By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Metroid needs (and deserves) a reboot. Caution - Lots of gifs!

Frogger on 01 September 2015
Samus Aran said:

Metroid Prime was a third person shooter first, but Miyamoto shot down the idea because it sucked donkey balls.

 


Woah, let's not lie. Miyamoto shot it down because it was the early 2000's and the best example of a third person shooter back then was Jet Force Gemini. No one understood how to design a game like that back then. It's 2015 now. We understand how to make that kind of game brilliantly now.

If you can't spot the similarities between Splatoon and Metroid from a gameplay perspective, you clearly have a glaring misunderstanding of what Metroid is.



Around the Network
Frogger on 01 September 2015
TheLastStarFighter said:

I agree that there should be platform elements.  And Metroid, being free of reality moreso than Batman could have some epic verticle platforming elements like you describe.  I've never played Infamous so I can't really comment on that feel but I think I get what you're saying and genrally agree. There should be a mix of nice, accurate shooting with nimble character controls.

I think it might be a nice touch to have retro-inspired elements where the camera locks and you play an area of a zone in classic Metroid style, as they did in Super Mario Galaxy.


Eh. I'm not a fan of when games do that. Though Prime did it well with some morph ball sections. But no thank you to Samus in 2D in a 3d game. Didn't like it when galaxy did it either, if I'm honest.



GuyDuke on 01 September 2015
Samus Aran said:
guiduc said:
Samus Aran said:
guiduc said:
Metroid is NOT a good option saleswise. It just doesn't have the selling power of about... let's say every other Nintendo franchises. It costs lots to produce and I'm pretty sure there is no financial viability. It's not cost-efficient like Pikmin (smaller scale) or Splatoon.

It sells more than a lot of Nintendo franchises that keep getting new games... As for Pikmin, it uses very realistic graphics, so I doubt it's as cost-efficient as you think. The latest game had a much longer development time than any Metroid game ever had.

In fact, it took Retro Studios longer to make the Donkey Kong Country games than it did with the Metroid Prime games. I seriously doubt making the Prime games was more expensive.

Metroid Prime 1: 2002

Metroid Prime 2: 2004 (2 year gap)

Metroid Prime 3: 2007 (3 year gap)

Donkey Kong Country Returns: 2010 (3 year gap)

Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze: 2014 (3.5 years gap)

The development teams of the DKC games were also bigger than the teams working on Metroid Prime 1-3.

The highest-selling Metroid game is Metroid Prime at a whopping 2.82 million copies... It is clearly not the juggernaut that are Animal Crossing, Mario Kart, Zelda, Donkey Kong, Pokemon... even Kirby sells better. Only 6 other franchises sold less, most of them being newer (Pikmin, Tomodachi) and of courses Fire Emblem (but this one's seems to sell better now).

I still don't think it's much of a viable choice. Yes, the gap was bigger for the Donkey Kong Country games, but Returns sold 6.40 million copies, and Tropical Freeze is sitting now at 1.20 on a 10M userbase (VS MP3 on 100 million with 1.80 million games sold). Look, I know by your username that you must be a pretty serious fan, and I like Metroid, but Metroid, let's be honest, is far from being Nintendo's most profitable franchise. If I'd be in an investors' meeting, and someone would pitch the idea of a new Metroid game, I'd be very, very skeptical about his selling potential.

Metroid would need somehow a stronger argument to sell. Like a big online Halo-style community. Maybe it would attract more people.

Kirby sells less nowadays... Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze sold less than Metroid U would have... Star Fox sells less. Fire Emblem still sells less on a much bigger userbase. Fatal Frame sells less. Xenoblade Chronicles (X) sells less. Yoshi's New Island and Yoshi's Woolly World sell less (and had double the development time of a Metroid game). Codename Steam sells less. Pikmin sells less. SMT X FE will sell less. F-Zero sells less. Bayonetta sells less. TW101 sells less. Lego City Undercover sells less. Wii Fit sells less (look at the latest game's  sales). Mario & Sonic games sell less as well nowadays. Sonic Lost World & Boom sold less (funded by Nintendo). If Nintendo greenlit those games why not Metroid? Let's not pretend that Metroid games are so much more expensive to produce, especially the 2D ones.

Also Metroid Prime Trilogy is doing extremely well in the eshop rankings on the Wii U. Much better than let's say Xenoblade Chronicles in Europe or Donkey Kong Country: Returns (probably outsold it 10 to 1).

Metroid Prime 1 & 2 outsold DKC: TF. Metroid sales aren't all that affected by big userbase, that Wii example is dumb. The HC Metroid games outsold the HH Metroid games despite the latter having much bigger userbases. Wii was filled with casuals that are gone now. You can't rely on them.

And I didn't say most of them were relevant too. Metroid failed to capture the mass like other sci-fi adventure games did. You know, Nintendo is trying to make a lot of their dying or low-profile franchises work, like they tried to make 3D Mario sell more by combining elements of the 2D games, even more so with the Amiibo centric games. They are trying to revive old franchises like Starfox and make them relevant again by making the gameplay Gamepad-centric, but they have yet to figure a way to take something like Metroid, and make it more popular (like they did with Fire Emblem). In fact, the sales were declining with each games coming out from the last 13 years, so probably they are now making it rest so they can come back with a stronger concept that would fit the Metroid universe.

