Forums

Topic: Ignore the Leaks: How Would You Like To See Star Fox Revived?

Nintendo Switch 2 is finally here, check out our guide: Nintendo Switch 2 Guide: Ultimate Resource.

Posts 81 to 96 of 96

NeonPizza

[Edited by NeonPizza]

NeonPizza

dew12333

@Megas75 Not your desired way forward then sir, and I don't think once on a handheld is enough. I would take a new game but I would want it to be 'on rails', and to include a achievement system for completing levels for high multipliers./combos/score. Make it more of a stylized shooter ( like pn.03), I wouldn't want it to be open world.

dew12333

StuTwo

StuTwo

Switch Friend Code: SW-6338-4534-2507

Holdthepineapple

StuTwo wrote:

There's a logic that they should just do that as a loss leader for the Nintendo fans. Star Fox 64 is one of those games that people play over and over and over again once a year. That audience would take another and it would help lock them in to the Nintendo ecosystem.

The question is "Is that audience big enough?" I don't know. I think even under ideal situations, I would expect a new Star Fox to sell between 2 and 4 million in a year at best. So roughly between what the first Mario+Rabbids and Skyward Sword HD, so comparable with games like Pikmin 4, New Pokemon Snap and Metroid Dread (which is the franchise I feel Star Fox is closest to). Maybe I'm wrong, and it'll be an even bigger but I doubt it. It's telling that the only franchise that was represented in the original Smash bros with even a smaller presence on Reddit than Star Fox is F-Zero (even the Mother base is slightly larger and the best they can hope for is an official release for Mother 3).

StuTwo wrote:

I'm sure they could make a very good game on that basis that could potentially find a grateful audience but I also think it would be (another) misstep for the series because I don't think it's what the majority of fans want... but then maybe that's just my bias showing through because it's not what I personally really want!

I feel people know what they want, but they don't what they'll like. With exceptions, I find myself incredibly unpicky about what kind of a game a new Star Fox should be because I can see a lot of potential in many areas if it's done right (a vague and most useless term, I agree). I can take a rail shooter, I can take an open-world space game with on ground parts, I can take a rouglite space shooter, etc. Deep down inside I wouldn't oppose say another Star Fox Adventures as long as it was good (I'm not saying they should do that; the Star in Star Fox matters for a lot of people and I want to spend a lot of my time in a space ship cockpit). Maybe that's just me being desperate to see this franchise given another lease on life and I'm willing to let it be a little un-Star Fox just so it succeeds and survives in case Miyamoto drops dead.

And as far wants go, I've come to realize that I've got more specific do not wants than wants

  • Don't be a remake of 64
  • Don't retell the Lylat Wars
  • Don't be something you can complete in a weekend
  • Don't restrict the cast to just 64's
  • Don't try something gimmicky with the controls

Really the want only I have is I want to spend a lot of time in Arwing and take Wolf's other eye out.

[Edited by Holdthepineapple]

Holdthepineapple

StuTwo

@Holdthepineapple True. In absolute terms it's a series that's never sold too many copies but it's still a famous game and I'd guess that due to its short and accessible nature Star Fox 64 in particular has been played by a lot more people over the years than its sales would suggest. I think it's got a better chance of finding a large mainstream audience than a series like F-Zero.

I'd also argue that the "Star Fox audience" - whilst theoretically small has an outsized influence in taste setting. We on this type of forum are that audience and we are the ones who (for better or worse) have a big influence on the discourse and general "mood" around whether more casual buyers should get a Switch 2. If a "small" game like "Star Fox Switch 2" is what it takes for us to turn over from saying "Switch 2 is a decent upgrade if you've got the money" to "Switch 2 is essential - Nintendo's doing some of their best work" then it would potentially be money well spent.

I don't think they get that without it basically being a "Star Fox 64 clone" at it's core though. I'm sure that Nintendo could make an excellent open world space shooter or a cuddly third person 'on foot' shooter with vehicles and whilst either genre would be a bit more mainstream those genres come with baggage and would encourage comparisons that might not be very flattering or welcome. They're also both inherently more complex in controls and navigation.

I should also clarify when I say "Star Fox 64 clone" I don't mean the same storyline - I mean game structure, length and primarily on rails shooting. I think we're all ready for a new plot and story beats.

StuTwo

Switch Friend Code: SW-6338-4534-2507

metaphysician

Something to note: part of why I suggest "space sim" isn't just because I think it fits the franchise. Its also that space sim is a genre that Nintendo does not otherwise have any presence in. Thus, even if it doesn't draw in a vast number of players, there's a good chance it would draw in players who are not already Nintendo fans. Add in that none of the major space sims are exactly "family friendly and accessible", and there's at least a chance a Star Fox Space Sim could be a relatively expansive hit.

