Guru-Meditation wrote:All I remember from Metroid Prime is it's a harmless first person shooter you can put the kids in front of. In the FPS department it pales compared to most anything else like it. But it's not a scary game, there's no gore, it's rather harmless. So it wins in that department.
I agree that if you came at MP with "FPS" in your mind then it's going to end up disappointing. Some people were playing it off against Halo and that was a patently stupid thing to do.
MP is an adventure game that just happens to be in first person and happens to contain a fair number of baddies to kill. But the nucleus of the game is exploration and information gathering. The whole control system is designed around the weapon switching so although it can feel odd at first it soon becomes apparent why it's that way. The save points are a non-issue because the game is easy anyway (certain boss battles are more challenging) and the points are well balanced. I imagine most people played the game in sessions, found a save point and went away to do something else for the evening. There's nothing inherently wrong with save points in my mind. See also Castlevania on the DS which places them all but perfectly.
It's gloriously polished with a solid silky framerate, nice inventory management, very high quality audio (the music was especially atmospheric) and some really fantastically designed environments. It often reminded me of Mercenary in the sense that you felt you really were messing around in an alien world, the suspension of disbelief was well judged. MP is/was very much a chill-out game, you can take it at your own leisurely pace and just enjoy the experience. I frankly wish more games were like that and I'm really looking forward to the Wii version, maybe more than Galaxy.
It isn't Metroid I have a problem with, Fusion on the GBA is a glorious game, it's just Prime I couldn't get on with.
Too much 'come across boss, die, have to work your way across half the bloody level again cause there wasn't a save point by the boss, die again, give up and play something fun instead'.
Flabio wrote:It isn't Metroid I have a problem with, Fusion on the GBA is a glorious game, it's just Prime I couldn't get on with.
Too much 'come across boss, die, have to work your way across half the bloody level again cause there wasn't a save point by the boss, die again, give up and play something fun instead'.
Honest question: Is it now wrong / arrogant / against the etiquette to say that people who say stuff like this and what we've seen on the previous page just don't "get" Metroid Prime? And to make it clear, this is just an honest observation, not a criticism.
This all sounds a bit like when people are dissing a Lynch / Kieslowski / Kaurismäki / whatever movie for all the reasons (superficially) that make them a great experience for others.
carolen wrote:I unlocked the NES Metroid game on the GC by doing that GBA linky with Metroid:Fusion and found it completely unplayable. So bad as to defy description. Had the same problem with the original NES Zelda game, though I have since come to love the franchise, having entered it at OOT.
My question is this.
Were the first-generation titles of these two franchises actually any good or have people's opinions been swayed by rose-tinted screens and nostalgia? If they weren't, how did they come to be so popular?
Maybe I'm just out of touch with popular opinion.
One reason for asking this question is the forthcoming Nights title on Wii. Was the Saturn original actually much cop or am I wasting my time in getting interested in it?
Thats a little like saying the Penny Farthing was shit just because now we have modern superbikes.
Back in the days early of the NES you didn't have anything better to make comparisons with. You had to play the games at that level of sophistication and through this had to appreciate them for what they were, without sophistry.
I find it incredibly difficult and tedious to play the original Zelda, Castlevania etc now, but at the time I couldn't praise them or play them enough. They are still good games, but the world has moved on- I've grown older and become spoilt to hell in my gaming.
"Shouting lager, lager, lager, lager. Shouting lager, lager, lager, lager. Is just one of the reasons you're not welcome at Claridges any more". -Psychic Bob
. It often reminded me of Mercenary in the sense that you felt you really were messing around in an alien world, the suspension of disbelief was well judged. MP is/was very much a chill-out game, you can take it at your own leisurely pace and just enjoy the experience.
This sums up my feelings of the game too.
One thing that worrys me about the next game is it looks like it might lose the lonely atmosphere of the Metroid games (which is something else it has in common with Mercenary).
While I guess theres only so many times a girl can end up alone in the world, its still hard to beat for atmosphere.
betamax wrote:Thats a little like saying the Penny Farthing was shit just because now we have modern superbikes.
