Close Menu
NERDBOT
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram YouTube
    Subscribe
    NERDBOT
    • News
      • Reviews
    • Movies & TV
    • Comics
    • Gaming
    • Collectibles
    • Science & Tech
    • Culture
    • Nerd Voices
    • About Us
      • Join the Team at Nerdbot
    NERDBOT
    Home»News»Kotaku Possibly Sabotaging “Metroid Dread” Sales with Emulator Links
    News

    Kotaku Possibly Sabotaging “Metroid Dread” Sales with Emulator Links

    Heath AndrewsBy Heath AndrewsOctober 10, 20217 Mins Read
    Share
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest Reddit WhatsApp Email

    Nintendo’s “Metroid” series has a complicated history between its fans and the company that created it. Despite debuting in 1986, the series has only had 15 games released; 10 if you don’t count any remakes, spin-offs, or the “Metroid Prime” compilation. Much of this is supposedly due to the series having more success in America than its native Japan. It has taken a decade of waiting for an original, mainline installment in the series to come along. In 2021, Nintendo finally released “Metroid Dread.” A day later, website Kotaku ran an article about how effective PIRATING “Metroid Dread” is, and the benefits of doing so.

    To give Kotaku credit where credit is due, they have run some pretty good pieces in the past that gave voice to workers being exploited and burnt out in the gaming industry. Their piece on “Anthem,” for example is an incredible slice of journalism. Author Jason Schreier (also former news editor for the site) should be proud of it. The point of that piece was clear; to showcase the failures of a big business in delivering a product while simultaneously putting their workforce under immense physical and mental pressure.

    So what’s the point of running an article titled “Metroid Dread Is Already Running On Switch Emulators?” Or, was that even the title to begin with? We can see two other titles clearly at work:

    The URL for the article shows that the word “Great” was originally part of the title, while some of the meta data goes so far as to say that the game is playable in 4K already thanks to emulators. These other two titles seem to be ringing endorsements of why it’s better to play a ROM of the game on an emulator, than a cartridge version on an actual Nintendo Switch.

    Does the content of the article also suggest this? Yes, yes it does. This is not because it outright states that you should, but because of what information the author chose to include; information that would otherwise not be newsworthy. So let’s really break this down by analyzing parts of the article.

    Is this piece newsworthy to begin with?

    Yes and no. The yes part of this relates to how there is something to be said about a potential piracy problem for Nintendo. If their games are able to be run in better quality through an emulator as opposed to native hardware, then that does represent a potential problem for the Big N. And while the article suggests that this is actually the point of why its being written, that logic isn’t consistent with the other information presented.

    For starters, why is this article just about “Metroid Dread?” Yes, it’s new and search engine optimization would be helped by making something about the recently released title, but other Switch games are emulated too. So if this is about a bigger problem for Nintendo, where’s the overall part of it and not just the “Metroid Dread” part? Where’s the discussion about “The Legend of Zelda: Link’s Awakening” and how maybe its frame rate issues were fixed in emulation? What about “Astral Chain?”

    Why, if this article is about Nintendo’s emulation problem, does it describe in detail how much better two specific emulators run the game, WITH LINKS to them? Yes, you should cite your sources, but when you’re covering a subject like this, you don’t provide a link that helps advocate for piracy. It would be like writing an article about how a movie leaked online, and then providing the torrent link to it as proof.

    But it gets even more ridiculous from there. The author even goes on to state that even though there were some reported bugs in running the game on one specific emulator, you can fix it with an update to the latest version. How is that newsworthy or essential to the point of Nintendo having a potential piracy problem? All you’ve done is further advertised for that emulator and why people should use it.

    It all culminated in this line:

    “It certainly seems a shame that the legitimate versions of the game, its art style, and visuals, don’t look as good as when it’s running in 4K.”

    Zack Zwiezen – Kotaku

    What actually seems to be a shame is the author thought this was an acceptable thing to say in a piece of journalism about Nintendo’s issues with emulation. This sounds like a ringing endorsement of using unofficial software to play a game otherwise why would you continue to point out how much better something looks when pirating it? Again, it’s like writing an article about a film leaking online only to point out where you can go to get it AND saying how much better it will look if you do go out and get it without paying for it!

