Star Fox Zero isn't far away, yet rather than unquestionable hype about the first series entry for over a generation, much of the talk is over its control scheme. As the Wii U heads towards its retirement it seems like an apt conflict - innovation vs familiarity, instinctive play versus unfamiliar control.
The two tweets below, featuring our own Damien McFerran and familiar Nintendo fan Roger DiLuigi III, perhaps exemplify the split in opinion that'll only increase once the game hits stores.
For his part Roger DiLuigi III has also encouraged franchise fans to have an open mind and try the game, as the general consensus (in reasoned debate, at least) is that the TV / GamePad controls can click nicely for some players. The issue, of course, is that the lack of a universally accessible and understandable control scheme will put some off to the point that, not unreasonably, they won't be inclined to spend a lot of money to try them out.
The Splatoon comparison is certainly reasonable, though there are two key differences between the shooter's use of the GamePad and that we see in Zero. For one thing Splatoon only requires occasional glances down at the controller, and it's feasible to go through extended periods (especially in single player) where the second screen can be entirely ignored. While the motion-based aiming does have similarities, and Zero does support some instinctive movement while watching the aim on the top screen, some particular levels and encounters in the latest Star Fox demand plenty of attention on the second view. One potential workaround to those segments, notably, is to switch the views and focus on the 'aiming' perspective on the TV rather than GamePad.
The second difference is that Splatoon allowed players to use traditional dual-stick movement and aiming. Star Fox Zero doesn't offer any such luxury - in terms of changing the control scheme - unless you jump into co-op. In single player you play the Nintendo way or no way at all. That inflexibility is certainly a necessity in terms of accommodating the level design, as highlighted above, but it's worth noting nevertheless.
The controls are innovative, and can feel terrific - in this writer's opinion - once in full flow, but the lack of immediate accessibility has proven to be problematic for Nintendo in promoting this release. The narrative around the game and a number of previews have focused on whether the controls work, and they're predictably divisive. If the fundamental merits of a title's gameplay are the focus in pre-release discussions, as opposed to how awesome it is to have a new Star Fox game, then Nintendo has an immediate problem.
In some ways Star Fox Zero has presented a microcosm of the broader problems that have made the Wii U toil so badly at market. Muddled messaging and a demand that players of all levels adjust and learn a fiddly new way to play runs contrary to Nintendo's past successes. Since convention was dropped for innovation - largely out of necessity - in the Wii and DS era, Nintendo became the name associated with accessible and clever gaming fun. The 'Touch Generation' of the DS made gaming easy for more people, while the Wii Remote delivered experiences that were as simple as waving a controller around. Both systems adopted their controls for more complex games, of course, but there was a true sense of instinct and natural reactions coming together when playing games on that hardware.
In defence of the Wii U, some of its games do show how two screens can be used for terrific play, especially with asynchronous multiplayer. Nintendo Land, for the most part, demonstrated how splitting the views between players could produce interesting experiences, though even that collection had some baffling controls in Metroid Blast. It's been a generation, though, in which Nintendo's big concept was so awkward that it was barely used for the company's own games - Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze is an infamous example, where Retro Studios wanted to keep things simple and made the GamePad blank when playing on the TV.
It was at E3 2014 (and investor meetings beforehand) when Nintendo stated that Shigeru Miyamoto and his team would commit themselves to showcasing the GamePad, yet little has come from it, with Star Fox Zero arriving after a route to completion that was accompanied by whispers of concerned localisation teams. Star Fox Guard is also coming, of course, and we've had DS games on the controller, though the latter don't always work particularly well. Through a combination of other priorities and the toughness of the challenge, it seems, Nintendo has struggled to find a late killer hook for the GamePad.
It may seem odd that a controller riffing on the most accessible gaming hardware of all - tablets - has struggled to win the day, but a lack of simplicity is the common thread. The need for Nintendo to combine full gaming experiences with the controller has led to a clash in priorities, and it's lacked the flexibility in form factor and approach that the Wii Remote and Nunchuk achieve so impeccably. Not to mention the fact that primitive free-to-play mobile approaches aren't exactly Nintendo's normal modus operandi (though it's dabbled), so the GamePad was never going to be pushed as a 'tablet' device.
No doubt Nintendo's followed all of these trends closely, while noting that the 3DS (with two screens naturally integrated together and continuing the DS approach) has achieved relative success in light of market challenges. The great issue the company faces, with the NX and in generations to come, is that it's now the brand of evolution and (occasionally) revolution. There's an expectation that the company will deliver new, interesting hardware rather than a core system offering familiar controls at a higher resolution. Sony and Microsoft, to be fair, look to innovate with mid-generation add-ons, with the PS4 to be complemented by PlayStation VR soon. It's worth also citing Kinect, though, as an example where a lack of simplicity backfired. A record-setter when initially launched, the questionable practicality of the peripheral, with the requirement for a decent-sized room and the player not being able to relax and play when 'being the controller', meant it lost its allure quickly and - perhaps like the GamePad for the Wii U - became an additional cost and unwelcome extra that damaged the Xbox One's early days.
Finding that sweetspot in the future, of accessibility and innovation, isn't an exact science for Nintendo - the tale of two generations from Wii to Wii U demonstrate that nicely. Star Fox Zero also shows how thin the line between clever innovation and a tough reception can be - this writer may talk up the controls and the way they enhance the gameplay until the cows come home, but the added proviso of "when you master them" will haunt the game should it fail to gain traction with the Wii U audience.
The greatest gaming innovations are those that are the easiest to enjoy - let's hope Nintendo masters that trick again with the NX.
I bet everyone who played the likes of Star Fox on SNES could use the controls without any issues after a matter of seconds, and I also bet that no one ever complained the original Star Fox wasn't great fun because it had simple and intuitive controls either. Despite being cutting edge in so many ways and an epic experience in its day, it didn't require a debate over whether the core controls actually added to the game experience in a positive way or were just a forced and clunky gimmick that some people simply got used to over prolonged play, and that was true of every element of the masterpiece that was Star Fox on SNES, from the graphics to the gameplay.
Almost none of the above is true of Star Fox Zero.
Nothing that was truly brilliant about Star Fox on SNES required justification; it spoke for itself and prove itself within seconds of booting up the game. Again, that's simply not true of Star Fox Zero, not after a few seconds, or a few minutes, probably not even a few hours for many people, and it's clearly still not true for some people even after completing the entire game.
To be a truly great modern Star Fox game did not require doing something new and different almost entirely for the sake of doing something new and different in and of itself, especially when it doesn't actually improve on the core experience of previous games (or even equal it). There IS a problem with these controls, and it goes beyond personal preference or taste, and it's also about more than simply "getting used to them".
I see that innovation on WiiU is comming without the required simplicity that makes the gameplay engaging from the first moment you play it. A common trait in Nintendo platformers and other tittles on 3DS, for example.
I have played Star Fox for first time on the remake for 3DS and, actually, was kind upset since it took me hours of play to get used with that simple and kind rudimentary controls scheme - and with the gyro was worse! But the more I played, the more I mastered it. And soon the almost unobtainable medals came to my score. Gaming is also about facing this hardships, it may not make you love it form the beginning, but there is always a second sight love when the game has a pedigree.
This one is a new Star Fox and it deserves some hype and may also need some insistence to fully enjoy a great game!
No matter what each side of the debate think there is no right or wrong here. Traditional controls are not intrinsically better and not trying new control schemes is self-defeating. Equally, not liking innovation for the sake of it or not liking the controls does not need to be greeted with self-justified snobbery as can already be seen from some.
My main hope is they put out a demo. If they want people to try it and they have faith in what they've done people need the chance without having to gamble £40.
Nintendo's best moments have come when they've tried something innovative and made it seem like something we've always had. Playing Mario 64 with the analogue stick, playing Wario Ware Touched on the touch screen, playing Wii Sports with the Wii Remote for the first time....they didn't need explaining or 'getting used to'. The control method immediately melted away in your hands and wasn't an issue. Nintendo's best games have a low barrier for entry but a high level of depth coming from skilled game design rather than forcing people to learn a new control method.
I hope Starfox Zero is good but I agree with the comment in the article that it serves as a microcosm of the Wii U's struggles. If you're selling a gaming innovation but you're struggling to get across to people why it's good or why they would want it when existing systems work perfectly well, it's always going to be an uphill struggle.
I honestly love the controls.
Getting used to new controls, including the new controls in Zero, is no different than getting used to new combos from a complicated character in a fighting game for me; in both cases it's all about practice, and once you've mastered them and ingrained how they work into your muscle memory, it brings about a new level of mastery and satisfaction to the game.
The controls aren't bad just because they take some adjusting to master, the same way a complicated fighting game character isn't bad just because it takes a while to learn how to get used to their complicated aspects and take full advantage of their strengths.
In the end it all comes down to whether or not the abilities being practiced will provide a higher level of ability once mastered.
And in SFZero's case, there is a DEFINITE advantage to learning these controls.
IMO, there are just a lot of people out there that are insulting this because it's #1 different from the traditional stuff and therefore outside of their comfort zone, and #2 because it's coming from Nintendo, and whenever Nintendo tries to do something different lately, everyone jumps on the "its just a gimmick" bandwagon because that's the popular reaction.
It's not a bad control scheme just because it's different.
In fact, once mastered, the advantages are transparently obvious compared to being limited to only shooting down your present flight path.
Anyone capable of thinking in a logical way can see the advantages of being able to shoot and fly in different directions at once.
Let those who can't step outside of their comfort zone hate on the controls all they like; it won't change that they're good controls that offer an advantage once you've learned them, and that they are most definitely a control scheme meant for core players that are used to learning new things, as opposed to casuals that easily give up, or worse insult something as horrible, the moment something becomes even slightly more complicated than what they're used to.
@electrolite77 Just so you know the're selling Star Fox Zero on The Game Collection for just under £30.
@electrolite77 Some of Nintendo's best moments have come when it tried something innovative and did it right. Some of Nintendo's worst moments have come when it tried something gimmicky and did it wrong.
Well as usual I feel players should have a choice of control scheme. If Nintendo want to aim at gamers who played previous games in the series they should respect their desire to play with traditional controls. Splatoon lets you play without motion contols if you want to.
I'm going to keep an open mind and see for myself regarding motion controls.
@Kirk So true.
The only way to resolve this is to get a demo out before the release.
From what I have read so far this game is one to avoid. May be a demo will change my mind.
If we don't get a demo then maybe Nintendo are not happy letting us try before we buy.
@PtM ZL button does something related to that, but I need to look it up again before I can tell you precisely how it works. Don't want to misinform...
@smashbrolink I'm judging these controls negatively not because they are new but because they are very clearly worse that what came before them in previous games from the same franchise and therefor they are a bad design decision that only lessons an experience that could and would have been superior if they had not been implemented in this way.
These controls do not make Star Fox Zero a better game Star Fox game in 2016 than could have been achieved with more "standard" controls, and anyone who is trying to convince themselves or anyone else otherwise is living in dreamland.
It's easy for a whole lot of people to tickle themselves. It's not so easy to tickle me.
Come back in 20 years time and we shall all see the truth about these forced, gimmicky, clunky, and totally unnecessary controls—just like we already have about 99% of the games on Wii at this point. Much like the situation on Wii, Star Fox Zero is 1000% not one of the 1% of games that's got Wii U controls right—and you can quote me on that.
@Kirk - please refrain from trying to circumvent the profanity filter. Thanks.
@Kirk Sorry, but you're wrong.
I've tried the game, and being able to shoot and fly in two different directions at once is a DISTINCT ADVANTAGE, not a bad control scheme.
Not even compared to average controls from past entries in the series.
That's not conning anyone; that's a fact, coming straight from someone who's had the opportunity to judge their own capability to score higher points with the two control schemes shortly one after the other, and found the new method to be more effective.
Anyone trying to convince others otherwise is living in denial of the truth, and needs to stop bashing and step out of their comfort zone, or get left behind in the race to higher scores.
Not everything worth learning is learned in an instant.
Why do people not like to controls? From what I can tell it actually allows you to do more stuff than what you could before and is more accurate than just shooting forward.
edit: see above
There's a few different kinds of people who don't like them.
#1 People who don't like them because they're used to traditional controls and don't want to learn a new way of playing.
This is the most fair type; they don't mindlessly bash people over it, but they still prefer what they're used to.
#2 People who hate them because they force them to step out of their comfort zone.
#3 People who view anything new in terms of controls as nothing more than a wasteful gimmick.
@smashbrolink No, it's not. Go play something like Star Fox on SNES or Star Fox 64 and tell me a single time you couldn't shoot what you wanted, in the way you would actually want to (that made sense and felt good), because there was no such thing as dual-screen motion control back them. . . .
It's a "solution" to a problem that simply did not exist, and it's a forced gimmick that simply is not a superior experience to what came before it or what could have been achieved with a more "standard" configuration and game design.
If Nintendo didn't force you to use this stupid gimmick in order to hit certain enemies then you'd basically never use it, and you know it. You're using it here because you have no choice to do otherwise, and you've simply gotten used to it and somehow wiped from your brain just how much more intuitive and fun an "on-rails" shmup can feel and play without such a stupid gimmick.
Star Fox existed before Star Fox Zero and this control scheme is not an improvement on what existed in the previous games—it really is not—ergo, it is a bad control scheme because it is a worse implementation that has replaced what existed in the previous games that simply worked better (it was just more intuitive and more fun).
To me, it's the very definition of a bad control scheme for all the reasons I've mentioned above in my various comments.
@smashbrolink l agree not everything worth learning is learned in an instant.
But learning a new control system for just one game and adjusting a little are two separate things.
I am happy to adjust, but not re learn for one game that I have no idea if it's worth learning for or spending £40 on.
Reviews will be mixed are therefore not easy to get a definitive judgement.
@Kirk Yes, it did.
I've owned Star Fox on the SNES, and I'm telling you right now that the control scheme here in this game would have been welcomed by me just as much back then as it is now.
In Zero, I can maintain my flight path regardless of where I'm going and still hit that enemy outside of my flight path on the screen, precisely BECAUSE these new controls allow it.
Corridor sections no longer force me to risk running into a wall to hit that one extra enemy that I knew I'd need for a gold medal, because my lasers can reach it without having to readjust my flight path.
That's AN ADVANTAGE.
Not a gimmick nor a detriment.
If this control scheme existed in any other on-rail shooter, you can bet your tailpipe I would be using them to dodge shots and shoot in any direction at the same time, because that's a clear advantage no matter WHAT shmup game it's in.
No matter how much you want to spin this as a gimmick, it's useful and is providing me, as a player, a clear and distinct advantage.
Not having to adjust my flight path to shoot down an enemy in a position that's outside of said flight path, lets me rack up higher scores in a shorter time than I would if I had to constantly readjust the direction I was flying in just to hit those same enemies.
@Clownshoes Certainly the worst decision was to not give players another control option to enjoy the action. You don't need to really love it, but at least be something you can trust to control. It seems to not be the case with this game.
It is sad to see such control feature and lack of option to ruin the interest in this game! As the article says: It is a sum of all the WiiU gamepad brought!
