Metroid Dread (Metroid 5) - Nintendo Switch - October 8 2021

[Randy Butternubs]

The long rumored (since 2005), thrice in development, sequel to the most recent chapter in the 2D Metroid saga (Metroid Fusion in 2002), and spiritual successor to the most recent Metroid game (Samus Returns 2017 [the remake of Return of Samus 1991]) has finally been announced and comes out this October. Here's the trailer:





Major stick tap to this creator and video who called it before any 2021 E3 rumors:

Click to read more...

 

[Emperoreddy]

Honestly I am more hyped for this then Prime 4.

I can't believe it's real.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

News & updates | Metroid Dread for Nintendo Switch™ – Official Site

 

[Shareefruck]

While I would much prefer an actually 2D version, the style is growing on me. I like that it doesn't just look like generic 3D-- there's this sort of ultra-contrasty inverted look to the colors that makes it look distinctive.

 

[HanSolo]

Honestly I am more hyped for this then Prime 4.

I can't believe it's real.

I wish they'd port the Prime trilogy to Switch. I never picked it up for Wii.

 

[Blitzkrug]

I'm ****ing in.

While I worry about Prime 4's fate it's good to see Nintendo actually giving Metroid a chance again. Samus returns was alright but they needed to actually put resources behind the series. Looks like they're going to.

 

[Shareefruck]

I'm ****ing in.

While I worry about Prime 4's fate it's good to see Nintendo actually giving Metroid a chance again. Samus returns was alright but they needed to actually put resources behind the series. Looks like they're going to.

Does it actually look like they are, though? To my eyes, Metroid Dread looks very Samus Returns-esque in terms of resources dedicated.

 

[Blitzkrug]

Does it actually look like they are, though? To my eyes, Metroid Dread looks very Samus Returns-esque in terms of resources dedicated.

It's more resources than Star Fox, Mother and the other series they locked in the basement are getting.

 

[Shareefruck]

It's more resources than Star Fox, Mother and the other series they locked in the basement are getting.

But that's always been the case, no? To me it seems like they're putting exactly as many resources into Metroid as they have in recent years (which is not much but not nothing, either), but this just happens to be a release year.

 

[The Macho King]

With this and SMT V, I may finally get a Switch.

 

[RandV]

While it's usually not something I think to much about in games I wonder how much 'value', or quality playtime, they will put into it.

The original Super Metroid probably takes you 8-12 hours to play through the first time, and once you know it without attempting a speed run takes 4 hours to play through. That's fine for the time and there are some indy games of the genre that are similar, but Super Metroid was cutting edge for the time. If Nintendo is going to release a 2D Metroid at I'm assuming full price there's nothing wrong expecting more from that.

Technically this is a cheap type of game to make now, so you expect to be compensated with bigger and more stuff, but can you apply that to Metroid without ruining the experience? Other recent Metroidvania's like Hollow Knight and Monster Boy you can get a good solid 30 hours in on your first regular play through.

 

[Shareefruck]

While it's usually not something I think to much about in games I wonder how much 'value', or quality playtime, they will put into it.

The original Super Metroid probably takes you 8-12 hours to play through the first time, and once you know it without attempting a speed run takes 4 hours to play through. That's fine for the time and there are some indy games of the genre that are similar, but Super Metroid was cutting edge for the time. If Nintendo is going to release a 2D Metroid at I'm assuming full price there's nothing wrong expecting more from that.

Technically this is a cheap type of game to make now, so you expect to be compensated with bigger and more stuff, but can you apply that to Metroid without ruining the experience? Other recent Metroidvania's like Hollow Knight and Monster Boy you can get a good solid 30 hours in on your first regular play through.

I do wonder what the playtime will be, but ultimately, I think that it should be irrelevant to expectations, personally. As you've alluded to, bigger/more isn't necessarily better and can actually hurt an experience-- it's about quality, charm, and perfection, not quantity, IMO. I'd go a step further and say that 4 hours was the perfect length for Super Metroid, not just in the context of its time but as a game overall, and that it would be misguided to expect/demand "more" from that in today's age, because "more" alone isn't meaningful in any way. One could argue that Hollow Knight is overly long and too big for its own good.

