Confirmed: No Online for Metroid Prime 3

[callme.nasty]

What I meant was online play might make single player become forgotten in future titles....

that's what everyone who only wants single player is saying. but why not take some extra time and have great single player and multiplayer?

 

[Squall7]

i'd just like to point out that over half of the people in this thread share my opinion on online. this doesn't mean that any of us are right, because there is no right and wrong in this case.

Correct. Although, to be fair, this isn't the entirity of the Nintendo community. What about those fans that don't usually sign up to forums?

but nintendo has to look at the times we're in right now and the games that are being released now. most games are online now, and thats what people want.

Wrong. That's what SOME people want. Others don't really care about online play. "The times that we're in"? The US and UK is supposedly at war, doesn't mean that every media product should be about that. Likewise, Nintendo is doing something different - it's their philosophy. To want them to do what everyone else does is nonesensical.

Nintendo's reach is far beyond those "hardcore gamers" that only want games if they can shoot people from around the world in it.

 

[Wiinter]

Nintendo's reach is far beyond those "hardcore gamers" that only want games if they can shoot people from around the world in it.

I'm not asking that Nintendo abandon casuals, I just want them to keep their promise to include both casual AND hardcore gamers. I made my Wii purchase banking on that promise. MP3C was supposed to be a AAA title to satisfy us (not casuals and not Just Metroid fanatics--though in this rare case, everyone could have been satisfied). Heaven knows there's a new announcement of mini-games every freakin' week, when do we get ours? Eventually, sure. Just not this year. Not the end of the world, but expect to hear about it more than once.

The one consolation is that this leaves the door open wider for a third party that might not drink the Friend Code koolaid (opting for their own system like Madden rather than using Nintendo's for comm). For there to be a really good online shooter, there's going to need to be a broad fanbase--and hardcore gamers want nothing to do with Nintendo's convoluted roadblocks. It also leaves the option of bluetooth chat arising in time for integration with first big online FPS. Hope springs eternal.

 

[Squall7]

I'm not asking that Nintendo abandon casuals, I just want them to keep their promise to include both casual AND hardcore gamers. I made my Wii purchase banking on that promise. MP3C was supposed to be a AAA title to satisfy us (not casuals and not Just Metroid fanatics--though in this rare case, everyone could have been satisfied). Heaven knows there's a new announcement of mini-games every freakin' week, when do we get ours? Eventually, sure. Just not this year. Not the end of the world, but expect to hear about it more than once.

Lack of online will not make this drop from an AAA title. Besides, I think a fully working, polished and enjoyable experience in single player should be the important factor, rather than proven mediocre online play with sacrifice to single player. Any extra time that they could have had for online implementation would be better spent on the single player mode, considering it's the important factor.

The one consolation is that this leaves the door open wider for a third party that might not drink the Friend Code koolaid (opting for their own system like Madden rather than using Nintendo's for comm). For there to be a really good online shooter, there's going to need to be a broad fanbase--and hardcore gamers want nothing to do with Nintendo's convoluted roadblocks. It also leaves the option of bluetooth chat arising in time for integration with first big online FPS. Hope springs eternal.

Personally, I have no grievances with the friendcode system. All it means is that you have to type in a 12 digit code to whoever you wish to play with (if it's specific). Most games (all that I'm aware of) will still let you play with people randomly though.

And why is everyone suddenly obsessed about FPS online? Online wasn't neccessary for Goldeneye to be a classic. It wasn't neccessary for Perfect Dark to be brilliant. It won't be needed for Metroid Prime 3 to be amazing.

 

[Wiinter]

And why is everyone suddenly obsessed about FPS online? Online wasn't neccessary for Goldeneye to be a classic. It wasn't necessary for Perfect Dark to be brilliant. It won't be needed for Metroid Prime 3 to be amazing.

It's not the 20th century anymore. Goldeneye did have an excellent multiplayer system--one of the reason it became a classic--and I assume PD did as well. Online wasn't a viable option at the time. Dial-up, slower hardware, unproven systems... It's a proven utility now--even for Nintendo with the DS. Super Mario Brother's 3 didn't need 3d to be a hit, pac-man didn't need sound above the bleep-bloop level, pong didn't need more than about 50 pixels, but times change. The AAA goalpost moves as tech and expertise improve.

