NES Metroid, being replaced by Metroid Zero Mission.
NES Metroid is interesting to play through to see where the franchise came from, or for the nostalgia factor, but Metroid Zero Mission is vastly superior in nearly every conceivable way, its not even close. Its not like Silent Hill 2 or Resident Evil 3, where the originals are still better than the remakes overall, everything taken into account (though in that case, SH2 remake is superior to the RE3 remake). Absolutely every element of Zero Mission is an improvement on the original.
Metroid Zero Mission did not make vast sweeping changes to alter the identity of the game, making only minor adjustments to designs that were not thematically important (for example, the physical appearance of Ridley or Kraid being different is not thematically important). There were not big amounts of cut content, with only minor elements being cut like the fake Kraid enemy, which was not thematically important. The music is all familiar with the same composition, but with added flair. Its not different just for the sake of being different. Items and suit upgrades are almost all in the same places as the original NES Metroid, with the addition of new items that were added to the Metroid setting later on such as the Charge Beam and Super Missile. A map was added to the game, and the beam weapons now stack like in Super Metroid, rather than replacing the last beam you had.
All in all, Zero Mission leaves very little reason for the player to play the original game, especially if all the player cares about is the overall story of the Metroid IP. The player won’t get more thematically important designs that enhance the story like they would playing the original Silent Hill 2, and they won’t get more original game content and story like they would playing RE3 Nemesis. They wouldn’t get an improved experience. The choice to play NES Metroid mostly just comes down to nostalgia, historical value, or personal preference. Or if someone only has an NES or device capable of emulating the NES but not the GBA.
If you have a smartphone, or a computer built after 2005, you can definitely emulate Metroid Zero Mission, but unfortunately Nintendo makes it really hard to do it the easy way.
I completely agree and to I’ll add that this also applies to Metroid II. As Metroid II was on the Game Boy the game resolution is far too small to ever revisit. For a side scrolling game you can barely see what is in front of you.
Luckily the fan game AM2R, or the slightly less good but still excellent 3DS remake do for Metroid II what Zero Mission did for the original.
Luckily the fan game AM2R, or the slightly less good but still excellent 3DS remake do for Metroid II what Zero Mission did for the original.
I just started with the Metroid saga (it is never too late I guess) and I started with Zero Mission, I am actually struggling with what is next for me, whether to start with AM2R or the 3DS one… Both look appealing to me, but as I don’t have nostalgia googles for the older 2D games and the 3DS one has always called my attention, I might lean more to it… On the other hand, AM2R is a fan game… And I have a huge respect for those…
Super Metroid is definitely the gold standard. Zero Mission definitely feels like it uses Super Metroid as its base. The same is also true for AM2R.
I think if you are getting into the series for the first time, Zero Mission, AM2R, Super Metroid & Metroid Fusion is the order to go in. They all share a similar set of gameplay & graphics.
I think the 3DS Metroid II remake is great, but in terms of cohesiveness, it’s going to stand out among the four games.
That being said it’s made by the same developers who will then go on to make Metroid Dread, which is probably my favorite Metroid game behind Super Metroid, which is the best.
If youre playing the games according to lore timeline order, I believe that the Metroid Prime games all take place inbetween Metroid Zero Mission and Metroid II. Prime 1, Prime Hunters, Prime 2, Prime 3, and potentially Prime 4. Then Metroid II, Super Metroid, Metroid Other M, Fusion, and finally Dread.
I don’t know if it really matters if you play them in any sort of order - Super Metroid really perfected the style and set the standard for the rest of the games
For me games from the NES era can tough to enjoy for more than a short period of time. They just tend to feel punitively difficult in a way that is not very fun. I’d much prefer a Mario from SNES onward any day for example.
Now you got Rock, Paper, Scissors, Stapler, Banana, Atomic Bomb, Literature, Handcuffs, Police Brutality, Spock, Tweezers, Howling Dog.
And really, who would ever expect you to pick Tweezers? But it doesn’t lose to much, so it’s actually a great pick to twist your friends nipples. Unless they start EXPECTING you to twist their nipples, so they pick Atomic Bomb, and blow up all of civilization in a 30 mile radius.
I think they knocked the SH2 remake out of the park too, but I would absolutely still recommend playing the original as well. Especially the PC enhanced edition.
Pretty much all the racing games from my childhood. I remember them having super realistic grip and aerodynamics, but playing them again compared to even sorta SIM modern racing games today is just night and day.
