Topic: Metroid Prime 4: Beyond

@Bolt_Strike it’s conservative in the wider context of game design, it’s unambitious and lacking innovation with things like its dungeon design is what I meant.

Sure, in terms of the series it’s trying something new (to be more mainstream, maybe?) while simultaneously being unimaginative with the building blocks of the design. Maybe that’s why it’s not landing: it’s caught in a no man’s land.

I tried to find more about Sylux in the databook that was released on the Nintendo Today! App. Looks like Sylux made his own research and experiments with Metroids and found a way to breed them (can we know about that just by playing the game?). But that doesn't explain how the bosses in MP4 were all fused with Metroids — the only way would be that the Metroids did get teleported to Viewros too, again, how can we know that? On one hand I find these story gaps exciting because we can speculate, on the other hand I think it's a bit lazy...

If you want to check the Databoook : https://metroid.fandom.com/wiki/Metroid_Prime_4:Beyond-_The_World_Databook

Weren't the infusions in the past Prime games made from Phazon? With all this lore I'm getting quite confused so maybe there was some Metroid DNA involved somewhere along the way

This is a pretty liberal definition of conservatism, by this logic anything that isn't a BotW-esque revolutionary convention smashing departure is conservative. Prime 4 feels somewhere in between, it's definitely not the BotW-esque revolution, but it's not really a copy/paste rehash along the lines of the NSMB games. It's somewhere in between.

As for why it's not landing, I don't think it's purely because of the in-betweenism. You can have games like that be successful. Mario Galaxy took a similar approach and that was a major success both critically and commercially.

The likely reason this particular in-betweenism isn't landing is because its contrasting elements don't really mix well. Galaxy was somewhat of a weird mish-mash of sandbox gameplay elements and linear course-clear elements looking back on it, but those two styles have significant overlap and they can go back and forth between the two with little trouble (they mainly differ in terms of level design, which can be remedied by simply having some parts of the levels be more open and some parts be more linear). With Prime 4, the new things they tried to do don't really mesh well with the Metroidvania gameplay fans are used to because they have polar opposite gameplay philosophies and contradict each other. They wanted to do open world sections with the bike, but Metroidvanias are designed around obtaining new abilities to open up more of the world and open worlds are designed around going wherever you want at any point in the game, so it's difficult to imagine how you could make a Metroidvania open world. They wanted to add NPC interactions to give the game more dialogue and interactions, but fans consider the isolation a key part of Metroid's identity so this move waters down what they enjoy about the series. They made the non-desert areas more linear (presumably to make them more casual friendly) but fans like the mazelike design of a Metroidvania so that also feels watered down. They wanted to create new abilities to make the game feel fresh, but they evidently didn't have many ideas and just made Psychic variants with new properties, so it makes the changes feel artificial.

Prime 4's issue is that it's not really designed under the philosophy of "what is a Metroidvania and how can it be modernized in a way that expands on what it can be?". It feels purely designed under the philosophy of "how can we get Metroid to sell more copies?". They added in elements that felt broadly appealing but don't feel like they fit Metroid's identity and as I've mentioned multiple times, they've watered down elements that fans did like. So it feels like a pandering sell-out rather than a genuine attempt to make a quality experience.

No, I know there's still story gaps, I'm saying that would've been an easy way to fill the gaps and provide a rational explanation for adding Metroid enemies to the actual gameplay. It's a simple fix that they could've implemented but sadly didn't.

@Bolt_Strike I think what I'd say is that it sounds like you're saying that anything with any changes from a previous iteration can't be considered conservative.

It's context. Vi-O-La, while a new element to the series, is a conservative addition. It adds very little other than bloated run time (oh you've got the flame chip? Drive over the other side of the map!). Grievers - new but are derived from bog standard sci-fi and feel no different to fight than the space pirates. Interiors, boss fights, puzzles - all iterative at best, and the stuff we've seen loads of times in other games. Just because they've added or removed design elements doesn't stop it from feeling like this is a game scared to take chances and there's been little progress in this series in 18 years.

The BOTW thing is a grand example - maybe that kind of revolution is what we should expect, given the protracted development time and gap in the series, whether it upsets the diehard fans or not. Again, this puts MP4 with a foot in each county.

I've just fought the Omega Griever. Another boss fight that isn't challenging but goes on for way too long. Is anyone playing on hard mode and finding that these sections are more satisfying second time around?

