Fun Club "Mario, Zelda, and _________"

[Keon]

 

[Serif]

Mario, Zelda, Metroid.

My criteria: debuted on the Famicom / Nintendo Entertainment System, was (and still is) highly influential in the gaming sphere, and harbors some of the greatest games of all time under its umbrella.

I enjoy interpreting this as a question of categorization and grouping (by factors other than overall popularity or sales) and this historical framing resonates with me. 'Action/adventure' games starting on the Famicom, with definitive and well received sequels on the Super Famicom that left an indelible impact on gaming, to striking transitions to 3D that maintain the spirit of the originals while the 2D series continues. The timelines do not sync up perfectly between these three series (comparisons are not going to be perfect, we know Metroid does not perform as well as the other two), but this is how I see them in relation to each other.

If you interpret the question as "what are the current biggest three franchises that perform well and Nintendo are frequently pushing" then we obviously pick something else. But I find that dull, it's not the only way to compare game series.

 

[xghost777]

For me the sentence is Mario, Metroid, and Zelda. It’s a Bugs and Daffy vs Daffy and Bugs thing.

Quality > Sales all day every day for how I immediately jump to this sentence.

 

[Deleted member 4028]

Gaslit? Metroid is a seminal work for videogames in general, any game design 101 class ought to mention it. It may not have had as many chances to shine on different platforms as Mario and Zelda did but the few times it had an ambitious mainline entry (SNES and Gamecube), it reached the level of critical acclaim that no other single player Nintendo series can do besides Mario and Zelda. Once a work reaches the canon it stays there, you don’t see movie discussions being constantly derailed by how “Blade Runner and The Thing were actually flops, why are so many people still talking about them”. You may say that its relevance or sales is disproportionate to the attention it receives online but like, who cares? You have series like Yakuza, Persona, Nier, From Software games and Arcsys games that have memed their way into relevance. They used to be quite niche, they got to be cult classics with diehard fanbases, they got their time to shine and explode in sales due to good word of mouth and also due to offering certain aspects that people were missing in AAA gaming. Once Prime 4 actually drops, Metroid will solidify its place in Nintendo’s big three

I really don’t see any other series deserving to stand next to Mario and Zelda, we’re talking about the big, critically acclaimed, single player system sellers here. Stuff like Smash and Mario Kart, on top of being crossovers, may have the critical reception and sales but they are multiplayer games so they make more sense as part of a multiplayer big three. Now the elephant in the room would be Pokemon, it’s clearly the most popular Nintendo IP alongside Mario but it shouldn’t be mentioned next to Mario and Zelda for multiple reasons. The most notable one is how it’s not even fully owned by Nintendo. This, on top of them being basically forced to release games yearly, made that Pokemon is essentially the only Nintendo series to not have had a smooth transition to 3D. Third game of the big three simply can’t be anything besides Metroid

Quality in video games is subjective though. Critic opinions are just opinions like anybody else's at the end of the day. And people buy systems for different things. If you're talking about the majority of people, "system sellers" are probably more like Mario Kart, Animal Crossing, Smash, Mario, and Zelda. Metroid doesn't really come anywhere near those in sales, and even Mario and Zelda are outsold by Mario Kart/Animal Crossing/Smash. For me, DK and Smash are the real "system sellers" which convince me to buy a new system. I wouldn't say other series that I don't like as much aren't "deserving" though.

 

[Phosphorescent Skeleton]

I could just as easily say, who cares about critical reception? There are over half a dozen Pokemon games that have sold individually more than the entire Metroid series combined. Its cultural footprint is monstrous and only really Mario compares on that front, not just in Nintendo but in gaming in general. Pikachu is one of the most recognizable fictional characters in the world, that's a far bigger metric than something as arbitrary as Metacritic scores.

The comparison to movies doesn't make sense. Nobody would serious argue Blade Runner is as culturally relevant as contemporary movies from that era like Star Wars or Indiana Jones.

People in film circles also do argue whether or not Blade Runner is a canonical or particularly important film. I personally don't care for it at all.

 

[Clov]

This about sums it up! For anyone wondering where Pokemon is, it's in its own dedicated store right next to it on the same floor.

 

[AngryAlchemist]

I could just as easily say, who cares about critical reception? There are over half a dozen Pokemon games that have sold individually more than the entire Metroid series combined. Its cultural footprint is monstrous and only really Mario compares on that front, not just in Nintendo but in gaming in general. Pikachu is one of the most recognizable fictional characters in the world, that's a far bigger metric than something as arbitrary as Metacritic scores.

The comparison to movies doesn't make sense. Nobody would serious argue Blade Runner is as culturally relevant as contemporary movies from that era like Star Wars or Indiana Jones.

Alright, as flawed as Yoshifans comment is, going in the opposite direction is very flawed too.

I'd be one thing if Blade Runner or Metroid were just critically acclaimed, but they're literally some of the most innovative and influential pieces of fiction within their respective mediums. Blade Runner is probably the single most popular cyberpunk story in media ever (not counting game "stories" or tabletop "stories"), which counts for a lot now that the niche has really exploded in popularity in the past few years. Metroid is basically responsible for Metroidvanias as a whole.

None of this is to say that Blade Runner is as culturally impactful as Star Wars or that Metroid is as impactful as Pokemon, but to act as if the only thing those works have earned over the years is critical acclaim is silly. They have tons of cultural impact on basically birthing genres, they just aren't nearly as big as some of the biggest IP in the world, which Star Wars / Nintendo franchises are. But then again, rarely anything is.

