• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Opinion Drama Cringe David Jaffe sucks at Metroid

Horatius

Member
Oct 26, 2017
184
428
410
Just because it's 'always been like this', doesn't mean that it's not a legitimate complaint. There's always room for improvement for anything and the fact that you guys are willing to forego legitimate design issues because it's always been like that... Man, maybe the industry is doomed for stagnation after all, what with this kind of mentality amongst consumers.

Also, how about, instead of attacking Jaffe and his place in the industry, you critique his opinion? I disagree with Jaffe with a lot of things, but he has a point in this; and no, I'm not 'appealing to authority' here: from a designer's perspective, this is not good design.

I swear man, people take their video games so seriously that they're willing to take it up the ass with these corporations.
lmao you ingrate
 

Mikey Jr.

Member
Dec 5, 2008
17,871
726
1,230
Toronto
Gotta agree with Jaffe on this one.

That was pretty fucking dumb.

"If you're stuck, just start shooting random walls"

I understand loving Metroid, but take a step back and realize when something is bad game design, its bad game design.

Believe it or not, Nintendo is not the Alpha and Omega.
 

RoboFu

One of the green rats
Oct 10, 2017
4,452
7,110
685
Well for starters... Why is what Jaffe saying wrong from a game design perspective.
Because there is no such thing as one set of rules for design. I mean I can understand why one would think so these days with all games following the exact same formulas.
But there is no hand book that says “ this is good, and this is bad” It’s more about what the idea is, what is expected ( if it’s a game in a series) and how it was executed.

my crazy analogy is chess.. playing chess is hard but very rewarding when you win.
Today’s games are like playing chess with each move shown to you before you make it. Chess with way points.. lol.
 
Last edited:

Dr Bass

Member
Jun 6, 2013
2,308
6,704
955
Gotta agree with Jaffe on this one.

That was pretty fucking dumb.

"If you're stuck, just start shooting random walls"

I understand loving Metroid, but take a step back and realize when something is bad game design, its bad game design.

Believe it or not, Nintendo is not the Alpha and Omega.
And that's not how this game works, as mentioned by people over .... and over ... and over.

You know what actually seems pretty dumb to me?

Not understanding this.
 

Ezquimacore

Member
Jan 8, 2021
1,183
3,091
440
And that's not how this game works, as mentioned by people over .... and over ... and over.

You know what actually seems pretty dumb to me?

Not understanding this.
I'm actually amazed of how unfamiliar people are with Metroid, even myself a few months ago before I started playing this amazing franchise. I guess Nintendo needed to do better at marketing for the franchise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tygertrip

Horatius

Member
Oct 26, 2017
184
428
410
And that, my friends, is how you start a conversation.
you're espousing the opinion that a game asking the player to have the problem solving ability of a four year old is too much of a burden to bear and is fundamentally "bad" game design

source: been playing this shit since super metroid as a literal human child

the game teaches you there are hidden blocks as one of the very first things it teaches you. if you're too thick to extrapolate based on that information, the flaw is not with the game, but with you.

if you make it obvious there's hidden blocks with visual clues they are no longer hidden blocks you goddamn mouthbreathers

the reason people get defensive is because, for the most part, game designers actually listen to your position and almost exclusively. there's very few games left that challenge the player to use their brain on anything other than a completely braindead, uninteresting level. when an entry in one of the very few series that don't cater to the lowest common denominator come out, e.g. dread, dark souls, etc., there is a cavalcade of morons there instantly who feel the need to harp on about how it's objectively "bad" that they were forced to, for unabashed minutes of their life, think for a bit before figuring out what they had to do or where they had to go in a video game.

you can't even twist this into "elitist gatekeeping bla bla", i'm not saying you need to be smart to play metroid, you just need to be as smart as a fucking toddler in the 90s with a super nintendo. that's not a high burden to bear and STILL you get fuckers trying to change the last few bastions of non-completely-idiot-proof games to be more like everything else.
 

Ezquimacore

Member
Jan 8, 2021
1,183
3,091
440
You're right. Developers should only make games for fans of the series, not attract new ones.
 