Back in the days early of the NES you didn't have anything better to make comparisons with. You had to play the games at that level of sophistication and through this had to appreciate them for what they were, without sophistry.
I find it incredibly difficult and tedious to play the original Zelda, Castlevania etc now, but at the time I couldn't praise them or play them enough. They are still good games, but the world has moved on- I've grown older and become spoilt to hell in my gaming.
All fair points, and I fully understand. I suppose I'm coming from a place where I can play Super Mario World, DKC and the like - from a generation only one step on- and not be put off by the graphics, gameplay etc. It's prolly just me.
Flabio wrote:It isn't Metroid I have a problem with, Fusion on the GBA is a glorious game, it's just Prime I couldn't get on with.
Too much 'come across boss, die, have to work your way across half the bloody level again cause there wasn't a save point by the boss, die again, give up and play something fun instead'.
Honest question: Is it now wrong / arrogant / against the etiquette to say that people who say stuff like this and what we've seen on the previous page just don't "get" Metroid Prime? And to make it clear, this is just an honest observation, not a criticism.
I just think people get switched on by different stuff, and likewise get switched off by stuff that other folks are prepared to look over in the grand scheme of things. Very few games are truly perfect. I don't personally have any issue with anyone not liking a game provided they're prepared to tell us why. Opinions differ and it's often nice to see a healthy collection of viewpoints. Nothing wrong with that, there's lots of stuff I don't like that other people get foamy over.
There is however nothing more frustrating than someone (as happened recently) just throwing in a single-word "Dire" or some other missive without any real articulation as to why. Especially if in response to positivity. It doesn't help people reading the thread, doesn't offer anything new or interesting to a discussion about a game, just does nothing but be utterly pointless. The one thing I always liked about Rod_S or RevStu was that when they shat on a game thread they at least tried to explain why. And at least Flabio here has pointed out what he didn't like, most of the time we don't get that, just a pompously generic dismissal. Usually people haven't even played the f**ing games. The little post-death save point journeys never bothered me in MP but I can see why others were put off, no big deal. Save points kill games when they're badly placed or you have to fight impossible odds after three solid hours of play just to reach one.
betamax wrote:Thats a little like saying the Penny Farthing was shit just because now we have modern superbikes.
Back in the days early of the NES you didn't have anything better to make comparisons with. You had to play the games at that level of sophistication and through this had to appreciate them for what they were, without sophistry.
I find it incredibly difficult and tedious to play the original Zelda, Castlevania etc now, but at the time I couldn't praise them or play them enough. They are still good games, but the world has moved on- I've grown older and become spoilt to hell in my gaming.
All fair points, and I fully understand. I suppose I'm coming from a place where I can play Super Mario World, DKC and the like - from a generation only one step on- and not be put off by the graphics, gameplay etc. It's prolly just me.
No, it's not just you. Even now I can throw myself into 16-bit era games like Streets Of Rage or Secret Of Mana and love every second. But back beyond that point, for NES/Master System era games, there's just something that renders them ...inaccessible to me. I think the days of the SNES and Megadrive marks the limit of what the eye can cope with, plus there was an additional layer of complexity in the 16-bit games that marked the end of gaming as a fun novelty and the beginning of gaming as a definite, valuable hobby. Anything further back is just a gaudy, garish mess of primitive play mechanics. Prototypes of most of the main genres were really set in stone with the 8-bit machines, which is something to be grateful for, and I can still enjoy them, but I have to work really hard to do so and, damn, do they make my head hurt.
The reason I couldn't stand Metroid Prime was the control scheme. Sure, the control scheme worked, no problems there but I've always had a bit of a problem with depth perception in 3D games. As long as I can get some parallax movement going on I can build up a 3D picture of the game world. But by not including strafe control, Metroid Prime removed my ability to do that and as a result the game world felt incredibly flat (because technically it was), small and cramped.
GeeZa wrote:There is however nothing more frustrating than someone (as happened recently) just throwing in a single-word "Dire" or some other missive without any real articulation as to why. Especially if in response to positivity. It doesn't help people reading the thread, doesn't offer anything new or interesting to a discussion about a game, just does nothing but be utterly pointless.
