What's in a Name?

So the other day, CP posted about Metroid and that got me thinking. A lot of video games aren't titled with future marketing in mind. Game producers are only thinking in the now.

Case in point: Metroid. In the original game for NES, a space bounty hunter named Samus Aran (who is nowhere near as cool as Spike Spiegel or Faye Valentine*) travels to the planet Zebes and fights space pirates and their leader, Mother Brain, in order to destroy the danger organism the pirates has hijacked, the silly jellyfish-like creatures called Metroids.

So you've just created the game and now you want to name it. You really have six directions you can go with the title. You can name it after: 1) the hero; 2) the villain; 3) the geographical locale; 4) the goal; 5) the primary action; or 6) the McGuffin device. So, here are some titular possibilities:

The Hero:

Samus. Samus Aran. Space Hunter.

The Villain:

Space Pirates! Mother Brain.

The Locale:

Zebes. The Battle for Zebes. Zebes: Deathtrap!

The Goal:

Plantary Quarantine. Planet Wipe.

The Primary Action:

Space Fight. Bounty Hunt. Space Hunt.

The McGuffin:

Metroids. Bio-Hazard. Drainers. Space Jellyfish.

For a single game, any of these titles are acceptable (if not great). The problem comes when producers opt for a sequel. Or worse, sequels. This is where a game's title can become a liability. Take, for instance, Metroid.

The game is named after the McGuffin, the meaningless detail that gets the ball rolling. So what happens when you want to make a sequel? You have to shoehorn in the device again, because you're almost forced to rep the brand in your sequel. 'Cause nobody's gonna know that Space Hunter II is the sequel to a game called Metroid. So you're stuck with Metroid 2. And now, you've got to stick the dumb little things in every single episode of the game.

Poor Samus. She's basically stuck fighting against the same villain over and over and over again. All because a publisher didn't think.

And lest you think that stupid names are rare, here's a couple more:

The Legend of Zelda

Named after the game's trophy, Zelda, who you don't ever see until the credits roll. It would be like if Super Mario Bros was called Peach. Legend of Link makes more sense.

Grand Theft Auto

Probably made sense at the beginning, but by GTA: San Andreas, you're really not doing enough auto thieving for that to be even considered your principle activity.

Myst

Granted that in the first sequel, they called it Riven: Sequel to Myst, but in later installments, they just call it things like Myst III: Exile or Myst IV: Revelations (neither of which games have anything to do with the island of Myst).

Contra

Contra had always mystified me as well. I suspected that it was meant to capitalize on the vaguely recent Iran-contra mess. But the game had little to do with Central America (the heroes were what? American mercs fighting off an alien menace?) or illicit arms sales. And by the time Super Contra rolled around, none of those kids in the target audience probably even knew what Contra ever stood for - an example of simulacra (the copy becoming its own original).

So yeah, I'm just sayin' is all.

*note: or even Ed or Ein for that matter.