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
1,215
1,545
440
Because there is no such thing as one set of rules for design. I mean I can understand why one would think so these days with all games following the exact same formulas.
But there is no hand book that says “ this is good, and this is bad” It’s more about what the idea is, what is expected ( if it’s a game in a series) and how it was executed.

my crazy analogy is chess.. playing chess is hard but very rewarding when you win.
Today’s games are like playing chess with each move shown to you before you make it. Chess with way points.. lol.
So are you telling me there are no best practices to game development? I find this hard to believe. Also, I completely disagree with your chess analogy.

Chess is not rewarding because one randomly moves pieces and wins (kind of like in some points of Metroid you seem to just shoot random walls to progress). Chess is rewarding because of being able to outsmart your opponent with carefully planned moves.

Metroidvanias and chess have nothing in common with the exception that they are a game.
 
Last edited:
Dec 12, 2018
2,345
2,967
435
Well for starters... Why is what Jaffe saying wrong from a game design perspective.
Well, for once what Jaffe may concede as poor game design is one of the quintessential elements of the Metroid franchise => Exploring, figuring things out, non-linear level design, backtracking
This is what Metroid is in a nutshell. Every other room works like a puzzle, and the game gives you the tools necessary to solve them.

On an elementary level his criticism is understandable. There are game's that are super cryptic and you essentially need guides or the internet to solve them and I may include the original Metroid, which is very cryptic and has plenty of legit design flaws upon that, for example requiring to draw a map... still, this is Metroid! It is about exploring, looking for cues, finding a way to progress and Dread uses the frachises strengths to it's benefit. Should the game be faulted because the player isn't paying attention? You don't approach Metroid like a usual side scrolling shoot 'em up like Mega Man for example. It's more meta.

Look, I am not saying his opinion is invalid (which would be absurd), its just... he doesn't seem to understand Metroid... at like a fundental level.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tygertrip and Rran

Ezquimacore

Member
Jan 8, 2021
1,183
3,091
440
You didn't watch the video did you? He addresses this.
his opinion is fucking dumb no matter what he says! Metroid "bad design not gonna play it lol" is a trash opinion and judging by the game that he designed I can't take him seriously. He should just stop playing videogames tbh. I honestly think he has something going up there you know what I mean. Everyone thinks Metroid is the best level design Nintendo has to offer right there with zelda, everyone agreed... except Daved QTE Jaffe.
 

Jeeves

Member
Dec 7, 2008
1,194
1,605
1,180
Gotta agree with Jaffe on this one.

That was pretty fucking dumb.

"If you're stuck, just start shooting random walls"

I understand loving Metroid, but take a step back and realize when something is bad game design, its bad game design.

Believe it or not, Nintendo is not the Alpha and Omega.
For the umpteenth time...it requires context to understand.

By now the game has already shown you that there is practically no wasted space and that not everything is as it seems at a glance. This small room at first glance has nothing in it besides a locked door at the end of the hall. Except...it's not quite a hall, is it? There's a platform you can jump on top of, but for what reason I wonder? There are enemies inviting you to go up there and have a look. Up there you can see a chamber above you, one layer of terrain separating you from it. There's an enemy crawling around on the ceiling and another in the chamber above it. If you check the map, there's a passage on the right side of the above chamber. Is it an entrance or an exit? Well, let's look at the chamber. There's absolutely nothing in it besides that one enemy. There's no reason to exit into it from another room. Therefore it must be an entrance to another room. So now we need a way to get up there. The most obvious thing to attempt? Poking at the thin ceiling with standard blaster fire. What do you know - it works! We've found the path forward for ourselves.

Wasn't that more interesting than "me see crack, me shoot crack"?
 

A.Romero

Member
Feb 23, 2009
3,739
2,533
1,250
Mexico
www.lavejota.com
It seems this triggered a lot of people.

Can a person have a preference?

I mean, I don't think he said "they should stop selling this game" or something like that. He is just saying that he believes it's a bad design choice and that he will stop playing. I think that's fair.

Personally, I hate wasting time with shit like this. I don't get enough gaming time so when I do I want to feel I accomplished something meaningful (even though obviously nothing is when it comes to vidya) and running around and shooting everything doesn't feel like that.

Still, that's what a Metroid style game is so nobody should be surprised. Is like getting pissed off at RE2 because it has mild puzzles and a lot of backtracking.
 

