Post by: Bloodworth on March 02, 2006, 05:28:59 AM
Earlier this week at NOA Headquarters, we had the opportunity to learn more details about the development of Metroid Prime Hunters from Director Masamichi Abe (pronounced "ah-bay") and Lead Technical Engineer Colin Reed from NST. Bill Trinen served as translator for Mr. Abe.
PGC: I understand both of you also worked on Pikmin as well?
Reed: Yeah, we worked on Pikmin together and 1080° on the N64 together. So we've worked together a lot.
PGC: How large was the development team on Metroid Prime Hunters?
Reed: I think the largest sized team got up to maybe thirty people.
PGC: Is that quite a bit larger than other DS games?
Abe: I think so. (laughter)
PGC: What led to the decision early on to make Metroid Prime Hunters a multiplayer game? Was it influenced by Metroid Prime 2?
Abe: Actually, when we first started the project, one of the main focuses of the DS hardware at that point in time was the wireless functionality and being able to play with other people wirelessly. Because of that, we felt that the multiplayer aspects of Metroid Prime Hunters were going to be very important and that was kind of our starting point.
Then as an idea of introducing a new element to the Metroid series - really bringing in something that we haven't seen before - was this idea of the different bounty hunters. We had this idea early on and thought that would be a good way to introduce this new content and this new element to the gameplay and take advantage of that in the multiplayer.
PGC: Do you think that this new element is going to influence the future of Metroid games, such as Metroid Prime 3 on Revolution? Or is it going to be something that's self-contained, and if it's in a sequel, it would be a "Hunters" kind of sequel?
Abe: I think there's definitely a possibility for it to influence the series. Personally, I don't know what's going on with Metroid Prime 3, but I think that because we've been able to use this opportunity to introduce these new bounty hunters, then I think that just opens up more opportunities to continue to flesh them out and explore different avenues with them in future Metroid games.
PGC: At what point was it decided to go online? I think that earlier they mentioned the feedback from E3 last year.
Reed: Definitely. After last year's E3, we got a whole load of feedback. There was a certain amount of disappointment that we weren't intending to go online at that point. The schedule for when the Wi-Fi stuff was starting didn't really match up with our schedule for finishing. So, that's why at that point we decided to go into those issues.
PGC: Voice chat: was that just a natural extension? At about what point did that come in?
Reed: I have no idea when that got implemented. It's a fairly new technology, and it's just something that came up just as we were finishing up when we decided, "Yeah, why not? Let's put it in."
PGC: So it was pretty easy to put in there then?"
Reed: Oh yeah. It was really easy to put in actually.
PGC: Great. That shows that there may be a chance that it will show up in a lot more games.
Reed: I believe so.
PGC: With the DS online capability, most of the games that we've seen have been four players. Is that a technical maximum or do you think that in future games or simpler games that maybe more players will be able to join-in online?
Reed: An online game is always a trade-off between beauty and number of players. So we've tried to take a nice compromise. The thing with the more players is that the more players you have, the larger arenas you have to have. There are always these technical trade-offs that you have to make. I think that we've made a nice balance with this game, but it's not by any means a technical limitation to stop at four.
PGC: That also influences the voice chat functionality? It would be too much information transferring to try to talk and play at the same time?
Reed: It's always a balance that you have to take, yeah.
PGC: What other kinds of elements were added in addition to the online and the voice chat once you knew that you had more time to work on the game?
Reed: I think that it was mostly a case that it gave us the extra time to be able to polish the game. We got the chance to make so many more optimizations, and to get the framerate running at a solid state and to try all these new shiny material kind of effects. It gave us that time to just step it up a notch. So we're actually pretty thankful!
PGC: Yeah, the reflectivity on the morph ball looks really nice.
Reed: It was one artist just hammering away in the middle of the night. He comes to show us what he did, and we were like, "Oh that's cool, let's use that." (laughter) Then the effect just spreads off and starts getting used all over the place. Then we have to reel them back in and say, "Ok. No, he's using it too much."
PGC: Was there ever a point during development when you thought that maybe with this new control scheme and all these other characters that it might be better as a different franchise?
Abe: No, not so much. From early on, one of our key focuses was really creating this as an extension of the Metroid universe while at the same time upholding the traditions of the Metroid franchise, everything from the continuity of the story to the graphics. In that sense, I think it's really always been a part of the Metroid series.
PGC: Who was responsible for working on the designs of the new characters and how difficult was it to try to get them to fit in to the Metroid universe?
Abe: Actually from the very initial stages of game development, our art team worked in collaboration with the lead designer at Retro Studios, who is in charge of the design of the Metroid franchise, the Prime franchise in particular. We had a lot of discussions with them to not only talk about the design of this game, but also in creating the new characters, working with them to make sure that these characters fit into the overall Metroid Prime series.
PGC: Hunters takes place between Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2. How does that work out with continuity? Is it not really influenced by either game?
Reed: It's not really influenced at all by either of the stories. It's just a side story, really. It's a separate mission.
Abe: As Richard [Vorodi] was saying earlier, the ship that you see in the game is the ship from Metroid Prime, whereas the suit Samus is wearing is the suit from Metroid Prime 2. So, where the character is, in terms of development, fits somewhere between the two. Maybe there are some events that happen on either side, but that's kind of the general flow of where it would fit.
PGC: Other than the different morph forms, what are some of the gameplay differences between the different hunters?
Abe: In addition to the morph forms, the effectiveness of the weapons can change, depending on which hunter is using the weapon. The simplest example is the charge missiles. When Samus uses the charge missiles, the homing is very effective, and they are able to home-in on targeted enemies very easily. Whereas, other hunters, when using the homing missiles, the homing may not be as effective for them as it is for Samus. In that sense, there's a balance between how effective different weapons are with different hunters.
PGC: How was the single player mode first conceived and how did it change throughout development? We didn't see much single player for a very long time, so it's almost as if it's just been revealed.
Abe: Actually for both modes, development started at the same time. The thing about multiplayer mode is that you've got a variety of different modes. People can pick it up and play it very easily and quickly understand what's appealing about it. Whereas, with the single player mode, you really need to spend a good half-hour or more to really understand what's appealing about it, what's interesting, what makes it different. In that sense, the single player mode was just something that was harder to show to people. We really wanted to show it off earlier, but we felt that we'd rather create demos using the multiplayer mode and show people the appeal of the multiplayer Metroid and save the single player mode for later.
PGC: How did the control layout influence the level design and the enemy design?
Abe: It wasn't really a driving direction in terms of changing level design based on the control scheme, but because we've gone from a control stick to the stylus/touch-screen control, our real focus in designing the levels was just to make sure that the actual gameplay didn't get more difficult or the actual control didn't get more difficult. In that sense, we just took our standard process for designing levels and fine-tuned the level design more for the stylus control. But to say that we had to shift the way we designed the levels wouldn't be very accurate.
PGC: During the presentation, [Richard Vorodi] said that the length of the game is maybe just a little bit shorter than the first Metroid Prime. What kinds of incentives are there for replaying the game – bonuses or harder difficulties, etc.?
Abe: It's pretty standard in terms of what you would expect from a Metroid game, having an unlock system to encourage people to go back through and play the game. But at the same time, just doing a speed run is going to be a lot of fun for people, and I think that people will enjoy the challenge of trying to beat it faster than everyone else.
Reed: There's a couple of other things. When you finish the game, we do actually show the time that you took to get through the game. Also, we keep track of the total enemies killed through the whole life of the game. So each time you play, it keeps adding up and adding up and adding up, and I'm sure there's gonna be forums where there's like, "Ah, I got a million kills. I got two million kills." (laughter) There's all that online competition that I think that will be going on. It's always interesting to see what ways people find to play your game.
PGC: Before, people were pretty comfortable with there being 3D Metroid on consoles and 2D Metroid on handhelds over the past couple of years. Now that Hunters has kind of broken that barrier by putting 3D on a handheld, do you think we'll still see some 2D sequels in the future?
Abe: I guess. I'm sure that they'll probably put out some more 2D Metroid games.
PGC: Just a couple of fun questions. Some of our staff wanted to know what some of your favorite characters and weapons are in the game as well as how you two stack up against the other players in the office.
(laughter)
Abe: I prefer Kanden, and I'm really not very good. (laughter)
Reed: I think my favorite character is Weavel. I like his affinity gun. I love his HUD. I did all the HUDs as well, so that's probably my favorite. And I… don't ever play multiplayer so I'm pretty terrible. (laughter) I'm looking forward to playing once the game comes out. It's just that, obviously, I've been very busy.
