RolStoppable said:
Nope, in previous Metroid games you didn't die by taking five hits or less. That's why these games didn't have to fall back on the use of checkpoints to be at least somewhat fair. The purpose of checkpoints is to mitigate lacking difficulty design; if Dread didn't have checkpoints, it would be a very frustrating game, be it the E.M.M.I. sections where one wrong turn can result in instant death or the bosses that aren't located anywhere close to a save point. That the later bosses in Dread routinely deal damage that exceeds 100 points hurts the upgrade system. There's no real point in trying to find more energy tanks when a tank isn't going to result in being able to sustain at least one additional hit. The previous Metroid games weren't like that. On top of that, Dread puts almost all full energy tanks directly on route to the next major upgrade/boss, so going out of your way to explore isn't of much value. Regardless of how someone plays, it's highly probable that every player will have little variation in their number of energy tanks at any given boss, unlike in previous Metroid games where this number could greatly differ based on playstyle. One key point of the Metroid gameplay is that the difficulty isn't set in stone, so any player who struggles with a particular boss always has the option to explore the game world and get more powerful. But Dread is pretty much limited to "learn the boss patterns" because there's no real alternative in light of how hard these bosses hit and how the energy tanks are distributed in the game world. I am not saying any of this, nor the remarks regarding Speed Booster collectibles, because I can't handle it. I finished hard mode with 100% in 4:36, after all. I am pointing these things out because there is a good chance that they'll be offputting to many players based on today's standard of what constitutes a normal difficulty curve. It won't surprise me in the least if a regular complaint about Dread will be its difficulty spikes, because it's apparent that they do exist. Elitist gamers take the approach to tell other players to git gud, but that recommendation has to be forwarded to the developers instead. If they had been capable of fair difficulty design, they could have done the game without a checkpoint system, the most basic bandaid to fix something where you messed up. |
Okay we have different opinions on a lot of things. Let's talk about specific topics individually. First, checkpoints. Older games always had a save station close to a boss, so that's hardly a difference. In the older games, you'd have to cross some rooms over and over when you died against a boss, but now you can retry almost instantly. That's not a step down in my book, it's instead the exact opposite, this is a benefit because it doesn't waste your time.To call it a lack of difficulty design is one way to look at it, but I think it's rather a logical evolution. That way you'll still be pumped when you retry and don't get distracted unnecessarily. It keeps the tension on a high level.
Next, difficulty. I believe that the bosses need to be difficult. It's a good thing that they are a challenge because the reward of defeating them is so much sweeter that way. However, the challenge of the bosses vanishes with practice, so much that they can potentially be humiliated without taking a single hit. Which is exactly like in the older games, too.
Regardless of how someone plays, it's highly probable that every player will have little variation in their number of energy tanks at any given boss, unlike in previous Metroid games where this number could greatly differ based on playstyle.
But the playstyle only differs when we look at sequence breaking. Most players don't do that, most just follow the linear path that each game guides them on. Speedrunners and sequence breakers are the exception, not the rule. I'd argue that most players of any Metroid game will have more or less the same amount of energy and ammo at the same points in the game. Exactly like it is in Dread. If we try to look at the older games from the perspective of the average player, then each and every boss is a serious threat for the first couple of times, until the player learned to read the attack patterns and how to avoid them. I really see no difference.
One key point of the Metroid gameplay is that the difficulty isn't set in stone, so any player who struggles with a particular boss always has the option to explore the game world and get more powerful.
I don't think that this is true, honestly. The average player will most likely be lost and stumble over a boss more or less by accident because all other ways lead to dead ends. There is the possibility that not all locations are already explored before a boss, yes. And then it would definitely be a wise move to check these locations for more items. But what if the player already had checked everything? I really can't see many players going back and search for upgrades again if the challenge is too high. Instead, the logical thought would be to kill the boss, grab the reward item and then make some progress. Allow me to repeat myself here. I'd argue that most players of any Metroid game will have more or less the same amount of energy and ammo at the same points in the game, which are more or less the same items that can be found directly on route to the next major upgrade/boss. Exactly like it is in Dread.
Metroid Dread is a difficult game, I don't deny that. And I agree that it will be too difficult for some players. However, I don't think this is poor design.
