Nintendo title:
de85d20aa226cb23dce409527e6c54eb-d799h1d.gif

One of the main hallmarks of the series is isolation- feeling lost and alone on a hostile world. It's that kind of tone that people play these games for. What they're doing with FF isn't really appropriate for the series- you're not alone, you're not exploring, and the presentation is way outside of the realm of this series- and it demonstrates that Nintendo still doesn't understand what the series is about at its core or what the fans expect from it.

Imagine a modern FPS-style Mario game where the characters are using actual guns and killing each other; it may be a fun game on its own if it's designed well, but it would be terribly inappropriate and just wrong to do with that character and series. The style of FF, both in terms of the visuals and gameplay, makes me cringe every time I see it. It was just a bad idea, and obviously fans weren't asking for a game like this.

...What?

You can't blame the fans for this situation. That's on Nintendo. They received an incredible amount of complaints about Other M not having real Metroid exploration and gameplay, about being too story based, about not having much atmosphere... and Nintendo's response was to release another story based Metroid without exploration and atmosphere, but this time on a handheld with cartoony graphics. It came about because Tanabe wanted to make a game to flesh out the lore behind the troopers, and the gameplay stemmed from that. It's unbelievable that after Other M this idea was pitched and Nintendo apparently said "yeah, sure, go nuts."

You could say "what's it to you, just don't buy it," but I care a lot about the series. The time they spent developing this could have been spent on a Metroid game people would actually have been asking for- we could have gotten the first new 2D Metroid in 11 years, for instance.

None of this means that FF is a bad game on its own merits. It could be a really fun game, but that doesn't change the fact that it was a really bad Metroid. And, based on all the videos and hands on accounts we've seen, it doesn't really look that great even taken on its own merits. It's slow and clunky, and generally seems pretty cheaply made. I could turn the question around on you and ask why you're being so defensive about the game... does it really look that great to you?

FF has a loose connection to the rest of the series. It's a spin off and having something that's a bit out there compared to the rest of the series isn't really unheard of considering stuff like Prime Pinball exists.

If this was a mainly entry or a reboot or something like that I'd totally get why people are upset about it, but it's simply not. They made a game on the same universe which is largely disconnected from the rest of the series and I don't see why this is such a massive issue.

The fact that a mainline Metroid game hasn't been made in a long time is a separate issue and likely is due to that type of game not really fitting the way Nintendo does business. I kind of covered this earlier but this genre is only selling on indie priced games. I don't think releasing a full price WiiU/3DS/NX game would make sense and there aren't many indications from the market that it would.

As far as the game itself goes I haven't looked into it too much, it's not really in a genre that interests me, but the developer has a good track record. If they put up a demo I'd love to give it a shot.

Also since you don't seem to be aware Iwata's last public statement before his death was apologizing for last year's E3, mainly due to the backlash for FF. It was about a month before he died.
 

Nerrel

Member
FF has a loose connection to the rest of the series. It's a spin off and having something that's a bit out there compared to the rest of the series isn't really unheard of considering stuff like Prime Pinball exists.

Just being a spinoff isn't really license to contradict what the series is about, nor does it guarantee the game will be an interesting expansion of the series. I'm fine with experimental side projects as long as they feel like they belong in the same universe (Captian Toad, for instance); this game doesn't. A lot of people actually used a similar "it's OK because it's a spinoff" defense for Resident Evil's Umbrella Corps, and hey, the game turned out to be the exact, massive pile of shit it looked like it was going to be. Sometimes a developer really can just fuck things up.

You brought up Pinball, but that's not exactly considered to be a beloved masterpiece, is it? It was a somewhat inappropriate use of the series, but it was forgettable because it was launched between high quality main entries. It didn't have the spotlight on it and it didn't carry the burden of being the first new release in years. If it had... if it had been the game that released 8 years after Super Metroid instead of Prime, people likely would have been just as insulted by it. Timing matters a lot.

The fact that a mainline Metroid game hasn't been made in a long time is a separate issue...

But it's not. A mainline game hasn't been made in a long time because they made some of these very same mistakes in the last title- starting with lore/story and designing the gameplay around that, for instance. The series is in an unhealthy place specifically because of Nintendo failing to realize to what Metroid's appeal is and taking the series places it doesn't belong, and this game is a direct continuation of that.

Also since you don't seem to be aware Iwata's last public statement before his death was apologizing for last year's E3, mainly due to the backlash for FF. It was about a month before he died.

Nintendo is a company that makes products. In this case, they made a product that the gaming community didn't want, and even angrily disagreed with just on the premise of it. This game is a marketing nightmare- there's not much Nintendo can do to advertise it, and it was clear from the unveiling that this thing was going straight into the bargain bin when it released. Iwata didn't "have to" apologize for that, the fans didn't force a sick man into some sort of embarrassing public punishment. He chose to do it because that's the kind of guy he was; he genuinely cared about making the fans happy. It's unfortunate that his last e3 was a dud, but that's the business he was in.

If your point is that fans should feel guilty about his apology... what would you rather have seen happen? Fans withhold criticism of a game they thought very poorly of out of sensitivity for Iwata, even though there was no indication of how sick he was at that time? Fans have a right to complain when a company does things they don't like, and it can be a constructive thing for both parties. The company can learn from its mistakes, and the fans can get what they want. There is such a thing as taking it too far, but you're not going to convince me that I should feel guilty for openly disliking a game.
 
Top Bottom