 

[Yoshifan31]

I could just as easily say, who cares about critical reception? There are over half a dozen Pokemon games that have sold individually more than the entire Metroid series combined. Its cultural footprint is monstrous and only really Mario compares on that front, not just in Nintendo but in gaming in general. Pikachu is one of the most recognizable fictional characters in the world, that's a far bigger metric than something as arbitrary as Metacritic scores.

The comparison to movies doesn't make sense. Nobody would serious argue Blade Runner is as culturally relevant as contemporary movies from that era like Star Wars or Indiana Jones.

Many games can sell a lot, not many can have the kind of critical reception Metroid Prime and Super Metroid did. It’s simple as that. Pokemon may be bigger than Nintendo and may be a sure system seller for handhelds but again, Pokemon has never been made in house. Its ownership alone makes it different from Mario and Zelda.

What I meant with the comparison to movies is that in film buff circles, Blade Runner and the like are up there and they accept that. No one argues whether it’s as big as Indiana Jones or Star Wars, they just agree that it’s one of the great movies of its time, as well of its influence for the medium abd the genre. Metroid won’t ever have the mass appeal of Mario or Zelda but it will always have the prestige. There are simply no other Nintendo series that ever came close to do what Metroid Prime did in terms of critical reception. That’s why it’s so logical to put it as part of a big three, it literally beat Mario and Zelda at their own game which was simply unprecedented

 

[Vampfox]

I'm surprise at all the Metroid votes. Metroid doesn't even sell well enough to justify its existence.

 

[xghost777]

I'm surprise at all the Metroid votes. Metroid doesn't even sell well enough to justify its existence.

The thread’s question isn’t a question about sales. It’s how do you fill in the blank yourself when you hear people say “Mario, Zelda, and …”

 

[Vampfox]

The thread’s question isn’t a question about sales. It’s how do you fill in the blank yourself when you hear people say “Mario, Zelda, and …”

I understand that. But the way that people are voting it's clear that a lot of people think that Metroid is more important than it really is.

 

[xghost777]

I understand that. But the way that people are voting it's clear that a lot of people think that Metroid is more important than it really is.

It’s most important to them and thus the right answer for them.

 

[Dolce]

i mean i'm not stuck in the past unable to appreciate that newer things come along. the idea that once was should always be is ludicrous to me.

thankfully nintendo in general have moved away from action action action.

though, tbh, i don't put zelda in what i think of after mario, either. nintendo has a lot of other stuff nowadays and it's not the 80s, and so zelda isn't that big to me anymore.

It’s most important to them and thus the right answer for them.

as long as they're not thinking it deserves more sales/recognition or something i don't care. the idea of deserving is stupid, and the idea that being popular with critics is somehow the most important thing is so regressive. other mediums already learned that what critics love and hate can be pretty stupid and not line up with what matters to society.

Many games can sell a lot, not many can have the kind of critical reception Metroid Prime and Super Metroid did. It’s simple as that. Pokemon may be bigger than Nintendo and may be a sure system seller for handhelds but again, Pokemon has never been made in house. Its ownership alone makes it different from Mario and Zelda.

What I meant with the comparison to movies is that in film buff circles, Blade Runner and the like are up there and they accept that. No one argues whether it’s as big as Indiana Jones or Star Wars, they just agree that it’s one of the great movies of its time, as well of its influence for the medium abd the genre. Metroid won’t ever have the mass appeal of Mario or Zelda but it will always have the prestige. There are simply no other Nintendo series that ever came close to do what Metroid Prime did in terms of critical reception. That’s why it’s so logical to put it as part of a big three, it literally beat Mario and Zelda at their own game which was simply unprecedented

plenty of movies have terrible "critical reception" at the time and then are re-evaluated decades later. it's why critical reception is meaningless.

 

[Phosphorescent Skeleton]

Many games can sell a lot, not many can have the kind of critical reception Metroid Prime and Super Metroid did. It’s simple as that. Pokemon may be bigger than Nintendo and may be a sure system seller for handhelds but again, Pokemon has never been made in house. Its ownership alone makes it different from Mario and Zelda.

What I meant with the comparison to movies is that in film buff circles, Blade Runner and the like are up there and they accept that. No one argues whether it’s as big as Indiana Jones or Star Wars, they just agree that it’s one of the great movies of its time, as well of its influence for the medium abd the genre. Metroid won’t ever have the mass appeal of Mario or Zelda but it will always have the prestige. There are simply no other Nintendo series that ever came close to do what Metroid Prime did in terms of critical reception. That’s why it’s so logical to put it as part of a big three, it literally beat Mario and Zelda at their own game which was simply unprecedented

I'm a "film buff", and I don't like Blade Runner. I think many people agree that its aesthetics are influential but its pretty week as a film.

 

[Mekanos]

Many games can sell a lot, not many can have the kind of critical reception Metroid Prime and Super Metroid did. It’s simple as that. Pokemon may be bigger than Nintendo and may be a sure system seller for handhelds but again, Pokemon has never been made in house. Its ownership alone makes it different from Mario and Zelda.

What I meant with the comparison to movies is that in film buff circles, Blade Runner and the like are up there and they accept that. No one argues whether it’s as big as Indiana Jones or Star Wars, they just agree that it’s one of the great movies of its time, as well of its influence for the medium abd the genre. Metroid won’t ever have the mass appeal of Mario or Zelda but it will always have the prestige. There are simply no other Nintendo series that ever came close to do what Metroid Prime did in terms of critical reception. That’s why it’s so logical to put it as part of a big three, it literally beat Mario and Zelda at their own game which was simply unprecedented

When people talk about Nintendo's "big three," I don't necessarily think they're saying because it got nice scores in a magazine. I don't think this invisible measuring of "prestige" is all that notable or interesting. I also don't see why Nintendo ownership makes a difference here, a Nintendo game is a Nintendo game. This is what I'm talking about when I say Metroid fans come up to with arbitrary categorizations to put it on a pedestal. It makes discussing the series difficult at times and it's not helped when its importance is inflated to the point where people were getting upset at the reveal of games like Tropical Freeze, saying Retro should be making Metroid instead, despite the fact that DKCR outsold the entire Prime trilogy combined.

It's also pretty clear you're coming up with arbitrary categorizations for why Pokemon counts less. Metroid is ultimately a niche series and Prime 4 likely isn't gonna change that.

People in film circles also do argue whether or not Blade Runner is a canonical or particularly important film. I personally don't care for it at all.

Yeah, it's definitely a film that I think has become contested over the years. I've seen the pendulum swing on it. I think its direction and set design is brilliant, but feel its story is a mixed bag. BR49 is brilliant though in my opinion and a better film in just about every way that counts.

Alright, as flawed as Yoshifans comment is, going in the opposite direction is very flawed too.

I'd be one thing if Blade Runner or Metroid were just critically acclaimed, but they're literally some of the most innovative and influential pieces of fiction within their respective mediums. Blade Runner is probably the single most popular cyberpunk story in media ever (not counting game "stories" or tabletop "stories"), which counts for a lot now that the niche has really exploded in popularity in the past few years. Metroid is basically responsible for Metroidvanias as a whole.

None of this is to say that Blade Runner is as culturally impactful as Star Wars or that Metroid is as impactful as Pokemon, but to act as if the only thing those works have earned over the years is critical acclaim is silly. They have tons of cultural impact on basically birthing genres, they just aren't nearly as big as some of the biggest IP in the world, which Star Wars / Nintendo franchises are. But then again, rarely anything is.

Of course, I didn't say Blade Runner/Metroid had no influence or impact, they most certainly did. But there is a reason both BR movies flopped at the box office. Just like Metroid, its general appeal has a ceiling, and that means it's difficult to claim it's a cultural icon that deserves to stand next to bigger and broader ones.

 

[EAD Ninja]

Should be Donkey Kong or Metroid.

 

[Dolce]

When people talk about Nintendo's "big three," I don't necessarily think they're saying because it got nice scores in a magazine. I don't think this invisible measuring of "prestige" is all that notable or interesting. I also don't see why Nintendo ownership makes a difference here, a Nintendo game is a Nintendo game. This is what I'm talking about when I say Metroid fans come up to with arbitrary categorizations to put it on a pedestal. It makes discussing the series difficult at times and it's not helped when its importance is inflated to the point where people were getting upset at the reveal of games like Tropical Freeze, saying Retro should be making Metroid instead, despite the fact that DKCR outsold the entire Prime trilogy combined.

It's also pretty clear you're coming up with arbitrary categorizations for why Pokemon counts less. Metroid is ultimately a niche series and Prime 4 likely isn't gonna change that.

Yeah, it's definitely a film that I think has become contested over the years. I've seen the pendulum swing on it. I think its direction and set design is brilliant, but feel its story is a mixed bag. BR49 is brilliant though in my opinion and a better film in just about every way that counts.

Of course, I didn't say Blade Runner/Metroid had no influence or impact, they most certainly did. But there is a reason both BR movies flopped at the box office. Just like Metroid, its general appeal has a ceiling, and that means it's difficult to claim it's a cultural icon that deserves to stand next to bigger and broader ones.

there are sooo many niche things i love, and as long as they sell enough to exist, that's all that matters to me. i'm definitely not lamenting they are not appreciated more. metroid gets tons of games, at the expense of other franchises nowadays. i'm not sure what people want.

Should be Donkey Kong or Metroid.

why should being first mean something is unable to be changed?

 

[Serif]

It’s most important to them and thus the right answer for them.

Yup. As a fill in the blank, grouping Metroid with those two series is not invalid, it depends on the framing and context.

e.g. if you want to group critically acclaimed legacy series, even Nintendo does it in their advertising for NSO - "Enjoy a curated library of more than 100 total NES™ and Super NES™ classic games—including Super Mario Bros.™, Metroid™, The Legend of Zelda™, Donkey Kong™, and more"

My personal big three for the Switch, numbers wise, is Animal Crossing, Pokemon, and Mario... Kart. Correct me if I picked the wrong three.

 

[AngryAlchemist]

there are sooo many niche things i love, and as long as they sell enough to exist, that's all that matters to me. i'm definitely not lamenting they are not appreciated more. metroid gets tons of games, at the expense of other franchises nowadays. i'm not sure what people want.

Metroid doesn't get games at the expense of other franchises just as much as other franchises get games at the expense of Metroid (actually, funnily enough, this might be more true of Metroid than most IP given it used to be developed in-house).

