When it comes to analyzing the rhetoric of games, one must go beyond the visual and auditory. As Bogost points out, the imagined systems the player inhabits are explored procedurally “by imposing sets of rules that create particular possibility spaces for play”. In a sense, the freedom of play is defined and facilitated by the rules and restrictions that create the play space.
Ostensibly, each of the original Metroid titles tell the same story. Bounty hunter Samus Aran is contracted by the Galactic Federation to investigate an alien threat. Isolated in an alien world, she fights for survival as she explores endless interconnected labyrinths. Obviously, these are not the same games, but why? The answer, as I will explore, comes from how the game allows the player to play. Though each of the games looks nearly identical–even the 8-bit NES version draws from the same inspiration—and the formula untouched, each game feels different.
Horror is a tone aspired for in each title, but the way it is conveyed varies. In Understanding Video Games as Emotional Experiences, Aki Jarvinen Identifies the ways in which game systems ellicit emotions from the player. This is in part because the outcome of play is unknown to the player, creating tension. For Super Metroid, this tension comes largely from exploring unknown territory. With no direction, the player must make their way through the game on their own. This sense of being lost creates feelings of isolation and confusion. Fusion is much more linear though. The level design is much easier to navigate and your progress is facilitated by waypoints on the map and a narrative largely told to you by a computer that briefs you on your missions. This “on rails” gameplay removes the suspense created from getting lost in exploration, but allows for new emotions to be elicited. As stated earlier, the parameters of a play space define the experience of playing.