    And the cherry on top of all of this is the article update that was released earlier today that tries to say that this piece was not intended to promote piracy and how that interpretation is regretted. But then it ends with this sentence:

    “We believe our readers are intelligent adults capable of making such choices for themselves, independently of us.”

    – Kotaku

    First of all, that sounds incredibly condescending and belittling. Second, until this article came out, some people may not have even known there WAS A CHOICE! What the article just did was say, “You could purchase the game legally, or you may not already know this, but did you know that if you pirate it and play it on an emulator it will look a lot better than it ever did for free? We’re not saying what you should do, but you’re an intelligent adult who can make choices for themselves. You can do this independently of us and the information we just told you about, that you may not have known before we told it to you.”

    Why was that article written? We can’t say for sure because we’re not in the author’s mind. If it was to point out Nintendo’s emulation issues, then why did it go into such massive specifics about how much better the emulation is including how to fix the emulation in one case? The article instead reads as if the author has an issue with the Nintendo Switch and is airing them out under the guise of journalism.

    Some people may point out that Nintendo, as a massive corporation, doesn’t need to be defended and any loss of revenue like this would not hurt them. Well, it’s true in a sense that Nintendo does NOT need to be defended and loss of revenue from this would ultimately not sink the company. However, that is a gross oversimplification of the problem for “Metroid” fans.

    The “Metroid” series as a whole has a huge worldwide fanbase but a surprisingly small one in Japan, where the series has rarely sold as well as it did in America. This is allegedly one of the reasons why it has taken so long for a new mainline “Metroid” game to be released; poor sales. So even though Nintendo doesn’t need to be defended, the “Metroid” series as a whole, and the developers, artists, and other designers who want to work on this series, absolutely do need to be defended.

    So what was the point of this article you’ve been reading? Was it meant to be a fanboy defense of “Metroid?” No. What Kotaku published was irresponsible and a slap in the face to journalistic integrity. That’s what needs to be defended more than anything right now; journalism. There’s already far too much clickbait in the world alongside fluff pieces that have nothing to say or serve no purpose other than to try and drive up ad revenue. The last thing we need is more shoddy journalism, especially from someplace like Kotaku that is fully capable of doing work that is so much better than this.

    When you can do better you should push yourself to do better, and when other people know you can do better, they should push you as well. This is your push Kotaku. Do better.

    Do You Want to Know More?

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Email
    Previous ArticleFirst Look: Wanna See Timothée Chalamet as Willy Wonka?
    Next Article iPhone Candy Dispenser Case for Those with a Sweet Tooth
    Heath Andrews

    Heath Andrews has been a student of pop culture ever since he found himself to be the only student in 3rd grade who regularly watched "Get Smart" on Nick-At-Nite. Ever since then he's been engrossed in way too much media with a growing collection of music, books, comics, TV on DVD box sets, and a video game collection that could rival a brick and mortar store. Prior to writing for Nerdbot he's written for Review You, MyAnimeList, and various advertising companies.

    Related Posts

    "Life of a Showgirl," 2025

    Taylor Swift Sued Over Trademark For “The Life of a Showgirl”

    March 30, 2026

    Best Movies in March 2026: Hidden Gems and Quick Reviews

    March 29, 2026

    Mark Wahlberg Launches 4AM Club Challenge YouTube Series

    March 26, 2026

    The Boys Trigger Warning VR Game Launches on Meta Quest 3

    March 26, 2026
    "The Shrouds," 2024

    “The Shrouds,” SeeMeRot, & The History of Corpse Cameras

    March 25, 2026

    “They Will Kill You” A Violent, Blood-Splattering Good Time [review]