There's always a group of guys every day. They're always like down at the end of the office battling away. (laughter) I think that's one of the reasons why all the characters are so balanced. It's just because we've played it so much. Not me personally, but everyone's played it so much. (laughter) Sometimes you’re like, "John, you gotta get back to work you know?" but they're just playing it, and it's all for the good of the game. That's one of the beautiful things about it. All the characters are totally balanced. We don't think there are any broken, too-strong characters.
One of the things that's really interesting to me - when you start playing team games – is how your combination of characters can influence the way that a match goes because your abilities can help each other. It's going to be very interesting to see how people end up playing the game.
Thanks again to Mr. Abe and Mr. Reed for taking the time to speak with us.
Post by: UncleBob on March 02, 2006, 05:49:08 AM
Wonder if Tetris DS will have it.
I want Tetris DS.
Post by: Strell on March 02, 2006, 08:38:16 AM
I cannot wait for this and Tetris. The DS has occuppied the majority of my gameplay time, and with killer titles like this, I'm having a difficult time excising myself from its iron grasp.
Post by: Louieturkey on March 02, 2006, 03:28:09 PM
I loved Prime and Prime 2, but I can't seem to get into the controls on this one(at least from the First Hunt demo). Maybe it's a bit better now, but multiplayer sounds like a lot of fun.
Post by: Nephilim on March 02, 2006, 03:40:21 PM
Post by: Bloodworth on March 02, 2006, 04:00:45 PM
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 02, 2006, 04:07:02 PM
Nothing more wasteful than when a game has a variety of characters to chose from and then 1-3 characters stand head and shoulders above the rest.
Post by: Bloodworth on March 02, 2006, 04:14:09 PM
Post by: Svevan on March 02, 2006, 04:59:42 PM
Quote
From early on, one of our key focuses was really creating this as an extension of the Metroid universe while at the same time upholding the traditions of the Metroid franchise, everything from the continuity of the story to the graphics. In that sense, I think it's really always been a part of the Metroid series.
Am I foolish for trusting Nintendo 100% on this?
-Evan T. Burchfield
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 02, 2006, 05:27:06 PM
Finally, Samus might actually do some, you know, bounty hunting.
Post by: UncleBob on March 02, 2006, 05:45:45 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bloodworth
UncleBob, I wouldn't hold your breath for voice chat in Tetris DS. Easy as it may be to put in, I get the impression that the Tetris team is very small. I did find out that the same guy that programmed Tetris on Game Boy is working on this version.
Sweet, that's the kind of thing that needs to be sung from the roof tops!
Post by: KDR_11k on March 03, 2006, 01:02:26 AM
Does Nintendo provide a voicechat library? If so it might be easy enough even for a single dev to implement that.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 03, 2006, 06:45:25 AM
I'd say so. Retro didn't even know about this game until Nintendo revealed it to the public. A bunch of losers bash Metroid Prime because it doesn't play like a first person shooter and then Nintendo has a different team make a Metroid first person shooter behind Retro's back? The way that action blatantly panders to the "I don't like Metroid Prime because I'm a moron" crowd is a little to obvious for this to be anything but a cash-in. It will probably be a good game because Nintendo typically makes good games but as a Metroid title this game has no credibility at all. It's nice that they're trying to make it not screw up the continuity though.
Post by: Rize on March 03, 2006, 07:03:24 AM
)that only like Hunters.
Post by: UncleBob on March 03, 2006, 07:20:34 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on March 03, 2006, 07:25:56 AM
I like how they're trying to tie in the story. But it seems to me that the story is a later addition. There was no trace of such a story in the original demo and I think Nintendo just went "let's make a Metroid FPS like all those rubes want us to" and got NST to make it. But there wasn't really a plan and it was just a typical cash-in where an unrelated game is given a franchise to attract sales. The storyline and everything seems to have come about due to backlash from fans. Afterall the game was supposed to come out a while ago now. That suggests to me that Nintendo was just planning on making a quick 'n' dirty cash-in, saw the reaction from the fans, and then realized they better work a little harder on it and delayed it.
Nintendo tried to make Star Fox Adventures fit in with the Star Fox storyline as well but that didn't change the fact that it was an obvious cash-in.
Post by: ShyGuy on March 03, 2006, 07:55:16 AM
I've got 3 words: Doki Doki Panic
Post by: Ian Sane on March 03, 2006, 08:19:22 AM
At least Doki Doki Panic was the same genre as Super Mario Bros and there wasn't a bunch of jerks that didn't like Super Mario Bros complaining that Mario should be able to pick up and throw his enemies. The fact that Metroid Prime Hunters is exactly what idiots who don't like Metroid have been asking for makes it easy to assume it's just a blatant cash-in.
Edit: I thought of a good comparison. When Ocarina of Time came out a bunch of idiots complained that it had no jump button. It was a 3D game and looked kind of like Super Mario 64 so it MUST be a platformer and thus should play like one. It didn't and it didn't have to because of the way the game was designed and it was brilliant. Metroid Prime did the same thing. Now imagine that Nintendo, behind EAD's back, made a Zelda shortly afterwards that had a jump button and played like a platformer. Would you think that that was a natural extension of the series or just a cheap cash-in for a quick buck? Metroid Prime Hunters is a Zelda platformer.
Post by: PaLaDiN on March 03, 2006, 08:43:12 AM
[Edit: It's actually in this interview. The one this thread is based on. Now I'm confused as to whether you didn't read it or just ignored it.]
Make no mistake, if that was just a bunch of words and the single-player ends up sucking you will all feel my wrath for all the inane babbling about online multiplayer, because I've been worrying about this happening for years now, and it happening to my favorite series is worse than even I imagined. Be forewarned, it will be a Paladin-Ian Sane tag team match of epic proportions.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 03, 2006, 09:21:38 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I like how they're trying to tie in the story. But it seems to me that the story is a later addition. There was no trace of such a story in the original demo and I think Nintendo just went "let's make a Metroid FPS like all those rubes want us to" and got NST to make it. But there wasn't really a plan and it was just a typical cash-in where an unrelated game is given a franchise to attract sales. The storyline and everything seems to have come about due to backlash from fans. Afterall the game was supposed to come out a while ago now. That suggests to me that Nintendo was just planning on making a quick 'n' dirty cash-in, saw the reaction from the fans, and then realized they better work a little harder on it and delayed it.
1. They did the smart thing with the GC primes because aiming with a control stick is a goddamn chore so they used the lock on system.
2. The DS has the necessary tools to aim as though you were using a mouse, so they used it. You think MP3 won't be using the Revmote to aim instead of the lock on system?
3. I could just as easily argue that TP is clearly an "afterthought" to the Zelda storyline because it was simply pandering to all of the rubes who wanted a realistic Zelda and the storyline doesn't fit anywhere.
4. Did you even READ the interview? It was delayed for so long because the game can only be done true justice online, making it what I predict will be a killer app in the process.
5. What's wrong with a story arc which happens between MP 1 and 2? You think Samus sat in her ship, staring at the wall until she got the contract to investigate the lost marines on Aether? Contractors get contracts (or bounties). Frankly, it's a colossal breath of fresh air for us to see some OTHER bounty hunters instead of just Samus so we actually have a comparison to make.
Nintendo wanted a SOLID multiplayer FPS on the DS which ties in to a good franchise. The Metroid series is perfect for this, given that Metroid is currently one of Nintendo's most respected franchises and actually has a reason to tote multiplayer to boot. "Quick and dirty buck", this is NOT. Read the preview? The graphics are the best they've seen on the DS yet because of the extra time the game spent in development. This game has been in development for a good long time and it sounds like one of the best titles we'll see on any platform this year.
Voice chat? Selectable games? A variety of different characters with different weapon styles and forms? Multiplayer online browsing to find the game of your choice? Team battles where you want to pick combos which work well together? Any DS gamer worth their salt would be happier than a pig in sh*t about that list of features.
Ian, sometimes you make good points and sometimes you go off on a tangent. Right now, you're on a tangent. This game will sell like crazy and push the DS even further in the US where players eat up FPS games.