Hmmm... I thought the gyro was in conjunction with the right analog. Are you guys saying that is in fact not the case then? See, I thought it was hybrid like Splatoon. Use analog- fine tune with gyro. Was I wrong in that assumption?
Also- how dare you speak ill of Metroid Blast controls! That was the pinnacle of NintendoLand!
I've been playing Starfox 64 recently, and the controls are much worse than I remember. They're oversensitive to the point where it's uncomfortably difficult to aim precisely; If you're aiming straight ahead in the standard view, most of the time the ship is in the way; and nowadays the lack of at least a second analogue stick for aiming feels hamstrung.
I haven't played Zero, but I'm looking forward to the two-screen gameplay and the extra control over the ship and aiming. Personally, I'm fine if it takes a bit of getting used to.
Also, some people hate motion controls with an irrational passion, and lump together splatoon gyro aiming with 'waggle for a button press' Wii controls. The two things are night and day.
Also, I've seen people online claim that twin analogue sticks are better than keyboard+mouse for FPSs, so I have learned to ignore other people's opinions when it comes to control schemes.
I'd like to know if people in this thread dissing/praising SF0's controls have actually played it for any length of time...
I fail to see these controls as a necessary mechanic, rather I see them as an attempt at pointlessly justifying the Wii U tablet's existence.
The game, from the several videos I've seen of it, does appear it could be lightly reworked and suited with traditional controls. Criticism aside, I really hope this game does the franchise justice.
@Kirk Okay, YOU need to CHILL.
Being able to hit an enemy that is outside of your flight path IS AN ADVANTAGE for anyone looking to rack up higher scores.
Narrow corridor sections and rapidly closing obstacles no longer force you to take the risk of running into something just to chase down enemies that would otherwise be outside of your flight path.
You can rack up higher scores with this, with less risk, and the only thing you need to do is GET GOOD AT IT.
"IMO, there are just a lot of people out there that are insulting this because it's #1 different from the traditional stuff and therefore outside of their comfort zone, and #2 because it's coming from Nintendo, and whenever Nintendo tries to do something different lately, everyone jumps on the "its just a gimmick" bandwagon because that's the popular reaction."
Or there's no conspiracy here and its just some people don't think the controls are very good.
And, regardless of what anyone else believes, this is 100% the case—FACT.
Miyamoto was literally playing around trying out different implementations of control gimmicks on the Wii U GamePad because he wanted to show people its worth—almost certainly because he felt pressured to do so after all the bad press the Wii U has received, with most journalists saying the GamePad is kinda useless and hasn't been used in any meaningful ways for the most part—and he decided this one gimmick could be forced into a new Star Fox game, thereby giving Nintendo a reason to justify making a new Star Fox game and also a way to show off another new application of the GamePad's unique features. That's basically been revealed to be the case in a couple of interviews—although he didn't put it so bluntly and honestly as I did.
And, while Star Fox Zero's control implementation looks to be generally okay, and it does use the GamePad in a novel way, it's simply not an improvement on what came before it in previous Star Fox game.
Miyamoto made a design choice, and this new Star Fox isn't the game it could have been as a result; it's that simple.
@Kirk For enemies that leave the onscreen view, Nintendo should've followed Panzer Dragoon's example. They didn't need to resort to some motion gimmick to provide additional aiming range and functions.
@electrolite77 There's also those people that are just rational about it and prefer something traditional, true.
But from what I've seen of comments towards this game, they're definitely not the majority figure amongst the complainers.
There's a LOT of irrational hatred towards anything new in controls lately, especially when it's connected to Nintendo.
Ironically, many of these same people, who claim to hate any level of control gimmickry, are now going crazy for the news that the Move will be used with the PSVR.
The flip-floppery is real.
I don't see the need to constantly look at the gamepad.
There is a reticule on the TV. One should be able to aim via reflex using the reticule on TV, only checking the actual gamepad screen if needed. I'm speaking hypothetically of course- I actually haven't played the game yet- but I see no reason why this wouldn't hold true.
No doubt this game absolutely is meant to utilize the gamepad. Pointlessly justify? Eh, not sure about that. I think it's more to satiate the fan outcry of 2014 for games that use the gamepad for something substantial. After the outcry, Nintendo began work on this game, and we are just now seeing those efforts come to fruition. This games's control scheme is a response to what fans asked for. And, people were really upset when they were complaining they wanted games that used the gamepad more.
Perhaps, be careful what you wish for? I don't know. I am definitely one of those fans who wanted to see more games use the gamepad. I wasn't raging about it but I'd be lying if I said this isn't what I asked for. Which naturally, makes it a little hypocritical for me to not give it a fair shake.
Hi, Kirk! Did you have the chance to play this game? Actually I haven't and probably will not play it. I am asking because I am curious to know how bad this control scheme is. Is it really like you said that you can't even shoot where you want?
I agree with the comparison between the first and last game in the series. But the first Star Fox seems so far away that the developers ( or should I say just Miyamoto) probably wanted to evolve the controls and they only had a WiiU gamepad to create a new thing. And this is also a big problem, as the article shows us.
Yet I still want to see how this games will go for the critics and the sales. As many people here are talking about how fine the new control scheme can perform.
I'm going to reiterate the need for a demo. I don't mind games adopting unconventional control schemes, but I don't like the idea of not being able to try them out before deciding whether to invest in the product or not. For many of us, a demo is the difference between potentially purchasing the game at launch or skipping it altogether to avoid wasting $60 on something we might not enjoy.
Firstly, have you played the game or are you merely talking from your own analysis of what others have played?
Secondly (and more importantly), the problem with your analogy between SNES StarFox and StarFox Zero is convention. Convention was already established that up goes and down goes down. A and B do something different. These were ideas established due to the fact that a handful of generations of videogame hardware solidified conventions for gamers to play StarFox SNES "intuitively."
A couple generations later, the idea of twin-stick was introduced. Many criticized this approach of gaming, saying it wouldn't stick. It wasn't conventional enough. However, we see in retrospect the plethora of advantages twin-stick gaming has to offer (assuming you're not a WASD+mouse elitist).
By now, we have an established convention of how third-person shooters should work — something much more solidified than during the SNES era. We expect that if you do x, y should happen. I haven't played StarFox Zero yet so I am willing to concede on an objective standpoint, but from what I have read and heard from critics (both on pro and con), it all makes sense. Is it intuitive? No, but whose fault is that: convention or the system itself? Conventions only change when new ideas are offered. Was this made primarily to showcase the Wii U gamepad? Sure. But the mechanics make sense and can offer a new experience to the game. 22 April will tell, I suppose.
I'll need to try the game out, but so far the controls don't sound that good to me. The constant looking at two screens at once could become a nuisance.
As for motion controls, if I end up liking them, then it's going to take a while. Splatoon took me some time before I clicked with it. Having an option to switch between motion and non-motion controls would have been a great addition to this game.
from what i've seen, these are three-dimensional tank controls. instead of a separate driver and gunner, the player performs both functions. not unheard of as a lot of real world weapons systems do this nowadays, but with a helmet. the guns aim where the pilot looks. in this case, instead of helmet, it's the gamepad. nevermind the nx, this might require a vr helmet to play at it's best.
@JTMnM That would have worked far better than what they have here imo, if they decided it was really necessary to be able to shoot enemies that have already flown past the screen.
It's really simple: Having to play a fast-paced shmup while tracking two detached screens in different positions and orientations, at the same time as using standards controls plus motion controls in tandem, just isn't a great "solution" to a problem that didn't actually exist. It does not make Star Fox Zero a better game to control and play than those games before it in the franchise (purely in terms of the controls and play mechanics).
Anyone who can't see this is simply tickling themselves as far as I'm concerned. But, give them a twenty year break and ask them to come back and play this game again, and we'll see how much of an "improvement" they think it was over more traditional moving and aiming controls.
And, if they don't think the same in 20 years time as they think they do now—THAT'S the truth of the situation.
@Kirk - please refrain from trying to circumvent the profanity filter. Thanks.
A demo could be good. On the other hand, it could put people off to an otherwise good game because the demo did not provide them enough time to get the hang of things. Seen this kinda thing before, like with Wonderful 101.
^^^ Read my post a few comments above. I see no reason why anyone has to constantly look back and forth between the gamepad. The same reticule that you see on the gamepad is also shown on the TV. So looking at the gamepad does nothing different than looking at the TV. It just gives a closer view for easier aiming. Of course, I believe it is confirmed that there are a few sections that require you to look at the gamepad but those sections do not require you to switch back-and-forth (I dont think)- those you would play by just looking at the gamepad and nothing else.
@JaxonH "Pointlessly" is fitting terminology. I have many games, and the only tablet-specific mechanism I regularly enjoy is off-TV play (Wonderful 101 is the only exception to that, and I still mostly prefer the analog stick to the stylus because IT WAS GRANTED AN OPTION, but I've only been an avid gamer since the 90s somaybeIforgetmyself.). Given the fact the game allows you to disable the motion gimmick for the traditional on-rail levels, that suggests the gimmick is not required. Like I stated before, the game does appear it can be lightly reworked to suit traditional controls. It boggles my mind how they impose this mechanic onto their consumers rather than simply adding it as a control option (like Star Fox 64 3D).
@Kirk Panzer Dragoon is one of my favorite gaming franchises, and it's painful to suggest games on the Sega Saturn will likely control better than a game on the Wii U. That statement is a little premature, so I'll wait until fortify it until after I tried the game out myself.
I still think twice about playing Kid Icaris: Uprising because of the controls. Have read lots of reviews/comments saying you get used to it but it never clicked with me. Hopefully this won't be the same 😓
Ah, the great controls debate. Touch vs Buttons, motion vs sticks vs mouse, etc, etc
Long have players contended they know their pleasure is the SUPERIOR experience. It just doesn't work that way and gives everyone a headache reading those debates lol
I won't argue that options are always good. And I am certainly not opposed to an option to play without these controls. So don't misunderstand.
But gimmick? Pointless? I think these words are used carelessly and derail the conversation. Just because something is unconventional does not automatically equate it to a gimmick. Otherwise one could argue that the analog stick was a gimmick. One could argue that having extra, unneeded shoulder buttons were a gimmick- after all, those commands could have simply been mapped to pre-existing buttons.
I think if we're going to have a mature conversation about the evolution of input methods the first thing we need to do is stop over simplifying the matter, or using those kinds of words to describe something that is not so black and white. I also think we need to stop labeling every game with gyro/motion as automatically inferior, as many games clearly demonstrate is not necessarily the case.
But yes I 100% agree options should have been available in this game. No question. No argument. I am in favor of these kinds of control schemes (when done right) but am ALWAYS in favor of traditional options being made available as well. Which somewhat surprises me Nintendo has not done since they usually champion diverse control options.
@smashbrolink No, it's not, if you don't have any reason whatsoever to hit that enemy outside of your flight path in the first place, just like in 99.9% of shumps that don't ask you to aim at enemies that have already left the screen or whatever. If you want the high score then shoot the waves of enemies when they are onscreen, just like in basically every other shooter; that's the actual challenge in case of aiming for high scores in such games. Don't blame your inability to shoot the enemy waves on why you've not got the best score, which you do by flying well and aiming accurately (even with that meaning shooting in the direction the plane is firing in), just like you would in a real fighter plane. You certainly don't design a far more convoluted and clunky control scheme (that's worse than previous implementations in almost every way) to fix a "problem" that didn't really exist, or to do something you didn't have to worry about in the first place in every other game in the series anyway.
It's like you honestly don't get it.
This implementation does not make the game better, no matter what bullsh*t justification you spin in your own mind; it makes it worse (for all the reasons I've now mentioned multiple times).
Your assertion is basically arguing that every single schmup would be improved if it added dual-screen, motion control to the mix—because, ya know, if you want to get the best high scores (like every previous shmup where you could go for high scores was flawed before now)—which is a crock of sh*t and you know it.
I think it's simple Kirk- people complained about having no games that used the gamepad for something interesting- here is Nintendo's response. It may be better for some and worse for others, but the bottom line is it uses the gamepad which is exactly what fans had asked for.
It may not necessarily be better (I think it can be for those that are willing to learn- but hey maybe I'm wrong), but I don't think it has to be. All it has to do is provide a unique type of experience with the gamepad- which people complained they wanted.
I truly believe that the real underlying issue here is fans raging but not really understanding what they want when they make demands. There were movements trending on Twitter for a StarFox game, there were movements and outcries within Miiverse for games that used the gamepad. Your Nintendo has killed two birds with one stone.
I think their critical error was not providing an alternative control scheme on the side- because fans truly don't know what they want when they make demands. It's more like, they make general demands, then Nintendo has to guess the specifics, they get the specifics wrong, then people make an outcry over that.
@JaxonH What I implied was pointless was the motion controls' forced intent. You agreeing with me on the fact options should be provided makes us stand on the same ground. I'm not against motion controls at all, like you, if they're implemented correctly, but to impose them as a mandatory end-all use in a franchise that has existed for 20 years using the tried-and-true methods is ludicrous.
Using W101 as an example, I theorize PG suggested to include the traditional option but Miyamoto was having a moment.
@JaxonH It's basically a gimmick when it doesn't improve on what came before it, isn't actually any more fun, and when no one will be using it in a couple of years down the line because it ultimately didn't add anything worthwhile of enjoyable to replicate again—that kind of thing.
Now, compare the two examples:
1. Analog stick
2. Star Fox Zero's specific dual-screen, motion-controlled aiming/shooting mechanic
Has that made the whole concept a little clearer for you now?
Comparing Star Fox now to Star Fox then isn't helpful in any way I can see. Completely different gaming landscape. It was a brand new game type for consoles offering something new to look at and imagine. Your recollection of instant intuitive understanding of the game play is not what many experienced (even by the time the N64 version came out). Many had trouble managing the reticle(s) with the low frame rate and even understanding what the low poly models were meant to represent.
Loved SNES Star Fox myself and I basically got it, but it did take a while to learn about the first brief moment when the reticle moved much faster than the ship so you could quick-aim over in a direction without always moving there.
The original game didn't release into a world where there were several games before it in the same franchise with a need to differentiate, either.
I don't know if I'll like the controls, but I'm finding this debate to be about the same old thing. The risk-takers get mocked as their ideas are revealed with naysayers getting all the attention. Over time the successes are always not possible anymore pointing at any failures. Remember when Mario 64 made everyone sick? Ocarina was horrible because Link couldn't jump?
@JaxonH Nah, I think people meant for Nintendo to use the GamePad in ways that actually improve the experience, like in Super Mario Maker or Art Academy: Atelier, not in ways that actually worsen it to some degree.
Don't twist what people are asking for to justify what has been the outcome, because I'll tell you for an absolute, 1000%, matter of fact, this is not what I was asking for when I asked for Nintendo to use the GamePad better.
And, that's the big problem here: We ask for something and Nintendo gives us junk and then someone say "But you got what you asked for".
Well, clearly, that person was a blind as to what people were actually asking for as Nintendo.
@Kirk The fact that you haven't answered anyone's question regarding your experience with StarFox Zero nulls your second aspect (that it "actually isn't more fun").
In fact, many of the bombastic opinions on this thread is rather disappointing. I can understand heated debates, but leave your ad hominem remarks on your side of the computer screen.
@aaronsullivan There is a difference between learning controls in general and struggling to learn clunky and unintuitive controls because they just aren't particularly great—but, you can eventually get used to and "master" basically any controls ultimately.
All games basically require you to learn their controls; you're not born with the instruction for Mario imprinted on your brain. It usually takes a few second of either reading the control instructions and/or trying them out briefly to get acclimated with them.
That's not what is happening in Star Fox Zero, and anyone who thinks otherwise is either lying to themselves or simply doesn't understand.
"I'm right and you're all wrong. Saying otherwise is bulls**t spinning to justify things."
Am I doing this right?
@PtM Except this is the digital "cloud" and once my shout registers with the "cloud" it gets noticed.
Look above if you believe otherwise. . . .
And, if you think that's where it stops, if you don't think the "cloud" reaches beyond just the place of the original the shout, then you don't understand how the digital "cloud" truly works.
You think there'd be articles on Star Fox Zero's controls if the people shouting at clouds weren't having any effect or reach whatsoever?
Trust me; I know exactly what I'm doing when I shout at clouds.
@Kirk So, how long did it take you to get used to the controls?
Also, how do we know if it's a gimmick yet based on your definition which requires looking back at something in the past?
@aaronsullivan Well, check back in a few years down the line and you can decide for yourself if it's a gimmick or not. . . .
To me this is definitely a case of people making a mountain out of a molehill seeing as I have yet to play a Nintendo game that controls poorly, and I don't expect that to change with this game. I am completely willing to give them a go and will no doubt become a pro at shooting down enemy ships with ease, and I expect I will be doing that within an hour at most. So much drama over controls, it is just plain silly!
@IceClimbers Nope, because you possibly think you are saying something that isn't just a load of worthless junk, which is missing the point.
Hope that helps you.
Fair points. But I would say to you that fun is subjective. And I truly believe that gyro and analog used in conjunction will actually still be around for many years to come. It's one of the better, more intuitive control schemes to develop in the last several generations.
And getting back to the topic of what people wanted, people didn't specify what they wanted when the demands were made. So we see Nintendo taking the logical approach of making several different types of gamepad implementations- Mario Maker, Xenoblade X, Splatoon and now StarFox Zero.
You say it doesn't add anything, but the fact that you get greater control from the cockpit view naturally means it does. It may not be what you wanted, but it's a different type of experience and that in and of itself is bringing something to the table.
Again I think their critical error was not providing options.
And once again, @Kirk dodges the ultimate question.
@Haiassai You know it's totally and utterly irrelevant in this particular case. Or, at least I'd like to imagine you have enough sense to know that.
@CreamyDream That is exactly what I feel is happening here too. Kid Icarus controlled amazingly well once you played the game for a bit and turned out to be one of my favorite games on the system. The same could apply to this game!
There were some very cool intuitive moments in the initial practicing with the controls for Super Mario Bros. back in the day. You could jump higher by pressing "harder" even though it was actually the length of time you were holding it down.
I remember how so many people swayed the controller in the air as if that would help them move faster. That was the intuitive response to move further or go faster for many. Proabably the reason motion control is more intuitive to non-gamers than for those who have been trained to press their thumb against a little lever.
I also remember falling into pits over and over in SMB and having a blast doing it. Then, eventually mastering it to some degree and the reward in that.
Now, it's not allowed, I guess. People will hate it before they've played it.
@CreamyDream Ah, that's exactly where we differ 100%. I almost always prefer a games that is near flawless (in all areas, from graphics to gameplay) than something that is meh but tried to be different. Each to their own.
@aaronsullivan It's really not the same. Once again, I'd really hope you'd have the sense to know the difference. This is not about simply learning how to play a game. This is about clunky, unintuitive, badly designed controls that do not actually improve the experience over what came before and therefore don't really have a particularly good justification for existing. These controls are not some kind of step forward and upward for the Star Fox franchise. They aren't even a sidestep. They're a step backwards in all the ways the really matter, but they are "new" and "different", for sure, and they do show off some different uses of the GamePad—I'll give Nintendo and Miyamoto that much.
Note: Some people might suggest this particular control "solution" actually is a step forward and upward for the Star Fox franchise (I hope for their sake it's now implemented in every single Star Fox game going forward, until Nintendo decides to "improve" the franchise even further). To that I can but only laugh at them.
Edit: please don't try to circumvent the profanity filter.
@Kirk Is it? One of your biggest arguments is that it lacks fun. Until you've had a try and state that you've had little fun, until you play it and say that it does nothing to the experience, your pathologically-centered argument is solely based on the mixed descriptions from other people. Your arguments may be sound, but until you play it, how can you trash such a game?
@Haiassai Well, kinda like CreamyDream said above: For some people just trying something new might be enough; maybe that's "fun" to them. I don't qualify that as fun.
There's a certain amount of meh I can let whatever game get away with, but there is always a limit before it's just wrong (bad). And, when it comes to controls, my personal limit is very strict, seeing as I consider controls one of the most important elements of pretty much every video game.
@Kirk Just out of curiosity... are you even gonna buy Star Fox Zero? Because you can say all you want about the controls but ultimately you can't have a valid opinion if you have never tried it for yourself!
I'm getting this game and I actually think the controls looks cool but if I don't like it then so be it.
@Kirk Then tell me how you qualify fun. I don't share the same definition as @CreamyDream, but I am not one to trash a game without actually experiencing it. We aren't debating a scientific phenomena which is grounded around objective data. Any game is based around one's experience, which is solely subjective. Yes, there may be certain elements that resonates with a multitude of people, but until you play the game, how can you trash a game? What are you defining as "fun"?
@123akis There is no correlation between buying a game and being able to say whether it has issues or not.
I'm not going to shoot myself in the head, but I can tell you that it wouldn't be good (well not for me personally at least lol).
@toxibunny "people online claim that twin analogue sticks are better than keyboard+mouse for FPSs" lmao
@Haiassai Well, let me put it like this: Stabbing myself in the eye with a needle would not be fun for me. You, however, might think it is fun you. But, just like me, I'm willing to bet the majority of people don't think it's fun for them.
Apply the same basic logic, to whatever degree seems appropriate, to whatever other things we may be talking about now or in the future. . . .
@CreamyDream That all seems reasonable enough to me.
@JaxonH This isn't about using gyro and analog together; certainly, that's not what I ever mentioned it as being about, not even once, and since it seems you're responding to my initial comments and assertions, and not the other way around, I think it's probably good not to confuse your interpretation of what I said with what I actually said.
You don't seem to understand the concept of adding. If you add one thing but have to take away two things in the process, it's not adding. It's subtracting. Unless you're actually trying to claim that adding the ability to aim separately from the direction you are flying by looking at the GamePad and tilting it while not looking at the TV screen has only added to the Star Fox franchise and come at no cost whatsoever in any other possible way—which would of course be total and utter bullsh*t.
Now, I'm not saying this is an exact case of adding one thing and taking away two things. I'm simple saying it's not adding to Star Fox; I'm saying it's ultimately subtracting from Star Fox (for all the reasons I've now covered multiple times above). Do you get me?
@Clownshoes Calibrating every 30 minutes? Luckyyyy! I was placing my wiimote down roughly every 5-10 minutes. I thought Skyward Sword was a decent game other than the never-ending "slash sideways, wait, slash up, wait, slash diagonally" gimmick for EVERY SINGLE ENEMY in the ENTIRE GAME. I honestly preferred Twilight Princess's waggle controls, because it was the functional equivalent of mashing the B button in Ocarina/Majora/Wind Waker.
It's bad if controls are unintuitive and take a long time to master. Sometimes, unintuitive controls can be the best way to play a specific game and end up being good after practice.
Splatoon motion controls took me a few hours time to click, but now I'm used to them there's no turning back. Kid Icarus Uprising controls were a similar story, but that took me to chapter 6 before I didn't hate them.
I will see once Star Fox is released whether it's unintuitive controls are bad bad or if they're bad good.
It's adding inasmuch as it provides a different type of experience- aiming via gyro and the added precision of aiming in cockpit view.
How well it actually works is yet to be determined by yours truly. But that's what it's adding- it's adding a different way to experience the game. Sometimes all it takes is a different method of controls to provide a completely different experience. May be better, may be worse, or it may be about the same. But the experience you will have one playing is undeniably new, and that is what is being brought to the table. The new experience.
Pikmin 2 was analog only on GameCube. But with the New Play Control release on Wii it became a new experience for people. A better experience in my personal opinion. Mario Tennis on GameCube became a new experience on the Wii with the new motion controls. This reboot brings with it not only new content but a new experience through the user input. You may like it or you may hate it but it is undeniably bringing something new to the table.
@Kirk No you misunderstood my point. My point is that until you have actually tried it, you can't accurately give a fair judgement. It's like looking at food and you think "eww that looks disgusting, I won't like it" but then it turns out you like it when you try it. I am not saying you're gonna definetely like the controls and also not saying that I will definetely like it... I just think it looks good but I do have doubts so it may turn out that I don't like it.
@Kirk Thing is though, everyone pretty much agrees that stabbing yourself in the eye is not fun, regardless of their level of experience. So if someone turns up and says, "Yep, I've tried it - it's totally not fun", they're not really going to change many people's opinions; just confirm their presumptions.
Here we have a situation in which some people think, "ooh, this looks like it could be fun/interesting/worthwhile", and some people don't. Some people think it looks like a pointless gimmick, and will be inherently clunky and unintuitive, and won't add much to the experience at all. But there's no universal agreement.
So 'consensus via common sense' doesn't hold, as it does in the "stabbing yourself in the eye" example.
And that's why - in this case - people value opinions that come from some experience. Because they provide insight that can't simply be gleaned by a cursory check of one's imagination. And with that respect for experience comes a corresponding expectation of deference from those who lack it. Which is why I think your rather brash approach to the issue is attracting some concern.
Say what you will about Star Fox Zero's control scheme; it's a long way from stabbing yourself in the eye.
@JaxonH It's definitely adding something, and it's definitely subtracting something too. And, again, not specifically one thing and two things, or one thing half a thing. But, what it adds comes at a cost; that much is for sure. You are right though; it is certainly new.
@123akis Yeah, and you're missing my point.
@Maxz Yeah, it's certainly a long way from stabbing yourself in the eye; that I can agree with.
You are making a determination on the controls being "clunky" and "unintuitive" which are both subjective terms based on a person's experience. If you feel intuitive is a sort of objective absolute, perhaps that's where we differ. No game is initially intuitive to someone who hasn't played with game controllers before and after that everyone has different experiences with gaming. (Those who have played Star Fox games, for instance, may assume that the way it has been done is the "best" by default in the same way some who use dual-sticks for FPS assume it's the best way)
In fact, if you were "right" about this, every single person who has played would say the controls were clunky and unintuitive while in fact many have described it as taking time to learn. Which, in the face of skepticism, I think many read, irrationally, as a confirmation of their bias. Maybe it's just what they say it is? They looked at the instructions, took an amount of time to learn it and then thought it was pretty great. If it's just the amount of time, then it's a sliding scale everyone must experience to know if it's "good" or "bad" for them. Something neither of us has done.
By the way, looking in more than one viewport while controlling a vehicle is the most intuitive action possible as everyone does it immediately when they begin... even when it's their own body they are controlling. The fact that a game is usually confined to one screen and that they aren't encompassed by the environment probably makes the transition to understanding the "windows" harder for some. That doesn't make it unintuitive for all or even clunky.
Anyway, the article is right. This is the key point of discussion about the game and that is a problem for Nintendo.
I'll definitely be checking it out. My son is excited about it and if we find the controls no fun, we'll switch to co-op. We have no hang-ups with motion controls, gyro or 2 screens in other games, though, so my expectation is we'll enjoy it quite a bit from the get go.
It certainly does come at a cost. They should have implemented an alternative control scheme for the more conservatively minded fans. As much as I enjoy gyro when it's done right even I understand it's not for everyone (although I think it could be, if everyone stuck with it until mastered, which would serve them the rest of their lives for every game which implemented such an input method).
One again they could have just provided different control options and none of this would even be a problem.
Instead they decided force a controversial one on people when they could have just as easily made everyone happy.
@Kirk Nope, I did not misunderstand your point. When you have tried it yourself and if you still hate it then fair do. But right now you can't do that lol
@CreamyDream I've played Metroid Prime Hunters extensively. Kid Icarus Uprising has similar means of inputting, but it's actual execution is definitely different. On ground controls in particular really bugged me with the whole flick and tap concept to quick aim and stop. MPH was no where near as slippery.
I don't like Miyamoto's decision to limit Star Fox Zero to his "innovative" control scheme. I do think that there should have been options, as I do think I would prefer to play the game traditionally, like I did with Star Fox 64 3D. Since there are no options and there is a questionable control scheme, the best solution here is for Nintendo to release a shop demo prior to the game's release. I'm interested in the game, but I do not see myself taking a $60 risk here. Having a pre-release demo would help ease my concerns if the scheme is as solid as Miyamoto and Nintendo believes it is.
@DarkKirby Unfortunately, by the very way they've designed this game around these new dual-screen, motion controls, they specifically can't do that in this particular case. You basically could not play this game (as is) if there was an option to fully turn of all the dual-screen, motion control stuff. So says Nintendo—and, on this matter, I'm inclined to believe Nintendo.
Now, if this inarguably improved the experience for everyone and especially over the previous games in the series that already had perfectly working controls that no one ever really complained about (at least not at the time, as I recall, and certainly not the original Star Fox game for sure), it wouldn't really be an issue that you can't choose the control method you prefer (because it would be inarguable better). But, there's clearly some major disagreements about whether this actually improves the game or not.
Hence, Nintendo has created a problem that simply did not exist in previous games in the series.
Some people think it's all ultimately for the better, that Star Fox Zero is now a better Star Fox game by virtue of these new dual-screen, motion controls—not me.
@123akis You still don't get it. And, no matter how many times you make that assertion, it's still questionable, in my opinion.
Edit: circumventing the profanity filter by masking one letter is not acceptable, and the wording was not conducive to an atmosphere we want at NL.
I really doubt the controls will be a major issue--I think back to how some people complained about Skyward Sword's controls, and how I could only shake my head at that--but it is strange that Nintendo wouldn't include a standard control option for SFZ.
@aaronsullivan "No I'm not. You just think I am"
I specifically deleted that comment because I misread your comment. So, you can ignore that comment; it's not relevant because it wasn't in response to what I actually thought you said.
Now. . . .
Learning controls is the process you have to go through for every single game control setup ever created. No one is born knowing how to play any game in existence ever. You always have to learn a game's controls.
If a game has controls that are clunky and unintuitive (those are random choices of descriptions but they will suffice for making the point) then the learning process changes for that of a game where the controls are are fluid and intuitive (again, random choices of descriptions but sufficient for the point).
To learn to play Wii Tennis you did the same action you would in real life, swing your arm and see what happens. It was very simple and easy to learn, but you still had to learn the controls for that particular game to play it, be it what each swing did or how the ball would react, and whatever other little things.
And there are varying degrees of that understanding and learning process with every game as well as how these games play and feel even after we've learned all of the basic control mechanics, which we commonly use to make a broadly understood and accepted judgements of how intuitive and fluid they are (random choices again but fine for point), or whatever.
So, imagine if playing Wii Sports required you to stick a Wiimote up your *ss, turn away from the screen, and waggle your toes until the ball bounced back towards the other players. . . . But, whatever you think, you could learn and master such controls, right. I could make that argument, if I really wanted to. Those controls are, after all, totally fine technically speaking, right. And, maybe some people would relish in playing a tennis game like this.
But, however you want to personally think of the above (maybe you're shoving a Wiimote up your *ss right now, just to see how good it might control a tennis game), I'm going to presume you're getting my point here.
Now, apply to my previous assertion(s) about Star Fox Zero's controls.
I somehow missed this quote of yours earlier:
"These controls are not some kind of step forward and upward for the Star Fox franchise. They aren't even a sidestep. They're a step backwards in all the ways the really matter"
Have you played this game? And I mean the finished game. Because, if you've only played, for instance the demos, you are in no position to make a determination like this at all. How can you know if it is less fun, less rewarding, less entertaining which is how most would judge a step backwards without having played the game in question? Speculation doesn't cut it here.
About that deleted post, I'll update mine as well.
@aaronsullivan Again, see everything I've said above.
When I see a friend of mine playing Splatoon or even Wind Waker HD without gyro enhancement (analog-only), I can't watch his amateurish slowpaced tries to get his aim right for more than a few moments. I can't swallow how much time he wastes on simple things like taking a picture of a seagull, and have to remark what a bad gamer he is. Thankfully Starfox Zero forces the better control scheme on players. Now you really have to use what's best and can't hide behind your dumbness or laziness.
Yeah, I have to agree with you there.
I love Skyward Sword (played it three times!) and had no problems with the actual controls themselves, but all the calibrating is not fun at all! And I was using the WiiMote Plus (the neat LoZ Gold one), that came with the game, too. :/
The way I got that is actually a really nice story about a great manager who especially reserved a copy for us when we missed the first shipment in the holiday rush, but that's another thing, haha.. (I wish more gamers would treat game retail employees better, I've worked in retail and it's no picnic!)
So I have a lot of great memories of Skyward Sword, but the calibrations! Yikes!
Forgetting about everything else, I can't really take what you're saying seriously after you said '99% of Wii games had clunky controls', when it's praised as the most accessible console.
But I'm not really up to debating anything, I don't really care. I'm going to buy Star Fox Zero when it comes out regardless.
For me, the best use of the GamePad is the game Project Zero Maiden of Black Water.
@Kirk Okay, reading your above comments I'll summarize what they add up to when adjusted in light of my own concerns:
Star Fox Zero is worse than SNES Star Fox because this iteration of Star Fox takes more time for many to learn (even though I have no data on how people adjusted to the original SNES Star Fox besides my own experience which I, incedentally, can't directly use in a comparison because I haven't played the final version of Star Fox Zero) "especially" because I know it's a worse game as a result. After all, I can infer that it's worse from speculation and a few individual reactions and reactionary bait-articles while ignoring those that praise it.
It's just not convincing to me. Can't speak for anyone else.
So people want standard games with a standard controller and never have anything different. Please god no. No. Nooooooooo
So... taking a step back here's my perspective:
The original Star Fox was created entirely out of a desire to prove the use of new hardware (the FX chip). It was unproven and a risk. The controls with a control pad, not a joystick was a pretty new thing for that type of game. The experience was weird for console gamers and looked really bad in screenshots. It was awesome, actually. It took a lot of imagination because of the crude graphics. It took a lot of making exceptions for new problems like a low frame rate which was unheard of for most Nintendo games.
It's a different time, a different need for Nintendo, and now there are fans and expectations for this particular franchise.
Still, much of that stuff applies. We were willing to put up with something odd and hope for a great experience and it paid off. Made me a fan.
Star Fox Zero lacks the cool buzzword (3D!) and attraction of anything but a franchise many have wanted to return.
For me, an innovative approach to the basic core gameplay was one of many new approaches I was hoping for. I have concerns about it, but I remember how Star Fox 64 felt like a huge let down the first time I played through it. It was short, the music was of poor quality compared to the original. The controls were natural and the analog stick was immediately nicer, but I didn't find the real fun in it until I started finding the secret routes and trying to do better and better. Then, I loved it.
I guess that's why adjusting to the controls doesn't bother me so much. I don't expect them to be bad, ultimately. I'm not really hearing that very much from even negative impressions. It's more about some long learning curves. When you get there, like maybe with Splatoon for many, I'm betting it feels fluid and precise. I'm hoping, as a player, I'll know when to look on the GamePad to my advantage and I expect the extra mastery to be satisfying: Just like it was to play through SF64 over and over.
Maybe a more direct comparison is Bionic Commando on the NES. That was truly clunky feeling at first. You can't jump? What? Mario says all platforming heroes must jump! Yet, the grab and swing mechanic made me feel awesome when I mastered it. What a feeling that game gave me. Took a long time, too. Definitely unintuitive given my previous experience. I'm glad I didn't write it off when I rented it.
Maybe all that makes it hard to see your point of view. Either way, it's going to be a fun Nintendo year to talk about and I'll be glad to hear your perspective.
10 years later motion controls are still causing large angry paragraphs in the news comments.
@Kaviam Just like in a recent interview with FF15 team that said the FF Creator (Whose name I forget) old ways had to be changed and they took over and made it how it is now.
The problem the Wii U had was that it was simply making updated versions of the 3DS games. 3D Land....3D World, New Super Mario Bros 2...New Super Mario Bros U, Super Smash Bros 3DS.....Wii U as well. Had Splatoon come as a launch title the same way that Uprising and 3D Land were launch titles for the 3DS, then the Wii U would have done just as well as the 3DS.
Now I wouldn't mind the gimmicks if I got the Wii U. But Nintendo should have made extensive use of the Gamepad and should have made the Gamepad sold separately as well. Sure, its still cheaper but it could be even more cheaper if they made another model that does so and it doesn't even have to have backwards compatibility.
I love the DS and 3DS and I am fine with whatever gimmicks Nintendo has to put for the next games and so on as long as its fun to play with.
@Kirk Such a sheeple. Won't try it, but assumes the control is like stabbing oneself in the eye with a needle - because hey, that's what he took away from some previews of the game! Because Kirk evidently doesn't trust himself enough to form his own hands-on opinion. Obviously, these paid critics are always 1000% factually correct, every time! I mean, unless it's something Kirk doesn't personally agree with.
People seem to have forgotten the controversy over the original Star Fox and how it was received very polarizing.
Many people hated the original Star Fox for a variety of reasons including the control scheme.
Even Star Fox 64 received a lot of hate when it came out because it used analog stick and it's button layout. A lot of people hated and still do hate how badly Star Fox 64 plays.
Star Fox Adventure was heavily criticized for the way it controlled.
Star Fox Assault was heavily criticized for the way it controlled on foot missions and how the Arwing missions controlled.
Star Fox Command received heavy criticism for the way it controlled.
Star Fox 64 3D faced heavy criticism for all it's control options
Every Star Fox game to date has been very polarizing on how it controls and plays.
You either love or hate it, none have been universally accepted.
"The issue, of course, is that the lack of a universally accessible and understandable control scheme will put some off to the point that, not unreasonably, they won't be inclined to spend a lot of money to try them out."
This is not unique to SFZ, but rather sums up Wii U as a whole to a tee. This is quite literally why the console ultimately failed.
Guess I'll hAve to pass which sucks.I have to play splat with normal controls.I wanna play star Fox on my 55in tv not forced to play on the gAme pad.guess I'll have to play star Fox 64 on the Wii vc
@smashbrolink say that to the guy who wants to play star Fox on my 55in tv not gamepad
@Xenocity @Slim1999 this star Fox and the star Fox on the ds suck.every other star Fox play fine
Maybe to you.
Plenty of reviewers and others have openly complained about each entry having horrible controls.
No Star Fox has universal praise.
Nintendo, once again, find themselves in the damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario.
If they released Star Fox with traditional controls, there would be complains of a rehash, if not, we have this discussion. The best choice would have been to have both control choices, but to dismiss one completely before the game is out?
I'm not saying it is good or bad. But the unwillingness to try anything new is astounding.
I went back and played through the original Star Fox the other day, from start to finish, for the first time since probably 1995 - it was one of my favorite games as a kid and I wanted to remember why. So, I absolutely could not believe how shoddy the controls seemed to be. They were not exactly 'intuitive'. And coupled with some universally low frame rates, one might even wonder how the game was ever a success to begin with. Oh, right - because it pushed the boundaries of what could be done in a console game at the time. The graphics still strangely hold up, in spite of their extraordinarily low amount of polygons. And after an hour of playing, I finally re-mastered the controls. Even playing against the original Star Fox's many glaring limitations, I had a blast doing it all the same. It's called LEARNING A GAME!
People often criticize Nintendo for being TOO universal in their control schemes, to the point of 'talking down to the gamer'. Yet, with Zero, the company is clearly offering up a fresh challenge using the system's available resources (the original Star Fox did the same!), and some people are STILL complaining! And some of these people haven't even tried it out for themselves!
I'm shocked that you both would be immediately critical and negative at this.
Ugh, another game doomed to be overlooked because gamers of this generation are terrified of change and close-minded to a fault.
Wii U will probably be my last console ever. I'll stick to PC for the big screen experience. I hope Nintendo continues it's handheld market where the budgets won't necessarily break a company when whiny, entitled, timid gamers latch on to a talking point and sink an otherwise innovative game.
@andywitmyer - Well put, Nostalgia is a powerful thing, and so are talking points.
You have to understand that -some- of these critics hate EVERYTHING Nintendo does because it's Nintendo and no other reason .
I'm buying the physical release because I think it looks fun.
I passed on Pokken Tournament because I wasn't really up to mastering a fighting game and the selection of fighters didn't interest me...but unlike these perpetual critics, I can pass on a game and let others enjoy it rather then obsessing that everyone known how much I'm filled with hate for Nintendo because something wasn't exactly what I expected.
And here I am having already had issues with the controls of older installments into this franchise and being really bad at the game as a partial result of it. I don't know why but I just can't play Star Fox right up to the point of failing tons of times at the first Wolf battle at Fortuna. Yeah, I definitely look more forward to that new Ratchet & Clank than this.
"but unlike these perpetual critics, I can pass on a game and let others enjoy it rather then obsessing that everyone known how much I'm filled with hate for Nintendo because something wasn't exactly what I expected."
Wait, @Action51 ...you mean you don't believe that your own subjective opinion on a game you've never played isn't still universally regarded matter of fact that must be accepted by anyone who reads the comments section of Nintendo Life??
@Clownshoes yes yes yes... I'm still haunted by Miyamoto revealing Wii music, I knew right then and there that he had lost his marbles and possibly had dementia...
@smashbrolink I guess my question would then be why is it that you watch YouTube videos and even videos on Nintendo life of the new game, and everyone that plays it is absolutely terrible, they are trying to shoot the enemies, and you see them miss and miss and miss and miss and miss it and finally they get one isn't a missing missing missing missing, and then finally they get one, it really sounds terrible. 😢😢😢😢
@Monado_III then why is everyone that plays it on YouTube and even this website, how come they are always so terrible watch them Miss and miss and miss even on the first two levels, the digital Foundry video is absolutely hilarious, he cannot hit anything, and it's all down to the new Innovative controls 😢😢😢
Most of my hesitation comes down to the fact that I find looking at a second screen while other stuff is going on to be very distracting. I rarely keep tabs on what the map looks like during Splatoon, for instance, because it requires me to completely divert my attention from the game itself, and I'm terrified someone is going to shoot me while I'm fixated on that screen. Motion controlled aiming sounds great, however, as it addresses one of my issues with the older Star Fox games: I had to maneuver my ship into the line of fire if I wanted to shoot at an enemy.
I guess how much I like this game will come down to how often I'm forced to look at the GamePad. If it's just for precision aiming during boss fights and whatnot, I'll be fine, but I don't want to shift attention from the TV when stuff is flying at my ship.
@CreamyDream It wouldn't be exaggeration at all on my part to say that the controls ruined Kid Icarus: Uprising for me. In every other way, it was a fun, charming, extremely well-made game, but those controls made it no fun to play. Same with MP: Hunters, to be honest.
@Kirk So... in essence, you have no clue what you label as fun so you'll use outlandish analogies soaked in the blood of a red herring as to avoid the real issue. Cool — glad we got that out of the way.
Just wanted to say I really enjoyed reading your comment.
I had a similar experience back when I first started gaming on the SNES, though I only really got into video games with the release of the Dreamcast and 64.
I'm sure the controls will be fine. At worst it'll just be Skyward Sword all over again, a game where a lot of people didn't mind the controls, and a lot of people did. The game looks fantastic in my opinion, though.
For people who are afraid of the learning curve associated with learning a dual-screen control set-up:
Nintendo did manage to include an Invincibility Mode. People have made fun of this feature as it seems to 'pander to n00bs' or whatever, but maybe it will be useful for anyone who'd like to get a hang of the controls first.
Of course, this optional mode will be available from the outset...but, I guess people who are too hardcore to ever (publicly admit) to using such a feature will moan about 'having to master' a new control scheme no matter what.
@Kaviam same feelings here... a lot of his comments absolutely drive me nuts. Specially when he's says they are forgoing putting a franchise on the current platform because he can't think of anything new. I'm like "what new like Wii music?"
Time for him to retire
@Monado_III. I know, right? Check it out:
"The experience using a analog controller is totally different from using a keyboard and mouse combo. I tried xbox controller with Bulletstorm yesterday and wow, it is much more fun than using a keyboard and mouse combo. The aiming of xbox controller is such a hassle that it makes the game a bit more challenging and funner. With a keyboard and mouse or the Wiimote, the aiming is too acurate that it is not as fun. Also i get much less motion sickness from using an xbox controller than using a the mouse to look around. So for all the PC gamers that never try a console controller for their pc gaming, I suggest you get an xbox/playstation controller. I can see why console gamers argue that playing fps with analog sticks take more skill than a keyboard and mouse combo because it is kind of true."
@Kirk By your logic, I guess the new Doom game (or just first person shooters in general) should have the exact same controls as the first Doom game because you could play the first game fine with it's original control scheme.
Game pad is awesome !
I wasn't originally going to buy this (the control scheme admittingly turned me off a bit), BUT I saw a Youtuber play it, and he said the controls were pretty good (it apparently takes about 45 minutes to completely get used to them, but that can change depending on the player too, everybody's different!)
Thankfully, my EB Games (Gamestop for everybody else) lets you return new games within a week of purchasing it, if you have a Platinum card, so I'm not too concerned if I end up just not "clicking" with the controls.
You needed a touch screen explaining to you? Or how to move your arms around and pretend you were playing Tennis? That my Gran could figure out? Rrrrrrreally? I mean I admire your efforts to defend Nintendo but....really? Hmmmm.
"Then gamers should rent Star Fox Zero first before they buy it."