Lack of online will not make this drop from an AAA title.

I grant you it will probably be fun. I grant you that the controls will probably be the best the Wii has seen so far. I grant you that it's probably destined to become one of the highest rated Wii games (not too hard at this point). Lack of multiplayer however does, mostly because of the previous statements rather than in spite of them, hurt it's standing. AAA requires the highest performance--not ignoring the clamoring of the hardcore MP3C was supposed to satisfy. If they want to emphasize the FPS (they clearly do, given the control system is a purely 'lock on' affair), online play is a must to reach AAA. If they want to emphasize adventure/RPG (which Metroid purists clearly do), then a massive gaming universe (morrowind style) with 100s of hours of first time gameplay is necessary to reach AAA. A polished 20 hour experience is still only 20 hours. AI is still only AI. You want to prove how good you can really play? Go up against real humans. What they've designed is probably the perfect system that no one will be allowed to experience in all it's glory. A perfect representation of everything the Wii is capable of in hardcore gaming just got tossed onto a pile with Red Steel (bad controls, rushed quality, poor storyline and the only FPS multiplayer mode on the system vs perfect controls and deep adventure story that is only worth playing once-- a wash), a place it doesn't belong.

Besides, I think a fully working, polished and enjoyable experience in single player should be the important factor, rather than proven mediocre online play with sacrifice to single player. Any extra time that they could have had for online implementation would be better spent on the single player mode, considering it's the important factor.

Google "false delimma". It didn't have to be one way or the other. A great single player campaign is a boon to Metroid fans, but it didn't require not having a solid online mode. As has been discussed, the separate online functionality could have been done NST, giving Retro all the time it needed to serve your every whim. You and yours want me to miss my favorite feature. I'm all too happy for you to have yours. Who's being unreasonable? Given the absolute dearth of decent FPS on the Wii, anything will likely be received with open arms and great sales. But at the end of the day, it's not 7th gen AAA. It's just another game. It could have been much, much more.

However, I hope you enjoy your game. I don't get why so many Metroid fans react so rudely to the criticism. People want online play PRECISELY because they think the game will be the best on the system--and they want the chance to play for multiples of its single player experience. Take it as a compliment.

 

[Squall7]

It's not the 20th century anymore. Goldeneye did have an excellent multiplayer system--one of the reason it became a classic--and I assume PD did as well. Online wasn't a viable option at the time. Dial-up, slower hardware, unproven systems... It's a proven utility now--even for Nintendo with the DS. Super Mario Brother's 3 didn't need 3d to be a hit, pac-man didn't need sound above the bleep-bloop level, pong didn't need more than about 50 pixels, but times change. The AAA goalpost moves as tech and expertise improve.

True. Though whilst the goalposts move, the fact that people still play on those classics even now, kinda says something. Maybe it's nostalgia, but even so, it proves that a game doesn't have to adhere to the latest "rules" to be enjoyable. A classic is not classic for the "amazing" graphics or the great extra features, a classic is a classic because the enjoyment you get out of it is timeless. Heck, it's why even now, Zelda Ocarina of Time is voted the best game ever in Edge magazine.

http://crunchgear.com/2007/07/02/zelda-ocarina-of-time-named-best-game-of-all-time-by-edge-magazine/.

Heck, the top online play game is 7. Halo. (I've checked wikipedia on Half Life 2, and foudn nothing about online play).

I grant you it will probably be fun. I grant you that the controls will probably be the best the Wii has seen so far. I grant you that it's probably destined to become one of the highest rated Wii games (not too hard at this point). Lack of multiplayer however does, mostly because of the previous statements rather than in spite of them, hurt it's standing. AAA requires the highest performance--not ignoring the clamoring of the hardcore MP3C was supposed to satisfy. If they want to emphasize the FPS (they clearly do, given the control system is a purely 'lock on' affair), online play is a must to reach AAA. If they want to emphasize adventure/RPG (which Metroid purists clearly do), then a massive gaming universe (morrowind style) with 100s of hours of first time gameplay is necessary to reach AAA. A polished 20 hour experience is still only 20 hours. AI is still only AI. You want to prove how good you can really play? Go up against real humans. What they've designed is probably the perfect system that no one will be allowed to experience in all it's glory. A perfect representation of everything the Wii is capable of in hardcore gaming just got tossed onto a pile with Red Steel (bad controls, rushed quality, poor storyline and the only FPS multiplayer mode on the system vs perfect controls and deep adventure story that is only worth playing once-- a wash), a place it doesn't belong.

