By that logic:

Tomb Raider has guns, it has a 3rd-person perspective......that makes it a 3rd-person shooter!

Uhhh.......no. It's an adventure game, with shooting. Just because a game has guns doesn't mean it's primarily a shooter. Metroid Prime is just as much a FPS as Super Metroid was a "sidescroller shooter".

I would call Tomb Raider a 3rd person shooter...

I guess I'll get Metroid. Maybe. If I get bored.

Wassup everybody? I was just shooting arrows while playing the 1st-person game Morrowmind. Guess that makes it a FPS as well!

Yeah it's a FPS. What's your point?

I did shoot fireballs in Super Mario Bros.

Man, they just don't make side scrolling shooters like they used to.

Every game in existence can be improved with multiplayer, be it RPG, FPS, racing, adventure, whatever. The only people who should be defending lack of multiplayer are the developers (to cover up their laziness or more likely lack of time/resources).

The "it's a great single player game and won't translate" excuse is meaningless. Half Life is one of the greatest single player experiences ever. But guess what? Its multiplayer is fantastic AND it does *not* draw from the single player mode's strengths. None of the 'boss' battles or scripted events or atmosphere is there. It takes the basic mechanics and basically adds a whole new game to it. Perfect Dark and Goldeneye are more examples. And if they CAN incorporate it into the main story to take advantage of the singleplayer benefits (co-op is genius!) ala PD or Halo, then that's even better.

Now, I'm not saying they should deduct marks anytime MP is missing in ANY game, but for this kind of game, I think they should. If it's first person and you can run around and shoot in real time, then MP is just expected.

But whatever, this is all just pedantic game freak debating.

from the ign review...unfortunately does not have a widescreen mode....

I was thinking about the multiplayer aspect, but I can't really see it fitting in with the game. Samus is a bounty hunter, and she works alone......its just her style. Who else could you play in it? It probably would have been delayed until spring if they had to come up with some new characters, etc.

Regardless, that review score is higher than what i was expecting it to be. I have been casually avoiding ign's site to prevent hyping this game up beyond reason , and its looking promising. Unfortunately by a strange twist of fate i don't have any rear speakers currently, but that wont' stop me! By the 18th i should have most of my exams out of the way for the time being, woohoo!

Games like this and Halo really wish I could afford a surround setup. I can't imagine how much I'm missing.

I understand your point, but still don't understand how it would work in Metroid. Are you sugesting just a regular death match game? Or the ability to play Co-op? both? Neither work in metroid because of the type of game it is.

You compare it to GE, PD, and Halo, all of which are great FPS, nothing like Metroid. I just dont understand how it would work, could you please give an example of the type of multiplayer aspects you are thinking of.

Also, have you ever played a Metroid game before?

Agreed. The only games that I have any multiplayer interest in at all are sports games..........

Exactly. Look at a game like SIlent Hill or Resident Evil, both are great games but there's no way a real multiplayer could work. You could make a deathmatch type game where it was good vs. evil but it just wouldn't work. A co-op mode wouldn't work either, part of the overall atmosphere (like Metroid) is being all alone in a strange place. I'd much rather have the developers spend more time on the single player aspect than tack on some multiplayer just because good games are expected to have multiplayer.

It GoldenEye syndrome. Before, you could have a great single player game and be happy with it. Then Rare introduced GE and all of a sudden a good game can't be great without multi-player. Some people knock down SMS a bit because there's no multi-player! What the hell?

Gee, can't a developer just make the best single-player experience they can? For instance, I don't have any gamer friends, so I almost never utilize multi-player with the exception of puzzle games. Plus, a huge theme in MP is that you are all alone. How do you shoehorn a co-op mode into it? It's like having a game called "Last Man on the Planet" and having a co-op mode. Just doesn't make any sense.

And I've played the kiosk version, and MP just moves too slowly to have satisfactory deathmatch experience. While TS2 and Halo whip around, MP is much more methodical in its pace. The game engine is just not designed for big ol' shootouts.

'eh if it's a 20 - 30 hours game, it doesn't need Multiplayer, that's why Timesplitters 2 is out on that system.

Me personally, I don't have a Gamecube, but Metroid Prime has me primed to get one. I am amped over it - especially after the footage on the freebie Nintendo DVD.

If you want a Metroid mulitplayer find a nice helmet, paint it red , strap it on and play some Goldeneye, PD, TSII, Halo etc. with friends.

They may think you're a freak but at least you'll be looking through Samus in multiplayer.... with loads of new characters and weapons! Woopee!

This is just a ridiculous statement. Did you even think when you wrote this? As several people have mentioned already...you think Resident Evil, Silent Hill, Metroid, Castlevania, and Super Mario Sunshine are all worthless b/c they don't have multiplayer modes?
Whatever...

The fact of the matter is, some games work great in multiplayer, and some are just meant to be single player games. That's just how it goes.

i was just about to make a similar point, if this game was multiplatform or on xbox it probably would have gotten a lower score but it looks like it uses the full potential of the gamecube so you have to rate it high seeing it probably is the best game for that system.

Did you even bother to read past my first sentence before your knee jerked and you hit reply? Hell, did you even read what the OTHERS wrote? At what point did I say, or anyone else imply that I said, lack of multiplayer meant a game was "worthless"?

