Quantcast
What Zelda and Metroid for the 3DS should be

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - What Zelda and Metroid for the 3DS should be

I think the question of "has Nintendo been scared away from Metroid" merits some discussion. Other M sales have to have been very disappointing given that they clearly wanted to grow the franchise's userbase with the title



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Around the Network
Khuutra said:

If there's a specific section to which I do not apply then you can take it as a tacit agreement on my part.

Puzzles: It's a matter of fact that I spent more time fighting the environment than fighting enemies in both the original game and LttP, especially the latter. The balance of the series has always favored the environment, simply because it is possible to get lost. Now I agree that the overworld/dungeon divide (where it exists) should also act as a a demarcation line, where crossing into a dungeon means the challenge becomes more combat-oriented. THat's definitely true. I think a lot of modern Zeldas kind of fall flat on that point - though I have noticed that that very shift has occurred in the first three dungeons of Skyward Sword. It's unavoidable that the balance isn't going to be 50/50, and that balance has always favored the environment, but again: I do agree that dungeons should have a stronger combat focus than the overworld.

Directions: The point remains that one needs to be clear about this, because more directions LInk can face = more angles from which to attack = necessitating more complex enemy design = bad.

Upgrades: This isn't Monster Hunter. Single upgrades for items? Fine, whatever, I guess I'm cool with that if it's necessary (it isn't). Three or four separate branches for your swords? We would be better served by a single sword with identical physics in its upgrades so that enemy encounters can be designed specifically around challenging the use of that one sword. Focused design is much more important than variety.

Metroid timeline: One of Prime's biggest strengths is that Retro did not give a damn about the timeline.

Size: I agree with this, but.... you're talking about two actual, separate games. This is a pipe dream. More, it gives the game two very visibly divided linear arcs, which I don't like the idea of.

My ideas: All of it beared saying in that your ideas move away from simplicity of design or what's built into the original games. More, those ideas need to serve as the bullet points tattoo'd onto the brainpans of every developer approaching 2-D Zelda or Metroid, and they need to be reiterated over and over again, forever. In addition, there is no reason one could not use pixellated graphics with the 3DS's 3D. It would be very nice, all neat and layered.

Directions: I was thinking of it along the lines of ALttP. While you can move into eight directions in that game, Link can only face four.

Upgrades: It wouldn't become Monster Hunter just because there's now two to three times as many swords than before. Also, the upgrade system wouldn't be like in MH or Skyward Sword which forces you to collect some random junk. Upgrades would simply be hidden in caves and dangerous places like dungeons. And since not every room of a dungeon needs to be visited and items wouldn't be essential to complete the dungeon, it would be perfectly possible to miss them.

An alternative for the different swords I suggested previously would be a single one that also has an upgradable beam and some special attacks. For example, the strength of the sword could be improved four times over the course of the game, the beam three times and a couple of special attacks each with one upgrade that increases their effect or makes them charge at a faster rate. Something like that.

Metroid timeline: I know it's not important, just like the Zelda timeline is crap.

Size: Maybe a Master Quest-like scenario would be better for Metroid then. Same planet, different locations for the majority of items, higher difficulty. In any case, something should be done to increase the playtime and there must be a solution that doesn't make the game boring, empty or annoying.

puffy said:

Also I'm not sure how stopping in each square to draw the environment would be fun at all, it'd break the flow of the game quite massively. I think Nintendo already got it right with how they attacked it in the DS titles and will probably also be a feature of the 3DS and Wii U Zelda games.

It's up to the player how frequently he stops to work on the map. Many squares would only require a line or two to be drawn, so there's not much of a point to stop everytime. For convenient map drawing, it's perfectly possible to have 100 squares on the bottom screen at once and with the game painting in the squares you've walked on, you are going to have a very rough map even if you are too lazy to do anything. Drawing walls and doors isn't time consuming, neither is dragging icons to mark special things on the map.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

Khuutra said:
miz1q2w3e said:

I meant pixel sprites (like snes graphics)

Though you mentioned Muramasa, I LOVED the art in that game. Also:

The graphics in Braid were sprites made of pixels! You had a problem with the art style, not the mode of graphic display.