StylishMGTOW

Member
Jun 9, 2020
399
781
395
you're espousing the opinion that a game asking the player to have the problem solving ability of a four year old is too much of a burden to bear and is fundamentally "bad" game design

source: been playing this shit since super metroid as a literal human child
Yes, because not everyone has played and/or grew up playing Super Metroid; especially with how the industry has grown since the SNES days, you really think people of all walks of life are going to know that going into Metroid Dread? I think it's the game designer's job to take into account, not only old-school fans, but new ones as well; especially if we're talking about Metroid, a franchise that hasn't been getting Nintendo's attention nearly as much as Zelda/Mario.

the game teaches you there are hidden blocks as one of the very first things it teaches you. if you're too thick to extrapolate based on that information, the flaw is not with the game, but with you.

if you make it obvious there's hidden blocks with visual clues they are no longer hidden blocks you goddamn mouthbreathers

Despite that, you still got people like Jaffe not knowing what to do. Maybe he didn't read the tutorial? In any case, a game can benefit from a better tutorial. For example, off the top of my head: Deus Ex: Human Revolution, a game from 10 years ago, gives you both text and video to explain to the player how to play:


Are you telling me Nintendo couldn't have made it more clear than just a text? C'mon man, no need for those ad-hominem attacks.

you can't even twist this into "elitist gatekeeping bla bla", i'm not saying you need to be smart to play metroid, you just need to be as smart as a fucking toddler in the 90s with a super nintendo. that's not a high burden to bear and STILL you get fuckers trying to change the last few bastions of non-completely-idiot-proof games to be more like everything else.

Well maybe Nintendo should assume that. Not everyone's going to fully grasp the mechanics in the first few hours and to make it obtuse for the players is just working against the game.
 

Dr Bass

Member
Jun 6, 2013
2,308
6,704
955
I'm actually amazed of how unfamiliar people are with Metroid, even myself a few months ago before I started playing this amazing franchise. I guess Nintendo needed to do better at marketing for the franchise.
It's not even that they are unfamiliar.

It's that they aren't paying attention to stuff being spelled out in the very game they are complaining about.

It reminds me of being in school way back in the day, where one person complains about a project that everyone else understood and completes just fine. These people yell and scream and complain that it's not fair for some reason ... all while not looking in the mirror for the true source of the problem. Again, if practically everyone else can handle something just fine and you are whining and complaining about that something ... the problem is you. The fact that people, let alone adults and not children, don't understand this concept continues to blow my mind.
You didn't watch the video did you? He addresses this.
His response is stupid though.

Look at the screenshot you quoted. Look at the tutorial layout and how destructible blocks tend to appear in the actual game. It's basic visual pattern matching. You know ... in video games. It's part of the description of the medium for crying out loud. Visual puzzles in video based games.

Gaming has truly gone off the deep end if the mainstream thinks this is bad. Thankfully going by the Metroid Dread OT this has NOT been a problem at all.
 

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
1,215
1,545
440
Well, for once what Jaffe may consede as poor game design is one of the quintessential elements of the Metroid franchise => Exploring, figuring things out, non-linear level design, backtracking
This is what Metroid is in a nutshell. Every other room works like a puzzle, and the game gives you the tools necessary to solve them.

On an elementary level his criticism is understandable. There are game's that are super cryptic and you essentially need guides or the internet to solve them and I may include the original Metroid, which is very cryptic and has plenty of legit design flaws upon that, for example requiring to draw a map... still, this is Metroid! It is about exploring, looking for cues, finding a way to progress and Dread is true to the franchises nature. Should the game be faulted because the player isn't paying attention? You don't approach Metroid like a usual side scrolling shoot 'em up like Mega Man for example. It's more meta.

Look, I am not saying his opinion is invalid (which would be absurd), its just... he doesn't seem to get Metroid.
Why couldn't you post this as your main thread? I don't agree with much here, but at least it's more thoughtful.

Some things I don't agree with:

1) because something "was" doesn't mean it's how it should be.
2) Exploration without logic didn't seem rewarding to me. If something looks like it should be broken, then sure.
3) A quick disclaimer after visually showing a depiction of the very thing you are disclaiming (i.e. specific blocks) then expecting the player to know to shoot completely innocuous blocks that look nothing like that is disingenuous.
4) This is not elementary. It seems logical, reasoned and non-surficial. Elementary would be, say he criticized the start menu backdrop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StylishMGTOW

davidjaffe

The Fucking MAN.
Mar 8, 2005
948
3,021
1,980
For the umpteenth time...it requires context to understand.

