Arena Test I -- Dead, but being used to test thingsSpace War 0: Free Space (update on game setup, you can still sign up though)
Site
GTX0 AnnouncementsFeedbackHelp | SandboxNewest Posts | Replies | Hottest
Activities GTX0 Mafia | AutoMafiaGTX0 Adventure | NIFESpectator GamingThe Flowvamp
Topics
Communities NostalgiaAxemsDrunjkPointless
Communities RPG ChatTerraria & IndiesJedi SithCovenant
Entertainment Computer Help & ChatSports | Entertainment & MusicWrestlingCreative Outlet
Special Topics World & PoliticsReal LifeSpiritualityScience & Math
Games
Game Genres StrategyMario WorldPokémonFinal Fantasy/RPGs
Superforums Video Game News & DiscussionsLegend of ZeldaAnimated/JapaneseDueling Cards
Popular Games OverwatchSuper Smash BrosMass EffectHalo


Video Game News & Discussions

Is your body ready?

Note: Topics for games that have their own forum with be moved to the appropriate forum.

Moderated by Vandy
If Nintendo wants Metroid Prime 4 to sell..
Posted: Posted June 13th by ShadowFox08

It can't just be a 20-30 hour single player campaign. It kind of sucks, but a lot has changed in 10 years, and online multiplayer has become the norm for shooters(yes I know this is labeled as a first person adventure). But yeah, Nintendo does have big shoes to fill for MP4, but it doesn't need AAA spending or an open world RPG like single player. But IMO, it needs a fairly deep online multiplayer and (what I recommend) DLC to stay afloat. At least Nintendo dies have MP:Echoes and MP:Hunters for some direction though.

What do you guys think? Should/does Nintendo need online multiplayer and/or DLC? How would you design it also? They could definitely have different hunters and even bad guys from the mp series as playable, with some even having their own unique abilities. I'm anxious as hell to see how Nintendo and the unnamed new developers will handle this game! We probably won't get footage until next E3 sadly..

There are 14 Replies

Definitely. Remember how Nintendo lied to us about metroid prime 3 and said that it would have online play, but they didn't because these dumbass fanboys wanted it all to be about the story mode and single player exploration (which is very nice), but depriving us of online play for this game and series is sacrilegious. Take your time and make gory single player and online modes but don't you dare force everyone to play only single player mode. Quit being fanboyish. Take a wide stance.

I only played hunters because it had online play and loved it whereas all of these bitches hated it because they wanted it to be solely about the single player experience.

Edited June 13th by weid man
weid man
 

I really didn't care for MPH's single player, but it had good online play. You know, a proper game should really try to achieve both. MP was all about the single player ominous adventure, that's something you don't get from multiplayer. I would like to see a new game do both really well.

I have not seen anything from E3, though, so I need to see this for myself :|

Posted June 13th by mariomguy
mariomguy
What up, 1-up

I totally agree with what mariomguy just said. No more fanboyism. You can't force us to play either mode.

Posted June 13th by weid man
weid man
 

It can't just be a 20-30 hour single player campaign

I mean I would still get it if I'm capable, I fucking loved it's campaigns. Online can be easily overlooked for me, especially now that they're going to be putting a price on online play.

but it doesn't need AAA spending or an open world RPG like single player.

I'm just saying this because some people have a weird definition of open world but if by "open world" you mean pretty much what every prior metroid prime has done It definitely does need that. That's part of what makes the experience so beautiful and meaningful. If I wanted online play OVER this, I would just play halo. Both is fine, but you absolutely must have what made it great in the first place too!

if you mean open-world like breath of the wild that would be great too. Honestly I would much rather have that than online play. Again if you want to place priority on online play, play halo.

DLC to stay afloat.

That's one of the last things it needs imo.

Should/does Nintendo need online multiplayer and/or DLC?

Online would be NICE if they can pull both off with single player quality intact.

but they didn't because these dumbass fanboys wanted it all to be about the story mode

Nintendo chose to do this themselves, and for good reason. if they don't have the resources to make BOTH modes good, it's good that they didn't focus on both, and good that they would stick to what made metroid amazing in the first place.

Again, both would be nice, but ONLY if they can actually still make a quality single player mode. That's what everyone loved these games for anyway.

but depriving us of online play for this game and series is sacrilegious.

It would be sacrilegious by definition if nintendo were to put out an online focused MP game and take away from the single player mode. Again I'm not sure if they can do both with quality, and they chose to only focus on single player themselves. I don't know how you see the reverse as sacrilegious. Just look at the single player mode for MP Hunters, the only MP game with online play. It was awful.

No more fanboyism.

Again it's not the fans holding it back. No one just says "hey this game would be better off without single player mode or online mode!"

You can't force us to play either mode.

And also you're not entitled to have both though. MP was always a single player game

Edited June 13th by KnokkelMillennium
KnokkelMillennium

I pretty much agree 100% with knuckles. If they can add multiplayer without making the single-player experience suffer, then that would be nice, but I'm not going to expend any energy hoping for it because it's not something I feel is really necessary for a game like Metroid.

If they did incorporate online multiplayer with the intent of fleshing it out, then DLC would make sense there. A lot of companies handle DLC in greedy, shitty ways, but I feel like Nintendo has handled DLC with respect, Mario Kart 8 being a great example. I trust that they would do the same if they added multiplayer-centric DLC to a Metroid game.

For single player DLC, I don't think it really makes sense for a metroidvania-style game. Guacamelee kind of did something like this - they released "Gold" and then "Super Turbo Championship" editions of their game, not really DLC but still in a similar vein. They basically shoehorned in an extra area or two. The problem I had with this approach is that I had to start the game all over again in order to experience the added content, and it really does feel like it was shoehorned in and I never finished my second playthrough anyway. I dunno. It could work, but I'm a bit apprehensive toward the idea of single-player DLC for this kind of game. It makes more sense for Zelda where they can just add an optional dungeon somewhere.

Posted June 13th by Jo Nathan
Jo Nathan

I'd rather have a 50-50 than 100-0 experience. Favoritism for anything is flat out wrong.

DLC would be wonderful. Look at how they did it for smash bros 4 and Mario kart 8.

Posted June 13th by weid man
weid man
 

Weid. Games aren't meant to be everything and do everything. Some of the greatest games are the greatest simply because they did one thing exceedingly well. if developers wasted all of their resources trying to do EVERYTHING it wouldn't be nearly as good. If they all did that, we'd be left with a lot of terrible games and maybe a few alright ones.

DLC would be wonderful. Look at how they did it for smash bros 4 and Mario kart 8.

What dlc would make sense for a game like this? And moreover why shouldn't the feature be in the game like this without a dlc?

Posted June 13th by KnokkelMillennium
KnokkelMillennium

Your logic makes sense

Posted June 13th by weid man
weid man
 

>I really didn't care for MPH's single player, but it had good online play. You know, a proper game should really try to achieve both.

Why?

If you have a survival horror game that depends on isolation as a major part of its design, why should it try to achieve good multiplayer?

If you have a MMO game that depends on guilds/clans/raids as a major part of its design, why should it try to achieve good singleplayer?

Posted June 14th by nullfather
nullfather

I mean I would still get it if I'm capable, I fucking loved it's campaigns. Online can be easily overlooked for me, especially now that they're going to be putting a price on online play.

I would too, because I loved the MP games.. But if it has the same exact content as the previous games in this day and age, I'd be dissappointed. For me, I like games with replay value. Once I beat a single player driven game, I don't ever touch it again(unless it has good online multi). So it would be nice if we do get online or some other content.. Would be nice if MP could be the FSPer of the 1st party genre for Nintendo.


I'm just saying this because some people have a weird definition of open world but if by "open world" you mean pretty much what every prior metroid prime has done It definitely does need that. That's part of what makes the experience so beautiful and meaningful. If I wanted online play OVER this, I would just play halo. Both is fine, but you absolutely must have what made it great in the first place too!

if you mean open-world like breath of the wild that would be great too. Honestly I would much rather have that than online play. Again if you want to place priority on online play, play halo.

Oh I mean like a giant big sand box style open world like botw and lots of other games. I don't think it needs a huge area size like xenoblade x or botw. If it has online multiplayer, 20-30 hours campaign for a normal run is ok for me.

It doesn't necessarely need DLC, but it does help with the longevity. Of course as long as its not barebones without DLC. Botw was handled perfectly in terms of content without DLC, though its 100% single player experience.

Posted June 14th by ShadowFox08
ShadowFox08

But if it has the same exact content as the previous games in this day and age, I'd be dissappointed.

There has been a whole lot of differences between Metroid Prime games... I'd argue that it's one of the few FPS series NOT just having the same content over and over.

Once I beat a single player driven game, I don't ever touch it again(unless it has good online multi).

I played MP games over quite a bit.

Edited June 14th by KnokkelMillennium
KnokkelMillennium

There has been a whole lot of differences between Metroid Prime games... I'd argue that it's one of the few FPS series NOT just having the same content over and over.

Each one had their own gameplay differences and features, but they all roughly had the same formula, linear gameplay, and replay value. MP1 focused a lot on exploring different worlds, MP2 brought an interesting light and dark worlds and a offline multiplayer mode, and MP3 brought motion controls to enhance gameplay.

Speaking of motion controls, I hope we get the same pointer(or at least gyro) for MP4 as well. I loved it in MP3 and Trilogy, and I hope it comes back.

Edited June 14th by ShadowFox08
ShadowFox08

I should say that obviously I don't think fps games are just doing the exact same thing but MP felt like it had so much variety in comparison save for like weapon mechanics.

Also I didn't really like the motion controls and I kinda hope they don't come back.

Posted June 14th by KnokkelMillennium
KnokkelMillennium

Nintendo recently posted this..



Posted June 17th by ShadowFox08
ShadowFox08
Reply to: If Nintendo wants Metroid Prime 4 to sell..

Enter your message here


Site Rules | Complaints Process | Register Complaint Facebook Page
GTX0 © 2009-2017 Xhin GameTalk © 1999-2008 lives on