Discussion Why do you think Metroid does not sell as well as zelda despite having some of the best recieved games ever?

[Lucifer]

It's less mainstream, simple as that.
It's dark, creepy, atmospheric, claustrophobic and amazing.

Zelda is much closer to bright coloured, familiar fantasy that everyone loves.

Same goes for the gameplay, Dread had challenging boss fights that require quick reflexes and endurance.

 

[Vookatos]

It has boomers too! Check out this old bloke! You don't think Admiral Dane is at least on-par with Sans Undertale?

You know, I actually like bounty hunters from Prime 3. It's a shame they only exist to die immediately. Would be cool if you could have, say, optional conversations with them from within your ship. Would make ship more useful, too. As it stands, Prime 3 has lots of story for no reason. The fact that you fight guys you knew for 5 minutes doesn't really affect me, and they could've just been cool guys you didn't know.

 

[KarmaDesires]

Metroid Prime could absolutely sell a bit better. Its sales ceilling might be around the best selling single-player FPS in the best case scenario.

With 2D Metroid if you zone in on the different elements featured in it isn't as good as Zelda and Mario, the platforming and the shooting aren't the main draw and are done better by other games. It only starts to come together when you view it as a whole, and lots of players might not stick around long enough to feel the pay off when you power up either due to getting lost or losing interest. That might limit its word of mouth .

 

[Linkstrikesback]

Ok. That's nice. So? I stand by what I said

All you said effectively is that you don't like the metroidvania genre. (As an aside, Which, no, the souls games aren't, it's always been a weird comparison, since they don't have any of the gameplay elements of a metroidvania other than you're a single player character with sparse interactions with friendly characters, which is hardly a metroidvania exclusive trait.)

Dread especially is among the best of the bunch.

 

[Phosphorescent Skeleton]

All you said effectively is that you don't like the metroidvania genre. (As an aside, Which, no, the souls games aren't, it's always been a weird comparison, since they don't have any of the gameplay elements of a metroidvania other than you're a single player character with sparse interactions with friendly characters, which is hardly a metroidvania exclusive trait.)

Dread especially is among the best of the bunch.

I like metroidvania games, especially Super Metroid, I don't care that they aren't more popular, and think Dread is just okay.

 

[BotenAnna]

I also like this genre (more of a Castlevania fan than Metroid but still) and I also thought Dread was just pretty alright. Zelda is one of the most popular and beloved Nintendo IPs that basically put out really well loved games for decades, then had a smash hit, revolutionary (for Zelda) launch title on what is most likely going to be the most popular console of all time that moves insane amounts of software for Nintendo. Metroid hasn't had a great game since the Primes, which were (mostly) on unpopular consoles 2 decades ago, and its reintroduction to the modern home console ecosystem is just a pretty okay sidescrolling platformer that doesn't do much new. It is not rocket science to figure out why one of these is selling better than the other I would think.

 

[Mer.Saloon]

You know, I actually like bounty hunters from Prime 3. It's a shame they only exist to die immediately. Would be cool if you could have, say, optional conversations with them from within your ship. Would make ship more useful, too. As it stands, Prime 3 has lots of story for no reason. The fact that you fight guys you knew for 5 minutes doesn't really affect me, and they could've just been cool guys you didn't know.

We still do have the Hunters from... Hunters. They were cool for the time period. At least mechanically cool when it came to online death matches. Update their models and designs and you have a good starting point.

Maybe Prime 4 will bring the rest back with Sylux. Sylux was the most boring on.

 

[Supreme Overlord]

The elements people are using as points of direct comparison, that they for Dark Souls and thus Metroid has no reason to change, is a fallacy because those elements they do share are used in different ways and to different effectiveness.

I've seen often enough where the existence of these elements at all is put forth as something that needs done away with if the series is to remain viable, regardless of how they're implemented. But even then, I think you're creating some measure of the argument you're trying to oppose here. What exactly do you think is being argued?

Nobody here is saying these are a direct comparison or implemented in the same way to the same effect, and in fact some differences have been explicitly noted. The broad concepts tend to be thrown around as being poison to any hope for success, but the broad concepts are implemented elsewhere to acclaimed success. Just because everything isn't exactly the same doesn't change that. And who would expect everything to be exactly the same?

Spoiler

Does a not obviously linear world, one that loops in on itself and presents shortcuts and expands as the player progresses fail because it's implemented differently from the original Dark Souls? I might posit that the abilitygating actually better highlights and utilizes this nature. Does Metroid need to go to a more obvious and straightforward narrative structure with a strong emphasis on plot, because it doesn't handle things quite the same? Does a more melancholy or oppressive atmosphere need to be eschewed because it's not arrived at in the same way?

Further, to say people here are arguing through FromSoft's Souls-related output that "Metroid has no reason to change" is an exceptionally strong statement, especially when the originating comment included an addendum --

Of course, I would not ever advocate for the series to make 180° turn at all, but I think there could be plenty of ways to evolve the formula without it abandoning its roots.

-- which certainly doesn't indicate a reticence toward Metroid undergoing introspective examination and consideration, nor even toward the series making any change at all; in fact, it specifically states a belief that the series can evolve, can implement change, while still remaining true to itself.


I'm on record in a couple places here, that I find the solution to best be a set of parameters, upon which different attributes operate on a sort of spectrum, where variables can be altered to best achieve the desired effect. One might be twisted or lessened in service of another (turning down the isolation, for instance, because the manner of doing so will contribute to a particular method of conveying a melancholy atmosphere, or one of oppression, or might be used to elevate some more horror sort of element).

This would be a way to maintain some sort of core, while still allowing for experimentation and changes among installments. Does that allow for change enough, or does considering some sort of connective throughline fall under insisting change at all isn't allowed?

From's Souls games, for example, are loaded with memorable characters that the player interacts with regularly, whether they're beaten down warriors hanging by an emotional thread, eccentric weirdos, or that asshole Patches, who seemingly exists to just fuck with you. You're never truly isolated, as alone as you may be in the depths of a cavern.

The existence of such characters is really the strongest example people bring up against the comparison because there are, in general, more characters in From's Souls-related titles, but I really don't think it negates the entire example, especially since -- as in the parameter interplay example above -- it really only impacts the one element and in execution plays into and heightens related aspects (note: I'd listed isolation along with other factors in a broader atmosphere designation), and that's without discussing whether isolation can only ever mean there's absolutely nobody else around (in which case, Metroid itself fails often enough, even in instances people generally don't seem to take issue with).

But I think the main takeaway about the execution of character inclusion is this:

The point is that it's there in Souls and has an impact on the atmosphere and interaction with the world.

This is what makes the characters work so well in Souls, and this is what the intent should be if there were to be more added into Metroid. But, again, building toward that atmosphere isn't good for mass appeal, after all.

Aurc helpfully notes one element of how these characters and the atmosphere coexist, in the tendency to treat these characters with indifference. Somehow, though, I doubt that's what many proponents of a simple "add characters!" mindset have in mind.

I'd be cool with some Metroid games having characters like described and utilizing them in such manner, furthering atmosphere or themes or what have you. I don't think every Metroid title going forward necessarily should, and I certainly don't think the series should just begin throwing characters in for mass appeal.

I also think a Federation team that's with Samus and starts meeting horrific ends could be used well, but Other M already did something similar not super well.


Really, though, everybody recognizes that Souls and Metroid are dissimilar in myriad ways. Nobody's trying to say otherwise. Nobody's trying to line up these attributes as though they fit perfectly. I'm not sure why the idea this is happening is a core thrust at all.