@Bolt_Strike I'd disagree with your analysis about Metroidvania concepts not working in an open world. This simply isn't the case. You can see it in BoTW itself - parts of the map are soft locked (or even in a few cases hard locked) behind particular armour sets. Of course, in theory, you can beat everything in Death Mountain without flame breaker armour by making lots of elixirs or constantly eating food but that's only because it's soft locked. Super Metroid - the platonic ideal of what a Metroidvania should be - is exactly the same and you can get through the Norfair caverns without the Varia suit if you're determined enough.

Open world and Metroidvania philosophies can be incredibly close. I think you're misconstruing what open world games are about. They aren't about "going and doing whatever you want at any point" - that's just the illusion they want to generate. They do typically utilise more soft locking than more linear games and they punish you less for deviating from a given path but with very few exceptions they are not free for all's.

As to why Prime 4 isn't moving big numbers I can't say since I've not played the game yet. Slightly mixed critical reception is probably the biggest reason. No-one has come out and said "this is a must play genre defining experience get it NOW" - they've generally said "it's really good but there's a few things you might not like". They might have got a better critical reception by doing what you'd suggest and picking one lane and doing it extremely well.

I suspect (and again I've not yet played the game) that the bike sections exist because they realised that designing an interesting and tightly interconnected map in 3d is extremely difficult; many players find it hard to navigate and the benefits in terms of what it actually gives to players turns out to be negligible when the game is actually designed around smaller discrete "levels" built in the world anyway. This is very obvious in some Metroidvania's (Metroid Fusion for instance or Shantae and the Pirates Curse) and less so in others but it's usually a feature of the genre to some degree.

I'm looking forwards to playing the game at some point - even knowing that it might not be the "out of the park 10/10" that Metroid Prime 1 was (I'm not a huge fan of 2 or 3 in the same way but they're both good games).

I do wonder if this game was just "More Metroid Prime", if people would be complaining as much because it HASNT changed much from the last entry.

Then again, saying what Metroid Prime is....is a bit hard as each game structures itself somewhat differently but also with similar elements.

How long until we get the official announcement for Metroid Prime 5?

If Switch 2 gets not one but two new Metroid Prime games I'll be reliving the glory days. Even more so if they port Prime 2 and 3.

I think... 2028 with a holiday release? Or perhaps 2028 with a 2029 release? That would give time for Prime 2 and 3 to drop late 2026 or early 2027.

Forgot to respond to this.

Oh I absolutely would've had that complaint and that's actually what I was feeling before the last few trailers where they revealed the controversial elements like the open world and the NPCs. What they were showing from the game up until that point felt largely samey.

It surely must be a difficult tightrope to walk, trying to figure out what to change and what not to change. Change too much and you risk the game losing its appeal. Don't change enough and the game feels repetitive and uninteresting. You really need to have a high level of understanding of what your game is and what the fans like about it and a high level of creativity to pull it off well. I do not envy these developers on that much, especially for some of the long running IPs that feel like they've done everything under the sun.

As for Prime 4 in particular, I think they picked the right elements to change but they didn't change them in the correct way and the game lost a part of its identity. The open world doesn't really add anything to the Metroidvania design, its dilutes it. They didn't handle the story and characters in a way that reveres the sense that Samus alone is traversing these hostile environments. The Psychic abilities are a good gimmick for this game, but I don't think they're executed well because most of them don't really do anything functionally different (many of them you just scan a mass of psychic energy and that materializes into a device that you interact with in the same way as the physical variant). The way they've gone about shaking up the formula definitely leads me to believe that this team simply doesn't understand Metroid that well (at best maybe on a surface level).

In a few minor ways maybe (for example, the overall map structure and connections between areas has always been different yes, but they're all mazes of rooms) but for the most part this is inaccurate.

I wouldn't expect anything soon. Nintendo is likely smarting from the incredibly-long development cycle for Prime 4, and probably would want to move back to their more traditional "announce things a year in advance tops" strategy. So, while sales being high might lead to Nintendo saying something vague like "we intend to continue the series", they won't actually make a specific announcement of a specific game. Or rather, they might announce something. . . but it'd be "the new 2D Metroid that was quietly in development that's coming out next fall" or the like.

@metaphysician 2D Metroid definitely feels like it should be close to ready since it's been 4 years since Dread. They're probably scheduling it so that they can announce it after Prime 4 fades from public consciousness. I'm not sure if that will be next year though, that may be 2027.

A long wait after a decade of nothing makes me want to say every thought I have about the game, but its just a bunch of small things after another 3 hours (3 actual hours, I don't think the in-game time counts anything in menus or reading scan text or anything).