Both are forms of 2D display but the sprites in games like Braid and Muramasa are different from snes games and the like. They're higher res, have more colors...etc - They look completely different form each other imo

When I say pixel sprites, I mean this

I get what you mean when you say Braid's and Muramasa's graphics were made from 2D 'sprites', but I'm refering to the graphical style of past 2D games, aka a 2D index map with a palette of indexed colors... Braid is to snes sprites as jpeg is to GIF

Also I'll add, you're right, I didn't like the art style in Braid that much, that's why even though Braid = Muramasa in sprite type, I loved Muramasa's art style >>> Braid



Rol, I think you expressed my way of thinking. Maybe when nintendo decides it wants to please its fans instead of fertilizing their ego(sakamoto).



I really would like the idea of games like A Link to the Past and Super Metroid on the 3DS. As Rol said, those kinds of games never stopped selling, but they were just stopped being made because the N64 put so much focus on 3D environments that all Nintendo franchises moved to 3D, and because Nintendo was so great at recreating these games in 3D. But I also think that you have to give credit to Nintendo for bringing 2D back: If it weren't for NSMB, we wouldn't have any 2D games now, not from other publishers either. I also don't really get your issue with 3D Mario, because it is very clear that we will get a new 2D Mario sooner or later. I mean, it is not the same team that creates the Galaxy games (EAD Tokyo) and the Bros games (EAD 4 or any other number), so I'm pretty sure the Bros team is already working on a new game, probably for the Wii U.
Also, it is not only Mario that Nintendo re-established in 2D but also Donkey Kong, and they were already testing the waters a little bit with Other M, so your critique about Nintendo doesn't seem really fair to me.

Now for the two games we are actually talking about: I think a new side-scrolling Metroid is definitely a possibility, because other forms of the franchise didn't really succeed to sell well. Top-Down Zelda is a bit more unlikely I'm afraid, but I think the 3D Zeldas are not as different from the 2D games as it is the case in the Mario and Metroid franchise, so no 2D Zelda is more acceptable than no 2D Mario or Metroid to me.



Currently Playing: Skies of Arcadia Legends (GC), Dragon Quest IV (DS)

Last Game beaten: The Rub Rabbits(DS)

Around the Network
nintendo_fanboy said:
I really would like the idea of games like A Link to the Past and Super Metroid on the 3DS. As Rol said, those kinds of games never stopped selling, but they were just stopped being made because the N64 put so much focus on 3D environments that all Nintendo franchises moved to 3D, and because Nintendo was so great at recreating these games in 3D. But I also think that you have to give credit to Nintendo for bringing 2D back: If it weren't for NSMB, we wouldn't have any 2D games now, not from other publishers either. I also don't really get your issue with 3D Mario, because it is very clear that we will get a new 2D Mario sooner or later. I mean, it is not the same team that creates the Galaxy games (EAD Tokyo) and the Bros games (EAD 4 or any other number), so I'm pretty sure the Bros team is already working on a new game, probably for the Wii U.
Also, it is not only Mario that Nintendo re-established in 2D but also Donkey Kong, and they were already testing the waters a little bit with Other M, so your critique about Nintendo doesn't seem really fair to me.

Now for the two games we are actually talking about: I think a new side-scrolling Metroid is definitely a possibility, because other forms of the franchise didn't really succeed to sell well. Top-Down Zelda is a bit more unlikely I'm afraid, but I think the 3D Zeldas are not as different from the 2D games as it is the case in the Mario and Metroid franchise, so no 2D Zelda is more acceptable than no 2D Mario or Metroid to me.

I give Nintendo credit for bringing 2D back, but I also need to blame them for taking it away again. My sole issue with 3D Mario is that Nintendo tries to use it to replace 2D Mario. Of course that's never going to happen, but Nintendo's attempts postpone future 2D Mario games until a later date, because they first will wait for the sales results of their latest 3D Mario before taking action. The SMB team should have started work on a 3DS game right after they finished NSMB Wii, if common sense played a role in Nintendo's decisions.

