How to make Super Metroid BETTER | Contrasting Design

~Video essay version below~

Recently, I’ve been playing both The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, and Super Metroid. Actually, my most recent run of Super Metroid is also my first completed playthrough; I’ve tried to finish it over the years, but I’ve never been able to get to the end. But, I finally have. And, to that point, believe it or not, Super Metroid is a pretty good game. I know-- scalding hot take. That doesn’t mean it is perfect though-- and during my time playing this title parallel to Breath of the Wild, I reached a conclusion which helps to explain why it has taken me so long bring myself to complete Super Metroid.

Both Super Metroid and Breath of the Wild communicate very little to the player. Really, player discovery exploration are the cornerstones of these two experiences. It was especially refreshing to see Zelda utilize this design philosophy. That is a big reason why I love Breath of the Wild; with how hand-holdy a lot of modern games have become, having to unpack all of the game’s systems and world myself was a real brick through the window; totally bucking the trends in modern design. However, Super Metroid was designed with these concepts of freedom and player-discovery a full 24 years prior to Breath of the Wild. The difference, though, is that each game interprets these ideas differently.

It wouldn’t be wrong to call both games obtuse, or well, actually it would be. When working on this script, I came to realize that the definition commonly attached to the word “obtuse” these days is actually a misnomer-- abstruse, difficult to understand or obscure, is much closer in meaning to what I, and many others, have been using obtuse in the place of. So, I would like to formally apologise to abstruse for all the uses I’ve taken away from it, because unlike certain ex-IGN staffers, when I say this has been unintentional, it’s actually true. But, I digress. Neither game tells the player much of anything-- leaving the player to their own devices when a problem needs to be solved. However, Breath of the Wild takes a far more grounded, understandable approach to player-driven critical thinking than Super Metroid does.

While this isn’t true for everyone, I derive my enjoyment in abstruse games from the process of solving the problem, opposed to the epiphany of stumbling upon the solution. Zelda rewards the former, whereas Metroid rewards the latter. They’re two different schools of thought, but I personally don’t find them to be equivalent. There is a disconnect between the problem and the solution in a “secretively abstruse” game, whereas a “logically abstruse” game flows from A to B to C. Even when you’re left spinning your wheels in one of Zelda’s shrines, the solution is going to come to you through poking around with the game’s systems-- and chances are, the solution will feel totally natural. The same simply can’t be said for Super Metroid, where you’ll just stumble across the answer-- and chances are, the solution will feel totally contrived.

I was playing Breath of the Wild the other night trying to hunt down some more shrines, and I came across one set into the rock face of Central Hyrule. To get into the shrine, I had to burn off a layer of vines, and then bomb a stack of cracked rocks blocking the entrance. This is very representative of how Breath of the Wild approaches abstruse design-- that is to say, logically. There are vines blocking the entrance, the logical step is to burn them away. Then, there is a clearly choreographed weakness in the rock wall, and as such you blow them away. The process is easy to interpret, and sensible to the player. You can even extrapolate this out to some of Zelda’s systemically abstruse design choices.

Take, for example, the entire cooking mechanic in Breath of the Wild. You’re never taught how to make a particular recipe, hell, the game doesn’t even tell you the basics of cooking in the first place. But, it’s logical to figure out; from how to light the cooking pot, to putting ingredients into it, to what ingredients will cook what, and so on. Breath of the Wild strikes a consistently great mix of sensibly abstruse design, and the necessity for experimentation.

On the other hand, Super Metroid’s design philosophy is closer to what I’d consider, “secretively abstruse”. If that exact same shrine puzzle was in Super Metroid you’d have to either, A; walk right through the wall, or B; bomb a nondescript portion of the wall to obtain entry. When I was playing Super Metroid, time and time again I’d find myself stuck, not knowing how to progress as I’d seemingly exhausted all my options. Most of the times, when I’d consult a guide, I’d find out that there simply was a false wall I had to walk through, or an arbitrary floor tile I needed to bomb. This isn’t inutive; no amount of game knowledge will help lead you through a false wall; and a lot of Super Metroid comes down to simple trial and error. It feels like you have to be in the know to progress-- which really doesn’t feel rewarding.

This is my problem with the Metroid series as a whole; I’ve always loved its universe, and the atmosphere it evokes. And, who doesn’t love the brilliant set-piece moments; from boss battles, to self-destruct sequences, and everything in-between. Even its platforming and combat work well too-- really, I can get behind almost every aspect of Metroid other its abstruse design philosophy. It is just designed in a way that doesn’t quite click with me. Even the more recent Metroid games are still saddled by the same design philosophy that I find frustrating, just to a somewhat lesser extent. Keep in mind, this isn’t a bid for linearity, just a hope for Metroid to move towards a design philosophy based more around logic than around luck.

With that said, I’d of course be remiss not to discuss the fact, once again, these two games were two decades and four console generations apart. Keep in mind, The Legend of Zelda series hasn’t always been logically abstruse, and honestly, the NES Zelda title is far more abstruse than Super Metroid. Thus is the fate of a series that has had time to grow and shift-- to realize its own visions throughout the years. Metroid hasn’t gotten that same treatment unfortunately, which makes me extremely excited to see how Nintendo tackles this design conundrum with not only Metroid Prime 4, but the next 2D Metroid title. There are ways to make 2D, itemized progression titles feel logically abstruse-- as games such as Hollow Knight prove.

Funnily enough, we’ve yet to truly see 2D Metroid step into the modern era, and learn from the genre that has fostered in its post-Fusion wake. What lessons it takes from where will be a fascinating analysis once that game eventually releases-- on top of the novelty of seeing Samus Aran kick ass in HD. However that game shapes up, I simply hope that the false walls and breakable tiles are gone. Arbitrate less, and engage the player’s mind more-- and then we could be looking at a Metroid game I’d feel is truly worthy of Super’s towering praise.

Video Essay: