I've just never really had the patience or interest in all the backtracking. I'd love a very linear Metroid though, like Castlevania 1, 4, Haunted Castle, etc. Haha, maybe one day!
One of my absolute favourites on the NES, it's very gratifying to read so many Substack posts lately that give this game its flowers; all the YouTube videos I've watched on it seem to beat it to a bloody pulp which is a real shame.
I owned this one. It's a game I have a complex relationship with, as someone who loves Metroidvanias to this day.
1. From the beginning, the atmosphere and music always grabbed me. It's the sort of game where I felt like there was a lot "there", even if I was only able to scratch the surface.
2. Nonetheless, I never got very far and didn't have THAT much fun with it. I wouldn't say I outright regretted the purchase like with a few NES games (*cough*, Ghosts n' Goblins), but it was definitely one of my least favorites in my collection. I didn't use/have any guides for it. I wasn't prepared to construct a map on paper. I don't think I ever defeated a boss. I only found some very minor upgrades. I don't know that I ever bothered to record a password.
3. I played around a fair bit with the "Justin Bailey" code. I think that was probably a majority of my playtime, once I learned about it. I would just wander the map, fighting enemies. Pretty sure at some point I eventually DID locate Mother Brain, but beating her required Game Genie. But all of that felt cheap to me, especially by later childhood and the end of the NES lifecycle.
4. Nonetheless, for reasons I can't fully recall, I KNEW, just KNEW, that Super Metroid was going to be awesome. And I was right! I reserved/pre-ordered it, which I only remember doing for one other SNES game: FF6. And in that case, FF4 was one of my most beloved SNES games, so the excitement about FF6 was a no-brainer. But how did I know Super Metroid would be awesome when I was so ambivalent towards the original? I just can't piece it together.
5. Unlike a game like Solomon's Key, which was too hard for a kid in 1987 but a fun challenge for an adult, for me Metroid was too hard for a kid in 1987 and ALSO not fun as an adult: far too many games in this genre I would rather be playing.
2. Not sure where I played the original Metroid growing up, but I did not care for it either back then. It felt too large and overwhelming. I hated feeling like I didn't know where I was going in games as a kid.
3. That makes sense. That code was a lifesaver for many.
4. You were definitely right! Not sure how you knew, but good call!
5. I think Metroid is a fun piece of gaming history, but I get why people would disagree with that. Pretty much every subsequent Metroid (and Metroidvania) game is better, but it's cool to see where the series/concept started. Especially given the 1986 timeframe in Japan, which just seems shockingly early to make a game this ambitious.
What's even crazier is that Nintendo of America released both Metroid AND The Legend of Zelda in the same month in North America. I would love to know their reasoning behind that.
I can agree that it's of historical interest, even if that in itself doesn't make me want to play it. But maybe if I hadn't grown up on it, I would have more interest in exploring it for historical reasons.
I also see what you're saying about Metroid's ambition, I agree that it's an ambitious game, but when I think on it Metroid's ambition doesn't stand out as being so exceptional to me. I would say Rygar, also 1986, is ambitious too. Multiple perspectives, RPG mechanics.
When I think "ambitious NES Metroidvania", what I really think of is Legacy of the Wizard. Which came out a year later in Japan.
Back to Solomon's Key: that game is rough around the edges, but still worth playing in part because there are very few games quite like it. No one really ever made a major upgrade of the concept. If they did, maybe we would look back on it more like Metroid.
Then there's Super Mario Bros. 1. Which is a game that is still really fun to play in 2025, EVEN THOUGH it's in a genre that has been done to death and it has been repeatedly exceeded in scope and polish by later games in the series.
Which maybe is just another way of calling out how special Mario is. Metroid is not that way.
Definitely a change for Nintendo from their more cartoony games. Even Zelda was lighthearted in spots. Metroid showed that Nintendo could do games with more serious settings and even with hardware limitations of the time, more dramatic stories…
I've just never really had the patience or interest in all the backtracking. I'd love a very linear Metroid though, like Castlevania 1, 4, Haunted Castle, etc. Haha, maybe one day!
Yeah, if you don't like backtracking, any Metroidvania is not for you!