There's no reason to be negative about this.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 03, 2006, 10:40:18 AM
The lock-on in Metroid Prime was not just there because mouse controls couldn't be done. It was there because it eliminated aiming and the need to have FPS skills to do well in a game that isn't an FPS and was never meant to be. In the 2D Metroid games aiming isn't an issue so they added the lock-on to make sure it wasn't an issue here and thus the game could concentrate on the important elements of Metroid like exploration. They remove the lock-on for Metroid Prime 3 and now I have to be good at a different genre of game entirely when originally I just had to be good at Metroid. Longtime Metroid fans could potentially suck at the game because they suck at a type of game they have no interest in.
This is clearly a well made game and I'm glad Nintendo to putting in a lot of effort into it. It probably will sell really well and sell DS systems. But I don't care. I want Metroid to sell well for being Metroid. I don't want Metroid to achieve success by compromising what it really is. If anything it would be bad for this game to sell well because then there would be a bunch of new Metroid "fans" who in fact aren't fans at all that could influence the franchise to go more in this direction. That I think is a damn good reason to be negative about this.
"I could just as easily argue that TP is clearly an 'afterthought' to the Zelda storyline because it was simply pandering to all of the rubes who wanted a realistic Zelda and the storyline doesn't fit anywhere."
You could though I think it's a little different. Zelda's gameplay isn't being compromised and a lot of the people who complained about Wind Waker's graphics are Zelda fans. They've played all the Zeldas and love the series and enjoyed Wind Waker and recognize that it's a great game. They just don't like the style much. The Zelda fanbase is somewhat split about the issue. This is different because the people who complained that Metroid Prime didn't play like Halo aren't Metroid fans and don't want a real Metroid game. What they really want is Halo. Most of those people are ignorant of the real Metroid series. They tried a game out assuming it was something else and then got mad and complained that it should be changed into what they want it to be without any regard to the franchise's history or what the game is even trying to accomplish. It's just "it's in first person so it must play like a first person shooter".
Why don't we change Super Smash Bros to play like Street Fighter II? It's a fighting game so I guess it has to play that way. Would a SSB fan be happy if this change was made and suddenly he had to memorize button combinations to play an SSB game?
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 03, 2006, 11:38:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
The lock-on in Metroid Prime was not just there because mouse controls couldn't be done. It was there because it eliminated aiming and the need to have FPS skills to do well in a game that isn't an FPS and was never meant to be. In the 2D Metroid games aiming isn't an issue so they added the lock-on to make sure it wasn't an issue here and thus the game could concentrate on the important elements of Metroid like exploration. They remove the lock-on for Metroid Prime 3 and now I have to be good at a different genre of game entirely when originally I just had to be good at Metroid. Longtime Metroid fans could potentially suck at the game because they suck at a type of game they have no interest in.
First of all, strafing, jumping and dodging in 3D are all characteristics of a FPS. The only aspect of MP which doesn't follow the traditional aspect of a FPS is the aiming and I feel that was done because Retro and Nintendo agreed that aiming on a console is a bad idea because a control stick is not an adequate device for doing so.
But aiming manually still exists in the game: whenever I want to shoot boxes, pods, etc., I need to aim manually with the control stick. All the lock-on does is allow the enemies to move around a lot more without having to worry about whether or not the player will be able to shoot them.
This was a design issue, not a gameplay issue, and the MP2 demo using the controller to aim was already available at last E3. Expect it to be used in full in MP3.
Quote
This is clearly a well made game and I'm glad Nintendo to putting in a lot of effort into it. It probably will sell really well and sell DS systems. But I don't care. I want Metroid to sell well for being Metroid. I don't want Metroid to achieve success by compromising what it really is. If anything it would be bad for this game to sell well because then there would be a bunch of new Metroid "fans" who in fact aren't fans at all that could influence the franchise to go more in this direction. That I think is a damn good reason to be negative about this.
How has Metroid been compromised?
-Samus is back in full 3D glory.
-New enemies to fight, but instead of phazon-mutated space pirates, they're rival bounty hunters being paid to horn in on Samus' bounties. If Samus doesn't bring in the crystals, she doesn't get paid. Unlike her recent "charity mission", this is a vastly more realistic scenario.
-Aiming is now possible with mouse-like precision via the touchscreen.
-Multiplayer won't suck like it did in MP2.
What about this is compromising the game? I know more than enough people bitched up a storm about Metroid going to 3D and it turned out just fine. I've played the game with the touchscreen with the demo and I very much enjoy the gameplay with the touchpad and I don't think it raises the difficulty to a point where it's out of the "league" of any gamer.
Also, why is auto-lock integral to the game? In the 2D Mertroid games, could you stand above an enemy from across a room, hold down the L button (SNES) and Samus would automatically aim for it? Hell no. You had to point your gun at it and shoot the bugger. Why should this be any different in 3D?
Quote
You could though I think it's a little different. Zelda's gameplay isn't being compromised and a lot of the people who complained about Wind Waker's graphics are Zelda fans. They've played all the Zeldas and love the series and enjoyed Wind Waker and recognize that it's a great game. They just don't like the style much. The Zelda fanbase is somewhat split about the issue. This is different because the people who complained that Metroid Prime didn't play like Halo aren't Metroid fans and don't want a real Metroid game. What they really want is Halo. Most of those people are ignorant of the real Metroid series. They tried a game out assuming it was something else and then got mad and complained that it should be changed into what they want it to be without any regard to the franchise's history or what the game is even trying to accomplish. It's just "it's in first person so it must play like a first person shooter".
I don't see how it's different at all.
Zelda purists who follow Miyamoto's vision feel this is pandering to the graphic-whores who aren't true Zelda fans by betraying his original vision for something with more widespread "mature" appeal.
Metroid purists, the same ones who kicked and screamed when Metroid went 3D, have now apparently latched onto the auto-aim feature and consider it pandering to the FPS fans by removing it.
Do you know how foolish this sounds in context?
Quote
Why don't we change Super Smash Bros to play like Street Fighter II? It's a fighting game so I guess it has to play that way. Would a SSB fan be happy if this change was made and suddenly he had to memorize button combinations to play an SSB game?
Because not having those combos is the entire purpose of the game. The entire purpose of Metroid is the puzzle solving, upgrades and combat, not using a lazy auto-aim system in lieu of actual aiming.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 03, 2006, 12:21:13 PM
The game is level based and lacks the permanent upgrades. That's what Metroid is about: exploring an inter-connected world to find items that gives you new abilities to explore new areas. This game is about finding crystals in a level based environment and shooting at rival characters. It sounds like a cool game but it ain't Metroid.
"Also, why is auto-lock integral to the game? In the 2D Mertroid games, could you stand above an enemy from across a room, hold down the L button (SNES) and Samus would automatically aim for it? Hell no. You had to point your gun at it and shoot the bugger. Why should this be any different in 3D?"
Aiming in 2D is way WAY easier than in 3D. It's like Zelda. In A Link to the Past I have to aim with my bow. My target has to be in front of me. But they added targeting to the 3D games because aiming became harder with the extra dimension and they needed to make it simpler so that the game still felt like a Zelda game instead of an arrow shooting game. It was important that the combat in Zelda remained as easy to execute as it did in 2D so that the focus of the game could remain on the adventure elements of the series. Metroid isn't about shooting so the shooting in the game should be streamlined. Metroid is an adventure game. Hunters is an action game. Metroid should remain an adventure game. If you add too much action the game becomes more about reflexes and twitch gaming when it's supposed to be about puzzle solving and exploration.
One thing that has to be taken into account is the fanbase and what they're accustomed to. Action fans and adventure fans aren't always the same people because those types of games require different skills. You add too many puzzles to an action game and the fans get stuck because they lack those types of skills. You add too many action elements to an adventure game and the fans get stuck because they lack those types of skills.
They're probably going to have manual aiming in Metroid Prime 3 but the game might be hurt because of it. It's not so much about the aiming but the balance between action and adventure elements. If they get the balance right it will be okay. But I think the auto-aim was added specifically to create this balance and removing it will make the game too much like Doom.
"Zelda purists who follow Miyamoto's vision feel this is pandering to the graphic-whores who aren't true Zelda fans by betraying his original vision for something with more widespread 'mature' appeal."
I personally see Wind Waker as the oddball that breaks away from the Zelda style but whatever. Twilight Princess still looks like Zelda and plays like Zelda. If Wind Waker didn't exist no one would complain about it. However if Metroid Prime had turned out like Metroid Prime Hunters fans probably would have complained about it. I think a game's looks and how a game plays are big differences. I don't really like how Wind Waker looks. Well actually I do, I just don't like that look for Zelda. But I still bought Wind Waker and loved it because it still played like Zelda. The feel was still right and that's the most important thing. The Hunters demo sure as hell doesn't feel like Metroid.