You're missing what Metroid is meant to be, a solo experience. Metroid always has (bar Hunters), and always will be a solo experience. That is fine. The fact that they've focused on polishing the game up until it runs like a dream, and plays like one to, is what will be great. It's like making pac-man a multiplayer experience - it doesn't work without changing the concept itself, thus changing it completely.

I would much prefer the Metroid Prime series to end as it began and have a new IP online for a FPS, than to have Metriod Prime 3 ruined just to compete with Halo (which in effect, it would do, had it been multiplayer online).

Google "false delimma". It didn't have to be one way or the other. A great single player campaign is a boon to Metroid fans, but it didn't require not having a solid online mode. As has been discussed, the separate online functionality could have been done NST, giving Retro all the time it needed to serve your every whim. You and yours want me to miss my favorite feature. I'm all too happy for you to have yours. Who's being unreasonable? Given the absolute dearth of decent FPS on the Wii, anything will likely be received with open arms and great sales. But at the end of the day, it's not 7th gen AAA. It's just another game. It could have been much, much more.

It's not really fair to say "you're getting what you want, but you're not letting me get what I want". Our discussion will do nothing to change Retro's minds. Likewise, as far as I'm aware, neither of us truely knows what implementing an online feature would entail, both programming wise and time wise. In the end, you have to consider what's more important, pleasing traditionalist fans of the series, or getting new fans. By changing the game, you're upsetting loads of fans, but you can always make a brand new IP to entice those that didn't find quite what they're looking for in the Metroid franchise.

However, I hope you enjoy your game. I don't get why so many Metroid fans react so rudely to the criticism. People want online play PRECISELY because they think the game will be the best on the system--and they want the chance to play for multiples of its single player experience. Take it as a compliment.

I would have hoped that people would've seen past the features. They're all nice and all, but in the end, the gameplay itself is what matters. People have already spoken out about the multiplayer experience of Echoes and Hunters, is that really going to change so much? If it didn't work for either of those, and Nintendo's online is just starting out anyway, the possiblity of the online being a let-down would be greater.

Have you ever gought a game and played it, before regretting your purchase? I have. Sometimes no game is better than a crappy game.

 

[Wiinter]

People have already spoken out about the multiplayer experience of Echoes and Hunters, is that really going to change so much? If it didn't work for either of those,

You have an MPH friend code in your sig...? To wit, I've never heard complaints about MPH multiplayer. Personally, I'm not sure a 4-player online mode would be much fun, but it was my understanding that it was a highly-rated hit.

Heck, it's why even now, Zelda Ocarina of Time is voted the best game ever in Edge magazine.

Heck, the top online play game is 7. Halo.

When was the last time you played OoT? It's clearly a classic, but how much replay value does it have? The Halo series is over-rated, and yet still ranks 7 on the list. It's barely old enough to be a classic--One would expect that relatively new online feature to take time to climb the all-time charts.. I still go over to buddies houses and play multiplayer halo. A real measurement that respects gameplay and isn't as nostalgia-biased (a best-ever list is going to be biased towards classics that wouldn't pass muster if they were released today) is how many Halo hours have been played vs how many OoT hours have been played. Neither of us could get the figures, but I (an avid Zelda fan who just replayed Zelda 2 The Adventures of Link a few months ago) have no doubt halo wins that battle. Even (maybe especially because it is) over-rated, it's well-executed online mode breathed years of extra life into the title.

Old games can be tons of fun (the VC was a big selling point of the Wii for me). But they wouldn't qualify as AAA if released today as if they were new. That's all I was saying. Feature requirements are real, and to be at the top, you can't just keep doing what you've always done. You'll notice I didn't say only online games could be AAA, but it does have to be special and provide enough gameplay to justify the designation. Polish isn't enough.

