• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Gamespot gives Metroid a 5.2

Wario64

works for Gamestop (lol)
Nfans are crying

http://www.gamespot.com/gba/action/famicomminimetroid/review.html

"Overall, the original Metroid is an example of a game that might have been better left to nostalgia rather than having been rereleased as a stand-alone game. The highlights of Metroid's design are in some ways also its weaknesses. Today's sequels and remakes on the Nintendo GameCube and Game Boy Advance do a far better job of formulating those same design conceits into games that are much more palatable to the tastes of today's players. And, again, when you consider that for just a few dollars more you can buy the great remake Metroid: Zero Mission, which comes with the original Metroid as an unlockable, there just isn't much reason to buy this version of the game."
 

Trevelyon

Member
Obviously an ominous warning of things to come.

panic.jpg


/fingers at the ready
 

drohne

hyperbolically metafictive
this is a fairly pointless release given metroid's presence as an extra in zero mission. but i think the actual game has held up better than any of its sequels. where the later games are rote, slack exercises in filling in an auto-map, the original benefits from the genuine thrill of exploring and learning a strange environment. the atmosphere's stranger and richer too. the stark visuals, the weird repetitions (really a case of technological limitations creating a desirable sense-effect), and especially hip tanaka's genius soundtrack make it feel very alien. even the original metroid's names for places and things -- tourian, norfair, holtz, ridley -- are much stranger and more distinct than the pseudo-latinate clichés -- crateria, thardus, luminoth -- that the later games are tagged with. metroid is genius. its sequels are mediocrity.
 

belgurdo

Banned
But it will still sell half a million copies while the N-drones praise Nintendo for "staying true to their roots" while demonizing the Playstation line as "port machines"
 
I dunno. I was just playing this version at the library for a good three hours and I couldn't stop. I tried to be Ridley without getting the Varia suit and only three energy tanks several times. I couldn't, but damn was it a rush. The game still retains its destinctive aesthetic. I love it, more than Zero Mission.
 

SomeDude

Banned
aoi tsuki said:
Wait, a game that's almost 20 years old doesn't hold up today? Does the President plan to give into the terrorists' demands?



Well it is even more weird that a certain company is reselling them. In general I don't think any NES games have held up well except for Super Mario Bros 3.
 

Dragmire

Member
The design of the game is inherently somewhat flawed, with no player direction whatsoever (coupled with rather large, labryinthine areas). That, or the designers relied very heavily on the players' willingness to explore. But any irritation changes with a little familiarity, IMO. Knowing what a gamer is in for can be half the battle, at least that's what got me to play all the way through it for the first time when I unlocked it in Prime, despite owning it as a kid. I definitely enjoyed it. That said, Zero Mission improves it to an absurd extent.
 

BenT

Member
For most of the players of the day (gotta allow for that guy who posted up above), Metroid was a fantastic game.

The key was that it felt thrilling to explore the huge space of Zebes. It was as alien as could be, and that unforgettably catchy Brinstar music helped pushed us onward. Since there were no other games like it, we didn't know how the world worked. Only through trial and error did we find power-ups and discover their uses. Only through a massive effort could we connect all the dots and figure out how to take our initially weak avatar all the way to the end of Tourian.

These days, we're all jaded fucks -- even the non-jaded ones. We've seen this gameplay before, and in much more user-friendly contexts. That makes Metroid feel creaky and ancient. It wasn't in 1986, though. Back then it was a profound, astounding experience.
 
Series has always been overrated IMO. Metroid Prime and Metroid Zero mission are both good titles, but nothing extraordinary. The rest are utter trash.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
trippingmartian said:
Series has always been overrated IMO. Metroid Prime and Metroid Zero mission are both good titles, but nothing extraordinary. The rest are utter trash.
prime and zero mission good. but super metroid utter trash. forgive me if i think you're insane.

No doubt the series is overated by anyone who thinks its "teh BEST EVAR," but most of the games are far from trash.
 
Super Metroid got very high scores by magazines at the time of its release.

As for the original Metroid, who really cares? I mean that's their opinion that the style of game was better suited for 20 years ago or whatever. Big whoop.
 

MetatronM

Unconfirmed Member
Wario64 said:
Nfans are crying

http://www.gamespot.com/gba/action/famicomminimetroid/review.html

"Overall, the original Metroid is an example of a game that might have been better left to nostalgia rather than having been rereleased as a stand-alone game. The highlights of Metroid's design are in some ways also its weaknesses. Today's sequels and remakes on the Nintendo GameCube and Game Boy Advance do a far better job of formulating those same design conceits into games that are much more palatable to the tastes of today's players. And, again, when you consider that for just a few dollars more you can buy the great remake Metroid: Zero Mission, which comes with the original Metroid as an unlockable, there just isn't much reason to buy this version of the game."
Thank god somebody else finally had the balls to come out and join me in saying that the first Metroid SUCKS. :D
 

Socreges

Banned
I only played it for the first time over a year ago and thought it was alright. I guess I could see the draw for its time, but after having played Super Metroid and Metroid Fusion (just months before, in fact), the original was substandard in every respect. Completely irrelevant [to me] and just felt like a chore; though a peculiarly atmospheric one. Really, getting lost was a double-edged sword.
 
Yea, I played Super Metroid, then Metroid Prime and Fusion, and then played the original Metroid a little bit after unlocking it. It's not that good. On the other hand, when I played the original Zelda, I didn't think it was that great either. The only really classic Nintendo games I like are the ones I played back when I was little. It's the nostalgia. When you've played better versions first, going back to the original just isn't the same. That said, I bet it was awesome back in 1986, like SMB, Duck Hunt and Excitebike were awesome for me back then.