 

[Supreme Overlord]

If we are bringing From Software into this: Dark Souls is also partly carried by its RPG elements to make the game more welcoming. Contrary to popular belief, Dark Souls is actually fairly accessible and Elden Ring really smoothed out more edges from the formula to appeal to way more people, like open world, no degrading weapons, basically no penalty for dying versus other games like Dark Souls 2 and Demon's Souls, insane cheese to curbstomp every boss, etc.

Sekiro is not as popular sales-wise as the rest (5 mil versus Dark Souls 3 at 10 mil back in 2020, likely more in further favor of DS3 now) because it eshews many of said welcoming elements. Dying almost always makes you lose half of your skill points unless you get a random Unseen Aid proc, leveling up does not let you out-stat bosses in a traditional sense, cheese strategies require much more skill to pull off, you don't have as much options to deal with things, and more importantly it ACTUALLY largely demands you git gud compared to Dark Souls. And honestly come to think of it, that's very similar to Metroid, moreso than any other From Software game. And guess what? Sekiro is predictably not as popular as the rest of their catalog.

I appreciate the analysis, and there's definitely truth there. There are factors that have allowed these games to be more welcoming than they would be otherwise, though they tend to get buried beneath the projected identity of the games being bitterly punishing. And the very different types of gameplay mean Metroid isn't going to have some of these mitigating elements. Even using abilities to gate the world, requiring a different manner of thought, might cause some people to have more trouble.

Of course, it'll lack some of the more punishing attributes, too, such as the run to gather your accumulated souls upon death. However, you're correct: the leveling up system isn't there to help you in Metroid.

So yeah, all those games that have had mega break-out hits have had RPG elements. Zelda, God of War 2018, Elden Ring, Horizon, etc. And I think it wouldn't be a direction I'd necessarily want for Metroid at first glance.

I would agree. RPG, or added RPG elements, is not the direction for Metroid. It doesn't need to chase that mega breakout hit status as such.

---

I find Bloodborne to be a masterpiece, but if you asked me why all that horrible stuff was going down in Yharnam, I could only really explain it to you in broad strokes. I actually love that, though, since not knowing what the hell is going on adds so much to the surreal, nightmarish, interdimensionally off-kilter world FromSoft managed to create. It substantially enhances the experience for me, as opposed to detracting from it.

I haven't been able to play Bloodborne yet, but that sounds like a good manner of worldbuilding and storytelling for this sort of thing. It's the whole thing of piecing together the lore and history and story, but you'll never have the full picture.

It's a sort of storytelling for which I find video games well-suited. The general concept fits for Metroid as well.

It's one of those things that seems very much not built for the masses, but which does develop its own fervent following,

---

The fact that games are fairly short also can be a negative for some, who would rather spend their money on a 30-100 hour adventure.

That probably does play a role for a lot of people. There's a push toward the idea that game length is inherently tied to game worth.

What bothered me about Dread is that exploration really doesn't feel natural when you need a Morph Ball or a Wave Beam for the 100th time. I'd rather see some new power-ups and maybe optional goodies that aren't missiles.

Perhaps a game could even include the morph ball in the base moveset as it introduces new ideas. I think people could handle it.

---

I'm not sure if there's anything to get Japan to like Metroid though. That's the more of the question to me. It does decent everywhere else.

And that's something, too, is that the series is often treated as though it's lost at the bottom of some abyss, but its problem is that it doesn't do as well as some other series. It seems to at least meet expectations. It has prestige.



I guess that's really the question, too. For all the changes that it's suggested Metroid needs to implement so it can be a mega breakout sales hit, do we really need that?

How much does it take to be good enough?

 

[Supreme Overlord]

Some of these dark souls comparison are missing the fact at it's a 3d action game with rpg elements rather than a sidescroller. Metroid should attempt that first(again).

I'm pretty sure I'm not missing that Dark Souls is a 3D (RPG-)Action game, rather than a 2D (non-RPG)action-exploration platforming sidescroller, but I guess what I'm missing is what that actually has to do with the underlying purposes of those comparisons?