You're missing what Metroid is meant to be, a solo experience.

...

It's not really fair to say "you're getting what you want, but you're not letting me get what I want". Our discussion will do nothing to change Retro's minds.

First, it's not about "letting", it's about "wanting". Second, it may not be fair to say that You specifically are saying that, but generally the argument that there is no room for multiplayer in MP (even though there's been more than not in the subseries--half of it was considered successful) or that it ruins the game is common amongst self-proclaimed fanatics. They do want to preclude my desired feature (whether they have to power to or not).

Our particular discussion will go unnoticed, true enough. Under different circumstances (imagine a Wii full of solidly controlled FPS with good multiplayer options, but don't strain yourself) however, such an oversight could affect sales, and in looking for the cause, Retro would easily find Tons of dissatisfaction over the lack of online. If they wanted few new players, that might not encourage them to change the next game, but if they expected to expand their base, the sum total of such discussion could spur change. Of course, there is no competition on the Wii for MP3C, and it has all the appearances of being a great game, so that's not going to happen. They'll sell like hotcakes.

Other developers are watching the meta-discussion at the major review sites as well, and review sites are more or less in touch with major user demands. Discussions like these could finally contribute to better FPS user experience down the road as Ubisoft asks themselves what it will take to get better reviews for RS2 in an environment with much more competition and higher expectations (spurred in part by MP3C's high standards)--under the current environment, even only looking at the major review sites, it's going to be obvious that they need the MP3 controls to approach AAA status. They are said to already have online vs on the brain, but we (people like myself) shouldn't give them the impression that hardcore gamers don't care that much about it, or it could easily get cut for other features.

As to what I understand about the Metroid experience--no, I am not a fanatic. However I haven't accidentally happed upon the series with only a vague awareness of some boxart. The solo experience is already changing--before I ever came along. Even in the current incarnation of MP3C, Samus has help from other AI hunters--something that by the arguments of many (don't think I'm pointing every argument at you--in this case purists argue that the solo experience is more than Just keeping Metroid single player, the game should immerse you in isolation on distant vistas with no one but yourself to depend on) should ruin the game. The Metroid experience need not be completely limited by past games, it has more than one aspect. The adventure puzzling environment didn't die when MP went 3D, though Metroid purists were apparently up in arms at the time when the 1st person perspective was announced. They calmed after MP turned out so well. The ways in which multiplayer are incorporated could easily by designed with MP in mind, and tailored to continue the experience. If you still feel the isolation intended while on a planet surrounded by metroids and space pirates who are out to kill you, why would you not feel isolation on a map surrounded by other players (possibly in alien outfitting) who are out to kill you? If in addition to the full Metroid experience you get in the solo mode, there's another mode that focuses on another aspect of the experience, what's the harm?

You are correct about our common ignorance of the practicalities of programming and production, but even inside of that, had the multiplayer mode been programmed by NST (MPH's dev), it wouldn't have taken from Retro's resources on the single player experience. There is ALWAYS a way to make something happen, whether or not it is worth it to do so. In this case, the added replay value that would come from multiplayer are almost certain pay off dividends for an extra developer. To wit, Retro isn't the only part of the company with a pony in this race. The first party AAA titles are intended to sell consoles as much as they are to sell games. Nintendo's hardware division wants to keep the juggernaut rolling and has an interest in seeing this hardcore gamer gap closed, and if extra cost is necessary to prove the Wii's full mettle, they have stake in making that happen.

Finally, starting new IP with online functionality ignores the built-in user base that Metroid Prime has. To make a great online game, you need lots of users (and no friend codes). To get lots of users, you need a great online game. It's a chicken and egg scenario. Taking a major game like Metroid Prime online need not affect the single player mode, however it could draw many of the single-player gamers into the multiplayer mode, people who excel at the controls and provide a challenge to defeat. FPS fans were once banished to the PC if they wanted a good experience, because part of the game is a control system that allows you get really good at the game. Goldeneye had it. Halo has it. MP has it. However having it and only being able to take it to task against AI leads to a limited number of gameplay hours. Putting your skills up against the best there is to offer while both of you get better and better leads to virtually unlimited hours. Where teamplay is included, the dynamics vary even more, and even non-expert players present a challenge to expert players when they use good teamwork (this is where req'ing FCs for communication could ruin the online experience--good teamwork across a large map requires quick communication). That basic online vs mode would work well with MP3's system without compromising it, but again, it's not the only online mode possible. A little creativity and NST or whoever could have kept the increased playability factor while focusing specifically on the Metroid experience (which is about more than one thing).