Other M was in no way, shape or form a test for a 2D game.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

The best part of Metroid's timeline is how simple it is to make Metroid games that have zero to do with it. It's too bad that Nintendo doesn't seem to understand that (well, Retro understood).
Samus is a bounty hunter and she isn't as bound to the history of the world of Metroid as Link and Zelda is to their world. The only thing you need to figure out is the reason for there being metroids in the game and you're set. And considering that those flying jellyfishies are spreading throughout the galaxy faster than the zerg thanks to space pirates, scientists etc. that shouldn't be a problem.

I guess another problem would be the suit upgrades. A simple solution to that would be upgrades specific to the worlds Samus visits. Once Samus leaves the place she loses her upgrades and you won't ever need to use that damn authorization fix for the next game because Samus already comes equipped with enough weaponry to blow up the moon. This solution would also make every Metroid game more unique in terms of upgrades, environments, enemies etc.
We've already mastered the basic upgrades such as missiles, bombs, grapple beam etc. so those should be enabled from the beginning. I want the designers to come up with new equipment instead of making me search for the missile for the nth time. This goes for Zelda as well. No more knowing beforehand what atleast 4/5 of the upgrades will consist of.



RolStoppable said:

Directions: I was thinking of it along the lines of ALttP. While you can move into eight directions in that game, Link can only face four.

Upgrades: It wouldn't become Monster Hunter just because there's now two to three times as many swords than before. Also, the upgrade system wouldn't be like in MH or Skyward Sword which forces you to collect some random junk. Upgrades would simply be hidden in caves and dangerous places like dungeons. And since not every room of a dungeon needs to be visited and items wouldn't be essential to complete the dungeon, it would be perfectly possible to miss them.

An alternative for the different swords I suggested previously would be a single one that also has an upgradable beam and some special attacks. For example, the strength of the sword could be improved four times over the course of the game, the beam three times and a couple of special attacks each with one upgrade that increases their effect or makes them charge at a faster rate. Something like that.

Metroid timeline: I know it's not important, just like the Zelda timeline is crap.

Size: Maybe a Master Quest-like scenario would be better for Metroid then. Same planet, different locations for the majority of items, higher difficulty. In any case, something should be done to increase the playtime and there must be a solution that doesn't make the game boring, empty or annoying.


I find all of these ideas agreeable. Master Quest scenarios need to be more standard in general. It should be implemented in all Zelda games, though, not just the 2D ones. I'm not as sure about the viability of that option in 3D Metroids, but then I'm also unsure of anything that would hinder it, so it would probably work. It's a bit tougher for Metroid, I guess, in that there's no overworld/dungeon separation, so the entire world has to be redesigned. Probably easier in 2D than 3D.



RolStoppable said:

The 3DS is a capable system, it just needs to be used correctly. How to not use a system properly, that we have seen when it came to Zelda and Metroid on the DS. Two touchscreen controlled Zelda titles which undermined the combat aspect of the game along with other idiotic design decisions and Metroid being turned into a brainless FPS with a halfassed solo campaign that ends with seven energy tanks and just a little over 100 missiles. It's time that Nintendo restores the glory of these two series with 3DS entries and here are my ideas.

The Legend of Zelda

1. Story/setting: Only the bare minimum is necessary, it's time to get rid of the bloated junk. Hyrule and Princess Zelda are in need of a hero to defeat the evil Ganon. Yeah, that's nothing new, but who the hell cares.

2. Gameplay: Strict topdown perspective, strong focus on challenging combat with only few puzzles added to the mix (no more than ALttP had). Items that prove themselves useful in many situations with plenty of upgrades to be found (many more than ALttP had). Slide pad allows you to move into more than just eight directions.

3. 3D: Not going to be essential (it never is), but adds more depth to the topdown perspective.