If we're talking about sales potential, doesn't conventional wisdom hold that the 3D action here is probably going to be afforded a higher ceiling?

Nintendo absolutely should make another 2D Metroid, and almost assuredly already is. I think there's room to add third-person 3D to the rotation, too, especially given development times and what that means for gaps between new entries. The different format might also help it feel varied. Por qué no los tres?

 

[Terrell]

I think the thing that feels closest to the truth in this thread is that it's an image problem. Metroid doesn't attract people, not because it doesn't have the same appeal as other Nintendo series, but because its appeal isn't conveyed well and is relatively difficult to get without playing it yourself. I'm not sure Nintendo knows how best to sell Metroid.

More than anything else, Metroid's biggest (and most pressing) issue is marketing. I'm not going to pretend Nintendo hasn't tried to market it, they clearly have, but I don't think they get that Samus, while certainly appealing, is maybe not the draw they think she is in terms of her ability to sell the series, as the marketing almost entirely centres around her. This is not to say "don't use Samus in promotion", but make her not the 100% focal point. The world she lives in, the worlds she explores and the alien things she's surrounded by should be the draw or at least far more front & centre (as it makes up a lot of the appeal to fans, as this thread demonstrated) and you don't really get a sense of that in most of the marketing. Other M's marketing was probably the closest, but even that fell afoul of Samus literally being centred in the frame.

This issue of centering Samus in marketing even applies to the box art FFS. I want you to tell me the difference:

Spoiler: Lots of box art images and dialogue about them

Centered in the frame, no real indication of what you're playing. Bad start.

Centered in frame, low-level generic bad guys in the backdrop, no idea what's going on here, either.

A LOT of Metroid box art has this problem. It gives little to nothing away.

Super Metroid gets it right by including the primary franchise villains in the box art (SFC version is better), the Fusion box art in Japan is better because it at least tells you it takes place on an alien-infested space station:

... and it culminates in Dread's box art being the best at conveying the actual game.

Finally, the first box art since Super that shows one of the main antagonists! I look at this with no prior knowledge and go "oh, I'm fighting creepy evil robots!" The bold color choice and the menacing look of the EMMIs grabs your attention in spite of Samus trying so hard to be the focal point. I get a sense of what the game is going to be about. It shouldn't be this difficult to do, but Nintendo frequently and consistently flubs it with Metroid in a way they rarely do with other franchises.

And this is without getting into the horrendous marketing NoA and NCL did for the series during what should have been its growth period (as it was with Mario and Zelda) prior to the generation-long hiatus before Prime happened. Like, the Japanese marketing for Metroid 2 even talked about how it was an "American sensation" or some bollocks, like Japanese gamers should care about that, among other mis-steps. And NoA's marketing during the NES and SNES eras really did few favours in terms of selling people on the value of a product people were unfamiliar with as a whole.

But the main challenge is that, while there is advertising, Nintendo lacks the faith to aggressively promote the games. I have, to note, only ever seen ONE Metroid commercial in the wild, only saw it twice in the wild, all others I saw "in captivity" (via seeking them out on YouTube). And that's a vicious cycle that started later in the franchise's life and someone else touched on. What good is a commercial that no one sees? And that was unfortunately a self-fulfilling prophecy because Nintendo lacked faith in the series (Prime 1 was probably the most promotion the series ever got and it wasn't all that strong, being a "just ship the damn thing" game after the early Retro fiasco, and launching it almost right alongside Fusion was frankly a mistake just based on how they were 2 VERY different games and one inevitably drowned the other out)

It's not that it's sci-fi, it's not the genre (because fun fact, all games in the "Metroidvania" type are quite typically promoted pretty poorly, there's a reason SotN is called a "cult classic", after all), it's first and foremost because Nintendo hadn't marketed the series correctly or aggressively.

