Shit taste. "Newer = better"? While there is a trend that developers learn from their mistakes and make better games, sometimes they try something new and fuck it all up.
>Super Metroid is broken and outdated
How so?
>Super Metroid doesn't even hold up compared to zero mission or fusion
ZM is boring because they tell you where to go all the time. Fusion is incredibly linear, and misses the point entirely. Both are good games, but they feel more like the newer Castlevania games than Metroid.
>MM > OoT
Both are bad, but I agree with you. The combat is boring, the puzzles are either "key on lock" or completely nonsensical, and there's hardly any exploration. Never understood the appeal of 3D Zelda.
>Castlevania? Only good one was 4, the old ones are too stiff and slow
Kek.
Oh no! No 8-directional whip that reaches across the entire screen? This game sucks!
Castlevania 1 and 3 are both great examples of good level design. The devs know that you're locked into your jumps, they know you can't move while whipping, and everything is designed around that. Each move is strategic, you can't just rush through without thinking.
>games like sotn are grindy and require collecting items just to progress on the other side of the castle
Grindy? Elaborate.
Also that's the whole point of a Metroid-style game. You get upgrades that unlock new paths. If the game is designed well, you don't have to travel too far to get to those paths. Haven't played SotN specifically but the DS ones don't have too much backtracking.
>crash, spyro
Haven't played either, but Crash just looks like a standard 3D platformer. What's wrong with it?
>turn based rpgs
Yeah, turn-based combat is usually pretty boring, but I think it's possible to make good turn-based RPGs.
>megaman games(X was good)
What are you even saying here? Both the classic and X series are great.
>doom1-3, sonic
All great games. Also, most Sonic games after Adventure 2 are total shit, which goes against your point.