Metroid

1. Story/setting: Only the bare minimum is necessary, it's time to get rid of the bloated junk. It's probably better to fit this game somewhere inbetween Metroid 2 and 3 or Metroid 3 and 4, rather than making it Metroid 5 which could be troublesome due to the whole Fusion Suit incident. One gigantic planet to explore with several areas on the surface and several below the surface (I am thinking 15-20 in total).

2. Gameplay: Strict sidescrolling view, emulating what made Super Metroid great, but with a higher level of difficulty. It is okay to die. Item count bumped up to 200, missile expansions only add two missiles to your total. The bigger game world has to be filled with goodies, after all. Holding down one shoulder button allows you to shoot in all directions while standing still, holding down the other one allows you to "lock" Samus' arm and move pretty much however you want (sort of an advanced moon walk from Super Metroid).

3. 3D: Not going to be essential (it never is), but adds more depth to the polygon environments.

The Legend of Zelda & Metroid

Now here's the big thing for both games: the bottom screen.

Remember the NES days when you basically had to draw maps to not get lost in Zelda and Metroid? Remember how the SNES iterations added convenient in-game maps? Do you know the Etrian Odyssey series? If yes, you already know what's coming now.

Both games won't offer an automap, but will force you to draw your own maps for the overworld and dungeons in Zelda and all the different areas in Metroid. The only thing the game will do for you is mark the tiles you've visited on your map screen (1 tile = 1 screen on the topscreen), but walls, doors, hints and all the other stuff you have to add by yourself, because drawing a map of your surroundings greatly adds to the feel of exploration.

Due to the amount of data the maps take, only two save files per game card will be available. Map data will carry over to a new game, if the player wishes to do so, for convenience's sake. During the game, maps can be drawn without having to pause the game.

 

At this stage, seen as though we already have Ocarina of time I would prefer a new Metroid game. Maybe that will be announced next year at E3?





RolStoppable said:
nintendo_fanboy said:
I really would like the idea of games like A Link to the Past and Super Metroid on the 3DS. As Rol said, those kinds of games never stopped selling, but they were just stopped being made because the N64 put so much focus on 3D environments that all Nintendo franchises moved to 3D, and because Nintendo was so great at recreating these games in 3D. But I also think that you have to give credit to Nintendo for bringing 2D back: If it weren't for NSMB, we wouldn't have any 2D games now, not from other publishers either. I also don't really get your issue with 3D Mario, because it is very clear that we will get a new 2D Mario sooner or later. I mean, it is not the same team that creates the Galaxy games (EAD Tokyo) and the Bros games (EAD 4 or any other number), so I'm pretty sure the Bros team is already working on a new game, probably for the Wii U.
Also, it is not only Mario that Nintendo re-established in 2D but also Donkey Kong, and they were already testing the waters a little bit with Other M, so your critique about Nintendo doesn't seem really fair to me.

Now for the two games we are actually talking about: I think a new side-scrolling Metroid is definitely a possibility, because other forms of the franchise didn't really succeed to sell well. Top-Down Zelda is a bit more unlikely I'm afraid, but I think the 3D Zeldas are not as different from the 2D games as it is the case in the Mario and Metroid franchise, so no 2D Zelda is more acceptable than no 2D Mario or Metroid to me.

I give Nintendo credit for bringing 2D back, but I also need to blame them for taking it away again. My sole issue with 3D Mario is that Nintendo tries to use it to replace 2D Mario. Of course that's never going to happen, but Nintendo's attempts postpone future 2D Mario games until a later date, because they first will wait for the sales results of their latest 3D Mario before taking action. The SMB team should have started work on a 3DS game right after they finished NSMB Wii, if common sense played a role in Nintendo's decisions.

Other M was in no way, shape or form a test for a 2D game.

Nintendo clearly needs to have a dedicated line for 2D games, and put serious effort on it, as much as for 3D games.

What I'd like to see in these games is a darker theme, orchestral music (like the 3D games get, no lesser treatment), excellent sound effects, and especially tight gameplay. NSMB was fun for sure, but I'd like a Mario game paced a little more like the older ones, where running you went fast.

I also love the HD sprites idea and ADSL's post http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4317640.