It's just common sense from a corporate viewpoint. Meet me halfway there, mate.



Samus Aran on 01 September 2015
guiduc said:

And I didn't say most of them were relevant too. Metroid failed to capture the mass like other sci-fi adventure games did. You know, Nintendo is trying to make a lot of their dying or low-profile franchises work, like they tried to make 3D Mario sell more by combining elements of the 2D games, even more so with the Amiibo centric games. They are trying to revive old franchises like Starfox and make them relevant again by making the gameplay Gamepad-centric, but they have yet to figure a way to take something like Metroid, and make it more popular (like they did with Fire Emblem). In fact, the sales were declining with each games coming out from the last 13 years, so probably they are now making it rest so they can come back with a stronger concept that would fit the Metroid universe.

It's just common sense from a corporate viewpoint. Meet me halfway there, mate.

Nintendo wouldn't have made Metroid: Other M or Metroid Prime: Federation Force if they made decisions that made sense from a corporate viewpoint.

Prime 3 sold more than Prime 2. Fusion sold more than Super Metroid. 1.9M sales aren't as terrible as most people seem to think here. Not every game can be a Mario or Zelda. And I'm confident that an ambitious new Metroid game (FPA or 2.5D) can sell over 2M now after the long break (last good Metroid game was 2007). I don't even mind if the series goes on a break, but instead of doing that they're releasing shovelware. I'd rather have no Metroid game than Other M or Federation Force. It only destroys the confidence fans have in the franchise and will do more harm than good in the long run. So yeah, people suggesting Metroid should become a third person shooter or going to destroy the franchise if they keep it up.

Besides, I can think of many cool things to add to a FPA Metroid game with the gamepad, I can't think of anything cool with a third person shooter Metroid. Nintendo just needs to advertise their games correctly.

I'd even be glad with Metroid Maker DLC to Super Mario Maker (or its sequel).

Other M bombed (most of the copies were sold at a very low price unlike other Metroid games that never dropped in price) because fans didn't want such a drastic new experience that is totally un-metroid. Federation Force will probably bomb even harder.



Frogger on 02 September 2015
Samus Aran said:

Nintendo wouldn't have made Metroid: Other M or Metroid Prime: Federation Force if they made decisions that made sense from a corporate viewpoint.

Prime 3 sold more than Prime 2. Fusion sold more than Super Metroid. 1.9M sales aren't as terrible as most people seem to think here. Not every game can be a Mario or Zelda. And I'm confident that an ambitious new Metroid game (FPA or 2.5D) can sell over 2M now after the long break (last good Metroid game was 2007). I don't even mind if the series goes on a break, but instead of doing that they're releasing shovelware. I'd rather have no Metroid game than Other M or Federation Force. It only destroys the confidence fans have in the franchise and will do more harm than good in the long run. So yeah, people suggesting Metroid should become a third person shooter or going to destroy the franchise if they keep it up.

Besides, I can think of many cool things to add to a FPA Metroid game with the gamepad, I can't think of anything cool with a third person shooter Metroid. Nintendo just needs to advertise their games correctly.

I'd even be glad with Metroid Maker DLC to Super Mario Maker (or its sequel).

Other M bombed (most of the copies were sold at a very low price unlike other Metroid games that never dropped in price) because fans didn't want such a drastic new experience that is totally un-metroid. Federation Force will probably bomb even harder.


Other M wasn't a TPS. Other M didn't bomb because "fans didn't want a drastic change." Other M bombed because it was a shit game with a shit story and shit controls for shit gameplay with shit level design. You couldn't try harder to make a worse game. A TPS Metroid not made by incompitent idiots and the team behind DoA: Extreme Beach volleyball would do much better, and franky, I'm sure it would do better than Prime. TPS is in now. A TPS wouldn't destroy anything but your heart. It would elevate the franchise even higher if done right. And even higher still if they just scrapped the absolute mess of a canon the franchise has now thanks to Fusion, Zero Mission, and Other M and just rebooted the whole thing.

Like someone else said in this thread, just because Metroid was done in FP first and it was good doesn't mean it couldn't be done even better in TPS.



Around the Network
Frogger on 02 September 2015
spurgeonryan said:
I would like a fps, that incorporates space flight in some levels. What is that game coming out with infinite worlds? I want that, with a bounty per planet.


I don't think that's very Metroid. Like, I know Samus has a ship, but that's never been what the franchise was about. I think that'd work great for Star Fox. Not so much for Metroid. Even hunting bounties. Like, I used to think Samus hunting bounties would be cool, but I get why we don't play those parts. Like, it's her profession, but it's not Metroid. What would be neat, however, would be if the start of the game was Samus hunting a bounty. Like, instead of the premise being that the GF asked her to escort people or something, she is on the planet because she's collecting a bounty for some big time Space Pirate leader or something. Shit hits the fan and from then, the real game begins.



