You can count them either way I guess. I would just say both games are crossgen personally. I'm also in the extreme minority disappointed by botw. The gamecube just had so much for me personally and for what my tastes are and was like the planets aligning.For first party games...
SNES => N64 > (Switch) > Wii > GameCube > Wii U > NES
SNES/N64 is close for me, if we're counting the Rare games, but the SNES library is just so huge and has some of the best games of almost every Nintendo series there, so it's hard to not hold it in high esteem. Give me a great new DK game, a great traditional Paper Mario, and BOTW2, and I can see Switch going to the top.
Is it cheating to consider Twilight Princess a GameCube game but Breath Of The Wild a Switch game? That's how I played them anyway. If BOTW counts as a Wii U game, despite me never playing it on Wii U, I might rank it above GameCube. But I've lamented enough about how the GameCube wasn't that great for me (Wii U would have overtaken if it didn't limp its way to the finish line).
Super Mario Party was great, best Mario Party since about 5 imo, but it really could have done with an extra board or two, included or DLC.I'll say it.
I really like Super Mario Party. And would like a sequel lol.
perfect game to play with my cousins. Kids are better at the motion controls games then me lol
I agree in terms of volume for sure. Botw is still tied for my favorite switch game though and I think I liked Oddysey a bit more than Astral chain, so that evens it out a bit.I genuinly think 2019 was better than 2017. Out of all the games from 2017, only BotW, Odyssey and XBC2 were interesting to me. And I only really liked the latter two (pls don't kill me BotW stans...).
My beloved Sunshinethe Gamecube is the console of games I love in spite of their many, many, many flaws
That's fair. To me metroid still ultimately revolves around the atmosphere and isolation and eerieness and not as much horror. I know most of the games have some parts that are a little scarier, bit that also makes those parts better. For most of the games, it feels more about the mood. Prime 2 is extremely tense and the most rough atmosphere, but still kept to feeling like just this alien world that you deal with.For one the space pirates aren't really the xenomorph analogue in this equation, but also the Phazon Mines had a fair amount of terror as did other parts of Prime 1. Also the OP exosuit analogy doesn't apply that often, there's frequent difficulty spikes throughout the games that make you underpowered until you find the upgrade that makes the area survivable.
There are plenty of ways to add horror to the games, Prime 2 comes very close to Fusion with its oppressive dark world and eldritch enemies, even Zero Mission had the zero suit section.
I didnt mean to imply there wasn't horror in the other games, just that Fusion did it best and I'd like to see even more in the upcoming games.
But it is because you have specific tastes, or else the software sales wouldn't be what they are. Nothing wrong with that.
For one the space pirates aren't really the xenomorph analogue in this equation, but also the Phazon Mines had a fair amount of terror as did other parts of Prime 1. Also the OP exosuit analogy doesn't apply that often, there's frequent difficulty spikes throughout the games that make you underpowered until you find the upgrade that makes the area survivable.
There are plenty of ways to add horror to the games, Prime 2 comes very close to Fusion with its oppressive dark world and eldritch enemies, even Zero Mission had the zero suit section.
I didnt mean to imply there wasn't horror in the other games, just that Fusion did it best and I'd like to see even more in the upcoming games.
I mean being a remake is a big part of that. And expect prime 4 to be closer to that evolution than metroid 5. Prime 4 will be the big 3d aaa one and have more pressure on it.I literally refuted this argument in the exact same post you're quoting lol
Sales mean nothing when it comes to discussions like these.
Personally I just want Metroid to feel 'cool' again. Samus Returns lacked any sort of personality beyond "this is what a 3DS Metroid game would look like," and that just doesn't inspire anything in me. The franchise needs to evolve like Zelda and Mario have.
You can't seriously expect Nintendo to take big risks all the time. They are a business and they need to make money so they'll make games that the majority will buy and enjoy rather than cater to the minority who are hardcore fans.
Games take more time and are far more expensive to make than at any other time, people just have to be patient or play one of the other many thousands of games on the system.
I hope botw2 has a story.I would Hope that at Least BOTW 2 can match the Voice Acting of Fire Embelm Echos and Fire Emblem Three Houses, a Nintendo Series that's budget is muuuuch lower.
Gimme a story trailer
You can count them either way I guess. I would just say both games are crossgen personally. I'm also in the extreme minority disappointed by botw. The gamecube just had so much for me personally and for what my tastes are and was like the planets aligning.
BOTW has a story too. You (Link) just were asleep when it happened.
Who "seriously" said that? Nobody's expecting a Breath of the Wild-tier upheaval with every single new instalment in a Switch franchise.