Post by: PaLaDiN on March 03, 2006, 12:36:50 PM
If the single player turns out to suck, I'm with you. But don't extend the demo to the full game, because the component you seem to be judging by the demo isn't featured in the demo.
Post by: Artimus on March 03, 2006, 01:07:24 PM
Post by: Jensen on March 03, 2006, 01:09:26 PM
If they just made mini Metroid Prime, why should I buy it when I can just play a better version on my Gamecube? Do you think you'd enjoy Metroid Prime on the N64 if it were coming out this month? I bought a DS so I could play games that would not be possible with any other system, not so I could play mini Gamecube games.
You just don't like that it is called a Metroid game? As others have said, it fits in more with who Samus is than other Metroid games, even if the gameplay will be different.
Post by: Rize on March 03, 2006, 01:24:57 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on March 03, 2006, 02:05:38 PM
Part of my opinion I'm basing on previews and impressions. I don't need to play the game to know that a level based structure is very likely going to make the game feel less Metroid like.
I think an ideal Metroid game for the DS would be a 2D Metroid game like the 2D Metroid games on the GBA. They've established Metroid Prime as the console series and the original series as the portable one. Metroid Prime Hunters looks like a pretty cool game and it does make good use of the DS hardware. But it shouldn't necessarily be a Metroid game since it doesn't have a lot of key Metroid elements. When you take an otherwise unrelated game and throw in a franchise it's called milking and it devalues the franchise over time. Case in point new Mario games don't make any impact on the gaming industry anymore when years ago every Mario game was like a huge deal. This is no different than Star Fox Adventures in that it is only loosely based on the original concept. The only difference is we knew they just shoehorned Star Fox in that case and we can't confirm if they did the same thing here. If they didn't call this Metroid I wouldn't care.
"As others have said, it fits in more with who Samus is than other Metroid games, even if the gameplay will be different."
Who Samus is? What the hell does that mean? Samus exists purely in the Metroid games. The original Metroid series is 100% accurate to her character because it defined who the hell she was in the first place. You guys are getting hung up on "bounty hunter" being written in an NES manual. Samus really is more of a superhero then anything else. The only reason they called her a bounty hunter in the first place is because it sounds cooler than "spaceman protagonist". With that logic the next Mario game better revolve around plumbing because it would be fit more with who Mario is.
Post by: Mario on March 03, 2006, 02:12:33 PM
I still can't hold the DS properly when playing the demo of this game, my left hand is the only thing holding the entire weight of the DS up because i'm using the stylus with my other hand and the DS just flops around and it's a nightmare to play for more than 5 minutes. That's the only thing stopping me from getting the game, which is a shame because it looks like they're cramming so much awesomeness into it, i'd definately buy a GC / Rev port. I think i'm alone in this though..
Post by: Artimus on March 03, 2006, 02:39:15 PM
Post by: mantidor on March 03, 2006, 02:47:26 PM
The only thing I dont like about it is that it seems that the thumbstrap scratches the screen more easily, and the thumbstrap doesnt cover the whole thumb so its also very easy to get those ugly greasy fingerprints on the screen.
Post by: Urkel on March 03, 2006, 04:17:19 PM
Just that there's more shooting now. And a worthwhile multiplayer mode.
Post by: Bloodworth on March 03, 2006, 04:30:22 PM
Oddly enough, despite the fact that I use inverted aiming on every console FPS, inverting the controls on Hunters makes it unplayable for me. WEIRD.
I think that the single player game will progress somewhat like Fusion, giving you access to multiple areas at once, but shutting off certain areas at times. The Hunters themselves feel like fighting Dark Samus in Echoes since you're toe to toe with an enemy that's very much your equal.
Post by: Bill Aurion on March 03, 2006, 07:17:00 PM
Probably because it's a more direct method of input...
Post by: Myxtika1 Azn on March 03, 2006, 07:26:31 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bloodworth
The Hunters themselves feel like fighting Dark Samus in Echoes since you're toe to toe with an enemy that's very much your equal.
Crap! Are there "regular" bosses in this game? You know, like the MP 1 and 2 bosses. I don't really want to go through fight after fight and it not be different between each other. It'll get tired fighting "Dark Samus" multiple times -- heck, I hated that part of Echoes.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 03, 2006, 08:12:56 PM
I use inverted on consoles and normal on the PC (don't have the Prime 3 Arena demo), the reason is that the control stick is more like controlling a flight simulator. I don't know which game started it for me but I just treat analog look as controlling a plane or spaceship.
Post by: IceCold on March 03, 2006, 08:53:12 PM
QuoteHahahaha.. Sorry, but that just made me laugh. The whole paragraph, but especially that
Now imagine that Nintendo, behind EAD's back, made a Zelda shortly afterwards that had a jump button and played like a platformer. Would you think that that was a natural extension of the series or just a cheap cash-in for a quick buck? Metroid Prime Hunters is a Zelda platformer.
Anyway, I'll give you Hunters, but there's no way in hell Retro will change MP3 into an FPS. You say that it's easier to aim in 2D games. Well, that's EXACTLY what the Rev controller is trying to do; it's trying to make aiming natural and intuitive. And if early impressions are to be believed, it's doing a good job at it. In fact, it may even bring Metroid closer to its 2D roots.. There will still be exploration, still be adventure - don't worry.
What you're saying here is just like your arguments about Zelda taking the focus away from adventure if it used the NRC - unfounded.
Post by: Mr Bloober on March 04, 2006, 12:17:27 AM
Quote
Crap! Are there "regular" bosses in this game? You know, like the MP 1 and 2 bosses. I don't really want to go through fight after fight and it not be different between each other. It'll get tired fighting "Dark Samus" multiple times -- heck, I hated that part of Echoes.
The Nintendo Power article mentions "Gaurdians" of the crystals, so I'm assuming there's going to be monster bosses, as well as the bounty-hunter bosses (If they're really bosses at all?). But then again, it might just be refering to the usual evil flora and flauna.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on March 04, 2006, 01:27:14 AM
Post by: KnowsNothing on March 04, 2006, 05:29:24 AM
Also:
Quote
Aiming in 2D is way WAY easier than in 3D. It's like Zelda. In A Link to the Past I have to aim with my bow. My target has to be in front of me. But they added targeting to the 3D games because aiming became harder with the extra dimension and they needed to make it simpler so that the game still felt like a Zelda game instead of an arrow shooting game. It was important that the combat in Zelda remained as easy to execute as it did in 2D so that the focus of the game could remain on the adventure elements of the series.
In Zelda you could shoot arrows manually or, when fighting an enemy, you can lock on. According to the Prime 2 demo with the Rev controller, the lock on was still there, it was just less necessary. So in Prime 3 you'll be able to shoot manually or, when fighting an enemy, you can lock on. Same thing
I know we're talking about Hunters here, I'm just saying that Prime 3 is doing the same thing as the other Primes, which, according to Ian, stays true to the Metroid roots. So he can't complain
So yeah, about Hunters, I agree with the dude who said it's perfect for the DS (don't feel like scolling up!). This game perfectly showcases the DS hardware in its own way: (in my opinion) awesome touch screen aiming, beautiful graphics for the system, and now voice chat through the microphone. The Metroid name may feel a little tacked on, but it in no way makes the game worse, it makes it much better, so I'm not complaining. With the Metroid name comes puzzle solving, upgrades, scanning, Samus (!!), and the whole Metroid atmosphere and history that another series wouldn't be able to replicate. It's still a Metroid game at heart, it just controls a little differently. So stop complaining! Super Mario 64 was much more removed from the Mario games than this is from the Metroid games, but we all love it anyway
words words words
Post by: Artimus on March 04, 2006, 07:31:12 AM
I think with the Rev we won't see a rehash of MP or Metroid, but an expansion and deepening of the world and experience. Very similar to the advancement that is MP.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 04, 2006, 09:08:49 AM
Stealth should never have been in Metroid. The game is about exploring, not about sneaking around. When you have the ability to remain unseen then you can be sure the developer will make a level where that's required. I will not buy a Metroid game with any stealth sections (provided the reviews bother to mention that, which most didn't for Zero Mission to avoid spoilers).