Samus Aran on 02 September 2015

What's next? First Person Zelda? Real time Pokémon rpg? First person Mario? 2D Splatoon game?

Third person shooters are in? Good thing that Metroid isn't a shooter. And FPS completely dominate third person shooters anyway, so according to your logic Metroid needs to remain first person.

Fusion has one of the best stories in the franchise, just because you hate it doesn't mean jack shit really. Metroid's canon is hardly a mess if you ignore Other M. The only "problem" is Ridley that constantly returns when he's killed, but I wouldn't mind if they killed him off for good, he's overrated. He adds nothing to the Metroid franchise. Let's keep returning villains for franchises that have non-sensical stories (Mario, Kirby).

Even Nintendo acknowledged that there are two types of Metroid games that need to be taken care off. Yeah, two, not three. I guess now you're going to ignore Nintendo's statements because it suits you? You were pretty sure Nintendo was going digital only based on a patent issued by them.

If Metroid wants to become more mainstream it's probably going to need online multiplayer. I'm fine with that as long as it doesn't come at the cost of the SP.



Samus Aran on 02 September 2015
spurgeonryan said:
Yes, fps Zelda and everything but Splatoon on your list would be awesome ^

I'll admit I would buy it.



TheLastStarFighter on 02 September 2015
Samus Aran said:

Metroid is NOT Splatoon and NOT Batman. If you can't see the difference between Splatoon and Metroid then I don't know what to tell you. Splatoon wouldn't work well in first person view because of the squid mechanic. Since you switch a lot between "kid" and squid "mode" it would get very disorienting if the camera had to switch between first person and third person mode. Turning into the morph ball in Metroid Prime isn't disorientating as you don't need to switch between it that often and usually during quiet moments of the game (and even then the developers struggled a lot with putting this mechanic in). Splatoon is also a pure shooter, it doesn't require a lock-on button like Metroid, it doesn't have strafing.

Metroid's roots lie with 2D side-scrollers and I have no problem with Nintendo making more Metroid games like that. A third person 3D Metroid game however has nothing to do with the Metroid roots.

Even Nintendo has acknowledges that there are two different types of Metroid games: first person adventure and 2D side-scroller. They wanted to continue those two types, they said nothing about that crappy third person game that we call Other M.

I've played Arkham City, it does nothave scan logs, it tells most of its story through voice acting and interaction between Batman and the rest of the cast (villains and good guys alike). Metroid is most definitely about isolation, it's what makes the atmosphere as great as it is.

This is cool looking:

This looks like it came from the power rangers:

LOL.

-Splatoon has transformation between Kid and Squid for fast travel.  I'm trying to think of another game that has transformation between two forms, one where you are a human character and can shoot and stuff and another where you go down to the ground and can move quickly and stuff...  I know there is another game that did that first, but I can't think of what it was... Darn, it just eludes me.  One thing I do know though, in whatever game it was, it would surely be disorienting if you switched between first- and 3rd-person with the transformation.  Better keep it in third person.

-Why are you talking about Arkham City.  I never brought up that game.  You're confused.



Samus Aran on 02 September 2015
TheLastStarFighter said:
Samus Aran said:

Metroid is NOT Splatoon and NOT Batman. If you can't see the difference between Splatoon and Metroid then I don't know what to tell you. Splatoon wouldn't work well in first person view because of the squid mechanic. Since you switch a lot between "kid" and squid "mode" it would get very disorienting if the camera had to switch between first person and third person mode. Turning into the morph ball in Metroid Prime isn't disorientating as you don't need to switch between it that often and usually during quiet moments of the game (and even then the developers struggled a lot with putting this mechanic in). Splatoon is also a pure shooter, it doesn't require a lock-on button like Metroid, it doesn't have strafing.

Metroid's roots lie with 2D side-scrollers and I have no problem with Nintendo making more Metroid games like that. A third person 3D Metroid game however has nothing to do with the Metroid roots.

Even Nintendo has acknowledges that there are two different types of Metroid games: first person adventure and 2D side-scroller. They wanted to continue those two types, they said nothing about that crappy third person game that we call Other M.

I've played Arkham City, it does nothave scan logs, it tells most of its story through voice acting and interaction between Batman and the rest of the cast (villains and good guys alike). Metroid is most definitely about isolation, it's what makes the atmosphere as great as it is.

This is cool looking:

This looks like it came from the power rangers:

LOL.

-Splatoon has transformation between Kid and Squid for fast travel.  I'm trying to think of another game that has transformation between two forms, one where you are a human character and can shoot and stuff and another where you go down to the ground and can move quickly and stuff...  I know there is another game that did that first, but I can't think of what it was... Darn, it just eludes me.  One thing I do know though, in whatever game it was, it would surely be disorienting if you switched between first- and 3rd-person with the transformation.  Better keep it in third person.

-Why are you talking about Arkham City.  I never brought up that game.  You're confused.

Either you can't read or you didn't read my post. Either way you got exposed. Try reading beyond what you bolded.

Some of you guys have no clue about game design...