As much as I will be sad the next time Metroid is put on ice by Nintendo, Nintendo not making games in niche series has always been an issue of finding the right developer, not an issue of one niche IP replacing the other, and I'm not going to start complaining it's because Xenoblade or Fire Emblem or something silly like that.

 

[MondoMega]

e.g. if you want to group critically acclaimed legacy series, even Nintendo does it in their advertising for NSO - "Enjoy a curated library of more than 100 total NES™ and Super NES™ classic games—including Super Mario Bros.™, Metroid™, The Legend of Zelda™, Donkey Kong™, and more"

Well if we’re picking from NSO marketing, then obviously the big three is Panel de Pon, Joy Mech Fight and Custom Robo.

 

[Serif]

Well if we’re picking from NSO marketing, then obviously the big three is Panel de Pon, Joy Mech Fight and Custom Robo.

I'm afraid I can't tell what games you're referring to from that grid.
My comment is more or less "it's valid to mention Metroid in the same breath as Mario and Zelda depending on the framing".

 

[Clov]

i mean i'm not stuck in the past unable to appreciate that newer things come along. the idea that once was should always be is ludicrous to me.

thankfully nintendo in general have moved away from action action action.

Definitely! It's only a good thing that Nintendo's diversified their output, and they've had great success with it, judging by how big Animal Crossing has gotten. I think a lot of people have trouble accepting a lot of these non-"hardcore" games becoming major franchises for Nintendo. The future is clearly not set in stone.

Well if we’re picking from NSO marketing, then obviously the big three is Panel de Pon, Joy Mech Fight and Custom Robo.

Panel de Pon gang rise up!

 

[Dolce]

As much as I will be sad the next time Metroid is put on ice by Nintendo, Nintendo not making games in niche series has always been an issue of finding the right developer, not an issue of one niche IP replacing the other, and I'm not going to start complaining it's because Xenoblade or Fire Emblem or something silly like that.

I mean in the past 20 years, Metroid has gotten 5 mainline games and 2 remakes. That's a game every few years, essentially. It's been a DECADE since Tomodachi Life, and that's a game in a genre that has like no analog. That is a game that outsold the entire Prime trilogy. Outsold Prime trilogy with fusion added on top.

 

[Bayonutter]

I look at that list and see only METROID

 

[AngryAlchemist]

I mean in the past 20 years, Metroid has gotten 5 mainline games and 2 remakes. That's a game every few years, essentially. It's been a DECADE since Tomodachi Life, and that's a game in a genre that has like no analog. That is a game that outsold the entire Prime trilogy. Outsold Prime trilogy with fusion added on top.

But again, this has nothing to do with your original claim:

there are sooo many niche things i love, and as long as they sell enough to exist, that's all that matters to me. i'm definitely not lamenting they are not appreciated more. metroid gets tons of games, at the expense of other franchises nowadays. i'm not sure what people want.

Tomodachi Life 2 doesn't not exist because Metroid Dread exists or Prime 4 is in development. That's super silly. It wouldn't be the same developers and Nintendo has the budget to fund all three games. So where is the logic in that?

Tomodachi will come soon and be a 10+ million seller anyways. Nintendo's priorities aren't like, out of whack, because they make Metroid games. They just have internal studios making other non-Metroid games along with the Tomodachi series.

 

[Mekanos]

Definitely! It's only a good thing that Nintendo's diversified their output, and they've had great success with it, judging by how big Animal Crossing has gotten. I think a lot of people have trouble accepting a lot of these non-"hardcore" games becoming major franchises for Nintendo. The future is clearly not set in stone.

It's hard to not feel like this is part of it, like a game scoring 9s and 10s in a game magazine instead of 8 makes it more important. I can't imagine anything more arbitrary. Metroid Prime may be a great game, but it's no less valuable than a great Pokemon or Animal Crossing game because people with access to a review platform deigned it with a higher number. This feels like a very narrow classification.

 

[Hailinel]

Metroid was never and is not the third third in this equation.

 

[SiG]

Metroid was never and is not the third third in this equation.

It is for some people. And certain publications felt the same way too...for a time.

 

[Yoshifan31]

Quality in video games is subjective though. Critic opinions are just opinions like anybody else's at the end of the day. And people buy systems for different things. If you're talking about the majority of people, "system sellers" are probably more like Mario Kart, Animal Crossing, Smash, Mario, and Zelda. Metroid doesn't really come anywhere near those in sales, and even Mario and Zelda are outsold by Mario Kart/Animal Crossing/Smash. For me, DK and Smash are the real "system sellers" which convince me to buy a new system. I wouldn't say other series that I don't like as much aren't "deserving" though.