Or Nintendo could put up a demo. Like they have with other games.
"In fact, gamers would save themselves alot of trouble and angry rants about how "Nintendo is out of touch and isn't the 'same old Nintendo'" on Nintendo Life message boards"
You mean less people would discuss Nintendo video games on the message board of a website that has Nintendo in its title and exists to cover Nintendo video games? That doesn't strike me as a good thing, people are allowed to put up 'angry rants' as well positive comments. That's what Message Boards are for.
It's sad that Nintendo implemented this forced 'innovative' yet unintuitive control scheme that the majority of people don't seem to like/can't get into. Haven't played the game, but tbh it seems awkward as heck.
So weird, especially considering Nintendo and especially Miyamoto himself are always going on about making games fun and easy to play, and accessible to anyone.
Moreover, forcing the game to use 2 screens has greatly reduced the visual quality. :/ I'm just sad about this whole thing.
It's a clear case of trying to be innovative just for the sake of being innovative - they've tried way too hard to desperately come up with some spectacular use of the Gamepad, yet in the end the game suffers for it, both visually and control-wise.
I think it's more that 'fans' is too wide-ranging a word. Some fans may have been complaining about games not using the Gamepad and this may be a reaction to that but similarly a lot weren't. Using what 'fans' say on the internet to justify doing (or not doing) something doesn't work. What if the group wanting a Starfox game and the group wanting games that used the Gamepad are entirely different Nintendo fans?
As a postscript, this is Nintendo, a company that in the past has been open and indeed proud about not listening to fans and letting their creators make what they want. This game got made because Miyamoto wanted it made.
I agree there are risks with a demo but I think they're lower than the risk of having punters buying a game and finding they don't like it especially if it's because of the controls. That's going to upset people and potentially impact future sales.
I think the crux of the matter is Nintendo could have included options regarding the controls as they've done in so many others. It's a gamble as there is a lot of competition for people's video-gaming time (indeed, their entertainment time) out there. If forcing people to use a certain control method means increased criticism and reduced sales they'll have to take it on the chin.
I'll say it again as well, it needs a demo. I'm looking forward to giving it a try as I've ordered the Special Edition with Guard on a disc but others will want to give it a go before spending their hard-earned.
As others have mentioned I think the simple solution is to make a demo available. Whilst others think that you can get used to even badly designed controls, I personally find it a potentially game breaking aspect, in fact I'd go as far as to say a decent control scheme is the most important element of a game. Of course this can be to some degree subjective. For example a individual used to FPS control schemes are naturally going to find similar controls easy whilst a newcomer will maybe struggle at first. Yet elements such as responsiveness, I'd argue, are mandatory for a enjoyable experience. Again, why I think a demo is important; with something as controversial as Star Fox's new controls I'd consider it only common courtesy.
@smashbrolink I picked up Star Fox 64 because of the sale price and I've never played a Star Fox game since the original SNES which I found disappointing because it was on-rails. I don't mind rails shooters as much now (in fact I have several good ones for the Wii), but damn if the controls aren't unnecessarily complicated with "shoehorned" c-button functions that seem unnecessary and easy to forget - not to mention the barrel rolls!
If anything Zero's controls sound more intuitive and flexible. I've already experienced frustration in Star Fox 64 with not being able to hit targets because my view won't arbitrarily move down a couple of degrees which takes me right out of the game.
@FACEOFBEAR Yes, the definition of boring. I cannot understand why Microsoft made a new controller (and charged an extra twenty quid) for the Xbox One when NOTHING HAS CHANGED. Similarly the touchpad on the Dualshock 4 is the very definition of a useless gimmick - which again costs an extra twenty quid.
But hey, let's complain about motion controls and dual screen gaming some more.
@Haiassai Twin stick shooting from a couple of early arcades game that worked brilliantly and were instantly understandable and enjoyable, before Star Fox SNES even:
At least know what you are talking about if you're going to try to make a point.
You keep trying to make excuses for Star Fox Zero's controls but on most accounts you simply don't understand where the issue truly lies and what the problem actually is.
@JTMnM It may seem premature but I'm willing to bet money that you're 100% correct in your judgement.
@SaKo Nope; that's by YOUR logic and incorrect interpretation of what I said, because that's really not what I said at all.
@Zibene999 "I can't really take what you're saying seriously after you said '99% of Wii games had clunky controls', when it's praised as the most accessible console."
Well, there's your problem right there, because it's widely acknowledged that the Wii's library was full of waggle-fest junk, with a few gems hidden in among the junk.
Most of the games that worked best on Wii either focussed on the pointer controls or basically didn't use the motion controls, and only a few that did truly proved the value of the motion controls.
All I can say is people are now used to joystick controls for fps like cod even though a mouse and keyboard is far superior 😂
@Kirk You keep saying "it makes it worse", but I've played it up to the point where I could use the controls in it just fine, AND IT MADE THE GAME BETTER FOR ME.
It gave me an advantage.
None of your narrow-minded BS changes that.
@smashbrolink Good for you; keep living the dream.
@3MonthBeef Different scheme, same effect; being able to shoot outside of your flight path is an advantage.
And at a certain point, if it wasn't trying to aim so far outside of it that I didn't see the reticle anymore, I didn't even need to look at the pad to accomplish it, during all-range battles.
The point is that people are unfairly and inaccurately claiming that this control scheme lends no advantage to the player.
And that's just not true.
It's a BS claim made mostly by people that either sucked at using them or haven't tried the game out themselves.
The logic behind its advantage is obvious, and when mastered it holds up to be true in practice.
That's 100% fact.
@Kirk And keep living in denial.
The rest of us will master the controls and enjoy the game while you gladly skip out on a game you couldn't control well if you tried.
@Sean_Aaron Yeah, I remember having to get used to the c-button controls too, but it was worth it.
Being able to run around in multiplayer with a bazooka, blasting Slippy straight in his smug face.
That was a special kind of awesome that made all the grueling effort of getting golds on every mission worth the time, no matter how often I got somewhat frustrated with the controls in the beginning.
The learning period was worth it, and I sincerely enjoyed the ride.
Never did get to entirely clear the original, though...
My SNES broke down and I never got a new one in time to finally beat that damnable Atom Smasher boss.XD
We will never know 100% for sure unless they come out and so so, but keep in mind that E3 showed a LOT of listening to fans. Earthbound reference, Zelda Majoras Mask remake and new Star Fox announcement.
Miamoto wanted to make it yes, but before or after Nintendo internally discussed the issues needing to be addressed? Nintendo has had a history of not listening- which is precisely why that E3 was so revealing.
I didn't adapt to Splatoon. I freely admit, I was just not willing to take the time and make the effort necessary. Not to mention that at the time, it was quite literally the only game, where that particular set of skills, would have been of any use whatsoever.
Also, it played just fine without making use of the gyro-assisted controls ... so I really didn't see any necessity to go out of my way.
I love StarFox, but I'm still not sure how much of a "learning"-investment I'm willing to make for a single game. I applaud Nintendo for trying to do something different, not just wandering down the beaten path, but at the same time, I really also must admonish them, for once more relying on "gimmicky" avenues, like integrating a 2nd-screen and a gyro sensor, to ultimately achieve this.
What happened to innovation through software design? I mean like leveldesign, gamemechanics and such ... honestly, the best part of Splatoon was most certainly not it's "innovative" control scheme (which again, I basically completely ignored after a short trial period), but the fact, that the game was beautifully crafted and balanced, as well as masterfilly designed around a single really unique and fun gameplay-hook.
Stop tinkering with things that are beyond not-broken, and focus on stuff that is really in desperate need of reimagination (just as the shooter genre was).
Been away for a while , but not surprised to see the usual suspects still railing against Nintendo. I find it amusing the way people are certain the game has bad or broken controls , even though they haven't played the game in question , and , in some cases , don't even own the console that the game is made for ! So , the chances of them buying the game were extremely remote at best anyway. If Shigsy and Nintendo want Starfox to control like this then fair enough , it is up to them , they have designed the game this way. An eShop demo would allay most peoples fears. The Wii U offers gamers more control options than other consoles , yet so called Nintendo fans would prefer to play with a NES pad.
For the NX , Nintendo should just update the NES pad with a night light like the PS4 - now that is innovation in gaming.
Nonsequitor points for @Kirk
I think what this ultimately boils down to for everyone in this argument is hubris. @kingofthesofa clearly I don't spend enough time on the NL forums to notice who has it and who doesn't, but you are so right: the people who have made the most bombastic remarks speak only in conjecture rather than their own experience of the game (or apparently the Wii U, now that I hear) being fun or not. Fascinating.
@Kirk - please refrain from trying to circumvent the profanity filter. Thanks.
I don't know about anyone sense, but I love weird new control schemes like this. It's primarily why I'm getting this game! I've been asking for Nintendo to use the Gamepad more, and now they finally have! I don't care whether it ends up being better or worse.
I am looking forward too Star Fox. I am excited too see how the controls will help the playing experience or maybe hinder it.
Still excited to play this. Once again I'm in the minority of online internet outrage, but thats Ok, N64 had the best controller ever and the gamepad is 2nd. And I still dislike the gamecube controller, but those are all opinions and just dont matter, what matters is if I will have fun with StarFox Zero and I'm optimistic
Nintendo needs to go back to the classic US Navy acronym KISS = Keep It Simple Stupid
Pretty amazing how in less then one video gaming console generation we've gone from embracing motion controls, to being terrified of them and hating them blindly.
My opinion has always been:
If it's done right, it can add to the game.
As someone who really enjoyed the motion controls in Sin and Punishment 2 (remember it relied heavily on pointer controls) and ExciteTruck/ExciteBots ...I'm really looking forward to Starfox Zero.
It should be one of those great palette cleanser games that you can jump in to for a short but exciting break.
Splatton's a different animal. It was a new IP in a genre Nintendo hasn't really dabbled in (FPS/3rd person shooters). So despite its smart sensible uses of the Gamepad, the focus is on its unique compelling take on the online competitive 3rd person shooter genre.
Star Fox is an established franchise which really nailed its formula with its second series release, Star Fox 64. It was a perfect on-rail shooter. Personally, I love the series but outside of adding a co-op mode any improvements to its established formula would be incremental. A control scheme offered by a 2nd screen acting as a turret that aims off the TV screen is a smart way to shake up the series and give more power to the player.
The main reason why there is controversy over these new controls is because fans have developed a preconceived notion of what they think the controls "should be" based on how previous games in the series played. If these controls were used for a new IP, they'd be better embraced. But in order for long time franchises to remain successful they sometimes need to surprise and stimulate long time fans in new ways. And level design isn't enough. "Software innovation" can only go so far. It sometimes takes a hardware innovation.
@electrolite77 Exactly, a demo would be perfect, as I'm interested in the game, but since the controls are so divisive, I'd like to try it out before plonking down 60 or so Euros.
There's literally no reason at all for Nintendo not to release a short demo. If ever a game sorely needed one, it's this one.
@toxibunny I just died a little
@gcunit I'm actually censoring myself, going to the deliberate effort to make sure there's no proper swear words in any of my posts, and you're moaning about it (and likely more is coming, I expect).
I'm not gonna write actual f'n swear words (trusting some random lines of code to auto-censor them) just so the mods can ban me for swearing, which is exactly the kind of thing that would happen. But, if it's okay with you, I'd actually like to express REAL emotions and sentiments as opposed to completely artificial ones. Sometimes that requires more than "Happy, happy, sunshine and rainbows, all sweet and sugary, candy land).
Please don't moan and create an issue when I have not made a single actual swear word in these d*mn comments. Censoring myself so I'm not actually swearing, ever, is better than a bunch of other people would do.
Or, are we even censoring the slightest hints at swear words on the Internet now?
Is that really how artificial, saccharine, and oppressed any actual human communication online has become?
I'm dead serious: Am I about to get banned for NOT ACTUALLY SWEARING—NOT EVEN ONCE?
I swear to Christ, if there were some way to take legal action against sites when they basically threaten to, or actually do, oppress people's natural voices on what is supposed to be an open and free Internet, for basically nothing.
We talk about life, liberty, freedom of expression, equality, fighting oppression, and all that other stuff, but it seems we don't really practice it in the places where it actually matters—the forums where most of us "socialise" and "communicate" in the modern digital world—only when it makes us looks good or fit in with the rest of the PC media crowd or whatever.
Christ, it's a f'n joke, that now I'm actually scared to even NOT swear—less I get banned.
@Haiassai It's "non sequitur", not "nonsequitor".
If you're gonna bother trying to use "big boy" words . . . at least actually bother.
Also, I guess we'll see once the reviews come rolling around. . . .
Seriously? I've beaten SS at least once a year since it's release. I calibrate the controller once during the on-screen prompt before starting the game and rarely ever have to recalibrate.
Perhaps your battery isn't fully charged or something else is going on with your angle to your TV?
Okay everybody calm down. The fact of the matter is that Fox McCloud must have official approved this new control scheme for his Arwings because they must be beneficial in his war against Andross. I am sure that Slippy worked hard at calibrating the Arwings just right and Fox and the rest of the team did extensive testing before they gave their approval. I trust Fox McCloud's judgement. I mean, he is an official Arwing pilot, I don't think any of you can claim that title.
I'm starting to think all of these articles about Star Fox's controls are click-bait type articles that are filler until the game actually releases. These same discussions have been had before. Obviously some like the motion controls and some do not, which in itself is probably a pretty divisive thing considering the small user-base the Wii U currently has. Nintendo's smartest business decision would be to make everyone happy and offer both and alter the game experience to match that (it can't be that hard to delete a few enemies out of a line up so you don't need to use certain features, and perhaps add them in the waves on the forward end). I'm curious to see how Star Fox Zero turns out and will happily try the new control scheme but overall I'm skeptical; I do not enjoy motion controls and turn them off regularly. I hated the waggle of the Wii mote and played Xbox 360 games primarily last generation and will do so if this is Nintendo's future. If a significant portion of Nintendo's fan want them, Nintendo would be wise to include controls that appeal to those players; the opposite is also true. The fact that we are endlessly debating this proves it is splitting a limited install base and is not in Nintendo's best interest. I hope the game/controls are great, but I will be reading the review (on this site and others) very carefully before I spend my money.
I'm going to throw a spanner in the works and make the claim that this entire issue isn't even so much about the game's controls and as it is about the game's mechanics, and that this assertion has been skewing entire debate from the start.
For something to be solely about the controls, it needs to be just that; about the input, rather than the mechanics or gameplay. Examples of solely control based changes would be the inversion of the Y-Axis, the reassignment of certain buttons, or a change in sensitivity of the control stick. Yes, you may may now need to press down to go up, or B (rather than A) to fire, or be a little less gung-ho with the control stick, but the gameplay and mechanics remain essentially unchanged. If the game reacted sluggishly or unresponsively to your inputs, these could also be chalked down to the controls.
In this case, if the only thing Star Fox Zero changed were the controls, we'd essentially have a game that was largely identical to Star Fox 64 in terms of actual gameplay and general mechanics.
But that's not the case; we do have a rather obvious new mechanic, and it's this that's causing the most controversy, rather than the games' control scheme itself. This of course being the untying of one's flight path from one's aiming reticule.