By now the game has already shown you that there is practically no wasted space and that not everything is as it seems at a glance. This small room at first glance has nothing in it besides a locked door at the end of the hall. Except...it's not quite a hall, is it? There's a platform you can jump on top of, but for what reason I wonder? There are enemies inviting you to go up there and have a look. Up there you can see a chamber above you, one layer of terrain separating you from it. There's an enemy crawling around on the ceiling and another in the chamber above it. If you check the map, there's a passage on the right side of the above chamber. Is it an entrance or an exit? Well, let's look at the chamber. There's absolutely nothing in it besides that one enemy. There's no reason to exit into it from another room. Therefore it must be an entrance to another room. So now we need a way to get up there. The most obvious thing to attempt? Poking at the thin ceiling with standard blaster fire. What do you know - it works! We've found the path forward for ourselves.

Wasn't that more interesting than "me see crack, me shoot crack"?
And for the umpteenth time...you are painting a false narrative.

You are trying to sell this as if the Player is stuck in 1-3 rooms and the solve has to be SOMEWHERE in one of those 3 rooms. In THAT case, YES, you would be right: the game is bottle necking you and saying (assuming it's not a bug) that 'SOMEWHERE in these 1-3 rooms is a way out. GO!'

In that case, your logic is sound.

HOWEVER, what you- and others like you- keep failing to take into account is the following:

I was not STUCK in this room. I was not STUCK in ANY group of rooms. I had about 25 screens (prob more) open at that point. All I KNEW was I was struggling to advance after about 30-40 min of running around.

With THAT context:
#1- there was NO INDICATION this particular room held the key to advancement. There were LOTS of other rooms with barriers and locked doors and areas of the map I could see but not yet reach.
#2- the game had also already conditioned me to know three things:
a- unless you unlock new powers there are some areas you can NOT go.
b- there are puzzles in the game that you have to solve- like recognizing you've reversed the lava flow pipeline and thus using the newly animating (in a new direction) pipeline art- as a breadcrumb trail to get you to the next section.
c- the map itself is pretty detailed and if you don't zoom in and study it in detail- which is part of what I love about the genre- you could easily miss a door or place you should go next.

So WITH THAT context, ask yourself:

What is more logical?

A-To magically KNOW the room where the way to advance is? And then go in there and start shooting?

I woulda loved that but this room seemed no more unique than any of the other rooms I had unlocked.

OR is it more logical to assume

B-the solve to advancement was one of the 3 ways (a,b,c listed above) the game had already trained me in?

If you honestly think A is the more logical choice, go with God sir. Agree to disagree but I hard disagree with you and I would never want to be on a design team with you (and I'm sure the feeling is mutual).

But there ya go- that's my take/response.

Jaffe
 
Last edited:
Dec 12, 2018
2,345
2,967
435
2) Exploration without logic didn't seem rewarding to me. If something looks like it should be broken, then sure. 3)A quick disclaimer after visually showing a depiction of the very thing you are disclaiming (i.e. specific blocks) then expecting the player to know to shoot completely innocuous blocks that look nothing like that is disingenuous.

Two of the main things you will do in Metroid is shooting and jumping. It shouldn't take long to figure out that shooting at something will may help you to progress.

This is not elementary. It seems logical, reasoned and non-surficial. Elementary would be, say he criticized the start menu backdrop.
it kinda is though. I would never even dare to compare Metroid Dread with some super cryptic bullshit. For god's sake, this isn't King's Quest V. You have a visual clue and a map on top there is only a limited amount of logical conclusions to the scenario. Just put 1 and 1 together. Saying "Metroid has bad game design because of shooting allegedly random objects" gives off aim chair critic vibes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tygertrip

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
1,215
1,545
440
Two of the main things you will do in Metroid is shooting and jumping. It shouldn't take long to figure out that shooting at something will may help you to progress.


it kinda is though. I would never even dare to compare Metroid Dread with some super cryptic bullshit. For god's sake, this isn't King's Quest V. You have a visual clue and a map on top there is only a limited amount of logical conclusions to the scenario. Just put 1 and 1 together. Saying "Metroid has bad game design because of shooting allegedly random objects" gives off aim chair critic vibes.
We'll agree to disagree.
 