I know game reviews are often flawed but getting 95+ on MC is no easy feat, the few games that have are pretty much the closest to consensus in terms of them being the peak of their genres. Now let me rephrase what I meant by system seller, I guess “killer app” is more accurate. What is the big, state of the art single player game to own for a Nintendo console. Smash and Mario Kart are nice to have but they are ultimately the big multiplayer ones, as we saw with the Wii U people won’t flock to a new console to play iterative sequels of multiplayer games. AC is a different beast altogether, you could argue it’s closer to the multiplayer big three due to the social aspect. This leaves Mario and Zelda, the Nintendo games that gets people to have over the top reactions like TP at E3. So for a lot of people, if you ask them about their favorite game for a Nintendo console, it would often be between a Mario and a Zelda title. SMW or ALTTP. Mario 64 or OOT/MM. For the Gamecube, it’s different because for the first time, you had actually Metroid (and RE4) that were the top rated games for the platform. So the debate wasn’t Mario vs Zelda anymore, it was Mario vs Zelda vs Metroid. That’s why it makes so much sense for many as part of a big three

I don’t even mean it pejoratively when I say the rest aren’t deserving, they simply never came close to do what Metroid did. You may like DK but while it was up there for a while, it’s too redundant with Mario so most people don’t think of it as a big three. Kirby isn’t up there at all. Pikmin is good but obviously never got close of eating Mario and Zelda’s lunch. Fire Emblem will never be a big three, SRPGs are arguably the most niche genre there is, even a Marvel SRPG couldn’t meet their sales expectations. (Plus, unlike most other Nintendo series, Fire Emblem was never the peak of its genre. I guess 3H might be the top rated one at this point but it took social mechanics and stuff for a SRPG to be close to 90 MC. What I mean is that for the longest time the SRPG crown is held by FF Tactics and most fans of the genre think it’s still better). Xenoblade was never the peak of JRPGs either. Remember how the selling points for X were that fans of Zelda and Metroid should check it out? Turns out most people don’t care about auto attack battles and convoluted mechanics. Xenoblade did get its niche and managed to be successful but it never solidified its place as a “big Nintendo single player game” the way Metroid did. Now the only ones left are Star Fox and F-Zero but while they might be peak of their genres for most they aren’t up there, maybe Star Fox briefly was for the N64 era but that’s it. It just makes too much sense for Metroid to be it

 

[Phosphorescent Skeleton]

I know game reviews are often flawed but getting 95+ on MC is no easy feat, the few games that have are pretty much the closest to consensus in terms of them being the peak of their genres. Now let me rephrase what I meant by system seller, I guess “killer app” is more accurate. What is the big, state of the art single player game to own for a Nintendo console. Smash and Mario Kart are nice to have but they are ultimately the big multiplayer ones, as we saw with the Wii U people won’t flock to a new console to play iterative sequels of multiplayer games. AC is a different beast altogether, you could argue it’s closer to the multiplayer big three due to the social aspect. This leaves Mario and Zelda, the Nintendo games that gets people to have over the top reactions like TP at E3. So for a lot of people, if you ask them about their favorite game for a Nintendo console, it would often be between a Mario and a Zelda title. SMW or ALTTP. Mario 64 or OOT/MM. For the Gamecube, it’s different because for the first time, you had actually Metroid (and RE4) that were the top rated games for the platform. So the debate wasn’t Mario vs Zelda anymore, it was Mario vs Zelda vs Metroid. That’s why it makes so much sense for many as part of a big three

I don’t even mean it pejoratively when I say the rest aren’t deserving, they simply never came close to do what Metroid did. You may like DK but while it was up there for a while, it’s too redundant with Mario so most people don’t think of it as a big three. Kirby isn’t up there at all. Pikmin is good but obviously never got close of eating Mario and Zelda’s lunch. Fire Emblem will never be a big three, SRPGs are arguably the most niche genre there is, even a Marvel SRPG couldn’t meet their sales expectations. (Plus, unlike most other Nintendo series, Fire Emblem was never the peak of its genre. I guess 3H might be the top rated one at this point but it took social mechanics and stuff for a SRPG to be close to 90 MC. What I mean is that for the longest time the SRPG crown is held by FF Tactics and most fans of the genre think it’s still better). Xenoblade was never the peak of JRPGs either. Remember how the selling points for X were that fans of Zelda and Metroid should check it out? Turns out most people don’t care about auto attack battles and convoluted mechanics. Xenoblade did get its niche and managed to be successful but it never solidified its place as a “big Nintendo single player game” the way Metroid did. Now the only ones left are Star Fox and F-Zero but while they might be peak of their genres for most they aren’t up there, maybe Star Fox briefly was for the N64 era but that’s it. It just makes too much sense for Metroid to be it

Just wanna point out that Fire Emblem is much more popular than Metroid and at least as influential.

 

[Dizzle]

Yeah, it's definitely a film that I think has become contested over the years. I've seen the pendulum swing on it. I think its direction and set design is brilliant, but feel its story is a mixed bag. BR49 is brilliant though in my opinion and a better film in just about every way that counts.

To veer off topic, I think BR49 is also not very good for the same reason as the original. Just totally lacking in feeling. Felt like an intellectual/stylistic exercise. Ironically, both movies fail the Voight-Kampff test.

Anyway, I love Metroid, but it's not a coincidence that western Nintendo fans are so attached to it over series than feel more "kiddy" or "Japanese." Just sayin.

 

[Phosphorescent Skeleton]

To veer off topic, I think BR49 is also not very good for the same reason as the original. Just totally lacking in feeling. Felt like an intellectual/stylistic exercise. Ironically, both movies fail the Voight-Kampff test.

Anyway, I love Metroid, but it's not a coincidence that western Nintendo fans are so attached to it over series than feel more "kiddy" or "Japanese." Just sayin.

For real, a certain kind of Nintendo fan reacts badly to anything that is "anime" or "for casual players". I think its an insecurity thing.

 

[Aurc]

To me, boiling the entire discussion down to what's most popular / sells the best renders it sorta pointless.