This is as much a new mechanic and wall jumps and ground-pounds were to 2D Mario; probably more so. So it's misleading to simply state that the game just 'controls differently', when the real issue is that you're being tasked with a significantly new style of gameplay to master; a completely new mechanic.
And it's undoubtably a more sophisticated mechanic; there's no arguing that shooting in the direction you're flying is simpler than shooting one way and flying another, but the advantages of the latter option seem intuitively obvious; you no longer have to choose between shooting an enemy and flying into an obstacle (which could be especially prevalent in SF64's narrow corridor sections). So it's more sophisticated, but ultimately more freeing, and in addition allows for greater variety of level design due to not having to deal with the shortcomings of the previous setup.
The irony of the whole thing is that it appears to be those who posture as 'hardcore gamers' that are rallying most heavily against having to learn a new gameplay mechanic, despite also being the ones who have claimed that Nintendo games are lacking sophistication and are designed 'for kids'.
Frequently, it's the assertion that this whole controversy is purely an issue of 'controls' that is used as the justification for such resentment, though this clearly misses the point. There have been comparisons made between "getting used to the controls" and "getting used to a nasty smell", which does make the case that it is possible to become accustomed to some unpleasant (which doesn't make it any more pleasant), but completely overlooks the evident advantages of the new mechanics (see "not having to fly into a wall to shoot something" point made earlier), and treats the issue as though we're simply getting Star Fox 64 with some weird input scheme, when we're not. At the heart of this controversy is the fact that you're able (and in fact forced) to do something that you could not do in Star Fox 64.
As such, I think this is a disingenuous comparison. While you can get used to sitting in a smelly room, there are no clear advantages to doing so (over simply airing the room out). However, the advantages of untying the target reticule from your flight path - to my eyes - seem a lot more evident, and is more in line with the examples @Project_Dolphin has quoted above (okay, I'm blowing my own trumpet here - sorry). That is, things like learning to drive/swim/ride a bike/etc. Things that take time but deliver an obvious reward. Riding a bike is mechanically a world away from walking, and feels completely alien at first, but the advantages of having done so are evident; it's significantly more efficient and quicker than walking, and gives millions of kids around the world their first taste of freedom and independence; just as walking is more efficient and quicker than crawling, and crawling is more efficient and quicker than sitting in your own excrement and bawling your eyes out.
In short; Star Fox Zero does not simply task you with a convoluted way of achieving the same result; it introduces a brand new mechanic, which offers pretty obvious benefits, but (like any new mechanic) needs to be properly practised and learnt.
Of course, this doesn't rule out the possibility that the mechanic actually isn't particularly well implemented - that's definitely still a possible - but is a secondary issue; the primary being that new mechanic exists at all and thus needs learning.
Regardless of whether new mechanic is well implemented, it will necessitate a period of adaption by virtue of it simply being 'new'. Star Fox Zero is in the rather precarious position of hinging its entire campaign on this new mechanic, rather than gradually introducing it over a familiar gameplay template, so every player will be left feeling a little out of their comfort zone as soon as they swoop into Corneria. However, the fact that you're not a master at something as soon as you touch it does not mean the thing itself is bad (though it doesn't eliminate the possibility either); it could well just mean it's new or unfamiliar, as is definitely the case here.
But the day we start rejecting anything new or unfamiliar in video games is the day that the medium has truly become stagnant. Perhaps some people don't actually want to master new challenges so much as be continually patted on the back for the techniques they've already mastered, but I don't think it's unreasonable that in such a young medium, we're still being asked to perform tasks that we're genuinely unfamiliar with.
Obviously, the game doesn't automatically deserve praise simply for introducing new mechanics to a well-worn series, but neither does it deserve to be instinctively dragged through the mud by a bunch of agenda-fueled, cantankerous old sourpusses who've yet to even play it.
It deserves thought, consideration, and ideally; experience. And I suppose all our bickering is really doing is just filling the time until that becomes available.
EDIT: Good GRIEF that turned out long. Sorry Thomas, it's no longer your Editorial; I've hijacked it. I should really just get a blog or something... O.o
We are all gamers, why can't we adapt to new control schemes? Anything that is different from the norm is instantly called a gimmick YET we expect new and original experiences and innovations!
I guarantee the same people who are complaining would still complain had Nintendo stayed with the standard input.
This is the first Star Fox since Star Fox 64 that I've pre-ordered and I'm excited for. Yes one year ago I was shocked, but since there has been so much polish added this will probably be my GOTY.
@Kirk Agreed Kirk. The reason I bought a Wii U was because it is different.
@Kirk ”We talk about life, liberty, freedom of expression, equality, fighting oppression, and all that other stuff, but it seems we don't really practice it in the places where it actually matters—the forums where most of us "socialise" and "communicate" in the modern digital world—only when it makes us looks good or fit in with the rest of the PC media crowd or whatever."
I'm pretty sure most people grasp that their liberties require some sort of modulation depending on context. For example, running into the middle of a nursery at lunch time and yelling every curse word you're aware of is at the very least frowned upon, rather than being seen as a healthy extension of one's freedoms.
Similar appreciation of context applies on the internet. The internet is not one big homogeneous lump with one universal set of rules. Some places cater to particular audiences, other places to others. Websites generally have their own guidelines and rules, and users of those websites agree to abide by those rules when they sign up.
This is generally understood by anyone with cursory knowledge of the internet and normally accepted as an unremarkable necessity.
It's charming how you seem to be casting yourself as some sort of universal crusader for justice, liberty and freedom, when all you're really doing is complaining about how you're not allowed to swear on what is (amongst other things) a kid's gaming website. Not a 'non-adult' website, but a website to be read and used by all ages, which is why the rules as they are.
If you insist on playing the role of Captain Profanity, you're not starved for choice in terms of places on the internet where swearing is accepted. But this isn't one of them, and users are generally expected to be able to make a coherent point without the use of expletives.
I must admit though, I found the threat of taking legal action against a kids' website to protect your right to swear quite amusing.
There are excellent examples of modern day oppression to be made, but I don't think that's one of them.
I'm hyped for this game and I'm looking forward to using the motion controls to aim at enemies, something that has been fairly difficult to do without crashing into things in the previous games.
While I see what they were going for (fly here, shoot there), I feel the Wiimote and nunchuck did it better anyway using the pointer and an analogue stick, in something like Sin and Punishment. Plus dropping the second screen may have benefited a stable fps.
My reaction to Zero was that it felt awkward to play, would really benefit from a demo I think.
@Maxz The point is that the is no f'n profanity in my posts. I AM "modulating" them! But, apparently even that isn't enough for people like you—and that's where I have the problem, because:
F'n is not swearing (it's an f followed an ' followed by an n. There is no such swear word in the English language). Same goes for *ss too; it's not swearing. D*mn is not swearing either.
They are all basically censored words. A censored word is not swearing. That's the whole d*mn point in censoring them.
When you can't even NOT swear without some kind of warning, like you're about to be banned if you continue, we have a f'n problem. The fact you can't see that, or don't think it's an issue, shows just how bad the problem has gotten.
Also, Nintendo Life is not a "kids" website, and any action taken would be against any website that tries to basically oppress natural human speech that DOESN'T CONTAIN ANY SWEARING or threats of violence or posts of sexual imagery or whatever other crap might offend OTT sensitive people, just implied swearing and little else.
I mean, what next? Are we going to get threats of banning for using this kind of thing "#[email protected]&%!"? When WILL it be at a point where you too see how totally absurd and oppressive it is becoming to engage in heated debate on the Internet?
We want to protect people from the bad stuff, sure, but that doesn't mean stopping anything at all that isn't all sunshine and rainbows and totally sugar-coating and forcibly faking the communications and behaviours of the entire online world in utterly absurd ways. People say bad words, and as long as they are censored on sites like this, which all my bad words are (by me personally), then there really shouldn't be a problem.
Censored swear words should not be something mods are warning posters about, not on a site like Nintendo Life. That's just ridiculous, and it IS oppressive.
And it's not a kids site; it's a general gaming site, full of all ages of visitors, young and old. And, again, I'm not actually swearing!
So, yeah, I'll take up the mantle of being the "universal crusader for justice, liberty and freedom", if need be.
@Action51 "I passed on Pokken Tournament because I wasn't really up to mastering a fighting game and the selection of fighters didn't interest me...but unlike these perpetual critics, I can pass on a game and let others enjoy it rather then obsessing that everyone known how much I'm filled with hate for Nintendo because something wasn't exactly what I expected."
My sentiments exactly.
@Kirk ...you're judging my character and argument based on a spelling error? You're that desperate to respond that way?
I think a better response is to see the reviews and user reactions.
@Haiassai Zero desperation.
I just figured since you were being a douche about it and trying to use certain words to make it sound like you had a valid argument against my points when you really don't, I'd just call you out on it. I mean, if you can't even spell the big boy words properly. . . .
You can throw in big boy words all you want. It won't make me change what I'm saying or provide you with ammo to lesson the validity of my assertions.
The assertions speak for themselves, as do all the points I've made around them, and we'll see how the reviews turn out. . . .
The real question is: are there language options? Can I play in Japanese??
@Kirk - Free internet or not, Nintendo Life has published Community Rules that apply across the site. I like a cuss as much as anyone, and use them whenever I can, but I acknowledge that NL is not a place for that, so I refrain.
NL Moderators are guided by a document that explicitly refers to partially-censored profanity and asks Moderators to edit it out.
I've not mentioned anything about a ban, but it's up to you whether you want to respect the Community Rules or not, and if you can't then you know what to expect.
But I'm sure someone with your verbal dexterity doesn't really have any trouble expressing real emotions without having to resort to profanity. Thanks.
@gcunit THERE ARE NO CUSSES IN MY POSTS!
There are a few self-censored words.
Where do we draw the line?
Soon I won't be able to call someone a tool, or a douche, or use even slightly conflicting language—less some plonker gets all upset and starts crying a river.
Like I said, only speaking like two year olds, with sentences that are written like a ******* Spot book, full of only nice and polite words that speak of cupcakes and dandelions, is not human; it's artificial, inhuman bull—even on a site like Nintendo Life. Is that honestly what you consider an open and free Internet. This ain't a kid's nursery page or whatever. It's a gaming site, full of all ages of visitors.
It's ridiculous that even censored words are now considered too offensive or threatening, or whatever—such that I'm being warned for "swearing".
How the HELL can you people not see this?
How long before even saying "HELL", like I just did above, is also ban-threatening material?
Do you REALLY not get it? Do you really not see the potentially terrifying problem in the making here, that's happening on basically all Internet sites these days?
And, if it's your job to decide what are the banned words and censor them accordingly—I don't have your **** mod guide in front of me—then go and frikin' do your job and further sensor those words you deem too offensive. I've never tried to stop you doing so. I have specifically censored every single one of my "swear" words precisely so they weren't actually swear words, but even that isn't good enough for you. SO GO AND EDIT THEM!
And, don't even try to suggest the ban isn't implied in the thinly veiled threat, because that's EXACTLY the kind of thing I'm talking about in general around this whole censorship and modified behaviour thing—the pretend "politeness" and "niceness" that hides the real sinister action that can be totally forthcoming as and when you see fit, which you know I know, hence you don't have to specifically and directly threaten me with a ban (you simply have to sow the seed), less I fall in line, and that's why you can in fact be much more "subtle" and "diplomatic" about it. I don't have that same privilege, because most other people don't get subtlety, so I mostly just say what I actually mean and the way I mean it.
Don't worry; I get the God ***** mother ******* "message". I'll sensor all my swear words from now on.
Or, is even the sentiment too threatening and offensive too now?
Do I also have to sensor my general attitude and demeanor as well?
@Project_Dolphin Dude, you do not get to decide what I get emotional over. That's not your privilege. I decide what I am and am not passionate about.
If I get emotional over games, I get emotional over games.
Now, people can subtly threaten me so I stop "swearing", but don't try and tell me what I give a **** about or how to act in accordance with what I give a **** about.
@Syrek24 I believe you don't know enough about that which you talk to make such an assertion.
No, I don't care about the mods "keeping the peace". I'm care about there being a point where censoring becomes oppressive and counter to natural human interaction in these online forums.
It's like, you just called me, and I quote "mentally unstable". Should I now report you to a mod, because that's highly personally offensive? That would be like called a mentally challenged person a r****d, or a coloured gentleman a n*****, or a woman a b****. . . .
I'm not really offended or upset at all, because I don't give a ****—but, do you see how there could be a problem?
Should you really be concerned that you might have to worry about moderation simply because you made a silly and ultimately harmless comment towards some random stranger on the Internet?
@Syrek24 The controls are clunky, convoluted, and gimmicky; I'm just calling a spade a spade. lol
@Kirk - Does Nintendo ever use partially-censored profanity in its Mario games?
As much as I share your frustration in the backwardness of social attitudes towards what we refer to as profanity, the fact remains that profanity is does not create an atmosphere that many parents want their children exposed to, which makes it damaging to the likes of Nintendo and Nintendo Life who very much include families and children within their market.
The Community Rules have not changed recently on this matter. Nobody is making you visit. If you choose to visit then you can expect to be held to these rules.
Please contact the Site Admin if you wish to make any suggestions or provide general feedback. There is nothing to be gained from continuing with your current approach. Thanks.
@Syrek24 Now, see. . . .
I was warned for "swearing".
I do hope you too get warned for "abusing" another poster.
@gcunit Dunno. Apparently it's a lot more tolerant of the language used on Miitomo (or whatever App/game it was that recently came out) than it is on its Mario games. I figure that says something about the point I'm alluding to.
OK, so I've been warned about the "swearing" and now you're suggesting my current approach is not appropriate or should be taken to the admin as opposed to being continued in here?
Well, I can totally sense that non-ban approaching, so I'm getting the **** outta here before you just go for it, and protect the community from my clearly utterly dangerous negative attitude. Despite not properly swearing once (having ZERO problem with you fully censoring any of my partly censored words), not threatening anyone, not posting any obscene images, not spamming with ads, or anything like that at all—just because I happen to be contrary to some other views and stick by and defend my assertions (whether it be against another poster or a mod)—I don't feel safe commenting in this thread anymore.
But, maybe I'm already too late. . . .
I do, however, hope one day you come to personally understand exactly where I'm coming from on some random website you enjoy visiting. Maybe then you'll will see my point at little clearer.
Funny you don't get that I'm actually not offended by your comments at all. I was being sarcastic and ironic, in respect of everything I've been saying over the last few posts.
But now I really am outta here before I get banned.
Let's get back on topic, or let it rest.
"The Great Star Fox Zero Controls Debate Highlights Important Lessons."
If you've read this far down, I think we've all learned some important lessons...
@Project_Dolphin Yes, I'm sure you've got a point, though perhaps it's just as well I didn't mention it in my piece at it was long enough already. I'm sure the fact that this extra mechanic is mapped to the gyro controls (which are anathema to some people) must have played a part in the immediate dismissal of the game in certain quarters. Though I maintain it's definitely not JUST about the controls, otherwise we'd have a game that was mechanically identical to SF64.