Dr Bass

Member
Jun 6, 2013
2,308
6,704
955
And for the umpteenth time...you are painting a false narrative.

You are trying to sell this as if the Player is stuck in 1-3 rooms and the solve has to be SOMEWHERE in one of those 3 rooms. In THAT case, YES, you would be right: the game is bottle necking you and saying (assuming it's not a bug) that 'SOMEWHERE in these 1-3 rooms is a way out. GO!'

In that case, your logic is sound.

HOWEVER, what you- and others like you- keep failing to take into account is the following:

I was not STUCK in this room. I was not STUCK in ANY group of rooms. I had about 25 screens (prob more) open at that point. All I KNEW was I was struggling to advance after about 30-40 min of running around.

With THAT context:
#1- there was NO INDICATION this particular room held the key to advancement. There were LOTS of other rooms with barriers and locked doors and areas of the map I could see but not yet reach.
#2- the game had also already conditioned me to know three things:
a- unless you unlock new powers there are some areas you can NOT go.
b- there are puzzles in the game that you have to solve- like recognizing you've reversed the lava flow pipeline and thus using the newly animating (in a new direction) pipeline art- as a breadcrumb trail to get you to the next section.
c- the map itself is pretty detailed and if you don't zoom in and study it in detail- which is part of what I love about the genre- you could easily miss a door or place you should go next.

So WITH THAT context, ask yourself:

What is more logical?

A-To magically KNOW the room where the way to advance is? And then go in there and start shooting?

I woulda loved that but this room seemed no more unique than any of the other rooms I had unlocked.

OR is it more logical to assume

B-the solve to advancement was one of the 3 ways (a,b,c listed above) the game had already trained me in?

If you honestly think A is the more logical choice, go with God sir. Agree to disagree but I hard disagree with you and I would never want to be on a design team with you (and I'm sure the feeling is mutual).

But there ya go- that's my take/response.

Jaffe

And again ...

Absolutely no one in the main thread is getting hung up on this.

The game clearly spells out to you at the beginning these situations can arise with visual indications of what those situations tend to look like.

There is no magic. This is your rhetorical device to try and support your own viewpoint, and from my perspective "you are not observant" is the actual answer. That's the other viewpoint. That you are not able to deduce anything from the environment based on clear and obvious visual cues. The fact that EVERYONE ELSE in the OT is not mentioning this and instead praising how brilliant and refreshing they think the game is (most people, anyway) points back to my earlier comment on how these complaints come across (i.e. school projects). You keep insisting it's bad, while not addressing the fact no one is complaining about this but you, it seems. Again, if you are the only one experiencing this "problem," is it actually a problem?
 

davidjaffe

The Fucking MAN.
Mar 8, 2005
948
3,021
1,980
And again ...

Absolutely no one in the main thread is getting hung up on this.

The game clearly spells out to you at the beginning these situations can arise with visual indications of what those situations tend to look like.

There is no magic. This is your rhetorical device to try and support your own viewpoint, and from my perspective "you are not observant" is the actual answer. That's the other viewpoint. That you are not able to deduce anything from the environment based on clear and obvious visual cues. The fact that EVERYONE ELSE in the OT is not mentioning this and instead praising how brilliant and refreshing they think the game is (most people, anyway) points back to my earlier comment on how these complaints come across (i.e. school projects). You keep insisting it's bad, while not addressing the fact no one is complaining about this but you, it seems. Again, if you are the only one experiencing this "problem," is it actually a problem?
Ok but NOW you are changing the argument. I thought we were talking about the design scenario.

NOW you are going, 'Well I know you just offered me all this evidence Jaffe to rebut my recent post but I don't wanna talk about that now. NOW I'd like to talk about how there's this made up litmus test that suggests a % of people must agree that there is an issue for there to actually BE an issue'. I could offer you examples of times in history when only a handful of people saw the writing on the wall and it took many years for others to see it (Civil Rights and Gay rights come to mind) BUT my guess is you don't really care about that response either; what you care about is 'winning' an argument.

And thus, we're done. Bye! Enjoy your Metroid game.

Jaffe
 
Last edited:

Dr Bass

Member
Jun 6, 2013
2,308
6,704
955
We'll agree to disagree.
How can you "agree to disagree" on this? It doesn't seem like a matter of opinion.