Yes, the objective metrics in question being what they are, Metroid is small potatoes. Pokémon, Animal Crossing, and Splatoon are vastly more popular, and sell better by orders of magnitude. This isn't up for debate, it's simply factual. If that's to be our framework for discussion, then pack it up, as I'm not sure whether there even can be any subsequent dialogue.

But ingenuity in game design, wider impact on the medium over a prolonged period, and critical acclaim are simply far more interesting metrics of evaluation in these discussions, in my view, which is why I personally find it more compelling when the discussion is approached from that angle, versus putting forth a picture of Nintendo Tokyo, for example. Yes, those IPs are far more popular, and far more marketable, but (and I'm sorry if this is a tad blunt) who cares? I don't think you'll get anyone disagreeing with you on those facts, haha.

At the end of the day, I think what a few folks have pointed out about enthusiast communities like ours having a skewed view on a niche franchise like Metroid is fair, but it's simply the nature of things. As a big fan of the series, I've never aimed to paint a picture that it's super popular, or even mainstream relevant, but I do think it's worth evaluating its place in gaming from other angles.

 

[YoboD]

It would be interesting to see what the age demographics are for the listed poll options. As a kid whose first system was the N64 and experienced the Pokemania phase first hand, the answer to me pretty clearly feels like Mario, Zelda, and Pokémon. Whereas I imagine a lot of the Metroid voters had their formulative gaming experiences during the NES or SNES eras.

 

[Deleted member 1005]

It's Animal Crossing. You can love Metroid as much as you want, the big 3 franchises people know from Nintendo (besides pokemon which they don't make), are Mario, Zelda, and Animal Crossing. Add one more and it'd be Splatoon.

You can love Metroid all you want, and be happy that it's actually getting games compared to other Nintendo properties that also aren't very popular, but it is absolutely not one of "the three" Nintendo franchises. That's like saying Gravity Rush is one of "the three" Playstation properties, or Manhunt is one of "the three" Rockstar properties.

 

[AngryAlchemist]

Just wanna point out that Fire Emblem is much more popular than Metroid and at least as influential.

It's not really much more popular. Dread has outsold every FE game except Three Houses, which it could get close to with 2 years less on the market (I doubt it will beat it but the difference will not be huge). Prime has outsold every other game too.

Of course Heroes makes things weird though and if we're including that then yeah probably. Definitely fair to say Intelligent Systems has nurtured FE better since Awakening than Metroid has been.

 

[samouraï]

I could just as easily say, who cares about critical reception? There are over half a dozen Pokemon games that have sold individually more than the entire Metroid series combined. Its cultural footprint is monstrous and only really Mario compares on that front, not just in Nintendo but in gaming in general. Pikachu is one of the most recognizable fictional characters in the world, that's a far bigger metric than something as arbitrary as Metacritic scores.

The comparison to movies doesn't make sense. Nobody would serious argue Blade Runner is as culturally relevant as contemporary movies from that era like Star Wars or Indiana Jones.

Like every other futuristic setting in film, anime, or video games is just ripped off from Blade Runner. The "cyberpunk" aesthetic/genre wouldn't be half as prominent as it is now if it weren't for that one movie. Akira or Ghost In The Shell wouldn't even exist had not been for BR. One could argue whether or not it's """good""" but the fact of the matter is that it's aesthetic alone had a bigger impact than Indiana Jones. Besides cash in sequels, how many earnest throwbacks to old timey serials did Raiders even spawn?

 

[Sturmgeist]

As a child of the NES/SNES generations I will always say Metroid. Mario, Zelda, and Metroid is the holy Nintendo trinity and no sales numbers will ever convince me otherwise.

 

[xghost777]

The only way there can be a wrong answer to this question is if you lied filling out your response. There’s no context for filling in the blank and no judgment expected on the answer.

 

[Deleted member 4028]

I know game reviews are often flawed but getting 95+ on MC is no easy feat, the few games that have are pretty much the closest to consensus in terms of them being the peak of their genres. Now let me rephrase what I meant by system seller, I guess “killer app” is more accurate. What is the big, state of the art single player game to own for a Nintendo console. Smash and Mario Kart are nice to have but they are ultimately the big multiplayer ones, as we saw with the Wii U people won’t flock to a new console to play iterative sequels of multiplayer games. AC is a different beast altogether, you could argue it’s closer to the multiplayer big three due to the social aspect. This leaves Mario and Zelda, the Nintendo games that gets people to have over the top reactions like TP at E3. So for a lot of people, if you ask them about their favorite game for a Nintendo console, it would often be between a Mario and a Zelda title. SMW or ALTTP. Mario 64 or OOT/MM. For the Gamecube, it’s different because for the first time, you had actually Metroid (and RE4) that were the top rated games for the platform. So the debate wasn’t Mario vs Zelda anymore, it was Mario vs Zelda vs Metroid. That’s why it makes so much sense for many as part of a big three

