Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

I think my idea for a Star Fox Zero port would actually work better than the original.

The second screen is just presented as a small window in the bottom corner by default, then if you hold the left trigger, it immediately blows up to cover most of the screen, in effect switching the screens. Then once you let go of the left trigger, it shrinks back again. That would cause less of a headache than the Wii U version because it was the constantly shifting your eyes back and forth that made it so uneasy.

I thought the actual game was brilliant. Really interesting and well designed. I hadn't heard anyone disagree with that, although there may be some. It's all just about the controls. It was so hard to enjoy doing it because it was such an unnatural setup that your brain just keeps rejecting it and you couldn't really feel immersed.

@Dezzy The internet darlings Platinum Games made the game, but Nintendo made the controls.

The game itself was okay to good but it's so hard to truly tell with those controls.

Game was good, controls didn't particularly bother me but it was a huge shame that the story was a reimagining of Star Fox 64 instead of continuing the existing story set out by Adventures, Assault and Command. Star Fox Assault was always my favourite Star Fox game by the way.

@Dezzy Hard disagree. Star Fox Zero is a rail shooter that frequently slows the gameplay down to a crawl with its horrible, tedious gyrowing + tethered robot levels, and the Walker (or, as I like to call it, 'chicken') transformation is incredibly hard to control and makes the game a bit miserable to play. Moreover, of levels that don't feature the horrible new vehicles/transformations, too many of them are exploratory instead of more traditional rail shooter levels.

The controls are the least of that game's issues, IMO. I adjusted to them, and I'd be fine if the game underneath was worth playing. But it's round inferior to Star Fox 64 in every way, and too frequently aggravating to recommend to anyone.

@Wavey84 I doubt Nintendo is going to bother porting Star Fox Zero to Switch. I'd only recommend buying it if you find it cheaply. If you get the opportunity, though, I'd recommend playing Star Fox Guard: it's repetitive, but decent enough on its own, and makes good use of the GamePad. Hard to say either way with Fatal Frame V; my guess is that Nintendo will continue to snub it (and the series in general), but, despite the game itself being pretty good, it's pretty damn hard to recommend someone pick up a full-price, digital-only Wii U game in 2020.

@Ralizah

Well yeah that's why we disagree. I dislike the rail shooter stuff but really like the "all-range mode" side of Star Fox. So that's why I liked Zero quite a lot. There's a ton of that side of things.

Landing on an enemy ship and then converting to the chicken to go inside and blow it up. That's just peek Star Fox enjoyment for me.

@jump

I thought Nintendo made the whole thing but just asked Platinum to help polishing the graphics. That was my memory of it anyway, because there was a lot of controversy to start with as everyone thought it looked bad graphically. Which it did. They improved it quite a lot by release.

Star Fox is a tragic story of being consistently so close yet so far, despite making an all time great game in 1997.

"Oh Rare is making it into a Zelda game-oh wait its inferior to Zelda in nearly every way"
"Oh Namco is making a straight up shooter-it took away multiple paths and has the most mediocre on foot gameplay possible"
"Oh we got some of the original devs to make a game where you're always in the air! We finally have it-I mean yeah but its also overly repeditive."
"Ok Miyamoto's back, Platinum's here, everything's ok-wait its simultaneously too samey and yet innovates in places no one wanted. Insert Paper Mario joke here."

And I really liked Command and think Zero got way too harsh reactions from people, but I can't pretend either are exactly masterpieces either.

@StuTwo Mario 64 DS was closer to a sequel than a remake though. Most of the game was changed up from SM64. Like, don't get me wrong, I enjoyed 64 DS, but I wouldn't really call it a remake.

Now, I do think they should have taken the improved models and textures from it for this release, but y'know, I'm also pissing people off by mentioning my dislike of the 3D All-Stars release so.

Star Fox should remain doing what it does best- on rails shooting. Alongside Sin and Punishment 2 and Kid Icarus Uprising, Star Fox 64 is among the greatest on-rails shooters ever made. It’s so simple. All they need to do is make a sequel that focuses on on rails shooting, without any crazy dual screen mechanics or alternate gameplay approaches. Just do what Star Fox does best. Nothing more, nothing less. If they just focused on that they would have a Star Fox that everyone loves.

But, the same could be said for F-Zero and they refuse to make a new one of those, too, unless they come up with some kind of idea to change it up from the formula everyone loves. So that even if we did get a new one half the fanbase would probably hate it.

