I Might someone be able to parse the nuances of this for me? It must be a particular dialect of doggwoof in which I am not well-versed.
So, I can see how you came to this reading of my post, but that's really not what was meant.
"Right" and "wrong," in a case like this, are going to be dependent on one's goals and, as such, aren't the question; for instance, I'd still consider that the wrong take for the situation, regardless if it appears the most profitable, which means suggesting this is born of concern of being shown wrong is ludicrous. It's not about a need to be right or fear of being wrong.
ElisaurusWrecks had more the correct reading. The idea is that the core of the series, the underlying, deeper aspects that make it what it
is, are tossed out without a care, and everything replaced with a facsimile, a facade of the series, nought but a cheap veneer, hollow and retaining nothing of that core -- as is the end point of the suggestions.
What is yet undesired is for the series to become a twisted version of Theseus' ship, but given an added twist, wherein it could be argued there once was something resembling a soul, the aforementioned core, which is no longer present; thus it negates the thought experiment and provides a more clear answer, one that suggests this entity bears the same name but is not the same thing.
It's not exactly the same question as
whether niche developers should prioritize outside critics over those who appreciate the genre in question, but it bears some similarities. We can consider that
Metroid offers something unique within Nintendo's offerings, not only in basic gameplay but in theme and mood and focus. It makes no sense to shove something else entirely into that skin.
But that theoretically could happen, and that's what is being dreaded up above: not that someone else can claim the nebulous title of being right, but that the idea could be conveyed that it might be beneficial to swap the series out for something else in its skin.
Prime, in general, has maintained that
Metroid essence, even if
Corruption might have flirted with pushing a different direction. The series, at its core, remains. The different elements retain a certain similarity. Your statement doesn't convey a sentiment that addresses the connected discussion, not unless you somehow equate
Prime with
Federation Force.
And, again, a complete rework could
theoretically alleviate some of this, but it seems unlikely.
You, you do realize "at best" doesn't mean "likely," do you not? Regardless, I still maintain a rework of
Hunters would have been a better method of achieving those ends.
This best case scenario seems to remove the possibility for trying something new that still hews closer to what the series has developed itself to be, though, at least without removing something else from the rotation (a suggestion that already seemed unlikely).
And given scheduling, resource allocation, theoretical return on investment, and the idea of sunk cost, there's definitely no guarantee of this best case scenario.
I defy you to quote where you commented this, and weeks before your post here at that.
But this all digresses from discussion on the grand revelation that Bandai Namco is developing a remake of
Donkey Kong: Barrel Blast.