But I think you're right in that SF0 seems to be victim of a wider narrative built against Nintendo's use of non-conventional control schemes - especially in its core titles. I'm sure a lot of people simply heard the words "Star Fox" and "gyro controls" and decided that provided a solid enough soap box for them to get up and continue moaning about how Nintendo is "ruining everything" by appealing to the "casuals".
Of course, then you run into the quandary of whether you're angry at Star Fox for being "dumbed down" with silly "waggle controls" for "babies" (which is the standard line of argument with these things), or whether you're annoyed that the controls are actually too sophisticated, with the resulting problem that you have to essentially learn them again from scratch.
Most people seem to find their way around this problem by just stringing the words "gyro controls", "gimmick", "rubbish", "unnecessary", "Miyamoto", and "bad" together in some order, and it seems to generally do the job. They don't have to engage with the specifics, but can still throw an effective gyro-based tantrum.
But yeah, it was wrong of me to miss out that the new mechanic being tied to the gyro controls is no doubt one of the main causes of controversy. Thank you for picking me up on that.
Do a barrel roll.
@Turbo857 You make it sound as if an existing IP could not be improved upon in terms of actual gameplay - either by strengthening the mechanics in place, adding new ones that complement the existing ones and/or removing elements that did not really work the last time around.
But yeah, I agree a new IP is certainly a different story when it comes to pitching new approaches to essential elements, like the control scheme. Still, we should not forget that it has been quite some time since the last proper StarFox game, and that this game is billed as kind of a reimagination/reboot of it's golden days. As such, it is not simply a "numbered" sequel, expected to just follow suit on it's predecessor.
In fact, looking at said precedessor, we find that none of them was particularly conservative in following such logic, not since Lylat Wars/Star Fox 64. Noone would have been surprised or shocked to see the game being different from previous Star Fox games (in fact, the game apparently was something else at some point in it's development, as stated in several interviews by now.).
On a related note, if in fact, innovation and improvement is no longer possible, you obviously reached the pinnacle of the particular genre ... at which point there is nothing wrong with stagnation in my book. I would have been totally fine with a HD upgrade to StarFox + new content (yes, "just" levels"), possibly a (online) co-op option and definitely a online dog-fighting component.
Basically an expanded and upgraded StarFox 64. I will reserve final judgement for now, but if I had to decide now, I would still pick all of that over a new control scheme - esp. since I was entirely satisfied with the established one.
I agree that thanks to human nature, people get set in their ways, and as such, have certain expectations. That is not a bad thing though, if this kind of mindset did not exist, few people would care about this game at any rate ... if it were even being made at all. Still, being FORCED (it's not optional after all, is it?) to use a new control scheme, when a totally workable one already existed, seems kind of unnecessary and uncalled for. I take zero issue with what they did in Splatoon, and I know people who swear by it, but I definitely would have resented by forced to either "take it or leave it" - and that goes for, as you said, an entirely new IP. It only follows, that for an established IP, it's all the more aggravating.
"But in order for long time franchises to remain successful they sometimes need to surprise and stimulate long time fans in new ways."
I agree, but the fact that the stewarts of genre stagnation (I don't have to name them, do I? ^^), are the most persistent ones in topping the charts all around, that is just not true - at least in terms of commerical success.
"And level design isn't enough." I never said as much, but the amazing part about Super Mario 64 was not just the 3D graphics (StarFox did that before, didn't it?^^), but the new worlds that hardware innovation gave rise to, as well as the new ideas it made possible to facilitate, and last, but most certainly not least, the brilliant level design (same for Ocarina of Time imho).
""Software innovation" can only go so far. It sometimes takes a hardware innovation."
Yes, but there is innovation, and then there is desperation. An innovation, like the jump to chips powerful enough to render complete worlds in 3D, plus all kinds of effects and stuff, does not come around every other day. Any attempt to kind of replicate this leap forward (be it stereoscopic 3D, motion controls, "gesture" controls or different kind of sensors, 2nd screen, even VR sofar), have simply put failed.
I can play a game like Downwell and still be amazed by the simple yet brilliant twist on an established formula ... basically offering a new experience within the framework of an experience, if known for decades. So, long story short, yes, sometimes it is necessary, but it only matters if it is true innovation, and it's only true innovation, if it changes gameplay for the better - in all or at least most ways.
Nintendo has struggled to "prove" the concept of motion controls (ironically, the best implementation is still to be found in those proof-of-concept games ala Wii Sports/Resort), equally the failed to proof the benefits of 2nd-screen gaming (Nintendo Land is nowhere near as impressive, or in terms of pure joy, rewarding as Wii Sports was and still is), and it reeks of desperation to shoehorn both elements (although the tablet is not a wiimote exactly, I know), into an old-timer like StarFox.
I'll be frank, that control scheme better work, it better be a true innovation of the (mostly) on-rail shooter genre, it better expand the experience without loosing CRUCIAL elements like precision and responsivess, or so help me god, Nintendo will (!for once) truly deserve the ire of the so-called "fanboys".
I'm willing to try it. The problem here is the ultimatum. "Do what we say, or go somewhere else." That's an awful business model (N64 and GC fanboy here) for a company wanting to make video games accessible to everyone.
I have nieces/nephews old enough to comprehend and beat Undertale but this control scheme won't work for them. And they'd be embarrassed to play an invincible mode. Similarly, I know people in their 40's who always work and are unwilling to invest hours in learning a new control scheme, given the limited recreation they have already. And they're fans of the SNES original, too.
Why no standard control option? Even if, say, you unlock it by beating the game. If they want us to experience it the way they envisioned it, fine, but why can't we have an option after the fact? I'm sure plenty, myself included, who are wary of the new set up will ultimately enjoy it. But there will be those who still dislike it or just can't get used to it.
Consider an earlier point: Nintendo's base has a much larger % under 18 or over 50 compared with Sony and Microsoft. This is problematic. These age groups are (generally) much less adept at sizable learning curves. Plus, this is the kind of title PS and Xbox gamers would look on with envy and even consider getting a Wii U for. But not when they're used to playing FPSs and action-adv games with intuitive controls and then hear "learning curve" and "motion controls."
Which transitions to my second concern; that this game will be a "referendum" on a series that's hibernated for ten years now. And if, because of the divisive nature of the controls, it doesn't sell well, we won't see another for ten years. Even though sales numbers would reflect distaste for the controls, Nintendo would likely see it as "low enthusiasm for the franchise."
And that's not an unfounded fear. It's hard to count FF as a Metroid game, since it supposedly doesn't even have Samus and it's multiplayer-centeric. Let's say Metroid hasn't had a proper installment in seven years and there's scant evidence, save speculation, of any on the horizon. The game fared poorly due to the new 2.5D gameplay and drastic change in storyline but the series itself suffered, now lying dormant. This despite IMMENSE enthusiasm for the Metroid series and the selling point/draw it poses to "hardcore" gamers on other systems (like SF). I'd hate to see another ten years without SF because of poor decision-making on Nintendo's part.
You know, I might have misunderstood you. You do have a point that, when it came to the Wii library, there were scattered gems in an awful lot of junk. However, I wouldn't give you 99%, there were still a ton of great games on the Wii.
I could list several of them, like Metroid Prime 3, Trauma Center: Second Opinion, Boom Blox (the latter two both fun games by the way), both Kirby entries, Radiant Dawn, the Super Mario Galaxy games, Skyward Sword, the surprisingly fun World of Goo, Sin and Punishment, Okami, Epic Mickey, Elebits, Donkey Kong Country Returns, and Punch Out!! are all games that I've personally played that had great motion controls.
I will give you that there is a bunch of junk though.
@Zibene999 Well, the "99%" figure is obviously just pulled out of thin air. It's not supposed to be taken as a literal statement of fact about the percentages. Who knows what the actual percentage is.
I just said 99% because one in a hundred games being an actual gem seemed like an appropriate enough guesstimate for that system.
Basically, there were are few gems on Wii, like the games you listed, but a whole lot of waggle junk.
I can't at all remember what point I was making in saying that though.
"The irony of you complaining that you or other gamers might not understand the controls of Star Fox Zero only to end up insulting other gamers for not understanding the controls of your favorite Nintendo video game".
Where did I say any of those games were my favourite? Let's not make stuff up now eh?
I'm expressing my scepticism about you claiming you didn't know how to move your arms around or use a touchscreen in order to claim that those controls weren't easy to pick up. Its hardly a controversial statement that I made but I understand you've committed to supporting Star Fox no matter what.
""I'm sorry if this is news to you, but learning curves exist in video games and differ from gamer to gamer."
Indeed they do. Something to remember when others are saying they don't want a long difficulty curve with Zero's controls.
"Or you can spend money to rent the game from your local video game rental store if Nintendo doesn't provide a demo for you to play. Right?"
If Nintendo want players to try the new control method and have faith in the new contrs they can put up a demo. It doesn't affect me as I've got the First Print edition pre-ordered but I think making it as easy and cheap as possible for players to try it makes sense. Again, not a controversial posioton and I really have no idea why you're arguing against it.
"Good to know that instead of finding a good solution to a problem, you would rather type endless and angry rants on a message board about how you were "wronged" by Nintendo. Sure, spew your angry rants on this message board. Just don't complain if your gaming experiences still don't improve jack squat"
Solution? I'm curious, what solution do you think I'm looking for? I proposed a demo but you don't like that.
I have no problem with people putting up angry rants even though I don't do it myself. I have no problem why you do. If such things upset you don't read the comments or try and find somewhere that restricts comments to anger-free expression of delight. I'm not sure such a place exists though.
That's a good point. I just hope Nintendo are aware thar by trying to sell to two of those fans requests (that weren't necessarily from the same people) at once they may in fact be restricting potential sales. My worry is the controls hinder sales and Nintendo see that as a reason to 'F-Zero' the series.
That's the thing I find odd (well apart from just how controversial some people are finding it), Nintendo offer different control methods with the Wii U and so many games, they've put in an extra mode to make it easier for people but not put in control options in this one. Maybe it's a time issue.
But anyway, we'll all have a better idea next week....
Ya. The Wii U is compatible with so many controllers- I always believed Nintendo prided themselves on options.
Then again, I believe some games that required the gamepad for certain sections didn't allow a Pro Controller. Idk.
I just know that this is the last year of the gamepad, ever (NX is surely coming soon) and StarFox is truly the last game that will use it with a gyro/control setup.
So I plan to enjoy it for what it is. It's the last time I'll get to experience a game with this type of control scheme for perhaps quite a while (I think all future controllers will include gamepad features, albeit on a normal sized controller and smaller auxiliary screen that doesn't take center stage), but NX will most likely not put such a focus on the controller screen. So even if there is a game that comes down the line that uses its unique features I doubt it's going to implement any kind of system where you have to look at the controller screen at the same time. I think it's going to be relegated to maps and menu data- maybe a little inventory management. But nothing like this.
@electrolite77 I think they have two problems working against them.
1. Older gamers don't necessarily agree with that opening statement. It might just be an "old dog, new tricks" thing, or a certain "get off my lawn" mentality. My 7 year old son, for example, will play games on the phone that I won't touch without synching to a Bluetooth controller. Whereas, I began gaming in the early days of the NES, and really hit my stride in the SNES days. The N64 had its hits and revolutionized 3D gaming (meaning polygonal, not the perspective) with the stick and rumble, but during those eras we also still had Gameboys and the DS with traditional set ups. MOST of my best gaming experiences have not relied on a gimmick control set up. Heck, as time goes on and hardware dies, I appreciate control methods as they are easier to preserve and emulate.
2. THE GIMMICK. Nintendo can and has innovated, and their competitors often steal from ideas Nintendo pushed. That being said, in this case Nintendo is doubling down in ways that are NOT ahead of the curve. Motion controls and second screen experiences are no longer new and innovative. They haven't been embraced by the masses. They work for some, and I'm not trying to insult anyone. It's just that, by and large, these things didn't take off. Gyroscope aiming on Nintendo properties and mobile devices was this "cool" thing a few years back that few people actually liked. So, with this late release in the Wii U's lifespan, it is very odd that they would double down in this way. It's like they approached this as a hardware-proving launch title.
@Kisame83 - The thing is: The Wii U is a dual screen system with really refined gyroscopic controls for better or worse.
The way the Wii U broadcasts to the second screen actually is pretty innovative, but it fails to impress in the post-tablet era.
Critics have been attacking Nintendo for not really utilizing the hardware of the Wii U, demanding they "justify" it, and calling any game that doesn't use the hardware features extensively a "missed opportunity".
Then, those same critics turn around and bash Nintendo any time they include uses of the second screen or gyroscopic controls. Some of them have even begrudgingly admitted that games like Splatoon and Super Mario Maker have been successful in using the hardware after lots of initial hand-wringing.
One final thought: I'm so sick of the term "gimmick" and how it's tossed around. It's become an innovation killer in our dialogue about video games... anyone who wants to try and innovate must fear the gaming media and community labeling what they do a "gimmick" and all the negative baggage that implies.
Then we wonder why mainstream gaming has gotten so stale (but I don't.)...
I certainly hope to enjoy it. I'm looking forward to trying it anyway. Same with Guard which seems to be getting rather lost in the noise.
Just occurred to me that we probably will get to try Zero with traditional controls at some point when it's 'remastered' edition appears on NX.
But isn't that cynicism partly because if you've been around a while as a gamer you've seen lots of much-trumpeted innovation come and go without really adding anything to gaming. ROB the Robot, the Power Glove, the Sega Activator, Kinect, PS Move etc.etc. Have the rear touchscreens on the Vita or the touch pad on PS4 turned out to be worthwhile?
What turns out to be genuinely useful becomes the norm and what doesn't justify itself-if the consumer decides it isn't worth their money-gets discarded as a gimmick. Plus ça change.
I hear ya. I thought the combat in Twilight Princess was fine and the best in its series until I played Skyward Sword. Just because something has always been "fine" doesn't mean it can't be improved upon. I will also agree that stagnation isn't always a bad thing. I welcome it in Fire Emblem, F-Zero, Megaman, one-on-one fighters and a bunch of other series. But some series can benefit from a gameplay improvement and I believe StarFox fits that bill. We'll have to experience how the level design's been impacted by the new controls in Star Fox Zero to fully understand the reasoning behind their inclusion. But... I'm very optimistic and have no doubt it'll be nothing short of an eye-opening experience.
I will also agree that, up to this point, the innovations for a 2nd screen has been a tough sell but Nintendo has already "proven" motion controls to the masses. The Wii was packed-in with a motion controller and sold what... 100 million consoles over its lifetime becoming the 2nd most successful selling home console of all time. And I wouldn't say the Wii Sports series would be examples of the best released implementations of motion controls either. A statement like that makes me believe you probably didn't give them a fair shot. I'd say the best implementation of motion controls are found in games like Sin & Punishment 2, Skyward Sword, Red Steel 2, Metroid Prime Trilogy, Pikmin 1, 2, 3, Trauma Center 1, 2, Trauma Team, WarioWare: Smooth moves, Punch Out Wii, House of the Dead Overkill, Resident Evil: Umbrella/Darkside Chronicles, Mario Kart Wii/8, Resident Evil 4: Wii edition any Call of Duty released for Wii/Wii U or for that fact any 1st or 3rd person shooter that came out for the Wii/Wii U.