In and amongst all that, as others mentioned:

• the constant console-handheld-console-handheld jumping about the series does
• dividing an already small fanbase between 2 very different game and narrative styles that the IP could not sustain
• the long downtimes between releases
• Other M poisoning the well

None of this makes for a healthy IP. Full stop. That Dread pulled out the best performance in franchise history speaks to how well it was designed and how a Nintendo Direct could drive interest in it (as Nintendo confirmed it was the fastest-selling Metroid game in franchise history in multiple regions, including Japan, where its first week was the franchise's best performance outside of the original). Dread finally gives the IP some momentum to build from for once. Let's hope Prime 4 doesn't ruin that.

It's a fun little action adventure, bit of a combination of action RPGs and the first Legend of Zelda. It was very well-received by fans and critics, but after a sequel Nintendo seemed to have called it a day. Could've named many other franchises that fell to the wayside, but it was the first one that came to mind.



Especially the third game, Super Metroid, was very well-received back in the day. However, it wasn't a big seller at the time. It's mostly the internet and the game's rereleases that moved it into the spotlight, otherwise it would've been just another good but forgotten Nintendo game. Hard to imagine now after the fact, but it could've happened just as well.

And yeah, fully agree on your last points.

StarTropics (which is good, yes) and Metroid have something in common, in that their original creators kinda moved away from their creations. In Genyo Takeda's case, he moved pretty near-exclusively into hardware after Super Punch-Out and, especially with StarTropics' ODD Western-only releases that happened WAY late in the NES cycle for the first and 3 years or so into the SNES cycle for the sequel, no one really cared? With Takeda now retired and no one stepping on his toes to make a new one with some (perhaps entirely reasonable) changes, maybe it gets picked back up for a new generation of gamers. We'll see.
Meanwhile, Metroid was Gunpei Yokoi's baby, and when he left Nintendo and then died in a motor accident, there was a void to fill and it took a while for Sakamoto to fill the void (nearly a whole generation). The release gap was almost entirely due to that.

Thinking more about the bounty hunter point I made earlier. I remember when Hunters and Corruption came out and people kinda poo-poo'd on the very concept of having other bounty hunters for Samus to interact with.

Yes, they were all underdeveloped, but thats honestly not what seemed to drive people's criticisms. The fact you even had other NPCs wandering the maps seemed to annoy Metroid fans at the time.

But being a pre-teen who was on a fair weather relationship with Metroid at the time, thats honestly what endeared me to them so much enough to make Hunters and Corruption, my favorite Metroid games for a while.

I recognize now they aren't great, but conceptually I thought the idea of just having a sort of collective of characters whose goals brought them to the same place as Samus was just so fun.

And they didn't have to be your friends at all, but the fact you never killed them showed some level of respect being shared by you and them. And when they "killed" you they would take your macguffin like as if they were just displaying the same respect of knocking you out.

Though until recently, I never could think of an example that really did this concept well for me in MetroidVania, until Hollow Knight came out.

Like, think of Hollow Knight, how much would it hurt the world if characters like Quirrel, Zote, or Cloth weren't just wandering all over the place? Did their existence really take away from the desolate atmosphere of Hallownest?

I mean... Super Metroid had its alien friendos, I see no reason the series can't have a little more of that, Samus making friends with the few non-hostile lifeforms she comes in contact with, even if it's not those same friendos from Super.

So I think Metroid games haven't sold big numbers for a lot of reasons already covered (the gritty sci-fi aesthetic, general lack of visible recurring characters), but I think Metroid fans are really bad at selling the series to non-fans. And a lot of fans also have a very particular idea of what Metroid should be, with any significant deviation being considered a mistake if not an insult.

But I think an issue not touched on much in this thread is that the 2D entries and the Prime series are very different in terms of how they play despite Prime being 3D Metroid. Not everyone that likes one will gravitate toward the other. And the handling of story and narrative between the 2D entries and Prime series is very discordant.

It certainly didn't help, no. Seems to me like Sakamoto basically stepped in when Miyamoto started handing Yokoi's (and his) legacy away and made Fusion as a kind of... rebuttal?

