Topic: Nintendo Needs Their Own First Person Shooter ....

They're first person, and you shoot stuff. How are they not FPS?

I don't understand why people always refuse to call Metroid Prime an FPS. Just because shooting stuff isn't as central to the gameplay as it is in other games doesn't change that fact. I mean there are first person survival horror games and nobody even blinks when they're lumped in as an FPS. Nobody cares about the fact that pretty much every AAA game that's not an FPS is almost automatically just called an "action-adventure". But for some reason people get really worked up when you call this game that's in the first person perspective with shooting stuff a first person shooter.

Actually, I think Nintendo needs their own gritty realistic FPS.

They are suffering from a lack of 3rd Party games, why not make their own in one of the most popular franchises out there?

We already have Splatoon.We have enough gritty shooters on the market today.We need to see more fresh ideas and innovation like back in the day when doing something new was celebrated instead of releasing the same game every year with new packaging,maps,and weapons.

But the thing is, gritty shooters sell. If Nintendo could manage to get a new popular FPS IP in that category, it could help them from a sales perspective. I get that we have enough, and I personally wouldn't touch it, but I recognize that it's needed.

It's the same way I feel about Hyrule Warriors and Devils Third. I'm not ever going to buy or play either game, but I'm happy they exist.

Not really. The market is already oversaturated, and no one is buying Nintendo for these games. And quite frankly, if a gritty FPS is the single difference between a person buying the console or not, I don't want that person part of this community. In the same way I don't want people that would buy Pokemon Rumble U over actual quality games, but let's not make things worse is my opinion.

Because it won't change anything at all

That's like when McDonalds added salads to their menu. Sure it kept the "think of the children" crowd happy but it didn't really change anything. The fact that they had it on their menu didn't automatically mean that health nuts were rushing to their restraint for lunch. And I know it's anecdotal but I don't think I've ever seen someone walk into Maccas and ask for a salad.

The "gritty FPS" crowd already know that the Wii U isn't about that sort of game in the way that the PS4 or XBOne are. So why would Nintendo bother trying to win those people over? Why not instead try to make games for the people people who have either already got their console or haven't brought into the other platforms yet?

Because it's not a genre description. That'd be like calling Super Metroid a shmup because you can shoot enemies. It ignores every other basic aspect of the genre.

Metroid Prime is a first person shooter and Super Metroid is a side-scrolling shooter, both with adventure elements.

So I just went to see Big Hero 6 and before the movie there were Mario Kart 8 and Pokemon Alpha/Omega commercials.

Thought people in this thread would be interested in this information. Nintendo is advertising their products.

No. It's the other way around. Adventure elements implies that it's not integral to your progression of the game. You don't have to shoot a lot of enemies in Metroid. Just ask the speedrunners. But you generally have to explore and backtrack and utilize an ever growing list of tools in order to actually progress.

That's not what I was implying about the adventure side of each game. I think a case could be made that it's split, and would love to start seeing Prime called a FPSA. I'd like to know what number represents a lot of enemies, and how many players of the series actually speed run the games? How does speed runners' assessments become a definition of the game's identity in the first place? You also have to kill enemies in many instances to make progression, maybe not so much in Super but certainly in Prime with doors locking. Then there's the fact that nearly every door in both games have to be shot open, so shooting feeds right into the series' aspects of exploring and progression.

The difference is the shmup genre came from a particular kind of game which Super Metroid isn't. It takes more cues from Zelda and Castlevania than it does Contra or Space Invaders. However Metroid Prime is well within and borrows a lot of elements from the FPS genre. And if the argument is that it's "not an FPS" because you don't clear rooms by shooting enemies, then why are survival horror games frequently called FPS?

Not once have I ever heard anybody refer to games such as Amnesia and Outlast as first-person shooters. Those kinds of games are generally referred to as "first-person survival horror" which is not the same as being called a first-person shooter.

If one of my friends called Amnesia an FPS unironically, I'd stop talking with them.

I tend to think of Metroid Prime as like...part FPS with Hunters as an FPS first and Prime 1 and 2 not so much. Closest comparison would be somewhere between Bioshock and Portal for the first 2 games and even then that's far from a good comparison.

That is complete bull and you know it. Sure, technically you aren't required to beat enemies to progress, but in many cases if you leave them alone, they'll kill you. So you are going to do a lot of shooting actually.

Genres are stupid anyway. If you want to describe Metroid Prime why not just say it's a "Metroid game" in the first person perspective? Then if someone asks what you mean by "Metroid game" you just say "have you watched Alien? Well it's basically the same thing except you're Ripley and you have a suit with arm-cannon"

This. I'm so tired of 'Mario Kart isn't a racing game, it's party game' and stuff like that. We don't have to label all games with genres! In fact, some games don't even fit into a single genre, like Papers Please en CN:STEAM.

Isn't Kid Icarus Uprising good enough? It does have that first person view although its better with third person in my opinion.......