Opinion – Why Nintendo Won’t Give Us 2D Metroid And Other Sequels We Want

Every year when E3 rolls around, analysts and critics start whispering about the possibility that this year could be the year that Nintendo drops a new Metroid game on us. Most years we walk away disappointed, but this year Nintendo actually did reveal a new Metroid title. Sadly, fans still walked away disappointed. In fact, Nintendo’s fanbase was so outraged over this sport-like mini game that over 20,000 people signed a petition asking Nintendo to cancel the game entirely. But this probably won't force Nintendo to give us the Metroid sequel we've been yearning for – not because Nintendo hates its fans – but because the company doesn't know what to do with the series. Nintendo has never been one for iterative sequels, and if it can't come up with a new angle for a franchise it usually doesn't make a game. The reason that we don't see more sequels to many of our favorite Nintendo titles is because the publisher has become over-reliant on the idea of a good gimmick.

Every time Nintendo releases a new console, it almost always has some unique technological trick that sets it apart from the crowd. Nintendo likes to be unique. This shouldn't be surprising, because Nintendo doesn't think of itself as a video game developer. Before the company even starting making electronic games, it was producing playing cards and other gizmos for a fickle toy market. When the NES first hit the market, the company packaged the system with a robot companion. When sales of the hyper-popular Game Boy started to wane, Nintendo released a "portable," faux virtual reality system that was rough on gamers' eyes. When gamers around the world were getting excited about playing Blu-ray discs on their home consoles, Nintendo unveiled a strange remote that allowed people to play virtual tennis by waving their arm around. Gimmicks are the way Nintendo does business. But maybe it's time for Nintendo to stop viewing itself as a toy company, and start seeing itself as a producer of entertainment.

The word gimmick is a bit of a loaded term, and many people view it as a negative thing. But I think there is a fine line between a gimmick and an innovation. Nintendo is the king of both. A lot of companies experiment with gimmicks – look at Microsoft's floundering efforts with the Kinect – but Nintendo has a better track record with its technical oddities because it does a better job crafting software that showcases its system's unique features. For example, at one point in The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass for the DS, you have to close the actual system in order to "press" a new copy of a map. That blew my mind the first time I did it. Nintendo’s MotionPlus technology made Skyward Swords' combat feel that much more visceral, and Pikmin 3 felt a lot better when using the Wii’s motion-sensing nunchuck. Nintendo's unique approach to gaming is why it has amassed so many fans over the decades.

Unfortunately, as often as Nintendo succeeds in incorporating the unique aspects of its systems into the games it makes, it also sometimes fails. In fact, it feels as though Nintendo is increasingly shoehorning gimmicks into its games because it feels a need to be different. The default controls for Nintendo's recent shooter Splatoon require players to use the gyroscope in their Wii U remote to aim – a feature that most people turn off immediately. A similar phenomenon can be seen in the recent Mario Kart games, which offered little-used motion steering. And how many people turned off the 3D on any game on the 3DS after about five minutes? What does it say about a feature if most players are compelled not to use it? Unfortunately, Nintendo feels like it needs these elements to set itself apart.

This fact really hit home for me earlier this month when I played Star Fox Zero at E3. Star Fox has long been one of my favorite Nintendo franchises, and I've longed for Nintendo to return this series to its classic roots for years. Unfortunately, this new title left me with some mixed feelings. I love the classic on-rails feel, but the default controls require you to look into the Wii U's second screen to fine tune your aiming. This feels awkward and is yet another feature that I'll probably turn off when I play the final version.

The sad thing is that Nintendo doesn't need gimmicks to make great games. Three of the highest profile titles released so far this year are Batman: Arkham Knight, The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, and Bloodborne. Those games don't rely on offbeat motion controls or intricate second screen functionality. In fact, much of what is seen in those titles was pioneered years ago. Those games succeed by taking an established design and polishing it to the nth degree. I wish Nintendo would take note of this: Games don't always have to push the innovation envelope to be fun; most of the time they can just be a lot of fun.

Unfortunately, Nintendo thinks it needs a unique gimmick before it can start working on a sequel. And if Nintendo can't think of a new direction for an established series, it just puts it in a closet. I think that’s why we haven’t seen a 2D Metroid, F-Zero, or Earthbound title in years. That’s why we waited 20 years between Kid Icarus games and nearly 18 years for a true Star Fox sequel. But maybe it's time for Nintendo to change its tactics. Nintendo needs to stop forcing us to use motion controls, to stop figuring out a new gimmick for every game that it produces. It's time for Nintendo to focus on what it does best: making great games.