And yeah, Metroid fans regularly do the franchise they love zero favours online.

Bad release consistency:
They release 1 game on the NES, then the sequel on the GB like 5 years later, then the amazing SNES sequel 3 years later.

Then the series goes dormant for an entire generation until Prime and Fusion on the GC and GBA.

They don't follow up with another 2D title. But they at least keep making Prime games (none which are better than the first one).

You can't grow your fanbase with a release schedule like that.

I mean... you can, but it's a hell of a lot harder and requires making some decisions intended to welcome newcomers without upsetting too many existing fans. See example: Pikmin.

People like Souls games better than Metroid because they're better games. Metroid hasn't had a great game since Metroid Prime.

This you?

We do we have to relitigate the topic every couple month, hasn't this discussion run its course?

You partly answer your own question. If you (clearly) don't like the topic, particularly its recurrence because you believe there's nothing new to say and it's just re-litigating, why read the thread except to look for the opportunity to post in a way that's designed to pick a fight in it as you have, to add toxicity that pushes people to stop engaging with the discussion (as I've seen happen in the prior threads you mention) until someone tries to make a new thread about it later on and causes the recurrence you loathe so deeply?

Why identify the problem and then seek to try and cause it? It seems incredibly counter-intuitive.

 

[ILikeFeet]

The world she lives in, the worlds she explores and the alien things she's surrounded by should be the draw or at least far more front & centre (as it makes up a lot of the appeal to fans, as this thread demonstrated) and you don't really get a sense of that in most of the marketing. Other M's marketing was probably the closest, but even that fell afoul of Samus literally being centred in the frame.

how do you promote this in a 2D sidescroller where the camera is up close to you? can't exactly have a trailer like this for Metroid. maybe you can, but how far from "metroid" do you go?

 

[Terrell]

how do you promote this in a 2D sidescroller where the camera is up close to you? can't exactly have a trailer like this for Metroid. maybe you can, but how far from "metroid" do you go?

… marketing involves more than just pure gameplay roll, hey? It doesn’t even fully consist of in-engine game footage, and even if the latter case were true, the games are now constructed of fully 3D environments with cinematic 3D camera angles.

Saying you can’t market a 2D sidescroller because of the camera placement in game is like saying you can‘t market a motion picture in print media because print media relies on still images and printed words while a movie is a moving picture with audio.

Like when bringing up Other M in that part of the post, I was referencing this commercial:


Literally centered in the frame for 90% of the commercial. And yet, in spite of that, it‘s still a better commercial than most of the ones that Metroid ever got, because it also depicts the world she lives in (albeit past story events that show her centred again, but I’ll take the win). Shame it wasn’t for one of its better games.

As I remember, this was the primary image used for subway advertising for the game in Japan:

Again, she’s in the frame, but she’s not pulling all focus, a near equal feature of the frame is the game’s most prominent antagonist. Better sense of what you’re doing in the game. Were I ignorant of the series, it would make me want to seek out more detail. It has a greater potential to sell me on the game than purely “Samus strikes a bad-ass pose”. My ultimate point is that, IMO, Samus as a character is insufficient to sell the game on her own except to existing fans and thus should not pull so much of the focus of the series marketing.

 

[ILikeFeet]

… marketing involves more than just pure gameplay roll, hey? It doesn’t even fully consist of in-engine game footage, and even if the latter case were true, the games are now constructed of fully 3D environments with cinematic 3D camera angles.

Saying you can’t market a 2D sidescroller because of the camera placement in game is like saying you can‘t market a motion picture in print media because print media relies on still images and printed words while a movie is a moving picture with audio.

Like when bringing up Other M in that part of the post, I was referencing this commercial:


Literally centered in the frame for 90% of the commercial. And yet, in spite of that, it‘s still a better commercial than most of the ones that Metroid ever got, because it also depicts the world she lives in (albeit past story events that show her centred again, but I’ll take the win). Shame it wasn’t for one of its better games.

As I remember, this was the primary image used for subway advertising for the game in Japan:

Again, she’s in the frame, but she’s not pulling all focus, a near equal feature of the frame is the game’s most prominent antagonist. Better sense of what you’re doing in the game. Were I ignorant of the series, it would make me want to seek out more detail. It has a greater potential to sell me on the game than purely “Samus strikes a bad-ass pose”. My ultimate point is that, IMO, Samus as a character is insufficient to sell the game on her own except to existing fans.

well then they actually have to make environments that are worthy of that sense of awe you think is sellable. Dread doesn't have environments in that level of detail, and I question if it has the type of environmental exploration that rewards folks looking for that scenic view comparable to Xenoblade. essentially, Metroid levels have to be more than thematic dressing and become characters on their own.

which leads to why Samus is the focus of the marketing: because they aren't designing environments to be characters. I'd argue Metroid Prime does a better job at that, but that might be because the 3D nature forces you to look at the mid and background more than a 2D game where it's largely foreground focused. what makes those Xenoblade trailers work is because a majority of what you see is gameplay.

 

[OctoSplattack]

… marketing involves more than just pure gameplay roll, hey? It doesn’t even fully consist of in-engine game footage, and even if the latter case were true, the games are now constructed of fully 3D environments with cinematic 3D camera angles.

Saying you can’t market a 2D sidescroller because of the camera placement in game is like saying you can‘t market a motion picture in print media because print media relies on still images and printed words while a movie is a moving picture with audio.

Like when bringing up Other M in that part of the post, I was referencing this commercial:


Literally centered in the frame for 90% of the commercial. And yet, in spite of that, it‘s still a better commercial than most of the ones that Metroid ever got, because it also depicts the world she lives in (albeit past story events that show her centred again, but I’ll take the win). Shame it wasn’t for one of its better games.

As I remember, this was the primary image used for subway advertising for the game in Japan:

Again, she’s in the frame, but she’s not pulling all focus, a near equal feature of the frame is the game’s most prominent antagonist. Better sense of what you’re doing in the game. Were I ignorant of the series, it would make me want to seek out more detail. It has a greater potential to sell me on the game than purely “Samus strikes a bad-ass pose”. My ultimate point is that, IMO, Samus as a character is insufficient to sell the game on her own except to existing fans and thus should not pull so much of the focus of the series marketing.

The YouTube commercials I constantly got for Metroid Prime Remastered also leaned into the idea of highlighting the environment and atmosphere a bit more than Samus herself, though YMMV on how good a job they did. "Step into the suit" is a nice tagline that really fits the Prime games, at the very least.



Also, TIL that Samus Returns had a commercial.

 

[Terrell]

well then they actually have to make environments that are worthy of that sense of awe you think is sellable. Dread doesn't have environments in that level of detail, and I question if it has the type of environmental exploration that rewards folks looking for that scenic view comparable to Xenoblade. essentially, Metroid levels have to be more than thematic dressing and become characters on their own.

which leads to why Samus is the focus of the marketing: because they aren't designing environments to be characters. I'd argue Metroid Prime does a better job at that, but that might be because the 3D nature forces you to look at the mid and background more than a 2D game where it's largely foreground focused. what makes those Xenoblade trailers work is because a majority of what you see is gameplay.

I said nothing of awe. Awe =/= appeal. Good example: 2D Mario games aren't exactly leaving people awestruck with their backdrops, they're no more than thematic dressing, but they're still appealing, they're still interesting, and are still featured in every part of the game's marketing, right down to the boxart itself. It's at least visually distinct and front and centre, which is frequently more than can be said of Metroid.

That said, I think you're quite hung up on one angle when I mentioned 3, all 3 of which were rarely featured in the games' marketing. One of those is actually featuring your primary antagonists. Or even just giving a rough understanding of the kind of world the game puts you in. Marketing leans in on Samus being a badass, and while that may be true, does that alone convey what the game is? No, it doesn't. And that's the point, Samus as a character cannot sell the series on her own.