One of my absolute favourites on the NES, it's very gratifying to read so many Substack posts lately that give this game its flowers; all the YouTube videos I've watched on it seem to beat it to a bloody pulp which is a real shame.
Thanks for posting.
You’re welcome, thanks for reading!
Metroid is vibes. It really captures its alien setting. Dark Nintendo is good Nintendo.
Yeah, Nintendo nailed the atmosphere with the first game.
I owned this one. It's a game I have a complex relationship with, as someone who loves Metroidvanias to this day.
1. From the beginning, the atmosphere and music always grabbed me. It's the sort of game where I felt like there was a lot "there", even if I was only able to scratch the surface.
2. Nonetheless, I never got very far and didn't have THAT much fun with it. I wouldn't say I outright regretted the purchase like with a few NES games (*cough*, Ghosts n' Goblins), but it was definitely one of my least favorites in my collection. I didn't use/have any guides for it. I wasn't prepared to construct a map on paper. I don't think I ever defeated a boss. I only found some very minor upgrades. I don't know that I ever bothered to record a password.
3. I played around a fair bit with the "Justin Bailey" code. I think that was probably a majority of my playtime, once I learned about it. I would just wander the map, fighting enemies. Pretty sure at some point I eventually DID locate Mother Brain, but beating her required Game Genie. But all of that felt cheap to me, especially by later childhood and the end of the NES lifecycle.
4. Nonetheless, for reasons I can't fully recall, I KNEW, just KNEW, that Super Metroid was going to be awesome. And I was right! I reserved/pre-ordered it, which I only remember doing for one other SNES game: FF6. And in that case, FF4 was one of my most beloved SNES games, so the excitement about FF6 was a no-brainer. But how did I know Super Metroid would be awesome when I was so ambivalent towards the original? I just can't piece it together.
5. Unlike a game like Solomon's Key, which was too hard for a kid in 1987 but a fun challenge for an adult, for me Metroid was too hard for a kid in 1987 and ALSO not fun as an adult: far too many games in this genre I would rather be playing.
1. Indeed
2. Not sure where I played the original Metroid growing up, but I did not care for it either back then. It felt too large and overwhelming. I hated feeling like I didn't know where I was going in games as a kid.
3. That makes sense. That code was a lifesaver for many.
4. You were definitely right! Not sure how you knew, but good call!
5. I think Metroid is a fun piece of gaming history, but I get why people would disagree with that. Pretty much every subsequent Metroid (and Metroidvania) game is better, but it's cool to see where the series/concept started. Especially given the 1986 timeframe in Japan, which just seems shockingly early to make a game this ambitious.
What's even crazier is that Nintendo of America released both Metroid AND The Legend of Zelda in the same month in North America. I would love to know their reasoning behind that.
I can agree that it's of historical interest, even if that in itself doesn't make me want to play it. But maybe if I hadn't grown up on it, I would have more interest in exploring it for historical reasons.
I also see what you're saying about Metroid's ambition, I agree that it's an ambitious game, but when I think on it Metroid's ambition doesn't stand out as being so exceptional to me. I would say Rygar, also 1986, is ambitious too. Multiple perspectives, RPG mechanics.
When I think "ambitious NES Metroidvania", what I really think of is Legacy of the Wizard. Which came out a year later in Japan.
Back to Solomon's Key: that game is rough around the edges, but still worth playing in part because there are very few games quite like it. No one really ever made a major upgrade of the concept. If they did, maybe we would look back on it more like Metroid.
Then there's Super Mario Bros. 1. Which is a game that is still really fun to play in 2025, EVEN THOUGH it's in a genre that has been done to death and it has been repeatedly exceeded in scope and polish by later games in the series.
Which maybe is just another way of calling out how special Mario is. Metroid is not that way.
Definitely a change for Nintendo from their more cartoony games. Even Zelda was lighthearted in spots. Metroid showed that Nintendo could do games with more serious settings and even with hardware limitations of the time, more dramatic stories…
Agreed, Metroid was a more mature outing for Nintendo at the time.
Great introduction! I recently finished this one and it was a great play through, despite the Mother Brain beat downs.
Thanks John! I really enjoyed your post on Metroid as well. It is still very fun, albeit frustrating towards the end.