I will blame my 1000+ hours in beamNG for some of that. Once you have seen super detailed soft body physics it’s hard to play anything that doesn’t have it. Wreckfest 1 had a decent hybrid soft/ridged system that worked for that game. Seems the second game that just dropped on early access improves on it some, but I’m gonna wait for the full release before I pull the trigger on that one.
I enjoyed the fighting simplicity of the original pokemon games. I could recognize and know the names of 151 pokemon and their weakneses/strengths. Now there’s too many pokemon and too many counters and hybrids. Too much work to keep track of.
As much as I adore, love and still prop Gen II as peak pokemon. I also have to blame Gen II for bringing in EV and IV that has served for the longest time, as fuel to the fire. Additionally so has making pokemon born and all that.
Now there's mega-evolutions, old pokemon have aurora forms or whatever. Why complicate it?
Yes. I enjoyed the simpler “rock paper scissors” offense/defense of the older games. There is such a thing as too much and it would be nice if game developers didn’t always feel the need to add way more stuff to every sequel.
The IV and EV system in Gen II is the same as in Gen I.
The “mordern” EV and IV system that’s being used today was introduced in Gen III with Ruby and Sapphire.
That’s just crazy talk. Pokémon Blue is my favourite, although I’ve only played up to gen 4 (Diamond, I think is the name). It’s not as good as the previous generations and the physical special split is just weird IMO. I’m sure that’s an unpopular opinion for people who are used to playing like that though, I think it would make more sense to me if it was how it had always been. Abilities were a neat addition though, I’ll give you that
Even though it’s hard to go back, I think Gen I is still quite good. I replayed Red maybe 3ish years ago, and had a great time. It’s just that it’s very rough around the edges until I’m used to it again.
The main thing that made me bring it up actually was remembering going back after playing GSC, and really missing the in-battle exp bar.
I’m surprised to hear you didn’t like the physical/special split, I think it makes much more sense the new way.
That split was great, the sp. atk/def split is very good, hold items and abilities added a lot. Inventory management got a lot better in later games. And monster sprites did too, although the bad sprites in Gen 1 have a lot of charm and nostalgic appeal of their own.
I’m sorry, I’m a young gen, so maybe that explains it but… I played the virtual console Yellow and got so damn bored…
It’s hard picking a favorite gen, as 4 was my first (Platinum my beloved) but I liked 5 despite not being able to beat it, but the features they introduced after gen I are all very good. Physical Special split is good imo, makes more strategy to a relatively basic game (when you don’t play against real people), abilities are great, newer types and type combos are nice additions, and a major one it the aesthetic.
Gen I characters and region are just so bland, the lack of themes, no extra minigame stuff… And I get it was the first gen so I can’t fault them for that. But the characters in the modern games are fantastic even if they’re weak, the music only gets better and better (each gen feels like it has a genre now), they include neat side stuff like the Poke Olympics, performance contests, berries & snacks, a ton of other stuff throughout the games. Like yeah, the newer games fall hard on the battle/difficulty aspect, and GameFreak’s inability to make a good looking game is astonishing. But they do put some heart in the little things in the new games, that just made grinding all day long in OG Yellow feel like a chore…
And even those there’s a lot, more Pokemon just makes that initial hour or so of a new game feel so special, like you’re discovering it all over again.
Yeah its disconnected from BYOND. I think you can launch it standalone but it also comes through Steam (always free). It was pretty bare bones but now its catching up. Looks easier to maintain and mod on the back end.
I started Monster Hunter with 4U on the 3DS. After World, Rise, and now Wilds, I have a hard time justifying crumpling my hands into a pretzel to play the old games on portable. The movesets are comparatively barebones, and there’s a lot of tedium and jank that the new games stripped away. Veterans will tell you that’s the real Monster Hunter and the new games are infantilized arcade games, but whatever. I play games to have fun, not bang my head against a wall.
Goldeneye. Revolutionized the FPS genre at the time. Nigh unplayable now. Tried recently using both NSO and on an original N64, it just hasn’t aged well when compared to something modern.
I played Goldeneye at an arcade recently that had an N64 set up and actually had a great time. But people who hadn’t grown up with it and tried to join in found it pretty frustrating. So I can see that going either way tbh.
Yeah it already had inferior controls at the time if you were familiar with FPS gaming on computers. But it was still a ton of fun and when I went back to it some years ago I fell back into the n64 controller muscle memory no problem
Yeah you can use two controllers to mimic the more modern twin stick ones that have become standard, but I don’t think too many people figured that out back then. Still though, controller will never be as good as mouse + keyboard for FPS games.