Heh, that was me. I'm sorry you took offense at that especially since you like the game, but a) it's just an opinion, and b) I didn't have time to post anything more detailed at the time and simply forgot to follow it up. It's nothing personal.
I did post a very slightly review just after the Japanese launch. I think it ended something like "don't buy this game". I'll post my opinions for you in the PS3 thread now.
GeeZa wrote:There is however nothing more frustrating than someone (as happened recently) just throwing in a single-word "Dire" or some other missive without any real articulation as to why. Especially if in response to positivity. It doesn't help people reading the thread, doesn't offer anything new or interesting to a discussion about a game, just does nothing but be utterly pointless.
Heh, that was me. I'm sorry you took offense at that especially since you like the game, but a) it's just an opinion, and b) I didn't have time to post anything more detailed at the time and simply forgot to follow it up. It's nothing personal.
I did post a very slightly review just after the Japanese launch. I think it ended something like "don't buy this game". I'll post my opinions for you in the PS3 thread now.
Yes it was you, naughty scamp. I didn't take it personally or anything, merely wanted to hear more of why you thought it was dire when I seemed to be liking it. I'm always interested in hearing what other folks think and was just disappointed you didn't lay into it good and proper with a bit more wordage. Thas all, nothing earth-shattering.
Gorecki wrote:The reason I couldn't stand Metroid Prime was the control scheme. Sure, the control scheme worked, no problems there but I've always had a bit of a problem with depth perception in 3D games. As long as I can get some parallax movement going on I can build up a 3D picture of the game world. But by not including strafe control, Metroid Prime removed my ability to do that and as a result the game world felt incredibly flat (because technically it was), small and cramped.
Plus I can't stand end-of-level bosses.
IIRC you can strafe if you use the left trigger. It has been a while since I played it though.
Hajile wrote:Anything further back is just a gaudy, garish mess of primitive play mechanics.
Yeah, Robotron and Tempest do kind of suck, don't they?
Kidding! I know what you mean, although there are some NES era games I can still have fun with today, and the C64 fares even better.
To be honest, that's the point exactly there - early console games are mostly just bad copies of arcade games and arcade game genres. The home computers had a lot more creativity and fewer slavish clones (most of which have been rightly forgotten).
betamax wrote:Thats a little like saying the Penny Farthing was shit just because now we have modern superbikes.
Back in the days early of the NES you didn't have anything better to make comparisons with. You had to play the games at that level of sophistication and through this had to appreciate them for what they were, without sophistry.
I find it incredibly difficult and tedious to play the original Zelda, Castlevania etc now, but at the time I couldn't praise them or play them enough. They are still good games, but the world has moved on- I've grown older and become spoilt to hell in my gaming.
All fair points, and I fully understand. I suppose I'm coming from a place where I can play Super Mario World, DKC and the like - from a generation only one step on- and not be put off by the graphics, gameplay etc. It's prolly just me.
No, it's not just you. Even now I can throw myself into 16-bit era games like Streets Of Rage or Secret Of Mana and love every second. But back beyond that point, for NES/Master System era games, there's just something that renders them ...inaccessible to me. I think the days of the SNES and Megadrive marks the limit of what the eye can cope with, plus there was an additional layer of complexity in the 16-bit games that marked the end of gaming as a fun novelty and the beginning of gaming as a definite, valuable hobby. Anything further back is just a gaudy, garish mess of primitive play mechanics. Prototypes of most of the main genres were really set in stone with the 8-bit machines, which is something to be grateful for, and I can still enjoy them, but I have to work really hard to do so and, damn, do they make my head hurt.
Purhapes if you tried a genra that hasnt evolved that much except in graphics.
I didn't take it personally or anything, merely wanted to hear more of why you thought it was dire when I seemed to be liking it. I'm always interested in hearing what other folks think and was just disappointed you didn't lay into it good and proper with a bit more wordage. Thas all, nothing earth-shattering.