I've always vehemently disagreed with the way that people like to treat videogames as an "occupy my time and distract me from my life for x amount of hours" service in general. Personally, I want a perfect and appropriate experience, however short or long that takes, and I'm paying for that finely honed appropriateness and craft, not novelty or time investment. The fact that good things can potentially take up a sizeable chunk of time is a necessary evil, not the actual reward that is worth paying for, IMO. I've seen 15 minute games that I've admired and would pay more for than 100 hour games, personally.

We should give games passes for being short not because they're old or because they're indie, but rather because it should be irrelevant to how good they may or may not be, IMO. If lack of length coincides with lack of substance, the latter is what's actually important to focus on, and the perceived correlation between the two is mostly a complete fabrication, IMO.

 

[Emperoreddy]

I don't recall Hollow Knight's main campaign being very long, though it was padded out by the game being really difficult.

What really rounded it out was lots of side content, multiple endings, and beefy end game content from the expansions.

I doubt Nintendo is looking to make a punishing experience, so side and end game content is the best place to pad out the run time.

They were really restrained with Samus Returns due to it being a remake of a GB game, so with a totally new game you want to see the team really let loose.

And yeah I tend to care more about quality then length.

Super Metroid is a near perfect game IMO despite not being a hyper long experience.

 

[Metroid]

I'm puuuuumped!!!

 

[Shareefruck]

I don't recall Hollow Knight's main campaign being very long, though it was padded out by the game being really difficult.

What really rounded it out was lots of side content, multiple endings, and beefy end game content from the expansions.

The main game without side content is like 25-30 hours. I love the game, but I do think that the manner in which the map gets bigger and bigger becomes a bit unwieldy (especially with somewhat suspect rest point and fast travel placement) and ends up having diminishing returns (especially compared to the perfectly paced minimalist elegance of Super Metroid). It was more of an example than dismissal of the game or anything.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Yeah getting around in Hollow Knight's and the map size padded out too

There is definitely a point with Metroidvanias where the map is simply too big and unconnected.

 

[RandV]

I do wonder what the playtime will be, but ultimately, I think that it should be irrelevant to expectations, personally. As you've alluded to, bigger/more isn't necessarily better and can actually hurt an experience-- it's about quality, charm, and perfection, not quantity, IMO. I'd go a step further and say that 4 hours was the perfect length for Super Metroid, not just in the context of its time but as a game overall, and that it would be misguided to expect/demand "more" from that in today's age, because "more" alone isn't meaningful in any way. One could argue that Hollow Knight is overly long and too big for its own good.

I've always vehemently disagreed with the way that people like to treat videogames as an "occupy my time and distract me from my life for x amount of hours" service in general. Personally, I want a perfect and appropriate experience, however short or long that takes, and I'm paying for that finely honed appropriateness and craft, not novelty or time investment. The fact that good things can potentially take up a sizeable chunk of time is a necessary evil, not the actual reward that is worth paying for, IMO. I've seen 15 minute games that I've admired and would pay more for than 100 hour games, personally.

We should give games passes for being short not because they're old or because they're indie, but rather because it should be irrelevant to how good they may or may not be, IMO. If lack of length coincides with lack of substance, the latter is what's actually important to focus on, and the perceived correlation between the two is mostly a complete fabrication, IMO.

I generally agree but am just applying a bit of nuance here. Super Metroid was both cutting edge and pretty much a perfect game for the time, and still holds up as one of the best 'Metroidvanias' today. I mean, when someone put together an HF top 50 video games list 5+ years ago on here where we'd just submit our own top 10 and they tallied up the results I was the only one to include Super Metroid in mine, so take that for what it is. Saying it's just the perfect size though I'm not so certain. It could be but it's not like you have a scientific process here where you have a bunch of different Metroid games of different sizes to determine what size is best, and it's quite possible at the time they didn't have the hardware capacity and/or budget to make it much bigger.

So what I'm really getting at here is if Super Metroid was a perfect game that still holds up amazingly well today on an early 90's budget/hardware/dev kits, what can they bring to the table in 2020 to improve the experience.

While a few people brought up Hollow Knight which makes a good example, not nearly as many people will have played the games but I think Wonder Boy makes a better example. Wonder Boy 3 and 4 were top tier games for the Sega Master System and Genesis respectively, but if you play them today while they're good it stands out how short they are. They released a new one recently, Monster Boy and the Cursed Kingdom, and it's an improvement in every way. It's also coincidentally a good deal larger and takes about 25 hours to beat.