    March 24, 2026
    • Latest
    • News
    • Movies
    • TV
    • Reviews
    Most studios searching for a match-3 level design company are looking for five different things. Some need levels built from scratch, others require a live game rebalanced before churn compounds, and some demand a content pipeline that won't fall behind. These are different problems, and they map to multiple types of companies. The mistake most studios make is treating "match-3 level design" as a single service category and evaluating every company against the same criteria. A specialist who excels at diagnosing retention problems in live games is the wrong hire for a studio that needs 300 levels built in 2 months. A full-cycle agency that builds from concept to launch isn't the right call for a publisher who already has engineering and art in place and just needs the level design layer covered. This guide maps 7 companies for match-3 level design services to the specific problem each one is built to solve. Find your problem first. The right company follows from there. What Match-3 Level Design Services Cover The term "level design" gets used loosely in this market, and this causes bad hires. A studio that excels at building levels from scratch operates dissimilarly from one that diagnoses why a live game's difficulty curve is losing players (even if both describe their service the same way on a website). Match-3 level design breaks into four distinct services, each requiring different expertise, different tooling, and a different type of partner. Level production — designing and building playable levels configured to a game's mechanics, obstacle set, and difficulty targets. This is what most studios mean when they say they need a level design partner, and it's the service with the widest range of quality in the market. Difficulty balancing and rebalancing — using win rates, attempt counts, and churn data to calibrate difficulty across hundreds of levels. Plus, this includes adjusting live content when the data shows a problem. Studios that only do level production typically don't offer this. Studios that do it well treat it as a standalone service. Live-ops level design covers the ongoing content pipeline a live match-3 game requires after launch (seasonal events, new level batches, limited-time challenges) sustained at volume and consistent in quality. This is a throughput and process problem as much as a design problem. Full-cycle development bundles level design inside a complete production engagement: mechanics, art, engineering, monetization, QA, and launch. Level design is one function among many. Depth varies by studio. Knowing which service you need before you evaluate a single company cuts the list in half and prevents the most common mistake in this market: hiring a full-cycle agency to solve a level design problem, or hiring a specialist to build a product from scratch. The List of Companies for Match-3 Level Design Services The companies below were selected based on verified credentials, named shipped titles where available, and the specific service each one is built to deliver. They are ranked by how well their capabilities match the service types outlined above. A specialist who does one thing exceptionally well sits above a generalist who does many things adequately. SolarSpark | Pure-play match-3 level design specialist SolarSpark is a remote-first studio built exclusively around casual puzzle game production. With 7+ years in the genre and 2,000+ levels shipped across live titles including Monopoly Match, Matchland, and KitchenMasters, it is the only company on this list that does nothing but match-3 level design. Level design services: Level production, difficulty curve planning, fail-rate balancing, obstacle and booster logic design, live-ops pipeline, competitor benchmarking, product audit and retention diagnostic. Verdict: The strongest pure specialist on this list. When level design is the specific constraint, SolarSpark is the right choice. What they do well: Every level is built around difficulty curves, fail/win balance, obstacle sequencing, and booster logic, measured against targets before delivery. Competitor benchmarking is available as a standalone service, mapping your game's difficulty curve and monetization structure against current top performers with specific, actionable output. Where they fit: Studios with a live or in-development game that need a dedicated level design pipeline, a retention diagnostic, or a one-off audit before soft launch. Honest caveat: SolarSpark does not handle art, engineering, or full-cycle development. Logic Simplified | Unity-first development with analytics and monetization built in Logic Simplified specializes in Unity-powered casual and puzzle games, with match-3 explicitly in their service portfolio. Operating for over a decade with clients across multiple countries, the studio positions itself around data-informed development: analytics, A/B testing, and monetization are integrated into the production process. Level design services: Level production, difficulty progression design, obstacle and blocker placement, booster and power-up integration, A/B tested level balancing, customer journey mapping applied to level flow. Verdict: A credible full-cycle option for studios that want analytics and monetization treated as design inputs from day one, not as post-launch additions. What they do well: Logic Simplified builds analytics and player behavior tracking into the design process. Their Unity expertise is deep, and their stated MVP timeline of approximately three months is competitive at their price point. India-based rates make full-cycle development accessible without requiring a Western agency budget. Where they fit: Studios building a first match-3 title that needs the full production chain handled by a single vendor, with analytics built in from the start. Honest caveat: No publicly named match-3 titles with verifiable App Store links appear in their portfolio. Ask for specific live game references and retention data during the first conversation before committing. Cubix | US-based full-cycle match-3 development with fixed-cost engagement Cubix is a California-based game development company with a dedicated match-3 service line covering level design, tile behavior, booster systems, obstacles, UI/UX, and full production on Unity and Unreal Engine. 