My initial impressions of the desert is that I'm confused that people have strong feelings on it in any direction at all.

The bosses are pretty cool so far.

The exploding fire enemy things before the first save point in that area feel a bit like a difficulty jump.

Having to essentially get my sci-fi bike license is inherently very funny. This also makes me feel even more bad for F-Zero fans that Metroid beat it to having an HD race course for some reason.

@kkslider5552000
Fast Fusion gave me my F-Zero fix.

I feel like that game was grossly slept on. It's so good! And only $20. Yet I saw nobody talking about it since launch. I didn't get around to actually playing it until recently but, I love it.

And ya, about being surprised people felt one way or another- it seems people are hyper-emotional, hyper-critical about every aspect of every game nowadays. I just play games and have fun. I don't keep an Excel sheet listing all the minutia I felt "could have been better" or whatever, I just have fun. And either a game is fun, or it isn't.

I play Farming Simulator... that's not a fun game to me. I play Pokemon Sword... that's not a fun game to me. I play Fast Fusion? I'm having hella fun. I play Mario Kart World? Hella fun. Metroid Prime 4? Hella fun. I think we'd all enjoy this hobby more savoring the entertainment we engage rather than pick it apart with a scalpel.

That's why all our favorite games from the past are regarded so highly- because we weren't dissecting every line of code when playing them.

I think the issue with F-Zero spiritual sequels/homages is. . . people don't like F-Zero strictly for the high speed racing. They also like it for the art style and characters/story ( limited and broadly sketched it might be ). For the latter, Fast RMX probably doesn't scratch the itch very well.

F-Zero 99 did a very good job of scratching my F-Zero itch.

People just want different things from the series, that's all.

@Matt_Barber
F-Zero 99 was very well done, but as someone who did play F-Zero on SNES but didn't truly fall in love with it until F-Zero X on N64 (and later, F-Zero GX on Gamecube) I needed some proper 3D action.

I won't say Fast Fusion is as good as F-Zero GX, which is available on Switch 2 BTW, but its campaign isn't so impossibly difficult as GX, and while I love F-Zero for the external cylindrical pipes, underwater tunnels and super sharp, tight turns using both triggers, and typically dislike every other copycat in the genre because of the handling not being as tight, Fast series is an exception.

The color changing mechanic genuinely adds a layer of strategy that I think would elevate F-Zero to be even better, and the racing still feels right in its own way. Being able to hop/jump to collect spheres for your boost gage residing in the air, or taking a parallel track with boost strips, gives it its own identity in a way other copycats don't.

I'll continue to want a new F-Zero, but with GX on Switch 2 and now Fast Fusion, I feel my soul is at least at peace. I do recommend for anyone who still appreciates this forgotten genre.

Another good example of a semi-open world would be Shadow Man, if any of you have ever played it. It was released 2 years before MP1. Instead of a central hub you have linear corridors (leading you to different areas of the game) whose sections unlock one after the other upon gaining enough energy/power (like in BotW when you need a certain amount of hearts to remove the sword, but more subtly designed as there is no grind really if you explore the world well enough).

So I caved in and finally started MP2 again, and what strikes me is how complex the levels are (rooms with 3 or 4 doors are frequent), the backtracking is real but it feels like you never actually take the same route as the doors unlock naturally. And the enemies that ambush you change most of the time between your visits. In MP4, if you take Fury Green for instance, you only walk through the entire area twice (not considering the countless visits to base camp which, looking back, could have been set in Sol Valley and given that area a bit more purpose) as there is no reason to go back after visiting it a second time with your double jump boots.

@kkslider5552000
For me it's just that Sol Valley seems utterly pointless and makes the backtracking, an aspect that has never bothered me in Metroid, quite a bit less fun. I really think the game would've been better off without it.

I just got this game for Christmas and I love it!!! It does such a good job of connecting the environments through Sol Valley, and the Federation soldiers aren't nearly as irritating as the previews suggested.
10/10 all around

@Gamer83
We'll see what they do for the next game.

I didn't mind Sol Valley and wouldn't mind a hub in the future. But what I do want to see (and I mentioned this in my little amateur YT impressions vid), is the individual areas less linear with larger regions blocked off. As long as they do that, I'm good with the hub.

As someone above mentioned, I think Metroid Prime 2 is the perfect example of what I prefer. Which, it also had a hub, and I think Sol Valley is more engaging than it was, but I'm also perfectly fine going back to the Prime 2 approach- either way works for me. I'd just like less linearity, hub or not.