Contrast that with genre suggestions where I sometimes see people ask for Nintendo to make a multiplayer FPS. Such being a bad idea since, while it doesn't have the "f"part, Nintendo absolutely already has a multiplayer competitive shooter: Splatoon. A new or genre-swapped game wouldn't open any new territory.

metaphysician

Holdthepineapple

@StuTwo

Length I can't agree with because I don't want this to be a weekend, let alone a single day, affair even just getting to the end (to say nothing of finding alternate routes, secrets, or post-game challenges). A short single player campaign (even if it wasn't a redo of 64) has limited appeal to me, and a straight-up multiplayer only battle royale version of Star Fox is probably one of the few things I disliked more than a Lylat War remake/retelling.

[Edited by Holdthepineapple]

Holdthepineapple

Megas75
  • Kid Icarus Uprising is proof you could make a meaty experience through the arcade like on-rails game play(or at least a linear structure)
  • RE games are short if you know what you’re doing, but an average playthrough will usually net you 9-12 hours of gameplay, and they still encourage replayability by having different characters with unique experiences

You could look to those two examples

Steam/NNID/Xbox Gamertag - Megas75

kkslider5552000

I do agree with the logic that Nintendo can afford to do whatever with Star Fox and it would be the best to do SOMETHING for the sake of its fans. There are Nintendo fans points at myself that love Nintendo for its variety of franchises beyond just the main ones and buys Nintendo systems for them as much as the top tier ones (even if Mario and Zelda are peak, the slightly below peak of greatness from Splatoon/Pikmin/Metroid Prime (2/3)/Advance Wars/Rhythm Heaven/Mario RPGs etc are a higher quantity) and is good for the company to keep that type of good will. Like Sony is still doing really well with Ps5, but there is clearly a lot of disappointment and disinterest from long term fans for them abandoning most of their niche titles, and I think that type of disappointment would be much worse for Nintendo in the same vein. Disillusioning your fans, even if for understandable-ish reasons, often backfires.

Also considering Smash Bros Ultimate is literally the best selling fighting game of all time and they put Star Fox in the Mario movie (a movie that primarily exists to be like "remember this?!") despite that series last having a successful new game 20 years ago, Nintendo still focusing on its more niche titles is clearly what they're going for, so they can do whatever with it, especially they don't pointlessly make needlessly expensive games even in the context of making ambitious ones (BOTW only needing 2 million to be profitable). Unless they **** up, its a non-issue, especially if Nintendo has any dignity and doesn't whine about the possibility of at worst, losing .001% of its Switch era profits over one video game that will be vastly made up by Pokopia alone. :V

Or I could just say that Star Fox Zero and Starlink in 3 years didn't kill the franchise, so I just assume it will live on as long as Shigeru Miyamoto is still alive.

I'd also argue that unless Mario sales suddenly double (or maybe 1.5X) in Switch 2 generation, that the movie can only do so much and similar to Sonic(a series that should be as big as ever from those movies but isn't), I don't see a scenario where a particularly large audience would buy any type of Star Fox game without the series becoming known for being reliably great, nearly regardless of what direction they take. I think zero chance any Star Fox below a 90 on Metacritic or becoming viral with tons of streamers sells even as well as Metroid Dread, quite frankly. Which is fine as long as Nintendo is self-aware about those limitations, a game can sell 1.5 million and still succeed (especially if its sold at full price) if you're not run by morons.

[Edited by kkslider5552000]

Non-binary, demiguy, making LPs, still alive

Megaman Legends 2 Let's Play!:
LeT's PlAy MEGAMAN LEGENDS 2 < Link to LP

Megas75

I don’t see a new game selling as well SF64. SNES would be impressive but selling past Adventures(1.8 million) or at least 64 3D(1 million) should be doable if they stick the landing

Steam/NNID/Xbox Gamertag - Megas75

Holdthepineapple

I'm going to be blunt, they'd have to put some real effort into making so that a new Star Fox that would sell less than Adventures. The Switch 2 was already close to outselling the Cube by the end of last year (if it hasn't already), so you can't blame a small audience base here (which was the Cube's problem). At that point bad marketing, and easy to see bad game choices become at fault at that point.

Holdthepineapple

Bolt_Strike

StuTwo wrote:

"Pretty well-received" is one way of putting it. It was a minor commercial success with mixed critical reception but Frontiers hasn't gone on to become the evergreen Sonic equivalent of Mario Odyssey or the game that really establishes a template for Sonic as a significant and important series going forwards. I'd suggest it's a minor footnote at this point.