It's like not being able to solve a sudoku puzzle, and then saying "Sudoku is bad design." Even though everything you need to solve it, is right in front of your face. No guessing. No mystery. Simple observation and reasoning. Even on the harder puzzles. Maybe you don't like Sudoku. I can understand that. But saying it's "bad" is objectively wrong because most people can solve it just fine. These puzzles are designed to be found and figured out. They tell you they exist, and show you what to look for. If you can't do that, that is on you.

This is not hard to understand.
 

Dr Bass

Member
Jun 6, 2013
2,308
6,704
955
Again, no there's not a small amount of logical conclusions. Because you can LEAVE THIS ROOM and go to 30 other rooms. This is not an escape room challenge. Thus th

Ok but NOW you are changing the argument. I thought we were talking about the design scenario.

NOW you are going, 'Well I know you just offered me all this evidence Jaffe to rebut my recent post but I don't wanna talk about that now. NOW I'd like to talk about how there's this made up litmus test that suggests a % of people must agree that there is an issue for there to actually BE an issue'. I could offer you examples of times in history when only a handful of people saw the writing on the wall and it took many years for others to see it (Civil Rights and Gay rights come to mind) BUT my guess is you don't really care about that response either; what you care about is 'winning' an argument.

And thus, we're done. Bye! Enjoy your Metroid game.

Jaffe
Wtf? Did you just compare your inability to solve a video game to civil rights? That is completely disingenuous lol. Come on now man, I completely answered all of your objections (even though you said I didn't, just more rhetorical devices on your part, but easy to see through), but I think you are just wrong in this case. It's not the games fault if you can't solve things everyone else can.

You can be done, but you're not addressing the points I made so ... ok. 🤷‍♂️

I also really don't understand the stand-offish vibe. Like I said, my first post in this thread said I thought it was rude towards you. But you quickly escalate things when people rebut what you're saying with some basic logic.

And I did enjoy Metroid Dread, thanks! :messenger_beaming:
 
Last edited:

MajinSweet4

Member
Dec 28, 2012
560
144
700
Cmon
Ok but NOW you are changing the argument. I thought we were talking about the design scenario.

NOW you are going, 'Well I know you just offered me all this evidence Jaffe to rebut my recent post but I don't wanna talk about that now. NOW I'd like to talk about how there's this made up litmus test that suggests a % of people must agree that there is an issue for there to actually BE an issue'. I could offer you examples of times in history when only a handful of people saw the writing on the wall and it took many years for others to see it (Civil Rights and Gay rights come to mind) BUT my guess is you don't really care about that response either; what you care about is 'winning' an argument.

And thus, we're done. Bye! Enjoy your Metroid game.

Jaffe
Holy bad takes. Maybe you should take your own advice and not tie your self worth to video games.
 

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
1,215
1,545
440
How can you "agree to disagree" on this? It doesn't seem like a matter of opinion.

It's like not being able to solve a sudoku puzzle, and then saying "Sudoku is bad design." Even though everything you need to solve it, is right in front of your face. No guessing. No mystery. Simple observation and reasoning. Even on the harder puzzles. Maybe you don't like Sudoku. I can understand that. But saying it's "bad" is objectively wrong because most people can solve it just fine. These puzzles are designed to be found and figured out. They tell you they exist, and show you what to look for. If you can't do that, that is on you.

This is not hard to understand.
It means I don't agree and we'll get nowhere good discussing it. Its not hard to understand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Punished Miku

carlosrox

Member
May 19, 2020
3,473
5,758
530
Having a discussion with you is disingenuous as I don't think you can be objective. Good day!

Sure I can. I know how Metroid works and have gotten stuck twice already in the game but you don't see me throwing tantrums about it claiming it's bad game design cuz I missed something.

There's also an ability later in the game that literally helps you find hidden blocks. What more do you want from them to attract new players?

And do you think there aren't new players buying and enjoying Dread?


Since you've already made up your mind that I can't be objective I will argue things from your side. Sure, I can see how it can be seen as obtuse. Like I said, I got stuck myself and literally went over basically the entire map (up until the third area) and was pretty confused as to where to go. I could see how this could be even worse for someone new to Metroid. I still think that Jaffe's example is awful though as that room should have stood out as suspicious. There were already rooms with easily shootable blocks before that. You can see there's a thin wall/another side. Why wouldn't you shoot there?