Nintendo doesn't need to prove motion/gyro controls to gamers. Those of us who've tried and embraced them are already sold on their superior advantages. Now I understand that there are many gamers (including my brother) that cringe at the thought of actually having to "move" a controller and that's fine (to each their own). But they shouldn't act like motion controls is just a passing fad and discount the number of existing gamers that prefer motion/gyro for certain games. And VR will catch on when the price comes down, and what does that use... er, motion controls?
I agree completely. The problem is..... gaming is essentially a relaxing pastime and despite the fact motion controls can often provide an enhanced gameplay experience, "moving" a controller in any way breaks this sense of relaxation for many gamers. So unfortunately, these gamers quickly dismiss motion controls by labeling it an unnecessary "gimmick".
Come on. 100 million Wii's sold... Safe to say motion controls took off right? And where are these people that think gyro aiming is a passing fad? I'm aware that the Wii remote has been divisive for many people but I lot of these same people I've met never had a problem or complaint about gyro aiming. Gyro aiming is simply faster and more accurate. It didn't take off?
Good points. But there have been solid gameplay improving examples for motion control implementations, at least when we're talking about the Wii remote and Wii U Gamepad. Yes, there's been a ton of Wii shovelware but there have been many games that have bombed and used analog controls exclusively. It depends on the skill of the studio developing the games that make use of these controls.
@Maxz "Most people seem to find their way around this problem by just stringing the words "gyro controls", "gimmick", "rubbish", "unnecessary", "Miyamoto", and "bad" together in some order, and it seems to generally do the job. They don't have to engage with the specifics, but can still throw an effective gyro-based tantrum."
I'd love to build a Nintendolife random comment generator based around terms like these. Throw in "gangbusters", "straw man", "traditional controller" and "all I want" and hit a refresh button. It would be brilliant.
Precisely and well said. It's funny how "shovelware" typically refers to bad Wii games or bad motion control based games. But every console ever created (regardless of their packed in controller) has produced mediocre to bad games = shovelware. And last I remember, I don't think the Wii owns the coveted award for producing the most shovelware on a console in gaming history.
@WiltonRoots Aah, I forgot "all I want"! That's an absolute classic. Start things off with "Dear Nintendo" (it's not a proper complaint unless the writer assumes to comment section is an official channel of communication Nintendo), and throw in "actually LISTENING TO YOUR FANS" somewhere down the line, and I think we're good to go.
@Action51 Amen yo.
@electrolite77 - I hate to admit it, but I'm old enough to remember ROB as a kid. I didn't own the ROB and zapper set, but I played games with it at friend's houses, and I found Gyromite to be a lot of fun at the time.
I passed on the Wii Balance board, but no matter because millions bought it and used it.
Know what else I bought?
A Playstation. Eventually I grew bored of my Playstation as a daily-use console, as I had every other console and piece of gaming hardware I've ever bought.
So I mean, doesn't all this stuff have a limited lifespan really? I wish I still had my blurry, spinach colored screen gameboy, but my (more less gimmicky) Game Boy Color still works, but eventually I got a GBA SP...with a gimmicky clamshell design that is still used in the 3DS with it's 3D gimmick that I actually really like.
So I guess my point is: Sorry...this stuff we play with is fun, but nothing lasts forever and I'm okay with that.
I'm eager to see what VR will bring now.
Yeah fair enough, I like to try these things too. I just wonder if that's where the characterisation of things as, and cynicism about, gimmicks come from as not everybody has the inclination or funds to experiment. At one point FMV games were the future, then the GC-GBA link was going to change gaming, meanwhile Sony were trying to convince us of how great UMD discs (shudder) were. Meanwhile the D-Pad, the Analogue Stick, that 4-button SNES controller layout etc. have been accepted into the mainstream.
I'd hate it if companies stopped trying things but by the same token I dislike innovation for the sake of it, when it's just there to be different. Look at the mobile phone market now, really weak attempts to differentiate devices that are more and more the same. Anyway, I have no idea where I'm going with this, my son has decided 4.30 am is a great time to get up. Just trying to get at where the distrust of gimmicks comes from.
P.S. I never understood R.O.B. Mind you, the NES wasn't that big in the UK. Around that time it was still all Computer games here. Speaking of attempts at innovating, Codemasters (the racing game publishers) spent part of 1989 trying to push a CD for 8-bit computers. It used normal CD players (http://www.gnomeslair.com/2006/10/cd-gaming-from-very-late-80s.html). Needless to say, that was the future. Needless to say, it didn't take off.
P.P.S. I bought an original Gameboy two years ago. I wouldn't recommend it. It's still a lovely chunky bit of kit with a great D-Pad and the clunk of cartridges being inserted is very satisfying, but that screen doesn't hold up well. My memories of what it was like to play one were better than the reality 23 years on....
I agree, and I think elements of the Wii Remote and Gamepad will remain. Gyroscope controls for example are in the Dual Shock 4 (to that they get used) and every mobile phone, the Off TV Play idea has become part of the PS4/XB1 firmware, and the remote for my LG Smart TV is remarkably Wii Remote-esque.
The Wii Remote worked beautifully in some games and not in others. Wii Sports, Ghost Squad (and all the other on rails shooters), Super Paper Mario, Zack and Wiki were marvellous to control. On the other hand I'd love to play the Mario Galaxy games without waggle to attack and I enjoyed DKCR more on the 3DS.
I think the Wiimotes problem is a market thing. It's associated with the Casual market that's gone elsewhere. I hope it makes it onto NX but I'm not sure it will.
"They could. If they don't, then I propose another solution: rent Star Fox Zero from a video game rental store."
For a lot of people that isn't an option. Speaking from a UK POV I don't know where I could do such a thing. I do have the Internet though. There's a lot of competition for people's gaming time, make it easy for them to try it, and don't make them pay because that will push them elsewhere. As I say, it doesn't affect me, but its an obvious thing to do.
"But every console ever created (regardless of their packed in controller) has produced mediocre to bad games = shovelware. And last I remember, I don't think the Wii owns the coveted award for producing the most shovelware on a console in gaming history."
That would be a close run race between Wii, DS, PS1 and PS2
@Turbo857 Most of those games were basically "Lightgun" games though, where motion contol only extended to the Wiimote/Move being used as pointer. I liked that tbh, it worked pretty great for some games, unfortunately, this generation has already abandoned even that basic use of "motion" controlers. Just look at Killzone Shadowfull for example, the PS4 supports move in theory, but the game doesn't although KZ3 worked pretty nice with move (they even had a plastic rifle, you could attach the move to). Of course, it's Sonly, and they are lightning fast to abandon stuff like this. During the same time, they also abandoned "3D", which was also available in KZ3, and is no longer available in Shadowfall.
It's not much better on the Nintendo side of things, as the Wiimote is still supported in theory, but have you ever tried aiming with the Wiimote in Splatoon? Or pretty much any WiiU game?
It's even worse for the actual "motion" aspect, as those saw really only a handful of great games - which is being generous, as games like Wii Sports/Resort or even Sports Champion felt more like techdemos than fullflechted gaming experiences.
There were very, very few other examples, games like Red Steel 2 come to mind, but again, there are no "swordfighting" games supporting motion controls on either Ps4 or Wii (or the now Kinect-less Xbox One).
All in all, you are right, the Wii was a huge success, but frankly, that is just it, was as in simple past. Motion controls is still alive with those folks, they just switched to smartphones and tablets. The problem I still see (been saying this for years now =/) is that Nintendo is trying to recapture this "special moment", and they seem to think the way to this is another low-cost system, offering a particular hardware hook: meaning a tablet and dual-screen gaming.
That did not work and they still seem concerend with kind of justifying that theory in retrospective, something like "look, that is what could have been, if you had stuck with us" ... It's kind of weird.
But yeah, I hear you, I hope StarFox can be that proof-of-concept, since WiiSports/Resort remain some of my favourite Wii games (the tank minigame in Wii Play was also really fun with a friend ^^). If so, it's just a shame the game has been released only near the very end of the WiiU's lifecycle, with the NX being right around the corner.
It is a shame. Admittedly, Nintendo has had issues coming into its stride with hardware innovations in the last year of their console's life. In the Wii's last year, the full realization of the Wii Remote's capabilities was finally displayed with Skyward Sword but luckily the masses were sold on its concept way before SS's release. No such luck with the Wii U. Hopefully NX doesn't offer too many new hardware "hooks" and they can just focus on improving upon the technologies started with the Wii/Wii U.
As we've already seen in the Wii U era, I think Ninty will be reluctant to produce Wii remote centric games going forward. But I have confidence it'll remain a control option for some games (where feasible) on the NX. If the NX isn't compatible with Wii remotes at all, than Ninty can't make money on Virtual Console Wii games (which would be pretty stupid) and some multiplayer Wii U games will lose some functionality (Nintendo Land, Mario 3D Word, Mario Bros. U., Mario Kart 8) if the NX is backwards compatible (most likely).
At the very least, the NX should be compatible with Wii Remote Plus controllers and discontinue original Wii Remotes altogether.
@Kirk Wow, I used te have some respect for you because you wrote some nice comments and not just attack people for the sake of it.
Btw, regarding all this new control schemes debate. Have you played Splatoon? When I first played it I didn't think gyro controls would add something meaningful to the gameplay, now I think it's far superior than twin sticks, but I would've never known that if I hadn't tried a new scheme that just didn't seem right or intuitive at the beginning.
My point is, not because it's not intuitive at first sight - and this is because of the conventions of today, a game can't control better or be more fun. It'd be great if you give this game a chance someday, it might turn out pretty fun to you.
@Freeon-Leon I write relative to the situation: Sometimes I'm nice, and sometimes I'm a ****.
And, as I've tried to state before, this is about more than just getting used to a new control scheme as far as I'm concerned. It's about what I see as, quite simply, bad control design. Every control scheme has to be learned, that has no real correlation to whether it is good or bad. I am not slating this control scheme because it's different. I'm slating it because I think it's overall bad control design outright, and in many ways it's a downgrade from the controls of the previous games, regardless of the fact we could all eventually get used to it.
When I think someone is being an ignorant douche I find it particularly hard to avoid attacking them; that's just how I roll. When they are relatively sensible and polite I might engage them similarly, but I'll still defend my views on whatever subject, vigorously. Sometimes that causes conflict, and I'm more than happy to engage if that's what it takes to backup my assertions.
And, let me assure you, the controls in this game will NEVER be fun to me (even if I bothered to get used to using them), in exactly the same way waggling to roll in Donkey Kong Country Returns on Wii was not fun for me, or waggling to spin jump in New Super Mario Bros on Wii was not fun for me, or how tilting the Wii U GamePad to aim in The Legend of Zelda: Battle Quest in Nintendo Land was not fun for me, or how trying to play an action/platform game on iPhone using a virtual d-pad and virtual buttons is not fun for me, and so on—all of which technically work and can be gotten used to, but most I simply consider bad control design because they are built around the issues with the device/inputs in the first place. They play to the weakness rather than the strengths of the control/input, and they are worse control implementations than they could have been as a result as far as I'm concerned—and to me that is one way I measure and define bad controls.
Bad controls implementation can ruin otherwise great games, which is bad enough, but I don't think Star Fox Zero would be a particularly great game even with what I consider the right controls.
@Action51 I agree, it is the best second screen experience overall. I have a PS4 and Vita, and even in the same room the connection isn't half as reliable as the Wii U. The trade off is longer range in general, but I find it to be a shallow advantage in face of the frequent lag and disconnects.
I can't speak for critics, but I honestly would be happy if they offer traditional control options alongside the "innovative" ones. It would remove the doubt and backlash. I HATED stylus flying in Star Fox Command, and nothing about that game would have been harmed by having more traditional controls. On the flip side, with Star Fox 63 3D I found myself experimenting a great deal with the gyroscope controls in part because I could always fall back on the traditional ones. Mario 64DS comes to mind. If they locked it into the stylus controls to force "innovation" it would have been horrid. The fact that you can seamlessly move between either control method tends to encourage both styles of play. I found myself switching based on the situation. My son is currently playing Ocarina 3D, and he rocks the gyro for aiming exclusively. I alternate back and forth, tending to make short range shots with the gyro and hitting further targets the "traditional" way. Flexibility never hurts!
@electrolite77 thank you. That is what I was more or less trying to get at. If we look at the relative short term, I can understand some feeling like the media jumps on certain things to kill them. It's just that, in the long run, for as much innovation has come from experimentation, a lot of it was just not very well thought out. The difference now is that companies seem to double down on certain concepts that haven't really taken off. Nintendo especially. I mean, could you imagine The Last of Us 2 requiring the Playstation Move? Gyro support is a fun thing, I just wish that, like SF64 3D, it was optional. Granted, I'm still going to grab this game near launch, and if the controls REALLY don't suit me I'll rock co-op with my son.
@Turbo857 The Wii had a huge boom from family markets. Heck, my grandmother got herself a DS and Wii for Brain Age and Wii Sports. It also slowed to a trickle, and didn't retain customer retention moving into the Wii U era. Just to be clear, the Wii AND Wii U where my first purchases of their respective generations. I'm certainly not bashing. I'm also an avid mobile gamer, and it has just been my experience that these schemes have largely shifted to traditional inputs or optional with the ability to switch. I remember when every other week a gyro game was hitting mobile markets. And that's including Star Fox or Ace Combat clones and FPS titles. Now, most of them are touch inputs with Bluetooth support for traditional controllers. They may still have tilt or gyro control options, but you toggle them in preferences. The "wave" seems to have passed on these being preferred and forced control methods. I'm talking in general, obviously there are exceptions. I'm also not trying to call any particular title out as being bad or good because of said controls. Mileage may vary lol.
The whole debate sort of reminds me of people who are ready to fight you if you don't like older survival horror tank controls. I remember really digging Resident Evil 2 on N64 because it let you customize the controls. If you want a more third-person setup like what you see in most games now, they had that. If you want to play with the Playstation tank control setup, that was default. But people where offended that they would even include the other options, because it somehow ruined the integrity of the experience to even have them buried in the menu.
@electrolite77 - Well, as long as you decide what is innovation for innovation sake without inserting personal bias, I suppose there is a point to be made.
I also agree that the original Gameboy holds more of a nostalgic feeling over my smaller, lighter, better screen bearing Gameboy Color, but there was just something about the look and feel of it.
Still, I feel the problem is that our online shared gaming community and media has become so bitter and cynical regarding innovation due to the fanboyism and console war mentality.
Think about this:
The Playstation 4 is lauded as the greatest console and worshiped for technically NOT having any unique features and being the most like a stripped down PC with proprietary software and multimedia features.
Now, there is nothing wrong with that, but we've reached a point where the echelon of popular design is to lack any identity...and that's not good.
The Wii U and XBONE were ridiculed and suffered in sales for including unique controllers and accessories, despite having generally better received software then the PS4...and that's troubling to me.
Just wanted to add:
A game co-developed by Platinum games with a control scheme that requires practice and a learning curve that upsets some critics?
Say it aint so!
Tap here to load 212 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...