The Sonic game that the fans actually love is Mania: a game that explicitly ignored everything that's happened in the series since the mid 90's.

Mania didn't become a Mario Odyssey-esque evergreen success either, it only sold 2 million more than Frontiers. No Sonic game aside from the first game (which IIRC was a Genesis pack-in) ever did, sales have consistently hovered in the 2-6 million range.

At any rate, Frontiers is pretty much the minimum an open world game typically sells and already it's outsold SF64. And there's no other on-rails shooter, at least to my knowledge, that has surpassed SF64 numbers. So an open world game's floor is roughly equivalent to an on-rails shooter's ceiling. That speaks volumes about which genre is more worth doing.

StuTwo wrote:

I disagree entirely. Structurally they are loosely "Metroidvania". Yes they have relatively few locks and few keys and most (though not all) of those locks are "soft" environmental ones that can be "powered through" (just as many of the "locks" in Super Metroid could be overcome without ever getting the "key") but there's no minimum/maximum number of upgrades to qualify as a "Metroidvania".

I'd say that BoTW isn't a particularly satisfying example of Metroidvania design because it wasn't the priority of the developers but what is there is clearly proof of concept that the general structure of a Metroidvania can co-exist quite happily with a non-linear open world.

You need more than 3 upgrades to provide a comparable experience to linear Metroids. And yes, Super Metroid did that to a degree, but it's far easier to do that with a 2D map than a 3D open world. So neither BotW nor Super are particularly good examples of how this could work.

StuTwo wrote:

There's a logic that they should just do that as a loss leader for the Nintendo fans. Star Fox 64 is one of those games that people play over and over and over again once a year. That audience would take another and it would help lock them in to the Nintendo ecosystem.

This only makes sense if there's nothing they can do to grow the IP. But again, there's evidence that going open world would give them greater or equal sales than the traditional on-rails segment, so it's not in this situation.

Bolt_Strike

Switch Friend Code: SW-5621-4055-5722

kkslider5552000

I think its mostly annoying you think that open world would magically single handedly grow Star Fox, while I think there's genuinely no chance of that happening beyond being widely acclaimed or hitting a perfect sweet spot of viral internet success and content creators falling for it and feeling justified to regularly make videos/steams about it.

Which still makes me think Sony cinematic or indie rogue-like is the secret other ways to get there anyway, but that the likelihood of a single Star Fox game of any type suddenly making Star Fox a big deal or as popular as even the most popular Metroid is probably close to zero. I think the closest possible future for Star Fox being popular, or even being as popular as it was in the 90s, is just actual consistent high quality releases to establish it as actually reliable purchases, which they would obviously not be based on any of the games after it. And even then there's a strong, distinct possibility that Star Fox will just be niche forever and that is borderline unavoidable, unless...I dunno, Nintendo buys Hello Games or something.

It is a shame, but Metroid Dread did everything right but its only so much more successful than previous games, same with Pikmin 4. I'm not getting my hopes up for any version of Star Fox to be THAT popular, when I have so much more doubt it will hit the same heights as those games for most people.

Now if you tell me Nintendo has near infinite money to just refuse to give up and make an open world Star Fox game that does every possible thing correctly or could be updated by a team with years spent giving them money to keep working on it the same way No Man's Sky would, sure that is a possibility. Nintendo's not doing that, they could, they're not that generous. No one would be happier at every one of my favorite Nintendo franchises having a widely popular game I love than me, but even with the many positives of the Switch era, I can't fathom that happening. Unless you are Dr. Strange who found the one reality where this happens, I will never be convinced that will happen until the day it does. So instead, I will just hope I have strong positive opinions about the likely only Star Fox game we will get on this system and accept the series inevitable fate. It's fine, not everything I like needs to be super profitable or have endless sequels, oh well.

[Edited by kkslider5552000]

Non-binary, demiguy, making LPs, still alive

Megaman Legends 2 Let's Play!:
LeT's PlAy MEGAMAN LEGENDS 2 < Link to LP

nomither6

without a doubt going the R&C route is the best thing for star fox .

nomither6

kkslider5552000

Honestly considering the variety of sometimes genuinely strange weapons, Kid Icarus: Uprising arguably fits that Ratchet and Clank mold as well. :V

Objectively hilarious that the best Star Fox game of the past 25 years then became not Star Fox at all.

Non-binary, demiguy, making LPs, still alive

Megaman Legends 2 Let's Play!:
LeT's PlAy MEGAMAN LEGENDS 2 < Link to LP

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic