-
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.
What is the worst 2D Metroid game?
- Thread starter Menitta
- Start date
butzopower
proud of his butz
I grew up playing Metroid 2, and this is exactly how I feel about it. One of the first things I bought on my 3DS (along with Donkey Kong GB). I'm just now playing through Super on my N3DS, and enjoying it quite a bit, though I miss the sparse music and weird atmosphere of 2.
nkarafo
Member
It was good but also painfully easy. And the zero suit part was just a generic, gimmicky stealth section. Overall, it was the least memorable Metroid game for me. I did like the original Metroid music remixes though.
If you find it so easy go for the 15% Hard Mode run for the best ending.
And don't give me the "I'm judging it on the standard difficulty bs", because the game is designed to be replayed over and over by uncovering different routes and secrets. The game just doesn't hand fist the information down your throat because it treats it's players with respect. 15% runs are not fan runs, the game is designed with it in mind and expects players seeking extra challenges to go for it.
flatearthpandas
Member
Played Super Metroid for about two hours thanks to this thread. Game is legit.
Super Metroid controls are ok, but are heavily improved in Fusion and Zero Mission. While not exactly clunky, it's hard to go back to Super once you've played the GBA ones.
Fusion is a great Metroid game. It's all action though.
ShadowOwl
Member
Yeah, what's with all the Fusion hate? I'll admit that it was my first Metroid game but I don't know how people can say that Zero Mission was better. Yeah it was great but Fusion's atmosphere was just phenomenal for GBA, so creepy and scary. Samus-X, anyone? And that OST.
Because some people here are too much of a purist to actually see the game for what it is. Too linear or too wordy are not valid criticisms of any game and it's also true for Fusion.
Where did you hear that. The wario people for all intents and purposes are the same people that made the originals.
hprshredder
Banned
People saying the original is the worst don't know what they're talking about. It's 2 by a significant margin
I loved both but it was obvious as hell that Zero Mission was just a retread of Metroid 1 and Super Metroid. Fusion's atmosphere was on point and yes, SA-X was actually scary. Those chase sequences were intense. And the game isn't even that wordy!
Personally, it's the first one for me. Metroid II is saturated with a heavy atmosphere and did the whole "no music to elevate tension and immersion" thing nearly twenty years before the Souls series. It's not without the problems common to early, ambitious GB games but I can give it a pass for what it's trying to do with horror.
I remember reading it in an old interview that was posted here and I can't find it. It was eitther that or it was linear because it was a really long time since they last made a Metroid game and they needed the warm-up, I can't remember.
This isn't a criticism of Fusion, I like the game and I'm fine with how it came out.
Pamplemousse
Member
Having to press select twelve times to be able to use missiles, super missiles, power bombs, etc. is the definition of clunky. If you try to go activate one quickly, you inevitably end up moving passed the one you want and end up having to cycle back to it. The GBA games control much better.
Green Mamba
Member
"Too wordy" isn't a valid criticism because... why? Because you say so? Get the fuck outta here.
It's funny seeing people say Zero Mission was too linear, when it's the only game in the series where most if not all the sequence breaks were intentionally built into the game.
Zero Mission wants you to ignore its advice on where to go. The team saw how people would speed run the other games and thought "let's reward the player for thinking outside the box". To say it does nothing new for 2D Metroid does a disservice to just how well designed that game is.
Zero Mission wants you to ignore its advice on where to go. The team saw how people would speed run the other games and thought "let's reward the player for thinking outside the box". To say it does nothing new for 2D Metroid does a disservice to just how well designed that game is.
I got the first on on the 3ds. That game is straight up annoying to play. I got the ice upgrade and it made it harder to kill enemies. How are you gonna feel like you've improved your chances of survival in a Metroidvania game if getting an upgrade makes enemies harder to kill? From what I played there is also no refill station so I have to farm for health. Game seems like a clunky and unsatisfying mess. Though I can't completely judge this because I haven't played 2 and have no idea if these problems are also in that game.
Fusion, Super and Zero Mission are phenomenal and smart games. Wish that the GBA had a few more buttons on it so the games could have some of the weird special techniques and abilities from super.
Fusion, Super and Zero Mission are phenomenal and smart games. Wish that the GBA had a few more buttons on it so the games could have some of the weird special techniques and abilities from super.
What's actually missing in Fusion and ZM that was in Super? Only thing I can think of are the plasma beam/power bomb combos, which were more of an Easter egg than anything else. You can still Shine Spark just fine.
Not having played Zero Mission myself, I say Metroid II, but I don't think it's a bad game anyway.
Perhaps they tried to play it on a keyboard?
Perhaps they tried to play it on a keyboard?
I actually just replayed Super Metroid over the past few days and that definitely reconfirmed it as my favourite Metroid game. I don't really have nostalgia for it since I only played it for the first time on the Wii VC and while Samus's physics are weird and definitely take getting used to, they offer more control for people who master it when compared to any other 2D Metroid games.
I feel like the original and Metroid II are probably the easiest ones to pinpoint as pretty much the worst just because they were stepping stones for future games and hampered by tech limitations. I can still appreciate them for what they are, but Metroid Fusion is just so boring to me. I've only ever been able to play it for a few hours because in a lot of ways its design feels like the total opposite of the natural flow of other Metroid games. In a lot of ways its design is a lot of exactly what I don't want in a Metroid game. It's a proto-Other M.
I feel like the original and Metroid II are probably the easiest ones to pinpoint as pretty much the worst just because they were stepping stones for future games and hampered by tech limitations. I can still appreciate them for what they are, but Metroid Fusion is just so boring to me. I've only ever been able to play it for a few hours because in a lot of ways its design feels like the total opposite of the natural flow of other Metroid games. In a lot of ways its design is a lot of exactly what I don't want in a Metroid game. It's a proto-Other M.
People are hating Fusion, because it's too linear and Adam tells you what to do all the time.
I feel sorry for the people, who can't get past that, because everything besides that mentioned stuff is pretty damn awesome. The mechanics in that game, aswell as the boss fights are very well designed. Not to mention that the story is actually quite enjoyable, because Samus has a personality in that game and is even scared as shit, because she knows what an overwhelming enemy the SA-X is. And that really translates to the players, because back then when I played the game and had to run for my live, I was also scared as shit.
To answer your question OP. I feel like all the 2D Metroid games are actually pretty good, but if I had to compare all of them, I'd say Metroid 2 is the weakest.
I feel sorry for the people, who can't get past that, because everything besides that mentioned stuff is pretty damn awesome. The mechanics in that game, aswell as the boss fights are very well designed. Not to mention that the story is actually quite enjoyable, because Samus has a personality in that game and is even scared as shit, because she knows what an overwhelming enemy the SA-X is. And that really translates to the players, because back then when I played the game and had to run for my live, I was also scared as shit.
To answer your question OP. I feel like all the 2D Metroid games are actually pretty good, but if I had to compare all of them, I'd say Metroid 2 is the weakest.
kunonabi
Member
Sequence breaks aren't really sequence breaks if the devs designed them for you.
You're factually wrong. Not the best of the genre, by far, but way better than some of em...
Metroid 1 is factually worse, for one. I'd say Fusion is worse... Really, the only 2D metroids that are better are Super and possibly Zero Mission...
DeuceGamer
Member
I'm an older gamer that grew up with the NES and I still feel Metroid is the weakest out of the 2D Metroids I've played (only not played Metroid II).
Metroid NES is still a great game, but the other entries in the franchise build on what Metrois NES established and easily surpass it IMO. It's really not a knock on the game, as I still fell it's amazing and a classic.
I'm actually replaying the series now as my current retro game that I'm playing. I usually play a console game, handheld game, and a retro game at the same time to give me choices. I plan to play the only 2D Metroid I've not played (Metroid II) soon, so it may take the spot on my list for Weakest 2D Metroid.
I don't agree. Zero Mission is set up in a way that encourages the player in a certain direction, there is a sequence of event that a new player is very likely to follow, and the bosses are balanced around that. The fact that the developers decided to let the player choose their own path does not mean that there is no encouraged path.
But the words used really don't matter, the point of my post was that Zero Mission is certainly not a linear game.
F*ck off, draw your own maps like a man.
Nintendoga
Member
Tbh? The original Metroid has aged horribly. It's as obsolete now as it was even 20 years ago when Super Metroid was released. Just not a good game. Zero Mission is infinitely superior.
Metroid 2's aged as well and desperately needs a map system and a remake, but it's still just OK.
Can't believe some people saying Fusion in here tho lol. That game is a worthy sequel to SM, the only "bad" thing about it being it isn't as non-linear as the previous games. But that's not to say there still isn't a huge amount of exploration just like the old ones.
Just made me realize in the past 30 years we've only had 5 2D games, 1 of them a remake. Metroid V on 3DS pls.
Metroid 2's aged as well and desperately needs a map system and a remake, but it's still just OK.
Can't believe some people saying Fusion in here tho lol. That game is a worthy sequel to SM, the only "bad" thing about it being it isn't as non-linear as the previous games. But that's not to say there still isn't a huge amount of exploration just like the old ones.
Just made me realize in the past 30 years we've only had 5 2D games, 1 of them a remake. Metroid V on 3DS pls.
The physics were shit. Bizarrely floaty.
The moonwalk, the visor, that explode last ditch effort move, and the grapple beam. Granted all that stuff is sort of just neat and not that important. I just sort of like that super has all this weird extra crap in it. The GBA games are probably more fluid without them.
Metroid and Metroid 2 don't lock you in a room and force you to scroll through dialogue every time you enter or exit a new area.
It's strange people ignore this aspect of Fusion, because it really is inexcusable. It's a fast-paced action game that slams on the breaks every time it wants to communicate its generic story. It's a game focused on replayability, yet become obnoxious on replays. Hell, these conversations even undermine the aspects of the game people like; the SA-X would be a hell of a lot more frightening if Adam didn't explain to you exactly what she was after the introductory cutscene.
And it's also strange because Metroid Prime 3 rightly gets a lot of flak for doing the exact same thing with the Aurora conversations.
Those strange features are what helped sell the suit as an over-engineered piece of alien super technology. I miss that aspect of the series.
If I wanted to play as a bland dude with an arm cannon I would play a Megaman game. I'm here for the weird shit.
Nintendoga
Member
I don't mind it because it doesn't undermine the well designed gameplay, levels, and bosses of Fusion. Although I will agree for the first couple for the hours of the game Adam does talk too much. But I'd argue that some of the conversations with Adam are fairly interesting in the later half of the game. I can see why people hate it tho.
Metroid 1 has aged extremely poorly. Start with 30 health every time you die regardless of how many energy tanks you have, can't crouch to shoot short enemies, no map, floaty controls... it's just not very fun to play.
Metroid 2 improved on some of these aspects, but was also seriously held back by the Gameboy's hardware. No map + everything is the same color = where the fuck am I?
Fusion is a better game. It's fun to play when you're actually playing. But so much of it reminds me of Other M: Adam, the general plot, the spaceship setting, the way it tells the story through unskippable cutscenes, the linearity... I used to really like Fusion despite these things, but now it just makes me think of Other M, and Other M makes me angry. Yes, Other M is so bad that it retroactively ruined a game I used to like.
So I dunno, it's one of these three, but I can't decide which.
Super and Zero Mission are both amazing though.
Metroid 2 improved on some of these aspects, but was also seriously held back by the Gameboy's hardware. No map + everything is the same color = where the fuck am I?
Fusion is a better game. It's fun to play when you're actually playing. But so much of it reminds me of Other M: Adam, the general plot, the spaceship setting, the way it tells the story through unskippable cutscenes, the linearity... I used to really like Fusion despite these things, but now it just makes me think of Other M, and Other M makes me angry. Yes, Other M is so bad that it retroactively ruined a game I used to like.
So I dunno, it's one of these three, but I can't decide which.
Super and Zero Mission are both amazing though.
Excuse me? Tone it down a little and learn to be civil.
Yes "too wordy" is the colloquial term for games that have text based narrative, which isn't s valid criticism by itself and depends on execution, hell there's an entire genre that revolves around "too wordy" games in terms of visual novels.
So what is the right balance of text narrative in more action oriented games? Ít's hard to say specifically but there has been not only a clear trend towards it's inclusion, no text narrative has been nearly completely phased out past the NES era. Compare how The Legend of Zelda and a Link to the Past start, what exactly makes them so different from Metroid and Fusion? And then what about Minish Cap that also included more narrative sprinkled throughout. Purists would say it defeats the purpose of playing videogames, because agency is taken away from the player and they're forced to scroll through the text while the narrative advances, and it's a valid claim but it's also foolish to deny the value of how text narrative helps with world building and allows for games to be structured around key plot points and arcs.
It's usually a fairly understated part of a Super Metroid's genius, but I consider it to be one of the greatest cinematic games ever made, that especially stands out among it's 2d sidescroller peers. While having no text other than the opening sentences and they're relatively far in between, the game is sprinkled with very intense cinematic moments that help drive the narrative and the tone of the game. From the opening fight against Ridley with the dead scientists and the self destruct escape plan, to more understated habitat elements like Crocomir's skeleton reemerging trying to kill you, how Draygon's kids take her charred body away, the animal helpers that teach you wall jumping and shine sparking, and of course the big ones pertaining the baby Metroid, from seeing it as you go past a duct in Maridia, to it's hostile appearance and later retreat and of course the game's climax. These cinematic elements also cuts player agency, albeit in a less violent way. It's one of my favorite aspects of Super Metroid and partly why I'm offended when people speak for "all Metroid fans" with what they want.
Fusion of course retains these type of cinematic aspects, which mainly involve SA-X set pieces, and while it obviously apes a lot from horror movies and Alien in particular, the execution is nothing short of genius. The controversial aspect is the inclusion of a longer opening sequence involving the infection and of course the 30 second intervals of text based narrative that appear every 10-20 minutes of gameplay. As I said in my previous post, their functional use is to acomodate handheld gaming by having shorter bursts of gameplay with clear defined beginning and end and serving as a guide to keep players from forgetting what they were supposed to do and helps drive the game forward at all times. Here we delve on what exploration is for the series and everybody will give it's own specific meaning, importance and necessity. I understand the difference between ever growing number of fork paths, in which the player is required to make a choice as to where to proceed based on nothing more than guessing and later having the player recall what he discovered and with ingenuity add up how power ups might help you overcome the obtuse barricades. I mentioned it as well on my other post, the original Metroid not only was a pioneer at this, to this day it's one of the most successful attempts at it. Super Metroid follows it up with probably the best designed level layout ever conceived in which it smartly circles you and points towards your next destination after acquiring new power ups to progress further in, and here it's where I'll agree 100% with the purists in that this approach to exploration in game form has an intrinsecal merit to it. This can be horribly executed, like when it comes to Igavanias, which I'm quite fond of, but the level lay out (and I'm not even talking about copy past hallways with skipable enemies) is extremely lacking and has to rely on warp points to make the experience of traversing the castle somewhat bearable. On the other side of the coin and this is where I'll probably butt heads with people is in that exploration can lower the amount of decision making while playing to it's advantage. Fusion does this in 2 ways, by having the short goals in makes it so each room has to be more densely packed and makes it more involving, you're required to find hidden nooks and crannies in order to progress towards your objective while at most times required to take alternate routes because of how the environment prevents you from progressing. Having a designated goal in your map but not being able to go through the logical direct way and instead tasks you to find a way to either circumvent the barricades, and sometimes in very long unorthodox ways, or finding the power up somewhere else that allows you to get past the obstacle is exploring, and Fusion pulls it off perfectly in a completely different manner than Super does. The other way it maintains exploration is by teasing different routes as you progress, in which you're not faced with dead ends that need to be remembered as you back track your way out, but instead has opens up your head as to how the game will continue to play out and how different objectives and different power ups will allow you to explore through the different areas. In short, I don't think back tracking and exploration are synonymous terms nor does it need to be present for one to explore the game world, leaving mysteries which are later solved while acquiring different tools to do so accounts for exploration, "go anywhere" is not the only way to explore and of course the Metroid series has never consisted of it like open world games.
So back to the narrative aspect and the intrusion, on top of consisting of optimized handheld play that lowers the barriers of entry for players (elitists will deny this is a good thing by arguing it dumbs down the games), they also serve an important aspect to build atmosphere and character development. Adam plays a key role in building up the space station for the player by giving mission briefings, foreshadowing threats and build up on the mystery intentions of the federation and the alliance with Samus in context of her past relationship with Adam. It builds up a lot things only possible through text that enhance the atmosphere, tone and pacing of the game, it's a lot more hands on approach, built with the specific vision of the director in mind. It's not high art, but it serves a specific purpose that it achieves perfectly. I believe the focus on heavy narrative is why people are so eager to find out what's the relationship with the Space Federation will be coming forwards and a reason why the game is filled with tons of memorable key sequences (and because it's the last cronological game).
I'll reiterate that Fusion would greatly benefit from a hypothetical rerelease that included harder difficulties and a bonus mode a la Julius mode that allows the game to be played more freely, it would require massive modifications due to all of the mentioned aspects above (for example, the auto destruct sequence would trigger after certain game time interval that requires you to rush towards it).
Hehehe, love how random the comparisons sound by Japanese developers.
I guess it's both a semantic aspect that creates a key difference but ultimately achieve the same purpose. Breaking the game is a meta game for the player that one ups developers by exploiting their own rules, while sequence skipping would be in the developers owns terms, but at the end of the day both are about playing around the traditional basic structure the game is built around and instead requires high skill and awareness to bend the game to the players. Dismeriting the work involved in creating a cohesive game that simultaneously works with the straightforward paths and the the expert sequence style is outstanding and should be celebrated.
The X-ray visor is a weird one since it was already incredibly underutilized in Super, and it was rare that you wouldn't be able to power bomb away a solution that would have required it otherwise. It was definitely much better implemented in the Prime games, especially in Prime 3 where it became kind of a sniper scope for combat.
Same thing with the grapple beam. Sure, you need it in Maridia prior to getting the Space Jump, but outside the one puzzle in Maridia that requires you to break a broken grapple block, the Space Jump renders it entire useless for everything else. Again, it was something better suited to 3D.
Man, you sure as hell aren't fit to judge over "too wordy"!
Similar threads
- Poll