Post by: 31 Flavas on March 04, 2006, 09:32:16 AM
QuoteWell, it's your personal opinion that you hated them, I can't very well contest that. That said, it's very natural for myself and a hell of a lot less awkward for me then the "standard fare" of dual analoge or Dpad + face buttons to look around. Whats awkward about both for me is that in a fire fight I have to choose a pitch angle thats a proximatly at the angle of the player, zombie, monster, (whatever), that I need to shoot at. Then since the combat is fast and the opponet is both shooting at me and moving around, all the adjustments to pitch angle need to be done by moving forward, backwards, or side to side. It is highly inaccurate and frustrating for me and the reason I don't like console FPS games (except those that impliment some kind of auto aim). The stylus + touch screen, gives me back the aiming accuracy so that it is basicly WADS + mouse. And now I can pride myself on aiming once again.
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey
I hated all of the touch screen aiming options in the demo. Stylus, thumbstrap, whatever, they were all awkward as hell after a few minutes. And resting it on a table while hunching over to see the screen sounds about as fun as sticking toothpicks under my fingernails. Dpad + face buttons for the win.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 04, 2006, 09:43:18 AM
Ian, your attitude on the subject pangs of an old man waving his cane in the air, screaming, "Why, in MY day..." when he doesn't even know what he's talking about because he hasn't experienced it yet.
Be honest, were you upset about Metroid being made into a FPS on the GC? I know there was a whole assload of people who pitched a fit about that and, with your current attitude, I wouldn't be surprised if you were one of them.
And I have bad news for you: Metroid Prime IS a FPS. Is the game viewed from first-person? YES. Do you shoot things? YES. Then it's a goddamn first-person shooter. End of story. FPSs have auto aim options as well, some of which barely require you to be aiming at the target and still allows you to hit it, but that doesn't change the fact that they're FPSs. Metroid Prime is a FPS geared toward exploration, but that doesn't change the fact that you fight your enemies by shooting them from a first-person perspective.
The argument of "I DON'T WANNA HAFTA AIM!!!!!" is a horrible one. Seriously, Metroid is not Unreal Tournament, not because they have different aiming schemes but because the two games have completely different focus in terms of gameplay, strategy and technique.
And you had to do plenty of manual aiming in OoT, including the last boss, the horse riding, solving puzzles, etc. No one complained about that, either. On the subject, Mario is a plumber who crawls through a lot of pipes. Samus is a bounty hunter who, to my recollection, has never actually been paid for bringing in a bounty (maybe in one of the 2D Metroids, but never in the Prmes). Even the f*cking StarFox team stuck with its guns and turned down the chance to join the Cornerian army because they're freelance mercenaries who GET PAID (among the list of offenders in the Nintendo universe is Captain Falcon, who supposedly catches all these criminals and yet we've never seen him do anything but race. A guy who never gets out of his car like that should be much fatter, IMHO).
You're overreacting. You haven't even played the game yet and you're already denouncing it, claiming it violates the "Sacred Metroid Testament" or some other such nonsense. At least PLAY the damn game before you blast it all to hell.
Post by: Artimus on March 04, 2006, 09:53:37 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Having the option to actually aim precisely, while maintaining a lockon, adds a level that should've been in Metroid games all along: stealth.
Stealth should never have been in Metroid. The game is about exploring, not about sneaking around. When you have the ability to remain unseen then you can be sure the developer will make a level where that's required. I will not buy a Metroid game with any stealth sections (provided the reviews bother to mention that, which most didn't for Zero Mission to avoid spoilers).
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I didn't mean stealth as in sneaking behind guards. I guess I meant long distance attacking. It makes no sense a bounty hunter wouldn't have the ability to do some form of sniping.
Post by: Artimus on March 04, 2006, 10:00:11 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
And I have bad news for you: Metroid Prime IS a FPS. Is the game viewed from first-person? YES. Do you shoot things? YES. Then it's a goddamn first-person shooter. End of story. FPSs have auto aim options as well, some of which barely require you to be aiming at the target and still allows you to hit it, but that doesn't change the fact that they're FPSs. Metroid Prime is a FPS geared toward exploration, but that doesn't change the fact that you fight your enemies by shooting them from a first-person perspective.
FPS generally refers to a Half-Life/Perfect Dark/Unreal game. Metroid is so different that calling it just an FPS makes as much sense as calling Mario Sunshine a shooter because he uses a water gun. One element doesn't define a genre unless its the primary element. Metroid's handling of enemies is very different than an FPS's, and the main focus of gameplay is exploration. I really think First Person Adventure is an accurate name for it.
That being said, the difference between MP and say...Half Life, isn't the control scheme. Having precise aiming doesn't change the type of game, and if the focus of the game remains a mix of platforming, morph ball puzzles, and killing enemies, then MP:H will easily be a FPA too, just with an FPS-styled multiplayer (which makes perfect sense in the Metroid universe as well). I think the main difference is simply that in Metroid you just shoot to obliterate. You're not aiming to shoot, but just to kill the enemy. It doesn't matter where you hit them, unlike an FPS which is modeled after aiming a gun.
Post by: Mario on March 04, 2006, 04:11:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: 31 FlavasQuoteWell, it's your personal opinion that you hated them, I can't very well contest that. That said, it's very natural for myself and a hell of a lot less awkward for me then the "standard fare" of dual analoge or Dpad + face buttons to look around. Whats awkward about both for me is that in a fire fight I have to choose a pitch angle thats a proximatly at the angle of the player, zombie, monster, (whatever), that I need to shoot at. Then since the combat is fast and the opponet is both shooting at me and moving around, all the adjustments to pitch angle need to be done by moving forward, backwards, or side to side. It is highly inaccurate and frustrating for me and the reason I don't like console FPS games (except those that impliment some kind of auto aim). The stylus + touch screen, gives me back the aiming accuracy so that it is basicly WADS + mouse. And now I can pride myself on aiming once again.
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey
I hated all of the touch screen aiming options in the demo. Stylus, thumbstrap, whatever, they were all awkward as hell after a few minutes. And resting it on a table while hunching over to see the screen sounds about as fun as sticking toothpicks under my fingernails. Dpad + face buttons for the win.
That's not the point though, I don't think anyone is arguing that the controls aren't good, I think they're fantastic, some of the best FPS controls ever, it's just to uncomfortable for some people to use. To me it's a massive teaser for the Rev controller which will have nothing holding it back.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 04, 2006, 04:41:11 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
That being said, the difference between MP and say...Half Life, isn't the control scheme. Having precise aiming doesn't change the type of game, and if the focus of the game remains a mix of platforming, morph ball puzzles, and killing enemies, then MP:H will easily be a FPA too, just with an FPS-styled multiplayer (which makes perfect sense in the Metroid universe as well). I think the main difference is simply that in Metroid you just shoot to obliterate. You're not aiming to shoot, but just to kill the enemy. It doesn't matter where you hit them, unlike an FPS which is modeled after aiming a gun.
Call it a FPA if you want, but my point is that MP and MP:H are not the billion miles apart which Ian seems to think they will be.
Post by: Artimus on March 04, 2006, 04:46:03 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: Artimus
That being said, the difference between MP and say...Half Life, isn't the control scheme. Having precise aiming doesn't change the type of game, and if the focus of the game remains a mix of platforming, morph ball puzzles, and killing enemies, then MP:H will easily be a FPA too, just with an FPS-styled multiplayer (which makes perfect sense in the Metroid universe as well). I think the main difference is simply that in Metroid you just shoot to obliterate. You're not aiming to shoot, but just to kill the enemy. It doesn't matter where you hit them, unlike an FPS which is modeled after aiming a gun.
Call it a FPA if you want, but my point is that MP and MP:H are not the billion miles apart which Ian seems to think they will be.
I know, I'm arguing the same thing, lol.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 04, 2006, 06:50:26 PM
I guess arguing about it is ridiculous: we haven't even seen much of the single player game. The single player game will likely be just like MP. The multiplayer will be like MP multiplayer without auto aim and more variety and options. That's the point I should be pushing here.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 04, 2006, 09:15:29 PM
Metroid is a Jump and Run. Do you jump? YES. Do you run? YES. Then it's a Jump and Run. End of story.
First person and shooting are necessary but not sufficient conditions for a game to be an FPS.
In Metroid Prime the gameplay is defense-oriented, you don't have to worry much about handling the weapon, you just hammer on the fire button but you have to jump around and dodge to avoid damage. In most (realistic) FPSes the gameplay is attack based, you control the weapon and have to think about how to shoot but defense is nearly nonexistant. In futuristic FPSes you often have to worry about both and I have this nagging feeling that that's too much for the mainstream gamer which is why they gravitate towards "realistic" games. Most people can't handle attacking and defending at the same time and I suppose keeping crosshairs over a target is easier than moving out of the trajectory of a bunch of flak chunks.
Metroid Prime was basically Zelda in first person.
among the list of offenders in the Nintendo universe is Captain Falcon, who supposedly catches all these criminals and yet we've never seen him do anything but race. A guy who never gets out of his car like that should be much fatter, IMHO
Real Formula 1 racers aren't in bad shape either.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 06, 2006, 06:00:32 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Metroid is a Jump and Run. Do you jump? YES. Do you run? YES. Then it's a Jump and Run. End of story.
So Metroid and Myst 5 are in the same genre then, because you run, jump and solve puzzles in Myst 5 as well?
You run and jump in Unreal Tournament, Deus Ex, Geist, Doom 1-3, Timesplitters, etc. etc. and yet people still consider those FPSs. The concept of running away from enemies instead of killing them or exploring instead of fighting is not so insanely new and revolutionary that it comprises a new genre.
Quote
First person and shooting are necessary but not sufficient conditions for a game to be an FPS.
If I were more of a dick, I'd use that as a sig quote.
But I know what you're trying to say so I won't take it out of context.Quote
In Metroid Prime the gameplay is defense-oriented, you don't have to worry much about handling the weapon, you just hammer on the fire button but you have to jump around and dodge to avoid damage.
I don't know if you've played any FPSs lately, but that's basically how they play as well, except that, instead of getting somewhat near the enemy with your crosshair and hitting auto lock, you get somewhat near the enemy and the system auto aims for you, but you're also using a mouse which is a drastically easier device to do this with.
The DS and Revmote remove this obstacle, which is why you'll likely never see a Metroid game with auto lock ever again.
Quote
Real Formula 1 racers aren't in bad shape either.
Sure, but find me a martial artist amongst them.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 06, 2006, 07:25:48 AM
When it first was revealed I was skeptical but willing to give it a chance. Back then though I had a more confidence in Nintendo's abilities. They were more careful with their franchise games then. On the Cube they started talking about their franchises as if they were what defined them and more rehashes and spinoffs started showing up. There wasn't any Star Fox Adventures or Mario Pinball or Mario in EA games back then. At that point I still felt that Nintendo only released sequels if there was a reason for the game to exist and they didn't milk their franchises very often (though they were starting to with games like Mario Party 3). That has changed and Nintendo today doesn't give their franchises that same respect. So when a new take on a franchise comes out and I'm not as open to it. Back then I trusted Nintendo to not shoehorn franchises into unrelated games for a quick buck. Now I don't. Too many soulless Mario products have come out.
When details about how Metroid Prime played came out I immediately accepted it. The description of how it worked just fit Metroid so I was very confident in it. Metroid Prime Hunters doesn't have that. I play the demo and look at the previews and all I see is a Doom-style first person shooter with some Metroid elements thrown in. It's the generic FPS we were all afraid Metroid Prime was going to be. I don't consider Metroid Prime to be an FPS. If it is then it's one of the most unique ones ever made. To me lumping it in that genre would be like saying Mega Man and Mario are the same type of game because they have jumping and they're sidescrollers. Yet in one you jump on enemies and in the other one you shoot them. That dynamic changes the two games considerably and if you switched the mechanics the games wouldn't feel right. Imagine playing Mega Man where you jump on enemies like in Mario. That would hardly be a Mega Man game. Or a Mario game where you can't jump on any enemies at all? Ugh.
Regarding the controls for the game I find the touchscreen slippery, if that makes sense. The lack of resistance makes it difficult for me to control the demo. The surface of the screen is so smooth that often the stylus slips and I aim too much to one side because I'm expecting it to be harder to "push" the stylus. The "point at the enemies you want to shoot" method works okay for me though.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 06, 2006, 07:35:10 AM
No. I'm not sure what that kind of argument is called but I wanted to show you the fallacy of your argument by applying it to a different genre.
If I were more of a dick, I'd use that as a sig quote. But I know what you're trying to say so I won't take it out of context.
I wasn't aware that quote needed context, in math there are sufficient and necessary conditions, if any of the former are false then the statement is false and if any of the latter are true the statement is true (if both can happen at the same time your proof is faulty).
I don't know if you've played any FPSs lately, but that's basically how they play as well, except that, instead of getting somewhat near the enemy with your crosshair and hitting auto lock, you get somewhat near the enemy and the system auto aims for you, but you're also using a mouse which is a drastically easier device to do this with.
I admit I haven't played many FPSes last year (only two) but to my knowledge auto aim is available but disabled by default in FPSes with mouselook.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 06, 2006, 08:08:10 AM
I took to the stylus control like a fish to water, but I can understand how you'd be skeptical of the game if you did not.
My skepticism revolves around two issues: 1. The balance of the hunters in multiplayer and 2. the main game being more than just a "training mode" for the multiplayer.
I hope these won't be a problem, but at the same time, all of the other features sound good enough that I'm happy with the way it sounds.
I also understand what you're saying about being careful with franchises. I think, though, that Nintendo knows how much they have riding on Metroid and wouldn't keep anything but a tight leash on the game (even Metroid pinball was very well done).
Quote
No. I'm not sure what that kind of argument is called but I wanted to show you the fallacy of your argument by applying it to a different genre.
And I'm showing you the fallacy of yours by asking you to draw lines between these two games when the only thing separating them is the shooting aspect. Myst 5 is a first-person adventure because the focus of the game is exploration and story. Metroid is a first-person shooter because the focus of the game is exploration and combat. If you could complete the game without killing opponents, I might be inclined to agree. As it stands, however, shooting your enemies is an integral part of the gameplay. Meanwhile, you shoot them from a first-person perspective. I understand the desire to not call it a FPS because of other games in the genre, but this is a problem throughout. Both LoZ and GTA are considered "action/adventure" games because they both allow free roaming and focus on combat. SSB and Mortal Kombat are both fighting games, despite how different they are. I understand the argument that lumping MP in with some of the crap FPSs out there seems to sully its good name, but understand that this is not the case.
Quote
I wasn't aware that quote needed context, in math there are sufficient and necessary conditions, if any of the former are false then the statement is false and if any of the latter are true the statement is true (if both can happen at the same time your proof is faulty).
We're just going to have to agree to disagree there. If you think "First person and shooting are necessary but not sufficient conditions for a game to be an FPS.", then name me an example of a game which has a first-person perspective, shooting, and yet relies so little on combat that the focus of the game is something else entirely.
MP fails this test. The game includes a ridiculous amount of killing. You cannot progress past most areas unless you have slaughtered your way through them. You also need to kill every boss you fight. Intermittent optional killing and a varied control scheme do not make MP something OTHER than a FPS. Most if not all of Deus Ex included optional killing: you could sneak past enemies to avoid detection without ever firing a shot, and yet the entire game was played from the first-person.
Quote
I admit I haven't played many FPSes last year (only two) but to my knowledge auto aim is available but disabled by default in FPSes with mouselook.
You can still enable it, but again, mouse-looking makes aiming so much easier that aiming is a non-issue most of the time. Also, I think the DS's stylus control is even better than mouse aiming because using a single point to control precision is better than an entire mouse (IMO, anyway).
We'll see when it comes out, but I don't think MP:H is going to betray the franchise in the least.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 06, 2006, 08:20:07 AM
When I was a kid I didn't play many "thinking games" so for years I had no idea what Metroid was. In screenshots the games looked no different then your typical sidescrolling action game like Super Star Wars or Castlevania. But it's not. You kill enemies, fight bosses, jump from platform to platform and the whole game is viewed from a side angle. But it's not a sidescrolling action game like Mega Man or Castlevania and you would never consider it as such. So why is Metroid Prime an FPS because you shoot things and have a first person view?
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 06, 2006, 08:32:44 AM
What elements can I look for in Metroid? Side scrolling and action are IN there, so I'd have no choice but to factor them into the equation.
I think I see where we deviate here.
Personally, I don't see a game where more thought is involved (like Metroid) as being so different from a game where it isn't. FPShooting has never been the sole aspect I've searched for in games. I've ALWAYS sought games which challenge the mind as well as the mouse hand, but yeah, if you took a FPS which is nothing BUT a FPS, I'd probably hate it too.
