As if the poster I have hanging didn't tell you, Metroid is a top franchise for me. Did Metroid Dread's focus on harkening back to the good ol' 2D days do the franchise justice?

I just realized I've been forgetting to link the written version, hehe: https://zyro-eg.com/2021/10/21/metroid-dread-review/

I'm going to reply by posing rhetorical questions, but it's a lot less aggressive than it sounds lol... But first, I think I need to clarify something with a little perspective: when I say I've re-tread this formula, it's because I love the formula and actively played games that mimicked it.  I've played ALL of the Metroid games, and repeatedly Metroid II (yes, on the Gameboy!) and Super Metroid in particular.  But since I also actively played games that mimicked it, this means I've played the Ori games, FIST, Bloodstained, etc. etc.  That is perhaps why I was able to hit 92% completion in barely 9.5 hours: I'm highly familiar with the design.  Having said that...

Do you really feel it's a truly "new entry" other than in name/lore when:

1. You conveniently lose all your moves at the start?

2. You once again have to get the charge beam, morph ball, power bombs, space jump, screw attack, grappling hook, speed boost, and gravity suit which are all re-used moves?

3. That the ending which I will not spoil is almost just the "2.5D" version of a previous retro entry, followed by that same entry's token timed event?

4. And that this does, indeed, follow the core maze-like, backtrack-access methods of its previous entries?

I will say that over the years, the only time people tell me I seem to focus on negatives is when they feel more positively about a game than I do (your core gripe is the same as Sony fans had about my Days Gone and Ghost of Tsushima reviews, haha!).  But my review was pretty distinctly clear on just about everything, and I think you might be a little hung up on the "retread" part.  The things I listed above are factual rather than based on opinion: there is a LOT this game does to focus on nostalgia more than it does new:

1. EMMI fights devolve into only two scenarios until you get the (unexplained on how "absorbing" an EMMI brain gives) Omega cannon: either run like hell; or stealth your way passed.  I never ended up even mentioning it because it was neither bad nor good.  It was a surprise to me that they focused so much on that in the trailers/marketing when in the grand scheme of things, it was actually quite minor and quickly fell into the background for me as I crossed those territories.

2. The only new moves are dashing, melee counters, and cloaking.  The dashing was nice, but hardly ground-breaking, the melee counters were mostly useful for bosses and feeling cool sometimes (most of the time, you could just blast your way through mobs, and you could actually do that with bosses, too), and the cloaking was really only for EMMIs.  I can tell these were carefully added in WITHOUT being a strong mechanic focus because it might ruin the core formula, and I am certain they didn't want to change things up too much.

And that last line is why we'll likely not agree about this: it is very clear to me they did NOT want to change things up too much!  They absolutely wanted to appease the nostalgia of the fanbase, otherwise they would have gone more like Fusion or Other M which both broke the mold far more.  Though, I wouldn't say the visuals were "revamped" when there really isn't a Switch reference point for this other than DKC: Tropical Freeze (which actually looks superior in many ways, tbh...).  As I said in the review, they did what they could with limited hardware power even if it just pails in comparison to just about anything modern.

In closing, though, my score shouldn't have been a surprise.  I think you put more negative connotation on "retread" than I did.  I was also very clear that the game's graphics looking terrible really isn't the devs fault.  I mean, they're working with 2015 hardware and probably would have been better off targeting 30fps so that they could pretty it up a bit.  The load times are already a bit questionable as it is for how little it's actually visually doing when MHRise exists, and even DKC:TF gives this game a run for its money (and even looks better at times because they're not using film grain and low lighting to hide things).

mZuzek Sums it up pretty well.

@ZyroXZ2 Framerate is way more important than graphics because a lower framerate would have been detrimental to the gameplay, which should always have top priority.

Just beat it. When these credits stop rolling, I'll watch the review. Excited to finally join the discussion!

No mention of the epic (and still forgettable) boys I fights? I was so satisfied after each one!

Personally, I enjoyed the game and I enjoyed the review. Not the best Metroidvania ever (Ori 1&2 and Hollow Knight do it better, imo) but it satisfied my itch. Metroid has been a favorite of mine since I was a kid wishing I could have my own NES. Followed the game from system to system buying each one at or close to launch. I can accept that it's not the industry king anymore--but I'm happy with what we got and I'm glad to still be alive to see the story "end".

“This isn’t a good looking game, period.”

Stopped watching the pretentious cringey fake accent skit at that part.

See you next time.

The time to make major changes to a franchise's formula is when its fanbase is growing tired of it, not when the series hadn't has a fully new entry in about 20 years. If after waiting this long I wasn't exploring a large maze with new abilities gradually unlocking more of it, I'd have been fucking pissed.

Well, Nintendo did change the formula for Paper Mario. There are new players who like the new formula, and old players who hate it and want their old franchise back. Changing the formula is always a risk, I wonder why so many people ask for it.

Because sometimes you get Resident Evil 4.