And the Metroid series is one of the best in gaming. I need to play Metroid 2 one day.

IMO Super Metroid = Prime > Fusion > Zero Mission >>>>>>>>>>>> Metroid
 

Kiriku

SWEDISH PERFECTION
First Metroid was cool back in the days, how they managed to create a special atmosphere with such primitive hardware. I think the music contributed to a lot though. :p

With that said, looking back at the original it feels dated, empty, and frustrating with having to memorize the entire map (too lazy to draw). But back then, it was a cool experience.

As for ranking the Metroid games...something like this:

Super Metroid = Metroid Fusion >>> Zero Mission = Metroid Prime >>>>>> Metroid

Never did play Metroid II, although I've always wanted to.
 

Kon Tiki

Banned
PuertoRicanJuice said:
And the Metroid series is one of the best in gaming. I need to play Metroid 2 one day.

IMO Super Metroid = Prime > Fusion > Zero Mission >>>>>>>>>>>> Metroid

I know some people here will disagree, Metroid 2 = Metroid Hunters. Well, as far as gameplay. I wish they would turn Hunters into a remake of Metroid 2. It would give it a solid story and some direction.
 

SantaC

Member
oh please let's make a big deal out of a review of a game that is 20 years old. The game was amazing for its time. You can't judge it now.

EDIT: For a moment I thought it was Prime 2. Yikes.
 
F

Folder

Unconfirmed Member
I think that's high.
The original Metroid is unplayably dull.
 
Eh, I like the original better than Zero Mission. I still play the fuck out of the original game, far more than I do Zero Mission or Fusion.
 
drohne said:
this is a fairly pointless release given metroid's presence as an extra in zero mission. but i think the actual game has held up better than any of its sequels. where the later games are rote, slack exercises in filling in an auto-map, the original benefits from the genuine thrill of exploring and learning a strange environment. the atmosphere's stranger and richer too. the stark visuals, the weird repetitions (really a case of technological limitations creating a desirable sense-effect), and especially hip tanaka's genius soundtrack make it feel very alien. even the original metroid's names for places and things -- tourian, norfair, holtz, ridley -- are much stranger and more distinct than the pseudo-latinate clichés -- crateria, thardus, luminoth -- that the later games are tagged with. metroid is genius. its sequels are mediocrity.

I agree with every last little bit of this post, particularly the auto-map and music parts. Couldn't have said it better.
 

Baron Aloha

A Shining Example
I hated the first one but loved the series from part 2 on. They need to make a Zero Mission style remake of Metroid 2 darn it!
 
BenT said:
For most of the players of the day (gotta allow for that guy who posted up above), Metroid was a fantastic game.

The key was that it felt thrilling to explore the huge space of Zebes. It was as alien as could be, and that unforgettably catchy Brinstar music helped pushed us onward. Since there were no other games like it, we didn't know how the world worked. Only through trial and error did we find power-ups and discover their uses. Only through a massive effort could we connect all the dots and figure out how to take our initially weak avatar all the way to the end of Tourian.

These days, we're all jaded fucks -- even the non-jaded ones. We've seen this gameplay before, and in much more user-friendly contexts. That makes Metroid feel creaky and ancient. It wasn't in 1986, though. Back then it was a profound, astounding experience.

Gotta say, I agree with BenT the most here.
 

ge-man

Member
I love the first game, but obviously it doesn't fit today's sensibilites. In an age were even mentioning the word backtrack causes gamers to become physically ill, the original Metroid could never survive as new release. It absolutely does not hold you hands--the lack of a map in itself is probably enough for some gamers to run away from the game. And we haven't gotten to the fact that the repetition in area design created a genuine alien labrinth. Those two things together are enough for a modern reviewer to knock the game down to 5 or 50%. So I disagree with review, but I do understand what is behind the low score (besides the fact that game can be unlocked in Metroid Zero, making it a redundant release).
 

Tritroid

Member
Frankly I think it's really stupid to review and score the NES classics period.

Obviously because of today's bias they're going to be insanely low.
 
The only problem I have with the original is the same I had back when I played it on my NES: the fact that you always start with 30 health no matter where you are in the game or how many health tanks you have and that there are no quick way to refill. When you start, this means you are at about 1/3 health and can still take quite a few hits, but by the time you approach Ridley, you can lose that much in one or two hits.

This means that you must always spend time at enemy spawning tubes to refill every time you load a game or must play through the game in one sitting, killing the purpose of the password.

The early Ice Beam was also as annoying as it was useful, since it doubled the number of times you had to hit enemies and they unfroze with every other shot.

I always found it too hard back in the NES days, even though I loved the concepts. These issues were fixed with part 2, but part 2 was rather barren and repetetive. I liked the series, but I only came to love it with Super Metroid.

All that said, I DESPISE the NES classics line because it means that Nintendo and publishers of other NES classics are not likely to improve those games. I would love a compilation of classic, unenhanced NES greats, and I am a fan of improved ports like Super Mario All Stars and remakes like Zero Mission. I would kill for a Zero Mission style remake of Zelda 2 on GBA or a Castlevania collection with enhanced graphics.
 

Zaptruder

Banned
Tritroid said:
Frankly I think it's really stupid to review and score the NES classics period.

Obviously because of today's bias they're going to be insanely low.

But shouldn't a commercial release of today be evalutated by today's standards?

I think more to the point, this review shows how nostalgia strongly rose tints everything; All too often you hear people criticizing modern games and pointing to the classics as if they were the golden era of gaming. If you go back and compare those games to the games of today, you'll see how crappy those games really were; they're best replayed in your memories.

That said, they're not completely worthless; far from it - there's still a good amount of fun to be had despite their flaws... and it shows how a good base concept can definetly hold the test of time.
 
Top Bottom