In my mind, adventure, puzzle solving and discovery are staple for a FPS as well. This is why I loved Deus Ex to death and still cite it as an example for nearly everything that gaming excellence can be.
However, I was wrong. You SHOULD be worried. I guess Nintendo wanted to go in a different direction after all...
From Penny-Arcade:
When I say the game isn't very Nintendo, this is what I mean: it is a balls-out paean to skill-based, PC deathmatch. I don't understand what it is doing on the DS. No auto-aim, no lock-on. It is not a party game tarted up with go karts or some sh!t. You do not bury fruit in Metroid: Hunters. It is, for some reason, a portable, online capable shooter on Nintendo's defiant, two screen mutant handheld. The real alteration to the old formula is the addition of "alt modes," like Samus' morph ball. Every character has an alternate form with its own (sometimes) strange function: laser tripmines, a turret, all kinds of weird crap.
If you have played any Mario Kart DS, you know that it can be difficult to settle on a hand position that is not excruciating after awhile. You may find that here as well, at least initially. There are several control options you can use, and settings to tune them further. The one I settled on was called "Dual Mode," one that features no stylus input: the four button quad on your right handles all look functions. It works surprisingly well. It's not what I think of when I picture the DS, and the sometimes unorthodox gamers that are drawn to the system don't seem like a good match for an unapologetic FPS experience. The renaissance gamer for whom the DS is part of a larger collection may well find something to adore.
And from the first review that I've seen:
Welcome, too, is the news that Hunters' single-player aspect hasn't been neglected in favor of the online game. While NST had originally indicated that Hunters' solo mode would effectively boil down to a series of mini-contests and trials, the final product bears far more resemblance to the previous Prime games than to, say, Quake III.
That's not to say Metroid fans won't find some things to gripe about in the campaign mode, though. The Metroid tradition of a vast world connected by labyrinthine passages is abandoned; Samus Aran will travel from world to world in her quest. Samus begins the game equipped with weapons and doesn't lose them during the opening sequence, meaning there's less emphasis on item acquisition -- and on adventure, for that matter -- than in previous Prime games. By NST's admission, Hunters is predominantly an action game ("it weighs heavier on action than on exploration," is the exact quote), down to the fact that each world will feature its own escape sequence. The main mission is largely focused on battling Samus' rival hunters and beating them to a number of alien artifacts which are said to be the key to real ultimate power in the galaxy.
So yeah, I'll be over here, eating my wrongcakes with wrongsyurp, if anyone needs me...
But hey, at least escape sequences are back, right?
Post by: Ian Sane on March 06, 2006, 08:58:19 AM
I think that's a big difference myself. Reflexes and problem solving are different skills and thus attract different people. My brother can't play games like Zelda. He just doesn't have the patience to figure out what to do. He loves games like Contra though and will play them for years to improve his skill to the point where he can beat them everytime he plays. I can't do that. I don't have the reflexes and don't have the dedication to improve my skills like that. So our game tastes are like night and day from each other. Therefore for me there's a big difference between an FPA and an FPS.
Post by: PaLaDiN on March 06, 2006, 09:12:01 AM
(&#$ Nintendo. *$%& them right up their lying )*&$#ing )$&#. And I don't mean that generally. I will personally make it my personal (%*#ing mission to (&$# walk over there and #$#( each and every *$&#ing one of those #($#ing )&#$s with a really #)$& #$(#ing #$*#$. I will then take that #($*ing Revmote from their internal (*#$ing development offices and (#*$# them (*#$* (#*$# so hard they'll (*#$#( #$(*$#. And then when I'm quite (&$#ing done *&$#ing, I will hunt all of you #$&(ing #$&#s down for your #$(*ing (*#$# #$(* retarded (#*$ing idea of online multi#$(*#ing player. I (#*$ing told you this would (#$*ing happen and not a ()*#ing one of you (*#$ing listened. I hope you enjoy your (*#$ing quake wannabe you sick depraved (*#$( (#*$($ (*#$(#$s. I hope you find it worth being (*#$(ed (#$*(#$ (#*$#($ *#($# (#*$ for.
@#*$.
Post by: UncleBob on March 06, 2006, 09:19:34 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on March 06, 2006, 09:21:44 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 06, 2006, 09:27:07 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: UncleBob
We should pitch in and buy PaLaDiN a copy of Metroid Prime Hunters and a USB WiFi Connector.
Exactly. I want nothing more than to hear that paragraph over voice chat.
Quote
Therefore for me there's a big difference between an FPA and an FPS.
I guess that's the defining quality which separates our arguments.
For me, the best part of the Prime games was watching as a new enemy emerged or the tense mini-cutscene before a boss fight started, knowing that I was going to have to be thinking on my feet in order to overcome the boss.
In essence, it's the action which I crave, and the MP bosses were some of the best I ever fought (I still look back on the Giant Phazon Pirate with awe), and Metroid Prime itself was one helluva fight too. I tolerate the backtracking because I enjoy the boss battles. Sounds like you push through the boss battles because you enjoy the adventure.
That said, it sounds like this game will be geared more toward my gaming tastes than yours. Sorry.
Post by: vudu on March 06, 2006, 09:44:14 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuoteI just wanted to point out that you don't actually jump in Doom or Doom II.
Originally posted by: KDR_11kYou run and jump in Unreal Tournament, Deus Ex, Geist, Doom 1-3, Timesplitters, etc. etc. and yet people still consider those FPSs. The concept of running away from enemies instead of killing them or exploring instead of fighting is not so insanely new and revolutionary that it comprises a new genre.Have a nice day.
Post by: Kairon on March 06, 2006, 10:44:25 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: UncleBob
We should pitch in and buy PaLaDiN a copy of Metroid Prime Hunters and a USB WiFi Connector.
Exactly. I want nothing more than to hear that paragraph over voice chat.Quote
Therefore for me there's a big difference between an FPA and an FPS.
I guess that's the defining quality which separates our arguments.
For me, the best part of the Prime games was watching as a new enemy emerged or the tense mini-cutscene before a boss fight started, knowing that I was going to have to be thinking on my feet in order to overcome the boss.
In essence, it's the action which I crave, and the MP bosses were some of the best I ever fought (I still look back on the Giant Phazon Pirate with awe), and Metroid Prime itself was one helluva fight too. I tolerate the backtracking because I enjoy the boss battles. Sounds like you push through the boss battles because you enjoy the adventure.
That said, it sounds like this game will be geared more toward my gaming tastes than yours. Sorry.
Smash Brother, aren't you and Ian talking about the same thing?
I mean, Metroid has its own style of action. The power beam isn't meant to be spewed, it's meant to be tactically applied. Charged shots are HUGE in metroid meaning you won't be seeing any FPS style gunfests. Ammo is a commodity, not a luxury.
All this results in very old-school weakness-based fights, which, in Metroid, mean a lot of 3D positioning and questions of "Am I in front of the enemy or behind the enemy?" Metroid action isn't about doing damage, but in being at the right place to do the damage.
Ian is talking about his brother being totally into twitch-based shoot-em-anywhere-but-ESPECIALLY-the-head Counterstrike gameplay with automatic weapons. This sort of action is nowhere in Metroid Prime, and the boss fights you eagerly anticipate are the furthest thing from it. Metroid Boss fights are old-school about finding the exact right procedure to fool the Boss' AI into exposing its weakpoints and not striking yours and executing that process well. It's that strategy, that drive to figure out an enemy and execute esactly what you need to do to conquer that enemies challenge when full automatic fire won't do the trick that makes up Metroid Prime's "action." I think you're both actually on the same page.
That said, "headshots" have been introduced in Metroid Hunters, so we'll see how that turns out. The thing is that until Metroid Hunters, no Metroid game EVER allowed you to freely target specific sections of your enemies body aside from "weakpoints." This is why the Metroid series has always been interpreted as an adventure/action game instead of as a pure action game, it required specific navigation like puzzles in order to fight enemies, not just good aiming.
What was my overall point again? I forget...
~Carmine M. red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Bill Aurion on March 06, 2006, 11:03:11 AM
Post by: UncleBob on March 06, 2006, 11:31:13 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 06, 2006, 11:31:27 AM
Plus, you won't be able to play as the other hunters in multiplayer unless you beat them in the single player, thus giving people incentive to play through the single player game first.