And this is why people love ports just as much as new games. Because sometimes, ya just can’t beat the classics (well, they could if they’d actually try without porking the working formula, but that seems to lie outside of their philosophy, at least for certain franchises).

@Wavey84

If you've never played Ocarina, you really should just play the 3DS version. It's better in every single way, and it's an incredibly faithful remaster, so you're not really playing a different game.

Seriously, see it much prettier it is. Easily one of the best looking 3DS games:

@Wavey84 Exactly. I've played the 3DS version, and it's marvellous, but only one version can give you that authentic '99 OoT experience. You want to play the original because it's The. Original.

Star Fox is still mediocre when it's at its best. Zero was just insult to injury. 64 was acceptable for its time, but if they did something like that again, it would be a short, overpriced on-rails shooter. That's basically what Zero was, except the controls were horrendous as well. The fact that Zero looked liked a remastered N64 game didn't help either. I have no problem if Nintendo abandons that franchise for a good while, and reevaluates the IP when Miyamoto is retired.

@Wavey84 N64s are rather cheap nowadays. The games are more expensive though.

Some of them are, but you can still buy a nice condition copy of OoT for less than it would have cost in '99.

Firstly, me saying Animal Crossing is a heavy hitter on par with BotW I think is kinda hard to dispute. It's the second best selling game on the console and, anecdotally, I know multiple people who brought a Switch specifically for it. Not only that but it has sold more copies than any game on the 3DS*. By any measure it's a huge release. So that's one monstrous release for this year without question.

What I was saying was that 2017, even with it's smaller number of releases, also had Super Mario Odyssey. A game I would also put into the monstrous release category. I don't think there are any other releases from this year outside of Animal Crossing that are in that league.

And then I did say that yes, it is my opinion that you can go a bit further down the 2017 list and still have releases that are (IMO) bigger than Paper Mario. Which would include Mario + Rabbids. Yes I agree that Paper Mario is a reasonable release, no question. But is it bigger than even the best of the second tier 2017 releases? I'm not so convinced. But this doesn't really matter so much for this discussion given that... it's clearly not bigger than a new 3D Mario.

Hell, if anything I'm being kind to 2020 by excluding Mario Kart 8 and Splatoon 2

*edit: going a bit further than this. The game has sold ~22mill units so far which makes it only behind Mario Kart 8 on Switch and more than all but the top 3 games on DS, top 3 on Gameboy, top 2 on NES, top 5 on Wii and more than any other game on any other Nintendo platform. So yes, it's a big hitter.

I didn't have a wii u so I really appreciate the ports. I just finished xenoblade and future connected for the first time. Absolutely loved it. 90 hours I put into the main campaign and I did everything in future connected bar one quest where you clearly need to grind a bit to tackle. I'm too lazy to boot the game up again to look at how many hours future connected took me!

I think its incredible the amount of extra value future connected brings to the table. It's easily as good as the main campaign. Gives me hope for bowers fury. But I can't wait to experience 3D world for the first time regardless of extras.

I'm also more hopeful than ever that wind waker will make it over next year if this 35th mario anniversary is anything to go by!

Got my 3D all stars physical preordered to keep wrapped up and will get the digital version to actually play.

@gcunit If I have my way, we'll get the 3DS version on a hybrid system and I'll never have reason to play the original again. I see absolutely no reason to return to a strictly worse version of the game. Same with Majora's Mask, or Wind Waker, or even TP.

Ninja Gaiden Trilogy is a huge win. My brother will be ecstatic.

And Hyrule Warriors: Age of Calamity is our big November game. It looks a LOT better than precious Warriors crossovers on Switch. Probably uses the BotW engine

@Octane
Star Fox is still mediocre when it's at its best

Ouch, that hurts. I agree it's short, but so are fighting games. Its replayability that gives the full value. That aside, I dont judge games based on price or length anyways. Only the purity of enjoyment while playing. And I loved Star Fox 64. I loved it even more on 3DS.

That doesn't make any sense. It probably uses the same engine, but with imported assets from BOTW.

@JaxonH I don't mind short games. But when they're only 5 hours, it's too short. I think they could've done a lot with SF. Look at the scale of the Rogue Squadron games. They could've linear levels but with impressive set pieces, like Uncharted.