Nintendo's online is just starting out anyway

Are you bashing Nintendo's mad adaptability skillz?? :yikes: I clearly have more confidence in them than you do. I jest

 

[Squall7]

You have an MPH friend code in your sig...? To wit, I've never heard complaints about MPH multiplayer. Personally, I'm not sure a 4-player online mode would be much fun, but it was my understanding that it was a highly-rated hit.

I've heard quite a few people that have had complaints about it. (though I can't remember exactly where). I've tried to do Metroid Hunters online myself. Whilst I like the controls, the fact that 1. Other players often cheat (like walking through walls, unlimited alternate weapons and infinte health), 2. I'm never on at the same time as people with my friendcodes and 3. I've had a hard time waiting for random players, and even connecting to one person that was in my friendcode list.

When was the last time you played OoT?

I'm more likely to pick it up than Halo. Also, whilst I love Zelda (and have played it more times than I can count), I hold an extra special place for Goldeneye, Road Rash, Perfect Dark, Smash Bros etc (in the N64 anyway).

It's clearly a classic, but how much replay value does it have?

Actually, it has quite a bit. Every now and then I crack it open for another go.

The Halo series is over-rated, and yet still ranks 7 on the list. It's barely old enough to be a classic--One would expect that relatively new online feature to take time to climb the all-time charts..

Ah, but that wasn't about "Classics", it was the best game ever list.

I still go over to buddies houses and play multiplayer halo.

I still play Goldeneye when my friends comes around. Kick ass at it too. Guess it takes all types...

A real measurement that respects gameplay and isn't as nostalgia-biased (a best-ever list is going to be biased towards classics that wouldn't pass muster if they were released today) is how many Halo hours have been played vs how many OoT hours have been played.

By that logic, Virtual Console, Live and PSN should all be failing...

Neither of us could get the figures, but I (an avid Zelda fan who just replayed Zelda 2 The Adventures of Link a few months ago) have no doubt halo wins that battle.

I liked Zelda 2. I also played it earlier this year. Zelda beats Halo hands down in my opinion (which we are talking about our opinions, not "fact").

Even (maybe especially because it is) over-rated, it's well-executed online mode breathed years of extra life into the title.

In my opinion, it's the only reason people play it. However, that's the people that require online for gaming as a norm - a relative minority of gamers (discounting the PC MMORPG - which is a genre in itself), especially now that the Wii has expanded the target audience.

Old games can be tons of fun (the VC was a big selling point of the Wii for me). But they wouldn't qualify as AAA if released today as if they were new. That's all I was saying.

I don't know really, I mean, graphics do not make a game AAA. Playability does. Whilst games are progressing, they're not necessarily getting more immersive (totally unprovable, but I did use the words "not necessarily"). In my opinion, even the likes of Perfect Dark have an AAA rating. I don't always play it as much as I used to (even AAA games can get dull once you've done everything that can be done 10 times over), but I still consider it an AAA title in gameplay. What other game can you instruct the computer player to hunt a specific player down? (or give them personality that actually breaks the rules of the game - Vengesim for example, will attack you if you attack it, even if it was meant to be on your team).

Feature requirements are real, and to be at the top, you can't just keep doing what you've always done.

True, but by the same token, immitating anything that looks even remotely successful all the time will just leave you with a mediocre product. If you do something well, it's best to stick to that thing. Look at Squareenix for example. Amazing RPG makers. Not so great (albeit interesting) Beat 'em up...

You'll notice I didn't say only online games could be AAA, but it does have to be special and provide enough gameplay to justify the designation. Polish isn't enough.

If the reports on the amazing controls are true, then that may make it enough. A game that plays like a dream only in single player is better than a game that also fails at online. IMHO anyway...