Perfect Dark, on the other hand, totally still holds up today in my opinion, and there’s a decompilation project that works great on PC and Steam Deck.
Yeah, I felt that way about GoldenEye after getting used to PD. GoldenEye was one of the GOATs in its day, but that day passed pretty quickly. Halo then further improved on the controls and CoD improved on the multiplayer mechanics.
When that GoldenEye for PC project released some years ago, I was excited to download and install it (because PC port meant it would get PC controls, which have always been superior to console controls, even after Halo fixed them) but I think I only played one game before remembering that you start with nothing and have to find guns and the port was more crowded than the 2-4 player games back in the day where you could at least spawn away from the action and get a chance to arm up before others made their way to where you were.
I love love love perfect dark. But it’s uhhh it does not hold up. The campaign starts fairly strong and craters pretty quick. It really feels like they just weren’t able to really… Finish the game when it came out.
Also, like GoldenEye, a huge component of Perfect Dark was multiplayer.
With the N64, it helps if you can hook it up to a TV from around that era too. Games like Goldeneye look terrible on a modern LCD. I had that experience myself - “Man, I know I’m used to modern games now, but I don’t remember these games looking this shitty”. Then I dragged out my old CRT and hooked it up, and instantly it was “Now this is how I remember these games looking like”.
I’m trying to see some stuff in BG1 and 2 that I missed as I take another lap through the entire series, and I remember BG1 being a fairly easy, straight-forward game, but now that I’m replaying it, I remember that’s only the tail end of the game. Early in the game, when you’re stuck at level 1 for hours, lots of attacks just one-shot you, and it takes so long to get level 2. In Baldur’s Gate 3, you’re barely out of the tutorial area before you get level 2, so you just don’t have that problem with low HP.
I don’t have an encyclopedic knowledge of 2e, but I think first level HP might be set in stone by class, and the Enhanced Editions of BG1 and 2 give you a max HP per level option, which doesn’t really help at level 1. Dynaheir keeps getting smoked with her mere 6HP, and she can’t get to level 2 fast enough.
If you’re revisiting BG1 via the Enhanced Edition it’s actually been changed a lot from the original game. One of the biggest differences is that summoning spells don’t scale in the number of minions you get the way they did in the original. I remember summoning great big walls of skeletons with Animate Dead and just having my entire party pelt the enemy with slings and arrows from relative safety. Can’t do that anymore!
Pelting the enemy with slings and arrows still works, but now and then they’ll still target me at range and land a hit. I don’t have a summoner in my party either, so I doubt I’d see a difference, especially at level 1.
I actually prefer walls of text these days. I find myself too impatient to sit through long, voice-acted diatribes. I can read 10 times faster than the voice actor can speak, so I just end up turning on subtitles and skipping most of the voice acting anyway.
I also just find that voice acting tends to compromise the amount of writing. They just won’t have the VA read a wall of text and instead they’ll cut it right down, removing tons of nuance. Voice also similarly compromises the amount of dialogue options available to the character. I have yet to see a voice acted game with the sheer breadth and depth of dialogue option choices as games like Planescape Torment or Fallout 2.
While I agree with you on how mediocre voice acting drags down most games, BG3 is one of the very few where the voice acting elevated the dialogue for me and the dialogue felt a lot less rambling than in NWN and other similar games. In BG3 the player character dialogue options are pretty robust, sometimes having six or more options to choose from, since the character doesn’t speak. I haven’t played Planescape Torment or Fallout 2 to compare, so I’ll take your word on them.
On a side note, BG3 was one of the games where the dialogue choices do matter. The worst are games where there are only a few poorly described choices and they have zero impact on what happens after! While I live Battletech (2019) the dialoge choices were completely pointless other than microfosing information. They would have been better off just having the NPCs banter after a single choice.
Personal preferences of course, which is why I love how many games there are to choose from.
I don’t normally like that kind of character but he really grew on me fast. Astarian, Gale, and Karlach are my absolute favorites but the cast as a whole is solid.
That’s what I am glad they included enough for personal preference and included the ability to respec them so they weren’t locked into their starting classes.
While I didn’t like his class much, it was his personality that really got me. I saw he can become a literal god in some endings. Sure didn’t happen in mine!
bin.pol.social
Najnowsze