 

[Shareefruck]

I generally agree but am just applying a bit of nuance here. Super Metroid was both cutting edge and pretty much a perfect game for the time, and still holds up as one of the best 'Metroidvanias' today. I mean, when someone put together an HF top 50 video games list 5+ years ago on here where we'd just submit our own top 10 and they tallied up the results I was the only one to include Super Metroid in mine, so take that for what it is. Saying it's just the perfect size though I'm not so certain. It could be but it's not like you have a scientific process here where you have a bunch of different Metroid games of different sizes to determine what size is best, and it's quite possible at the time they didn't have the hardware capacity and/or budget to make it much bigger.

So what I'm really getting at here is if Super Metroid was a perfect game that still holds up amazingly well today on an early 90's budget/hardware/dev kits, what can they bring to the table in 2020 to improve the experience.

While a few people brought up Hollow Knight which makes a good example, not nearly as many people will have played the games but I think Wonder Boy makes a better example. Wonder Boy 3 and 4 were top tier games for the Sega Master System and Genesis respectively, but if you play them today while they're good it stands out how short they are. They released a new one recently, Monster Boy and the Cursed Kingdom, and it's an improvement in every way. It's also coincidentally a good deal larger and takes about 25 hours to beat.

Regardless of whether or not Super Metroid is actually the perfect size (this much is subjective), my point is ultimately that there isn't a positive correlation between length and quality. It's more about triangulating the perfect balance, IMO.

I agree that the size of Super Metroid partly arose from hardware limitations and that if the same people had a chance to do the same thing now with modern technology, it could have been way bigger, but I don't really see the relevance of that point-- it doesn't suggest that doing what was envisioned all along would be hypothetically better in any way. Similarly, if they remade the game today, I could see needless expansion hurting the game more than it helps it. If we wanted to nitpick, I would argue that what makes the game marginally flawed has nothing to do with the size of the map (traversal and pacing's perfect, don't touch it), but with how movement mechanics and enemies are overly stiff and unpolished (I would love to see that modernized).

As for your example, I think I preemptively addressed a similar point. Just because one can envision a game becoming better while also becoming longer, doesn't mean that the two things actually correlate in any way. Whether a shorter or longer game has more or less substance/value is entirely incidental, IMO.

I get that you're not necessarily disagreeing with me, but I don't really follow what nuance you're adding that I can actually stand by, either.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

42 days

 

[MMC]

Definitely excited for this however after how craptastic New Horizons was I'm hesitant to buy a Nintendo game on first day again. Probably will anyways though.

 

[LokiDog]

I'm glad it's 2D-ish but I don't think anything will ever come NEAR Super Metroid, or my personal favorite, Metroid II - for the shear terror (dread?) of finding Metroid's shed skins throughout the world and never knowing when you were going to hear *that* sound and be under attack, nor which evolution of Metroid you'd be facing. Metroid II was terrifying, especially given how young I was when I played it. The raw gameplay looks great though. Can't wait to try it.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

Definitely excited for this however after how craptastic New Horizons was I'm hesitant to buy a Nintendo game on first day again. Probably will anyways though.

In what ways was Animal Crossing craptastic?

 

[MMC]

In what ways was Animal Crossing craptastic?

Is it possible to list them all? New Horizons was completely stripped of all of the heart of past games, the vast majority of NPCs (who aren’t villagers) are nowhere to be found, along with many other common features of the games. They made it abundantly clear that they didn’t care about past fans of the series, only about this new social media obsessed generation which is why the main focus of this game was the decoration and customization aspect. I also can’t stand the fact that they made holidays updates now to give people the ruse that they’re actively updating the game even though they’re just rehashing shit that was in the base game of every past game. The villager dialogue was also completely dumbed down making them incredibly bland to talk to.

The game is just completely soulless to me and I have absolutely no desire to play the game when I can get a much more genuine Animal Crossing experience playing New Leaf or City Folk. I get why some people like New Horizons but it’s absolutely unplayable to me. I haven’t touched it in over a year despite New Leaf being one of my favorite games of all time

 

[Ducks in a row]

Those are the 2 most recent trailers and they are less then 4 weeks old.

Fans of the franchise seem very excited from trailers that have been released.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

28 days