30+ in-house animators can cover the full scope of puzzle game production. Level design services: Level production, combo and difficulty balancing, blocker and locked tile placement, move-limit challenge design, booster and power-up integration, scoring system design. Verdict: A viable full-cycle option for studios that need a Western-based partner with transparent fixed-cost pricing and documented match-3 capability. What they do well: Cubix covers the full production chain in one engagement, with strong visual production backed by an in-house animation team. Their fixed-cost model is a practical differentiator for studios that have been burned by scope creep on previous outsourcing contracts. Staff augmentation is also available for studios that need talent to plug into an existing pipeline. Where they fit: Studios that want a US-based full-cycle partner with predictable budgets, cross-platform delivery across iOS, Android, browsers, and PC, and a single vendor to own the concept through launch. Honest caveat: Named shipped match-3 titles are not prominently listed in their public portfolio. This is a verification gap worth closing during vetting, not a disqualifier on its own. Galaxy4Games | Data-driven match-3 development with published retention case studies Galaxy4Games is a game development studio with 15+ years of operating history, building mobile and cross-platform games across casual, RPG, and arcade genres. Match-3 is a named service line. What distinguishes them from most studios on this list is a level of public transparency about retention data. Their case studies document real D1 and D7 numbers from shipped titles. Level design services: Level production, difficulty curve development, booster and obstacle design, progression system design, LiveOps level content, A/B testing integration, analytics-based balancing. Verdict: The most transparent full-cycle option in terms of real retention data. For studios that want to see numbers before they hire, Galaxy4Games offers evidence most studios keep private. What they do well: Their Puzzle Fight case study documents D1 retention growing to 30% through iteration. Their modular system reduces development time and costs through reusable components, and their LiveOps infrastructure covers analytics, event management, and content updates as a planned post-launch function. Where they fit: Studios that need a data-informed full-cycle match-3 partner and want to evaluate a studio's methodology through published results. Honest caveat: Galaxy4Games covers a broad genre range (casual, RPG, arcade, educational, and Web3), which means match-3 is one of several service lines rather than a primary focus. Zatun | Award-winning level design and production studio with 18 years of operating history Zatun is an indie game studio and work-for-hire partner operating since 2007, with game level design listed as a dedicated named service alongside full-cycle development, art production, and co-development. With 250+ game titles and 300+ clients across AAA studios and indie teams, this agency has one of the longest track records. Level design services: Level production, difficulty progression design, level pacing and goal mapping, game design documentation, Unity level design, Unreal level design, level concept art. Verdict: A reliable, experienced production partner with a long track record and genuine level design depth. What they do well: Zatun's level design service covers difficulty progression, pacing maps, goal documentation, and execution in Unity and Unreal. Their 18 years of operation across 250+ titles gives them a reference library of what works across genres. Their work-for-hire model means they can step in at specific production stages without requiring ownership of the full project. Where they fit: Studios that need a specific level design or art production function covered without a full project handoff. This can be useful for teams mid-production that need additional capacity on a defined scope. Honest caveat: No publicly named match-3 titles appear in Zatun's portfolio, their verified work spans AAA and strategy genres; match-3 specific experience should be confirmed directly before engaging. Gamecrio | Full-cycle mobile match-3 development with AI-driven difficulty adaptation Gamecrio is a mobile game development studio with offices in India and the UK, covering match-3 development as an explicit service line alongside VR, arcade, casino, and web-based game development. Their stated differentiator within match-3 is AI-driven difficulty adaptation. Thus, levels adjust based on player skill. Level design services: Level production, AI-driven difficulty adaptation, booster and power-up design, progression system design, obstacle balancing, social and competitive feature integration, monetization-integrated level design. Verdict: An accessible full-cycle option with a technically interesting differentiator in AI-driven balancing. What they do well: Gamecrio builds monetization architecture into the level design process: IAP placement, rewarded ad integration, battle passes, and subscription models are considered alongside difficulty curves and obstacle sequencing. The AI-driven difficulty adaptation is a genuine technical capability that more established studios in this market have been slower to implement. Where they fit: Early-stage studios that need a full-cycle match-3 build with monetization designed in from the first level. Honest caveat: No publicly named shipped match-3 titles are listed on their site — request live App Store links and verifiable retention data before committing to any engagement. Juego Studios | Full-cycle and co-development partner with puzzle genre credentials and flexible engagement entry points Founded in 2013, Juego Studios is a global full-cycle game development and co-development partner with offices in India, USA, UK, and KSA. With 250+ delivered projects and clients including Disney, Sony, and Tencent, the studio covers game development, game art, and LiveOps across genres. Battle Gems is their verifiable genre credential. Level design services: Level production, difficulty balancing, progression system design, booster and mechanic integration, LiveOps level content, milestone-based level delivery, co-development level design support. Verdict: A well-resourced, credible full-cycle partner with a flexible engagement model that reduces the risk of committing to the wrong studio. What they do well: Juego's engagement model is flexible: studios can start with a risk-free 2-week test sprint, then scale to 20+ team members across modules without recruitment overhead. Three engagement models (outstaffing, dedicated teams, and managed outsourcing) let publishers choose how much control they retain versus how much they hand off. LiveOps is a named service line covering analytics-driven content updates and retention optimization after launch. Where they fit: Studios that need a full-cycle or co-development partner for a match-3 build and want to test the relationship before committing to full project scope. Honest caveat: Puzzle and match-3 are part of a broad genre portfolio that also spans VR, Web3, and enterprise simulations. How to Use This List The seven companies above cover the full range of what the match-3 level design market offers in 2026. The quality range is real, and the right choice depends on which service type matches the problem you're trying to solve. If your game is live and retention is the problem, you need a specialist who can diagnose and fix a difficulty curve. If you're building from zero and need art, engineering, and level design bundled, a full-cycle partner is the right call and the specialist is the wrong one. The honest caveat pattern across several entries in this list reflects a real market condition: verified, named match-3 credentials are rarer than studios' self-descriptions suggest. The companies that couldn't point to a live title with an App Store link were flagged honestly. Asking for live game references, retention data, and a first conversation before any commitment are things you can do before signing with any studio on this list.