Quote
I just wanted to point out that you don't actually jump in Doom or Doom II. Have a nice day.
Oops, I'm thinking of Quake. My bad.
Quote
Smash Brother, aren't you and Ian talking about the same thing?
Well, yes and no. Ian and I both like aspects of MP, but the real argument was about whether or not this gameplay style is compromising the basic Metroid formula.
Due to the overwhelming response from people who have played the game, it seems that, while the game promises to be insanely fun, it IS a departure from the Metroid formula, focusing more on action than adventure (though, the "evacuation" segments are back, eh? EH?).
I was trying to downplay the possibility of that happening but it looks like it might have happened.
Of course, I'll reserve my judgment for after I play the game before I truly say how I think it turned out.
Post by: Hostile Creation on March 06, 2006, 01:24:38 PM
That said, Metroid Prime 3 better resemble the first two in terms of exploration, and I want traditional 2D Metroid on the DS.
(Also, I don't think I'll be getting this game, but I've known that for a while now)
Post by: Requiem on March 07, 2006, 03:12:17 AM
For instance, one bounty hounter has an impenetrable exterior. The only way to defeat him is to strafe around his super attack and shoot him in the back. Once the chest plate is off, he can start taking damage. However, to finally defeat him you need to shoot the back of his head (which is difficult) and releave him of his helmet.
Stuff like that could make the game feel more Metriod and less Quaky...
Another idea ---
One bounty hounter has a devastating earth quake attack. In order to dodge it, you must grapple to a hook above.
P.S. I always thought it would be cool if in MP3, you could shoot while on the grappling hook. It would better though, if you could grapple other things just to pull them closer. For instance, to defeat an enemy, you must first grapple an element. The element forms a cover over your gun and allows you to shoot it where ever you like. Of course, you figure out that the enemy is weak against this element and you wait for the perfect moment. The beast has a nasty breath and can suck in or spit out air and the like with immense power. So as he is sucking up everything, even you, you must concentrate and work against the wind to fire a charged super shot into his belly. If you get sucked up, that's it. Your life goes to zero and you die. No power bomb will save you.
If you can't shoot him or you don't have the element, you can grapple to a near by hook and hope to God that it doesn't break (which they do over time).
Oooohhhh. It would be even better if you had to grapple yourself to a hook, then aim and fire as you hang on for dear life.
Idea for the Win!
This would be alot harder without the lock-on mechanism. And personally, I would find it more enjoyable.
Post by: KDR_11k on March 07, 2006, 05:05:17 AM
Post by: Requiem on March 07, 2006, 07:43:43 AM
Metriod is about Single Player first....
Who cares if some of the bounty hunter's abilities won't make it? I am positive some of Samus's abilities won't make it either, so what's the difference.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 07, 2006, 10:30:22 AM
Personally, Nintendo making an online capable FPS is the stuff which I previously thought was purely in the realm of fantasy and conjecture. Nintendo QA + online FPS = less posting by me.
Historically, the term "bounty hunter" basically equates "pirate-for-hire". I understand that the general opinion of Samus is that she's a galactic superhero with a chip on her shoulder, but it brings the series a shade closer to reality when concepts like monetary costs of operation come into the picture. Superheroes never seem to have bills. This makes them aloof and harder to relate to.
If Samus is going to be called a "bounty hunter", she should probably hunt a bounty on occasion. I like the idea of other bounty hunters because it expands the universe to include sentient races beyond humans and space pirates. Competition in the market means that people who hire Samus to do a job actually have a comparison to make. "Samus is hired because she's the best!", but compared to what? Now we know, and it's the same principle of comparison which makes heroes look like better heroes when compared to the villains they fight. A hero or heroine is only as strong as the obstacles/enemies they overcome.
I wouldn't see it as a bad thing if the Metroid games evolved to include more of what happens off of these deserted planets. Samus receives contracts, goes to planets to accomplish them, and like any contract, you have no idea what to expect. Some could be rescue missions, some are assassination missions (don't even try to argue that Samus has something against killing things), others could be a "bring 'em back alive" mission where Samus could actually apprehend a bounty, throw them into stasis and return them to the contractor.
The concept of exploration would still be readily available, but the Metroid universe could come to life in a way it never has before.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on March 07, 2006, 12:15:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
I wouldn't see it as a bad thing if the Metroid games evolved to include more of what happens off of these deserted planets. Samus receives contracts, goes to planets to accomplish them, and like any contract, you have no idea what to expect. Some could be rescue missions, some are assassination missions (don't even try to argue that Samus has something against killing things), others could be a "bring 'em back alive" mission where Samus could actually apprehend a bounty, throw them into stasis and return them to the contractor.
The concept of exploration would still be readily available, but the Metroid universe could come to life in a way it never has before.
I'm not opposed to expanding Metroid, but I'd really rather see that concept done with Captain Falcon. There's already a good foundation for that gameplay in the F-Zero setting (and F-Zero fans would probably be less militant about such a spin-off than Metroid fans). Yeah, I know a new IP would be preferable in many ways, but Nintendo already has at least three franchises starring bounty hunters/mercenaries in a scifi setting, and of those (Metroid, F-Zero, and Star Fox) F-Zero is the one best suited to expanding in this way. A lot of people would probably mock the game as Grand Theft Auto: Mute City, but I think it would be interesting to see what Nintendo could do with that style of open-ended play.
Okay, sorry for interrupting. Go back to talking about MP:Hunters now.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 07, 2006, 12:58:35 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: PartyBear
I'm not opposed to expanding Metroid, but I'd really rather see that concept done with Captain Falcon. There's already a good foundation for that gameplay in the F-Zero setting (and F-Zero fans would probably be less militant about such a spin-off than Metroid fans). Yeah, I know a new IP would be preferable in many ways, but Nintendo already has at least three franchises starring bounty hunters/mercenaries in a scifi setting, and of those (Metroid, F-Zero, and Star Fox) F-Zero is the one best suited to expanding in this way. A lot of people would probably mock the game as Grand Theft Auto: Mute City, but I think it would be interesting to see what Nintendo could do with that style of open-ended play.
Okay, sorry for interrupting. Go back to talking about MP:Hunters now.
No, no, I agree.
I actually was going to mention how little sense the F-Zero universe makes when all these heroes and villains allegedly hate each other, are hunting each other, etc., yet they race against each other all the time. Beastman wants to know where the Bio Rex is? Two cars behind him, or he's drinking in a bar somewhere.
I've oft thought that an MMO F-Zero game would be excellent where you hunt bounties so you can afford car upgrades and race against other players in the same situation.
EDIT: Also, for a video of adventure mode, check the official MPH site.
Post by: Ian Sane on March 07, 2006, 01:51:50 PM
It's no different than stuff like Yu-Gi-Oh or Pokemon where villians will attack the good guy within the confines the established rules for dueling/battling. Or wrestling where a guy's all like "From now on it's personal! I'm going to destroy you... at our official santioned match at the Pay-Per-View next month in front of a sold-out arena crowd. I could just jump you coming out of your car in the parking lot but I'm going to wait until the match to get you. And if I decide to attack you prior to the match I'll make sure it takes place during our live weekly show and that a camera man is present."
The F-Zero background stories did make more sense when there was only like four guys to choose from.
Post by: Smash_Brother on March 07, 2006, 02:56:29 PM
In F-Zero that argument basically goes out the window when Blackshadow does things like attach bombs to Falcon's car and blow up buildings. F-Zero seems pretty lawless so I don't understand why the racers still race each other even though they all have ulterior motives.
Blackshadow is a known, wanted criminal and yet he's allowed to race in broad daylight without any law enforcement waiting for him at the finish line.
Post by: KnowsNothing on March 07, 2006, 03:14:03 PM
Where can I get tickets to race????
Post by: IceCold on March 07, 2006, 03:22:58 PM
QuoteYeah, but over time I've learnt the art of suspension of disbelief, so these things don't bother me much. I play F-Zero to play a good racing game. To me, that's it..
It's no different than stuff like Yu-Gi-Oh or Pokemon where villians will attack the good guy within the confines the established rules for dueling/battling. Or wrestling where a guy's all like "From now on it's personal! I'm going to destroy you... at our official santioned match at the Pay-Per-View next month in front of a sold-out arena crowd. I could just jump you coming out of your car in the parking lot but I'm going to wait until the match to get you. And if I decide to attack you prior to the match I'll make sure it takes place during our live weekly show and that a camera man is present."