The point I was making was that any game can be *IMPROVED* by multiplayer. Not that every game needs it to be good. That's as simple as I can make it for you.

Take Perfect Dark. It's all about a lone agent . The way the levels and story line are setup, it only makes sense for a single character. Yet you can play through the whole thing in co-op mode! It does change the dynamic of the game, but you know what? It's a lot of fun. And know what else? It DOES NOT ALTER THE SINGLE PLAYER EXPERIENCE. You still have that. But the multiplayer co-op is a fantastic bonus and you still haven't reached the deathmatch & challenge stuff in that game which are absolutely brilliant and could be a standalone game in itself. Hence, an already fantastic single player experience is improved greatly by multiplayer.

So take that, and apply it to Resident Evil. Why can't you have two players skulking through the game? It would change the dynamic of the game a bit, sure, but would it be less fun? Hell no, it'd be a great new experience. It doesn't ruin the atmosphere for single player, it adds a NEW atmosphere for two players. And there are many ways you could implement it. It could be two players, always in the same area helping each other out. Or it could be an online version, with each character in different areas of the compound completing different tasks, kind of like an expansion of the multiple characters idea found in the various RE games. Or you could simply have an almost SmashTV-style mode, where the two players go from screen to screen killing everything that moves and having all of the game's weapons available to them. That's what I came up with in the 5 minutes spent typing this message. Are you telling me Capcom's geniuses couldn't figure out something better?

Like I said, it will require more time and resources that the developers may not have. But at the same time, it doesn't mean they have to completely rehaul the game and make sure it offers EXACTLY the same experience & flavor except with two players. It merely has to be a fun extension of the game that allows multiple players to play at once. If they can tie it in with the main story, even better.

As for the 'best single player experience' possible explanation, I agree. If that's all they can manage, then just make sure the primary play mode is a good as possible. But why can't we expect them to aim higher? Why can't these HUGE friggin' game companies figure out a way to ensure a game has both great single and multiplayer? Especially when others have done it successfully.

Regarding Metroid Prime, I haven't played it yet. But you have a first person view and you can fire in real time, right? Then you can at the very least have a deathmatch mode. Speed is not an issue (ever play SWAT3?), it'll just give a different flow to the game.

Certain points you make I can agree with. But I also see the point in keeping a game to it's core gameplay. Just because you can do deathmatch, doesn't mean to me that you should. It would detract from the core experiance and what metroid is all about IMO. I think it would have been shame had they implemented deathmatch or co-op.

That's not to say that multiplayer is completley out of the question for metroid, but I don't think those two mods of play would do the series justice.

It's called raising the bar. When one company sets a new high, it's just natural to expect everything to follow suit. How else would anything improve?

Just like if a sports game these days doesn't offer a full season mode, player trading, or stats tracking, then people complain. The gameplay may be top notch, but these other elements are just expected. And if your game can't do it, but a comparable one can, then why shouldn't your game get a lower rating? A rating after all, just gives you an idea of where you stand versus other similar games.

Now that would be cool. Imagine hearing your friend screaming at you for help. Kind of like Ghostbusters when Bill Murray gets slimed. "It's in here Ray, it's looking at me."


Wow we're really getting off topic now.

Bear in mind that an online version of Resident Evil is on the way for PS2.

Because each game should be judged on it's own merits, for what it's trying to accomplish. Game reviews shouldn't be comparisons, the reviewer should just set down and base the review on their experience with that one game.

The review should simply mention that there is no multiplayer, so that those that only buy games with multiplayer modes don't pick it up unaware.

It should not drop the overall score though. The 9.8 reflects that it is a great single player game. Everyone knows that it doesn't have multiplayer, and can take that into account on their own.

When I read a review, I'm just interested in how good the actual gameplay is, not about modes it "should" of had.

Yes, but baseball or football games adhere to the same mechanics. A season in Madden is the same as a season in NFL2k3.

The hole in your argument is that you assume MP is an FPS just like TP2 or GE. While MP is primarily in first person perspective, it is not like the other games. It is slower paced and more contemplative. The engine is not built for breakneck speed and the ability to turn on a dime and shoot. There's auto-aiming for a reason.

Also, the environments are small rooms interconnected to each other. Not really conducive to deathmatches. You need item A to go back to area B to get item C to go back to area A and etc. This is not really suited for co-op play.

I'm not going to get into whether or not MP is a FPS or FPA. But it's mechanically unlike GE or TS2. Sure, Retro could have made new big deathmatch rooms, but they would have seemed half-assed and unconnected to the heart of the game. Unless the deathmatch is compelling, why have it? I don't really see the replay value in a poorly implemeneted mutli-player mode bolted on artificially to a stellar single-player experience.

Let me ask you this: let's say MP had deathmatch. And let's say it was nothing to sing home about. Would you get it then just because it had multi-player even though it paled to other multi-player FPS? At what cost "replay value"?

Well, whatever. If you want to simplify things that much, feel free. It's like saying Led Zeppelin and Limp Bizkit are both just "Rock" because they both have guitars and drums.

Like others have pointed out, MP's control scheme is more akin to zelda than a typical FPS. Most FPS games focus on shooting, and have adventuring and platforming as something you do inbetween the shooting. MP is the opposite.