    The Roland VG3: A Compact Powerhouse for Professional Print & Cut

    April 1, 2026
    Affordable Section 8 Living: Browse Houses & Apartments Easily

    Affordable Section 8 Living: Browse Houses & Apartments Easily

    April 1, 2026
    The True Value of Comprehensive Fire Protection

    The Fire Protection Weak Spot in Sydney’s Older Buildings

    April 1, 2026

    Carbon Craft Elegance: The Emergence of Modern Carbon Fiber Watches

    April 1, 2026
    "Life of a Showgirl," 2025

    Taylor Swift Sued Over Trademark For “The Life of a Showgirl”

    March 30, 2026

    Best Movies in March 2026: Hidden Gems and Quick Reviews

    March 29, 2026

    Mark Wahlberg Launches 4AM Club Challenge YouTube Series

    March 26, 2026
    "The Shrouds," 2024

    “The Shrouds,” SeeMeRot, & The History of Corpse Cameras

    March 25, 2026

    Big Trouble in Little China Gets an Honest Trailer Makeover

    March 31, 2026

    Gina Gershon Turned Down a Role in “Friday the 13th Part 2”

    March 31, 2026
    Nas "Hip Hop Is Dead," 2006

    Nas Will Produce Eli Roth’s New Movie “Ice Cream Man”

    March 31, 2026

    The Housemaid Sequel Confirms Potentially Horrible Release Date

    March 30, 2026

    SNL Ryan Gosling Wedding Traditions Skit Is His Funniest Yet

    March 31, 2026
    “Malcolm in the Middle: Life’s Still Unfair,” 2026

    “Malcolm in the Middle” Could Get a Full-Fledged Reboot

    March 30, 2026

    Survivor 50 Episode 6 Predictions: Who Will Be Voted Off Next?

    March 27, 2026

    “Star Trek: Starfleet Academy” to End With 2nd Season

    March 23, 2026

    Best Movies in March 2026: Hidden Gems and Quick Reviews

    March 29, 2026

    “They Will Kill You” A Violent, Blood-Splattering Good Time [review]

    March 24, 2026

    “Project Hail Mary” Familiar But Triumphant Sci-Fi Adventure [review]

    March 14, 2026

    “The Bride” An Overly Ambitious Creature Feature Reimagining [review]

    March 10, 2026
    Check Out Our Latest
      • Product Reviews
      • Reviews
      • SDCC 2021
      • SDCC 2022
    Related Posts

    None found

    NERDBOT
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram YouTube
    Nerdbot is owned and operated by Nerds! If you have an idea for a story or a cool project send us a holler on Editors@Nerdbot.com

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.