Again, look at the boxarts and explain what they can tell you about the games, because almost all of them give next to nothing away about what you might be buying.
I counted, and of all the 22 pre-Dread boxarts (NA and JP variants for each game and excluding Fed Force), you know how many of them focus on anything other than Samus in a pose over a poorly-descriptive backdrop? 6, maybe 10 if I'm really generous with that distinction, less than 50% either way (To be specific: the OG black-box NA NES game, NA MPHunters, NA MP2, NA MP3 & NA/JP Super Metroid, with Other M, NA Fusion & NA/JP Zero Mission if I'm being super-generous by including any box art that features any other character or creature other than Samus in any way)

Hell, the JP Zero Mission box art is the only one that actually has a Metroid on it, despite so many of the games featuring them (and 2 of them featuring them super-prominently). Let that sink in.

The YouTube commercials I constantly got for Metroid Prime Remastered also leaned into the idea of highlighting the environment and atmosphere a bit more than Samus herself, though YMMV on how good a job they did. "Step into the suit" is a nice tagline that really fits the Prime games, at the very least.



Also, TIL that Samus Returns had a commercial.

Between Dread and this MP Remastered CM, I'm feeling a bit better about the idea that Nintendo is getting the hint, but it shouldn't have taken this long.
And a Metroid fan being all "oh wow, I didn't know this relatively-recent Metroid game had a commercial" really brings my point home that this is largely a marketing problem.

 

[ILikeFeet]

I said nothing of awe. Awe =/= appeal. Good example: 2D Mario games aren't exactly leaving people awestruck with their backdrops, they're no more than thematic dressing, but they're still appealing, they're still interesting, and are still featured in every part of the game's marketing, right down to the boxart itself. It's at least visually distinct and front and centre, which is frequently more than can be said of Metroid.

That said, I think you're quite hung up on one angle when I mentioned 3, all 3 of which were rarely featured in the games' marketing. One of those is actually featuring your primary antagonists. Or even just giving a rough understanding of the kind of world the game puts you in. Marketing leans in on Samus being a badass, and while that may be true, does that alone convey what the game is? No, it doesn't. And that's the point, Samus as a character cannot sell the series on her own.

Again, look at the boxarts and explain what they can tell you about the games, because almost all of them give next to nothing away about what you might be buying.
I counted, and of all the 22 pre-Dread boxarts (NA and JP variants for each game and excluding Fed Force), you know how many of them focus on anything other than Samus in a pose over a poorly-descriptive backdrop? 6, maybe 10 if I'm really generous with that distinction, less than 50% either way (To be specific: the OG black-box NA NES game, NA MPHunters, NA MP2, NA MP3 & NA/JP Super Metroid, with Other M, NA Fusion & NA/JP Zero Mission if I'm being super-generous by including any box art that features any other character or creature other than Samus in any way)

Hell, the JP Zero Mission box art is the only one that actually has a Metroid on it, despite so many of the games featuring them (and 2 of them featuring them super-prominently). Let that sink in.

Between Dread and this MP Remastered CM, I'm feeling a bit better about the idea that Nintendo is getting the hint, but it shouldn't have taken this long.
And a Metroid fan being all "oh wow, I didn't know this relatively-recent Metroid game had a commercial" really brings my point home that this is largely a marketing problem.

Lol, and you say I'm hung up on one aspect. As I said, because Nintendo doesn't think the other aspects are all that marketable to begin with because the devs don't do much to make them marketable. Shit, Ridley probably got as much momentum as a villain because he kept coming back. Samus has to be the pull because they didn't try to make anything that until Dread. And probably Fusion. Notice how these are more plot focused. Prime does a much better job at this, but still fall victim to some Metroid-isms like killing off the potentially interesting characters in 3.