I don’t even mean it pejoratively when I say the rest aren’t deserving, they simply never came close to do what Metroid did. You may like DK but while it was up there for a while, it’s too redundant with Mario so most people don’t think of it as a big three. Kirby isn’t up there at all. Pikmin is good but obviously never got close of eating Mario and Zelda’s lunch. Fire Emblem will never be a big three, SRPGs are arguably the most niche genre there is, even a Marvel SRPG couldn’t meet their sales expectations. (Plus, unlike most other Nintendo series, Fire Emblem was never the peak of its genre. I guess 3H might be the top rated one at this point but it took social mechanics and stuff for a SRPG to be close to 90 MC. What I mean is that for the longest time the SRPG crown is held by FF Tactics and most fans of the genre think it’s still better). Xenoblade was never the peak of JRPGs either. Remember how the selling points for X were that fans of Zelda and Metroid should check it out? Turns out most people don’t care about auto attack battles and convoluted mechanics. Xenoblade did get its niche and managed to be successful but it never solidified its place as a “big Nintendo single player game” the way Metroid did. Now the only ones left are Star Fox and F-Zero but while they might be peak of their genres for most they aren’t up there, maybe Star Fox briefly was for the N64 era but that’s it. It just makes too much sense for Metroid to be it

I think a lot of this is subjective though. "A lot of peoples' favorite game for a console" isn't just Mario, Zelda, or Metroid, you'll get a lot of different opinions there. And yeah, maybe DK isn’t a big 3 to “most people," but I wouldn't say that "most people" think of Metroid as one either. Besides how all multiplayer games, Pokemon, and Animal Crossing are being excluded for some reason, which would probably be part of any "big 3" for most people, there are series like DK, Pikmin, Splatoon, and others, I feel like there's a pretty wide variety of opinions here. DK being "too redundant with Mario" is pretty subjective too, they're both platformers but that's really where the similarity ends, platformers are a pretty big genre with lots of different games. And while probably not the majority, there are a good amount of people who prefer DK over Mario. Especially when it comes to 2D, I'd even say it's pretty close there when it comes to people preferring DK over Mario.

I just think trying to come up with a big 3 based on "quality" is never going to work, because there really is no objective "quality." I don't think anybody's opinion, really, is inherently better than anybody else's (unless somebody is a terrible person but that's a separate thing). And if all these opinions are valid, then there's really no way to elevate the opinions of some over others and say that their favorite game is part of an objective "big 3."

 

[Mekanos]

Like every other futuristic setting in film, anime, or video games is just ripped off from Blade Runner. The "cyberpunk" aesthetic/genre wouldn't be half as prominent as it is now if it weren't for that one movie. Akira or Ghost In The Shell wouldn't even exist had not been for BR. One could argue whether or not it's """good""" but the fact of the matter is that it's aesthetic alone had a bigger impact than Indiana Jones. Besides cash in sequels, how many earnest throwbacks to old timey serials did Raiders even spawn?

That is in fact not the fact of the matter. Show someone a boulder and they will mention Indiana Jones. Play the first few opening notes of the John Williams theme and anyone will recognize it.

Indiana Jones was a huge turning point in the blockbuster genre and if you talk to any director that's made an action movie in the last 40 years they would agree, including Joe Johnston, who made multiple of those serial throwbacks post-Raiders, one being Captain America, which is part of a little known franchise you might know of as Marvel.

 

[Deleted member 1005]

It's not really much more popular. Dread has outsold every FE game except Three Houses, which it could get close to with 2 years less on the market (I doubt it will beat it but the difference will not be huge). Prime has outsold every other game too.

Of course Heroes makes things weird though and if we're including that then yeah probably. Definitely fair to say Intelligent Systems has nurtured FE better since Awakening than Metroid has been.

It really is much more popular though. Going off Reddit numbers (not good for overall popularity, but quite good for franchises that have a more niche, chronically online fanbase), Fire Emblem's subreddit has double the amount Metroid's has. That isn't counting the popularity of Fire Emblem in Japan either, considering the subreddit is focused on the english side of things.

 

[AngryAlchemist]

It really is much more popular though. Going off Reddit numbers (not good for overall popularity, but quite good for franchises that have a more niche, chronically online fanbase), Fire Emblem's subreddit has double the amount Metroid's has. That isn't counting the popularity of Fire Emblem in Japan either, considering the subreddit is focused on the english side of things.

The Mario reddit has 1/20th the users of the Zelda reddit. Same with the Mario Kart reddit.

This just isn't a good metric at all. Game sales are. And for game sales Three Houses is the most popular, with Dread outpacing it but outselling every other FE too. We'll see. I think Fire Emblem is a little more popular but they're comparable.

 

[Hailinel]

It's not really much more popular. Dread has outsold every FE game except Three Houses, which it could get close to with 2 years less on the market (I doubt it will beat it but the difference will not be huge). Prime has outsold every other game too.

Of course Heroes makes things weird though and if we're including that then yeah probably. Definitely fair to say Intelligent Systems has nurtured FE better since Awakening than Metroid has been.

Fire Emblem has always been nurtured better. The series has had a more or less regular cadence of releases since 1990. The only difference is that the FE didn't start seeing localizations outside of Japan until the seventh title.

There are a lot of reasons Awakening was the title to really break through in markets outside Japan. And there are also a lot of reasons using sales numbers as a gotcha in arguing FE isn't more popular is disingenuous. Like the aforementioned era when the series wasn't localized and sales were only in Japan.

 

[Aurc]

It would be interesting to see what the age demographics are for the listed poll options. As a kid whose first system was the N64 and experienced the Pokemania phase first hand, the answer to me pretty clearly feels like Mario, Zelda, and Pokémon. Whereas I imagine a lot of the Metroid voters had their formulative gaming experiences during the NES or SNES eras.

My first console was the PS1, so I think we're of a similar age (I'm in my late 20s). I never actually played Super Metroid until I bought it digitally on the Wii. I grew up playing Fusion and Zero Mission on the GBA, and loved Pokémon growing up as well (Sapphire was my first ever Nintendo game), but I just lost interest over time. Naturally, some of what we enjoyed as kids remains a core interest even into adulthood, and some of it fades. In my case, I'd say it's more a genre thing. I no longer enjoy turn-based RPGs, or games that are more easygoing, in terms of difficulty level. It's just down to personal taste, I think.

It's Animal Crossing. You can love Metroid as much as you want, the big 3 franchises people know from Nintendo (besides pokemon which they don't make), are Mario, Zelda, and Animal Crossing. Add one more and it'd be Splatoon.

You can love Metroid all you want, and be happy that it's actually getting games compared to other Nintendo properties that also aren't very popular, but it is absolutely not one of "the three" Nintendo franchises. That's like saying Gravity Rush is one of "the three" Playstation properties, or Manhunt is one of "the three" Rockstar properties.

I can appreciate the core point being made here, but your examples of Gravity Rush and Manhunt are false equivalencies. Neither did much to contribute to the wider gaming landscape in quite the way Metroid historically has, nor do they have the acclaim to match up to the likes of Super, or Prime.

 

[AngryAlchemist]

There are a lot of reasons Awakening was the title to really break through in markets outside Japan. And there are also a lot of reasons using sales numbers as a gotcha in arguing FE isn't more popular is disingenuous. Like the aforementioned era when the series wasn't localized and sales were only in Japan.

It's not a gotcha though and it isn't disingenuous. I DO think FE is more popular, but much more popular just isn't really true as far as console games go. I even conceited Heroes would probably qualify as much more popular (thats a guess on my part - I know it makes bank but no idea on MAU).

 

[Twilight]

Either in my brain or saying it out loud, the only correct way for me is Mario, Zelda and Metroid. Thinking about it is partly on their influence on games as a whole, and the fact that they are my favorite Nintendo franchises, but the biggest thing for me is that Super Mario Bros., The Wind Waker and Metroid Prime are the most important games in my life, they pretty much shaped what I love about videogames and left a lasting impact growing up with them, alongside Tales of Symphonia and the original Ace Attorney when it comes to stuff outside Nintendo.

 

[Deleted member 1005]

My first console was the PS1, so I think we're of a similar age (I'm in my late 20s). I never actually played Super Metroid until I bought it digitally on the Wii. I grew up playing Fusion and Zero Mission on the GBA, and loved Pokémon growing up as well, but I just lost interest over time. Naturally, some of what we enjoyed as kids remains a core interest even into adulthood, and some of it fades. In my case, I'd say it's more a genre thing. I no longer enjoy turn-based RPGs, or games that are more easygoing, in terms of difficulty level. It's just down to personal taste, I think.

I can appreciate the core point being made here, but your examples of Gravity Rush and Manhunt are false equivalencies. Neither did much to contribute to the wider gaming landscape in quite the way Metroid historically has, nor do they have the acclaim to match up to the likes of Super, or Prime.

I wasn't basing it off what they've contributed to gaming, solely because they are the niche fandoms of those particular companies. If I were going off influence I would have said Ape Escape or Parappa The Rapper for PS and Bully for R*.

The Mario reddit has 1/20th the users of the Zelda reddit. Same with the Mario Kart reddit.

This just isn't a good metric at all. Game sales are. And for game sales Three Houses is the most popular, with Dread outpacing it but outselling every other FE too. We'll see. I think Fire Emblem is a little more popular but they're comparable.

That's why I said it's really only good for online focused fandoms, like Fire Emblem and Metroid tend to be. Most of Mario's fandom aren't going on reddit, at least not for gaming.

On the topic of game sales, Fire Emblem Awakening was huge on the 3DS, it was Fire Emblem's Dread. It single handedly saved the franchise in the western market, despite being on the 3DS and the hurdles that came alongside the early days of that platform. Dread on the other hand came in at a time that Nintendo is at an all time high, their games are breaking franchise records left and right. The fact that it reached 3M+ is great, but comparing that 3M on a 100M install base to a game that did around 1.9M with half that isn't a solid metric either.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Danky Kang

 

[samouraï]

That is in fact not the fact of the matter. Show someone a boulder and they will mention Indiana Jones. Play the first few opening notes of the John Williams theme and anyone will recognize it.

Sure people will recognize certain elements. It still didn't spawn something like Akira which made every gaijin say "hey look Japanese animation exists and they are like cool and violent and adult and shiet." BR's influence led to people actually paying attention to and then gobbling up the pop culture of an "exotic" country that was a gazillion miles away.

Indiana Jones was a huge turning point in the blockbuster genre and if you talk to any director that's made an action movie in the last 40 years they would agree, including Joe Johnston, who made multiple of those serial throwbacks post-Raiders, one being Captain America, which is part of a little known franchise you might know of as Marvel

You could say the same with directors loving BR. Pretty sure some of the biggest auteurs like Nolan, Cameron, or the Wachowski sisters have credited it before. It's a bit disingenuous to even jokingly attribute the MCU's success to Johnston's work for hire job. People were roped in with the first Iron Man, they barely even watched Captain America. Disney has toys to sell, they were gonna get them sold whether or not Johnston was involved and brought in his Indy love.