If you could actually play out the memories, it would help a lot more. They are just these short cutscenes of awkward stuff happening and link usually just staring or looking surprised when zelda or a champion talks.BOTW has a story too. You (Link) just were asleep when it happened.
personally I really like that approach.The series kinda needed a more laid back way of telling you stuff. I think the Memories was a good concept that could've been executed much better.
I mean being a remake is a big part of that. And expect prime 4 to be closer to that evolution than metroid 5. Prime 4 will be the big 3d aaa one and have more pressure on it.
Sales mean everything at all times. Unless you want Nintendo to go the way of Sega?
Controversial opinion time. Kirby Star Allies is far better than BoTW, the Link's Awakening remake, and Mario Odyssey.The only way I can really see being disappointed with the Switch's output so far is if you wanted a bunch of great and creative new IPs. Most of Nintendo's big franchises have put out great games, with the arguable exception of a few like Kirby and Pokemon, and some franchises that are still waiting like Donkey Kong and Metroid.
It's still only three years into its life cycle, so hopefully this next Direct has a lot to show up.
That's also fair. Ideally there's a good balance of all of those, which I think Samus Returns and a large part of Prime 3 neglected to do.That's fair. To me metroid still ultimately revolves around the atmosphere and isolation and eerieness and not as much horror. I know most of the games have some parts that are a little scarier, bit that also makes those parts better. For most of the games, it feels more about the mood. Prime 2 is extremely tense and the most rough atmosphere, but still kept to feeling like just this alien world that you deal with.
I agree that Samus Returns was a bit too safe, but I have no doubt Prime 4 will blow people away and I want to believe that 5 will do too.Personally I just want Metroid to feel 'cool' again. Samus Returns lacked any sort of personality beyond "this is what a 3DS Metroid game would look like," and that just doesn't inspire anything in me. The franchise needs to evolve like Zelda and Mario have.
Yeah I honestly can't continue after a statement like this one.
I can get BOTW and Mario Odyssey but isn't Links Awakening a 1-1 remake?Controversial opinion time. Kirby Star Allies is far better than BoTW, the Link's Awakening remake, and Mario Odyssey.
Well I kind of agree, but again, that is more suited to prime. Samus returns was never going to be super bold or ambitious, being a remake of a 91 game and from mercury steam, late into the 3ds. I think metroid 5 has more potential now, but it won't be anything crazy. Plus you have to remember that metroid hasn't been in a mario or zelda scenario. They tried an...erm...ambitious game with other m and it setback the franchise basically a decade. They have had to bring back the series to it roots to a good extent. Zelda had the issue of not changing anything drastic outside of artstyle since alttp. 3d mario always drastically changes every few games.It being a remake didn't mean it had to adhere to the aesthetics of the old game. REMake, REMake 2, FFVIIr, and even stuff like Crash Team Racing shows that you can remake an older title whilst still having an art-style that feels modern and cool instead of, well, old.
Basically I just hope that Nintendo realises that they can be a bit more 'risque' with Metroid in the same way they did for Zelda and Mario. If Zelda can have cutting-edge open world gameplay, voice acting and a post-apocalyptic story and if Mario can have unique worlds, lyrical big-band jazz and Lovecraftian posessions then Metroid can have something cool and new as well.
As a completionist I felt the big new feature (the dungeon creator) detracted from the game more than it added to it.I can get BOTW and Mario Odyssey but isn't Links Awakening a 1-1 remake?
Controversial opinion time. Kirby Star Allies is far better than BoTW, the Link's Awakening remake, and Mario Odyssey.
I'll give the assist. It's because here we're fans of games, talking about games we like. We are not shareholders. We cannot account for business constantly, and to do so denies us of our ability to enjoy the games as they are.Ah so you are going to argue in bad faith. Perhaps you want to explain yourself and why I am so ridiculously wrong with my statement instead of using a dumb gif?
To me it was a step down even just to robobot.Controversial opinion time. Kirby Star Allies is far better than BoTW, the Link's Awakening remake, and Mario Odyssey.
I'll give the assist. It's because here we're fans of games, talking about games we like. We are not shareholders. We cannot account for business constantly, and to do so denies us of our ability to enjoy the games as they are.
I agree that Samus Returns was a bit too safe, but I have no doubt Prime 4 will blow people away and I want to believe that 5 will do too.
Well I kind of agree, but again, that is more suited to prime. Samus returns was never going to be super bold or ambitious, being a remake of a 91 game and from mercury steam, late into the 3ds. I think metroid 5 has more potential now, but it won't be anythint crazy. Plis you havr to remember that metroid hasn't been in a mario or zelda scenario. They tried an...erm...ambitious game with other m and it setback the franchise basically a decade. They have had to bring back the series to it roots to a good extent. Zelda had the issue of not changing anything drastic outside of artstyle since alttp. 3d mario always drastically changes every few games.
