MarshMellow96
Member
MadOdorMachine said:No ones asking for a SM remake. People just point to that game because it's considered the best overall. They should take the best elements of each game and improve upon them while adding new things.
That's a problem. There's nothing wrong with repeating what works. Ever heard the saying, "If it aint broke, don't fix it?" That's what we have here. That's not to say you can't add new things though. There's a reason game franchises have a fan base. Throwing what attracted the fans to the series out the window isn't a good idea.
''Don't look a gift horse in the mouth'
It's easy to say something like that. Why don't they add the best bits of Halo and Call of Duty? Surely that would make a good game? No, it probably wouldn't, because the 'best' bits of those games wouldn't necessarily fit together. The same goes for Metroid. It's easy to say 'throw in the best elements of Super, maybe a bit of Prime and the Metroid hunting from II, then make it good. They should add some new stuff while they're at it.'
Then again from what you've said, they've already done that. Off the top of my head..
Metroid best bits - platforming, collectibles, morph ball;
II best bits - Queen Metroid boss battle, plasma beam;
Super best bits - Power-ups, Atmosphere;
Prime best bits - scanning, first person perspective;
Fusions - Tight storyline, linearity.
There - some of the 'best' bits of Metroid rolled up into one game and added to. Other M has all of those things, only, you're not that big a fan of the game are you? You have to use the first person perspective to shoot missiles and it bugs you. It's impossible to scan pixels and the controls are awkward. The morph ball puzzles are non-existent. The plot is contrived and the atmosphere follows. Immediately this 'add it all up and make it work' mantra doesn't sound so hot, because the 'best' bits of those games do not work together.
The game you speak of ought to not exist, period; but it does. Other M is probably going to be the game that will come closest to your description. Sakamoto has done exactly what you wanted him to do - incorporate the some the 'best' elements of the franchise and coil them up into one neatly displayed package with few new things added. Something extraordinarily difficult to pull off has been done (or at the very least, attempted), only when it does manifest itself, you don't like it.
Most Metroid fans will like the same things, but those 'best' bits aren't your best bits or John Metroid's best bits (they aren't even mine). So who is best suited to decide what the 'best' bits of the series are? I would say Sakamoto. I want him to do whatever he wants with Metroid, because it isn't my decision. If I were in his situation, I wouldn't want anybody compromising my decisions either.