One of the areas I got stuck in was similar. I thought I had shot it out but I was either wrong or shot the wrong spot. That wasn't where I needed to go anyway. The spot I really needed to go I also suspected but avoided it because I saw a bit of lava there and assumed I couldn't go there yet. Both are essentially my fault for not exploring better and making sure they weren't the way forward. How is it the game's fault?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tygertrip

Jeeves

Member
Dec 7, 2008
1,194
1,605
1,180
And for the umpteenth time...you are painting a false narrative.

You are trying to sell this as if the Player is stuck in 1-3 rooms and the solve has to be SOMEWHERE in one of those 3 rooms. In THAT case, YES, you would be right: the game is bottle necking you and saying (assuming it's not a bug) that 'SOMEWHERE in these 1-3 rooms is a way out. GO!'

In that case, your logic is sound.

HOWEVER, what you- and others like you- keep failing to take into account is the following:

I was not STUCK in this room. I was not STUCK in ANY group of rooms. I had about 25 screens (prob more) open at that point. All I KNEW was I was struggling to advance after about 30-40 min of running around.

With THAT context:
#1- there was NO INDICATION this particular room held the key to advancement. There were LOTS of other rooms with barriers and locked doors and areas of the map I could see but not yet reach.
#2- the game had also already conditioned me to know three things:
a- unless you unlock new powers there are some areas you can NOT go.
b- there are puzzles in the game that you have to solve- like recognizing you've reversed the lava flow pipeline and thus using the newly animating (in a new direction) pipeline art- as a breadcrumb trail to get you to the next section.
c- the map itself is pretty detailed and if you don't zoom in and study it in detail- which is part of what I love about the genre- you could easily miss a door or place you should go next.

So WITH THAT context, ask yourself:

What is more logical?

A-To magically KNOW the room where the way to advance is? And then go in there and start shooting?

I woulda loved that but this room seemed no more unique than any of the other rooms I had unlocked.

OR is it more logical to assume

B-the solve to advancement was one of the 3 ways (a,b,c listed above) the game had already trained me in?

If you honestly think A is the more logical choice, go with God sir. Agree to disagree but I hard disagree with you and I would never want to be on a design team with you (and I'm sure the feeling is mutual).

But there ya go- that's my take/response.

Jaffe
I never implied that the player had a limited number of rooms to access at this point in the game. Maybe you thought that was what I was saying because I pointed out that the room is small? But I only mentioned that to emphasize that there's almost nothing to do or see in that room besides discovering the path forward. Yes, you can still turn back and check other rooms, but not before (hopefully) you get suspicious of this room for the reasons I laid out in my previous post. The game is pushing you out of the nest by not cordoning you off as often.

What I'm not saying is that you're supposed to magically know to head for this particular room and search for a path. I'm saying that when you eventually and inevitably do set foot in this room for the first time, the design of it is such that your attention is subtly drawn towards that suspicious chamber and that most players will become curious about that.

There is a downside to games trusting their players like this, and it's that it leaves open the possibility that someone could miss the cues and become stuck. It looks like your were streaming at the time, so maybe your attention wasn't fully on the game. But anyway, if you take away that element of trusting the player to make discoveries, you lose the essence of this genre.
 

MajinSweet4

Member
Dec 28, 2012
560
144
700
Sure I can. I know how Metroid works and have gotten stuck twice already in the game but you don't see me throwing tantrums about it claiming it's bad game design cuz I missed something.

There's also an ability later in the game that literally helps you find hidden blocks. What more do you want from them to attract new players?

And do you think there aren't new players buying and enjoying Dread?
To add on to this, a game isn't necisaraily bad for not attracting new players either. Nothing wrong with a developer wanting to make something for the fans. Especially an old school 2d Metroid game called Dread. This game isn't exactly a super high budget AAA game, if they make a good return appealing to a small yet dedicated fan base, what's the problem? A game not having broad appeal isn't bad or have "bad design".
 

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
1,215
1,545
440
Sure I can. I know how Metroid works and have gotten stuck twice already in the game but you don't see me throwing tantrums about it claiming it's bad game design cuz I missed something.

There's also an ability later in the game that literally helps you find hidden blocks. What more do you want from them to attract new players?