First, it's not about "letting", it's about "wanting".

I'm not allowing you to "want" online? How does that work? I'm just challenging the notion that it's neccessary for success.

Second, it may not be fair to say that You specifically are saying that, but generally the argument that there is no room for multiplayer in MP (even though there's been more than not in the subseries--half of it was considered successful) or that it ruins the game is common amongst self-proclaimed fanatics. They do want to preclude my desired feature (whether they have to power to or not).

Indeed. They want the storyline to work. Would it be okay if in the next Aliens film, they suddenly turned it into a romantic comedy? You can still have horror and Rom-com. Shaun of the Dead did it. Extreme example, but proves the point I think.

Our particular discussion will go unnoticed, true enough. Under different circumstances (imagine a Wii full of solidly controlled FPS with good multiplayer options, but don't strain yourself) however, such an oversight could affect sales, and in looking for the cause, Retro would easily find Tons of dissatisfaction over the lack of online.

Indeed, if this was a brand new IP, that incorporated a form of co-op in it's storyline (or even allowed it without breaking verisimillitude), then I'd be disappointed that it wouldn't have multiplayer (online, I still feel uneasy with, it's just not as friendly and because of that, fun (for me) because of the environment).

If they wanted few new players, that might not encourage them to change the next game, but if they expected to expand their base, the sum total of such discussion could spur change.

True, but you'd have to guarantee an expansion in their userbase to take that risk - how many people would play it once and say "it ain't no Halo", and not play it again?

Of course, there is no competition on the Wii for MP3C, and it has all the appearances of being a great game, so that's not going to happen. They'll sell like hotcakes.

Hopefully. Hopefully people will buy it, even though it doesn't have online (whilst I believe it's not necessary, I do acknowledge the fact that some people see it as essential).

Other developers are watching the meta-discussion at the major review sites as well, and review sites are more or less in touch with major user demands.

Ahh, but then there's a difference between what is possible and what people want. Also doesn't help if the opinion is split. There's tonnes of people not wanting Sonic in Brawl, with tonnes of people wanting him. How do yuo appease everyone in that instance?

Discussions like these could finally contribute to better FPS user experience down the road as Ubisoft asks themselves what it will take to get better reviews for RS2 in an environment with much more competition and higher expectations (spurred in part by MP3C's high standards)--under the current environment, even only looking at the major review sites, it's going to be obvious that they need the MP3 controls to approach AAA status.

Funny thing about Red Steel 2, is that they were looking for someone with online programming experience. This shows 2 things - regular developers aren't always able to set up online in some ways, and that the next installment may have online capability. For that, I'm actually a little excited (especially as they said something about an RPG element), because of the potential story. I like the idea that you create your own character that is either for or against Scott becoming the crime syndicate leader, and either attack or defend him (in the story). I think it would work there, but Metroid is different.

They are said to already have online vs on the brain, but we (people like myself) shouldn't give them the impression that hardcore gamers don't care that much about it, or it could easily get cut for other features.

I would personally be fine with not going online - the amount of cheating and elitism for online is a turnoff for me.

As to what I understand about the Metroid experience--no, I am not a fanatic. However I haven't accidentally happed upon the series with only a vague awareness of some boxart. The solo experience is already changing--before I ever came along. Even in the current incarnation of MP3C, Samus has help from other AI hunters--something that by the arguments of many (don't think I'm pointing every argument at you--in this case purists argue that the solo experience is more than Just keeping Metroid single player, the game should immerse you in isolation on distant vistas with no one but yourself to depend on) should ruin the game.

Indeed. Bounty Hunters rarely dogfight (so to speak), but are on a mission to recover something (i.e. The bounty).

The Metroid experience need not be completely limited by past games, it has more than one aspect. The adventure puzzling environment didn't die when MP went 3D, though Metroid purists were apparently up in arms at the time when the 1st person perspective was announced. They calmed after MP turned out so well. The ways in which multiplayer are incorporated could easily by designed with MP in mind, and tailored to continue the experience. If you still feel the isolation intended while on a planet surrounded by metroids and space pirates who are out to kill you, why would you not feel isolation on a map surrounded by other players (possibly in alien outfitting) who are out to kill you? If in addition to the full Metroid experience you get in the solo mode, there's another mode that focuses on another aspect of the experience, what's the harm?