Ah so you are going to argue in bad faith? Perhaps you want to explain yourself instead of using a dumb gif?
You are still a stakeholder, so you should have an interest in the money that Nintendo makes because it then means they can make the games that you love.
It was a step down from Robobot. Didn;t stop me from putting over 70 hours into it.
You think that the hot takes of a few people on ResetEra are part of a battle that would determine whether Nintendo lives or 'goes the way of Sega'. How am I supposed to possibly take your arguments seriously after something like that's been said?
I suppose I could concede that, but consider that "sales mean everything at all times" does not sound like the Nintendo strategy to me. Nintendo is about long-term strength and healthy intellectual property to me. Splatoon has already become a main pillar to Nintendo, and I think they should be pursuing fresh, modern, instant classic types of new IPs, as well as revitalizing forgotten ones, even if it's at the expense of short-term sales.You are still a stakeholder, so you should have an interest in the money that Nintendo makes because it then means they can make the games that you love.
I suppose I could concede that, but consider that "sales mean everything at all times" does not sound like the Nintendo strategy to me. Nintendo is about long-term strength and healthy intellectual property to me. Splatoon has already become a main pillar to Nintendo, and I think they should be pursuing fresh, modern, instant classic types of new IPs, as well as revitalizing forgotten ones, even if it's at the expense of short-term sales.
Please correct me if I'm wrong @Plum, but it sounds like he's arguing that even if the year was good, with high quality software and experiences, that doesn't make it exciting by default. A year's lineup can be exceptional while still feeling perfunctory.
I suppose I could concede that, but consider that "sales mean everything at all times" does not sound like the Nintendo strategy to me. Nintendo is about long-term strength and healthy intellectual property to me. Splatoon has already become a main pillar to Nintendo, and I think they should be pursuing fresh, modern, instant classic types of new IPs, as well as revitalizing forgotten ones, even if it's at the expense of short-term sales.
Please correct me if I'm wrong Plum, but it sounds like he's arguing that even if the year was good, with high quality software and experiences, that doesn't make it exciting by default. A year's lineup can be exceptional while still feeling perfunctory.
Well for a start I didn't say that did I? Grats on twisting my words I guess. I was saying that if Nintendo took as many risks as some people here want then the company would struggle to survive and the first thing to go would be the console manufacturing side of the business (hence the comparison to Sega)
I get what you mean, but I just don't want them to go too far like they did with botw. Yea botw sort of goes back to the nes, but it ended up becoming a giant sandbox. No dungeons, no current time story, and the appeal of the game is just wandering aroung to keep getting breakable weapons with basically no progression. I want prime 4 to be an evolution and not a drastic shift I guess. Go from what was there, but still keep everything that people loved.Lets hope, but I can definitely see both of them (especially 5) going down the safest possible path they can. Hell, Retro themselves made Metroid Prime 3 which had such radical and cool concepts like... The Federation... Sylux...
...yeah you get the idea lol
As for Metroid not having the same history as Zelda and Mario, that is true. However when you say "it needs to go back to its roots," I think you're missing what that statement should mean. Both Zelda and Mario went back to their roots in that they went back to older titles (TLoZ, Mario 64) and, instead of simply making those for a new era, they took what those represented and translated them into the modern era. Metroid absolutely needs to go back to its roots, but to me those roots are not "Just like Prime 1 but with prettier graphics," but instead "Atmospheric isolation-based gameplay with a, for its time, somewhat 'dark' art-style." They need to look at the context of what made those games so unique to begin with instead of simply believing that those games will work for modern times.
I hope that makes some sense.
Is XC Switch really a remaster? The character models are clearly new, and so are environments I assume?
Too hard for me to definitively rank the games. It's easier to just say that I think other m is trash. Federation force pretty much too. Hunters and pinball are decent enough spinoffs. Metroid 1 and 2 are just dated. Fusion...I still think is great, but not really what I want from the series overall. Prime 3 kind of like that, but for the prime series, but still love it. Rest of the games I love for different, and can't really differentiate in numbers.What's everyone's "definitive" Metroid ranking?
S-Tier - Super, Prime
A-Tier - Fusion, Prime 2, Zero Mission
B-Tier - Prime 3, Samus Returns
C-Tier- Pinball, Hunters, Federation Force
D-Tier - Other M's 3rd person gameplay
Z-Tier- The rest of Other M
You said that Raccoon was a "stakeholder" and should therefore "care about the money Nintendo makes."
For one, that's not how stakeholders work (shareholders, yes, but not stakeholders). However the main issue is that you've just brought the business side of things into here when it's entirely not needed, and you've chosen to completely fabricate some Strawman to do so in the first place. It's impossible to have a good discussion when you say stuff like that.