And do you think there aren't new players buying and enjoying Dread?
When was the last critical thing you ever said about Nintendo? Show me your objectivity then.
 

Jsisto

Member
Oct 11, 2019
124
181
260
New Jersey
Oh lord. 😂. Remember the “time in history” before society at large was willing to accept that this one room in some videogame from 2021 was designed badly. I’m glad the culture has changed so much and we can live in peace with our fellow countrymen now. Don’t mean to pile on and I know the intention wasn’t bad but that was a hell of a rich take. Im dying 😂
 
  • LOL
Reactions: tygertrip

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
1,215
1,545
440
To add on to this, a game isn't necisaraily bad for not attracting new players either. Nothing wrong with a developer wanting to make something for the fans. Especially an old school 2d Metroid game called Dread. This game isn't exactly a super high budget AAA game, if they make a good return appealing to a small yet dedicated fan base, what's the problem? A game not having broad appeal isn't bad or have "bad design".
Plenty of awesome games have had design issues. Skyrim is one my favourite buy some of it's design was horrendous I found. Games can be fun without being technically perfect.

Not sure why people are conflating the two.
 
Last edited:

MajinSweet4

Member
Dec 28, 2012
560
144
700
Plenty of awesome games have had design issues. Skyrim is one my favourite buy some of it's design was horrendous I found. Games can be fun without being technically perfect.

Not sure why people are conflating the two.
I don't think anyone has made the claim that Dread is perfect. More just people annoyed at people crying that a video game came out that has a sense of challenge and doesn't hold your hand through out.
 

carlosrox

Member
May 19, 2020
3,473
5,758
530
When was the last critical thing you ever said about Nintendo? Show me your objectivity then.

Are you serious? I've been posting before Dread even came out that I was worried about the music, for one. And my suspicions were confirmed. The music is a mixed bag like I had feared. Some tracks are great, some are okay. I wouldn't say anything is bad OR mind blowing but I would say it ranges from good to pretty good, and that to me is honestly a bit disappointing. And I have other criticisms of the game but those will wait til I'm done. I'm perfectly capable of criticizing Nintendo, I do it all the time. I also make no secret that BOTW's soundtrack was extremely disappointing, on top of other flaws the game had. My criticisms of both games does not change me feeling that they're incredible games anyway.

I edited my previous post btw since you're so sure I'm incapable of being objective.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tygertrip

Punished Miku

Gold Member
Jan 13, 2018
10,072
21,405
1,010
I never implied that the player had a limited number of rooms to access at this point in the game. Maybe you thought that was what I was saying because I pointed out that the room is small? But I only mentioned that to emphasize that there's almost nothing to do or see in that room besides discovering the path forward. Yes, you can still turn back and check other rooms, but not before (hopefully) you get suspicious of this room for the reasons I laid out in my previous post. The game is pushing you out of the nest by not cordoning you off as often.

What I'm not saying is that you're supposed to magically know to head for this particular room and search for a path. I'm saying that when you eventually and inevitably do set foot in this room for the first time, the design of it is such that your attention is subtly drawn towards that suspicious chamber and that most players will become curious about that.

There is a downside to games trusting their players like this, and it's that it leaves open the possibility that someone could miss the cues and become stuck. It looks like your were streaming at the time, so maybe your attention wasn't fully on the game. But anyway, if you take away that element of trusting the player to make discoveries, you lose the essence of this genre.
Excellent point about the streaming. It is definitely hard to play and read a chat. I've gotten stuck in Metroidvanias and lost interest. Thankfully Dread had just the right balance for me. Not too easy and not too hard. But I guess that won't be the case for everyone.
 

Boglin

Member
Jul 26, 2013
463
936
625
I thoroughly enjoy wandering around these games and prodding everything in attempt to discover secrets or my next path forward.
Having a crack in the floor or some other indicator that screams "SHOOT HERE" is hardly different than having no hidden path at all.
This is my favorite genre and I really don't want this "bad" game design to be removed from the option pool in the future because modern gamers feel they need to coddled.
 

ProLogY

Member
Jul 3, 2020
138
196
230
I agree with him honestly. There’s been a few times I’ve gotten stuck for a bit; only to find that the answer was a destructible wall that had no visual indication that it was destructible.

it’s just not fun running around shooting walls hoping for something to happen. Agreed