Well, for a start, when you're isolated on a planet with metroids and space pirates trying to get you, when you dies, you generally don't respawn. Besides, I feel the focus on the storyline in Corruption would be more important than in previous games.

You are correct about our common ignorance of the practicalities of programming and production, but even inside of that, had the multiplayer mode been programmed by NST (MPH's dev), it wouldn't have taken from Retro's resources on the single player experience.

No, but it would have incurred further costs to the development. We don't know what Metroid's budget is either.

There is ALWAYS a way to make something happen, whether or not it is worth it to do so. In this case, the added replay value that would come from multiplayer are almost certain pay off dividends for an extra developer.

On the other hand, people may feel it's the easy option. "Everyone's doing it nowadays, therefore you should too" isn't really a good enough reason to consider something. Now, if every Metroid fan wanted multiplayer again, then they would've considered it...

To wit, Retro isn't the only part of the company with a pony in this race. The first party AAA titles are intended to sell consoles as much as they are to sell games.

Indeed, the major incentive is to sell. But then, people have to make something of high quality for it to sell. If Retro wanted to polish the game up like they did, then I say that as the developers, we shouldn't condemn them for that.

Nintendo's hardware division wants to keep the juggernaut rolling and has an interest in seeing this hardcore gamer gap closed, and if extra cost is necessary to prove the Wii's full mettle, they have stake in making that happen.

But Metroid isn't Nintendo's only hope. They have plenty of IP's for that. I feel that being loyal to a fanbase is more important than trying desperately to compete and recruit others. At least if you're loyal, you're definately pleasing someone...

Finally, starting new IP with online functionality ignores the built-in user base that Metroid Prime has.

Yes, but it ensures that noone feels isolated because their favourite games franchise got turned into a cash cow.

To make a great online game, you need lots of users (and no friend codes).

That's two things I disagree with in a single sentence. Online experience shouldn't be about how many users there are, it should be about having fun online.

To get lots of users, you need a great online game.

There's no evidence that Retro would even be good at that..

It's a chicken and egg scenario.

Funnily enough, some people have an answer for that. I believe the Egg came first - as it doesn't pretain to a specific species. The egg must have came first for the Chicken to spring up. Technically, if a "Chicken" was born no out of an egg, it wouldn't be a chicken.

Taking a major game like Metroid Prime online need not affect the single player mode, however it could draw many of the single-player gamers into the multiplayer mode, people who excel at the controls and provide a challenge to defeat.

On the other hand, it could be like Hunters - Virtually everyone cheating or disconnecting if they're not winning. Some people would play dirty just to get a good score.

FPS fans were once banished to the PC if they wanted a good experience, because part of the game is a control system that allows you get really good at the game.

The control system is irrelevant. It's the experience that matters. If you had the best controls but had a bad time with someone constantly killing you unfairly and being abusive, you're not going to want to continue. If you had bad controls, but everyone was in the same boat, and you had fun on a fair basis, you're more likely to want to play on than the previous scenario.

Goldeneye had it.

Goldeneye was brilliant. I loved even the little details, like the death animations, the different amouts of characters (more than based on different colours), but more importantly, the fact that people had fun. People got awards at the end of each match. However, they didn't have to worry about an overall total in their scores they've ever had.

Halo has it.

I don't think Halo has it. I think Halo is just mediocre, but hype has made it popular.

MP has it.

I kinda liked Hunters, but then I can live without multiplayer when it comes to Metroid, as it doesn't have the classic feel of things like Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. There's something more satisfying about killing people rather than aliens. Makes it more significant. Now, say Red Steel 2 (better controls and such), I would love.

However having it and only being able to take it to task against AI leads to a limited number of gameplay hours.

That you play through each time. However, the amount of times you play through the game may increase if it's good enough. Take Resident Evil 4 for example. That was such a great game to play through that you could literally go back and play it all over again straight away.

Putting your skills up against the best there is to offer while both of you get better and better leads to virtually unlimited hours.

