Not sure why you care so much when you're not a big Metroid fan.  I can say if you've never played NES games on the original console with a CRT TV, then it can be hard to fully appreciate.

You are free to disagree if you want.  Does your personal opinion determine what a hot take is?

Yes. I know im free to disagree. That's why I did it. Not sure what that added to the conversation.

My personal opinion does not make a hot takes. And i have no idea why you thought i was implying that. But im fairly certain viewing the first metroid, kingdom hearts, Zelda, and sonic as the best in their franchises are opinions that are well outside the norm. Hence hot takes.

I do not care much, only enough to ask for your reasoning behind it, since it is a take I have never heard, just to broaden my understanding. But since you rather ask other questions instead of providing any reasoning my guess is that you have none, or at least no reasoning you know yourself good enough to articulate. 

I have played my fair share of Nes games on the original hardware. The first games I ever played was on the NES. SMB1, SMB3, Ice Climbers, Excitebike, TMNT and The first Zelda are all games I tried on the original hardware before testing any later games. SMB3 I still love. 

All of those games that you just mentioned are very high selling compared to other games in their series and were rated well by people who played them.  They are good games by most objective measures.  However, what they don't do is always conform to some narrative created on the internet. 

People can, and do, say almost anything on the internet, and that includes giving opinions about games that they've never played before.  I remember some video made a good while ago where they asked kids something like, "How many of you think Golden Eye is one of the greatest FPS games ever made?"  They all raised their hands.  "How many of you have played Golden Eye?"  They all put their hands down.  Narrative is a powerful thing.  It can make people believe a game is great even if they've never played it. 

Another thing people often do is hear some game is the greatest and they play that one in the series first and that affects their view of all other games in the series.  For example, people play Super Metroid first, because the narrative on the internet is to play Super Metroid first.  Now they think every other game should be compared to Super Metroid, even though it actually wasn't that popular of a game when it was first released on the SNES.  It's a type of rewriting history.

The thing that makes my takes seem like hot takes is that I've played most of these games when they were considered new games.  I formed my opinion on many of these games before most people were using the internet.  I know what I like, and I'm not going to change my opinion based on the internet narrative.  And as I said, all of these games are considered good games.  I'm not here saying Balan Wonderworld is the best game ever.  However, I will insist certain NES games are fantastic even if there are a lot of people on the internet who don't appreciate NES games in general.

The Metroid series is a space-horror series.  It's supposed to work both as a sci-fi game and a horror game, and the original game is based on the movie Alien. 

Original Metroid (NES) is the scariest game I've ever played.  One thing that contributes to this is challenge.  Super Metroid is not nearly as challenging as Metroid.  That makes Super Metroid boring (and not scary).  Metroid also includes no map.  That is a plus and not a minus.  They want you to get lost and feel like there is almost no way out to survive.  I know this because they also have floors that you can fall through without warning.  Then you have to find your way out with no map and many areas looking similar.  It adds to the horror.  The game is supposed to scare you and make you feel like you are in a hopeless situation.  Also, when I first beat the game, I still hadn't killed a single Metroid.  To me they were an unkillable monster.  This was before the answer to killing them was printed in Nintendo Power.  The title monster was unkillable.  That added to the horror of the game.

None of the other Metroid games I played have scared me at all.  They just don't feel the same.

FEAR is probably the biggest example. The first game was a perfect marriage of action and horror, and each subsequent game got worse and worse in both aspects. The 2nd game was still very good, but it was neither as fun or as scary as the first.

Banjo Kazooie. Some prefer Tooie, but the vast majority say the first game is better, and no one likes to talk about the 3rd game.

Knights of the Old Republic. Again, a minority prefer the sequel, but it's the first that is considered a classic and gets put on the "best of" lists.

You seem to be responding to agruments I am not making so i have no idea how to continue.

Lets try this. What makes Kingdom Hearts 1 better than 2?

The story and theming is tighter and more coherent in KH1.  Also, I like the Gummi Ship better.

I would agree with the story being tighter but the second makes up for it with much better big set piece moments and more emotion. Despite being sometimes obtuse it was also way more interesting. The story is tighter in the first because its really just very basic. Kid gets lost and wanders through Disney World to get home. And the cutscenes much cooler in 2.

Very strongly disagree with the gummi ship segments. They were dull visually flat and didn't offer much in the way of rewards in the main game. 

The combat, which is what you spend most time on in 2, is vastly improved, it has way better post game content, and the level design is stronger with better visuals, more varied gameplay, and better level design. Plus because of the lack of trinity marks you could actually use the disney characters in your party without worrying about missing stuff and had to go back.

So I must disagree on that one. 

Not a KH fan but KH2 has the best Gummi ship as they based those sections off Panzer Dragoon ans it's better for it.