Leads to the kind of addiction that the internet brings - people want to become the best and so practice and practice and practice. In the end, it's only a game, and nobody is going to care if you killed a random person 6 times or 66 times. In the end, I would want to prove my skills in local (non-online) matches, so that people would know that I was good, rather than not knowing me at all. For all they would know, I could be a cheap player, stealing kills and hiding until someone comes along.

Where teamplay is included, the dynamics vary even more, and even non-expert players present a challenge to expert players when they use good teamwork (this is where req'ing FCs for communication could ruin the online experience--good teamwork across a large map requires quick communication).

Yet, friendcodes allow you to have minimal lag - it's why Mario Strikers advises you to not play randomly people that aren't in your country, unless they're on your friendcode list.

That basic online vs mode would work well with MP3's system without compromising it, but again, it's not the only online mode possible.

In the end, I don't think it's really going to matter much. If it gives me an amazing experience in single player mode, I will mostly play that. If it were to give me a sub-par multiplayer mode, I would ignore it like the plague.

A little creativity and NST or whoever could have kept the increased playability factor while focusing specifically on the Metroid experience (which is about more than one thing).

Bah, sick of arguing now. I'll just say possibly and leave it at that.

Are you bashing Nintendo's mad adaptability skillz?? :yikes: I clearly have more confidence in them than you do. I jest

Lol. When people want online, they'll go online. I don't think it's necessary to make online standard if it's going to incur extra costs whether the player wants to play online or not.

 

[vagrant]

And the award for longest yet most unread post goes to......DRUMROLL....


Oh my god ladies and gentlemen it's a tie!

The co-winners are...Wiinter and Squall7!!!

Congratulations to the both of you!

 

[Squall7]

And the award for longest yet most unread post goes to......DRUMROLL....


Oh my god ladies and gentlemen it's a tie!

The co-winners are...Wiinter and Squall7!!!

Congratulations to the both of you!

Thanx. Sometimes I think it's how I win arguements. They try and read most of my posts until they fall asleep, while I do the victory dance:

 

[vagrant]

Thanx. Sometimes I think it's how I win arguements. They try and read most of my posts until they fall asleep, while I do the victory dance:

Ya I'm not saying you don't have good points cus I agree with all of them. I just like being silly.

"a VIDEO GAME eh?"

 

[Squall7]

Ya I'm not saying you don't have good points cus I agree with all of them. I just like being silly.

"a VIDEO GAME eh?"

Lol. No problem. Always more fun if people use humour.

I mean look at kevbomac05, you can't really take him seriously can you?!

Very funny dude. Has the dumbass look mastered.

 

[Wiinter]

The co-winners are...Wiinter and Squall7!!!

Congratulations to the both of you!

We won! Oh my Allah we won! I'd like to thank all the tiny posts that served as fuel for our tomes, and Nintendo. You inspire longwindedness.

That's two things I disagree with in a single sentence. Online experience shouldn't be about how many users there are, it should be about having fun online.

The point is, if there isn't a critical mass of users, you can't have fun. Online vs is designed to connect you to other people--that's the single most important aspect of it. The larger the pool, the more likely you can find someone that presents a challenge and makes a fun game.

Get a game with online vs, and you're the only person on (or alternatively, you're the only person online in your FC sphere as you described with MPH) and what's the point? All dressed up and no one play. You need lots of people and you need access to them.

 

[Squall7]

The point is, if there isn't a critical mass of users, you can't have fun. Online vs is designed to connect you to other people--that's the single most important aspect of it. The larger the pool, the more likely you can find someone that presents a challenge and makes a fun game.

Get a game with online vs, and you're the only person on (or alternatively, you're the only person online in your FC sphere as you described with MPH) and what's the point? All dressed up and no one play. You need lots of people and you need access to them.

Yes, but if all there is online are cocky American's who think that anyone that hasn't put in as many hours into the game as they have are "noobs", and constantly call people it ALL of the time (as with my experience at Halo online), then for me, it's not worth playing.

So far I've had no fun playing online on a console. I cannot just assume that things will get better when the attitudes towards online get worse or are the same.

 

[chach]

This thread pisses me off ever time i see it