About a week ago, we shared part of an interview that was conducted by Nintendo Dream with Yugo Hayashi and Shigeru Miyamoto, who led development of Star Fox Zero. Part one dealt with the inspiration behind many of the game's mechanics, along with a discussion of the highly divisive control scheme. Now, Nintendo has gone ahead and translated the second part of the interview, delving deeper into the gameplay.
The first part starts off by reviewing the vehicles and all of the different forms they can take, highlighting how the different forms of each vehicle broaden the scope and variety of the gameplay far beyond that of previous games. Also – as it would happen – the Retro Walker that you obtain by scanning the Fox amiibo is actually the original model that was set to feature in the never-released Star Fox 2.
Moving on from there, they discuss the Zoness stage that featured the Gyrowing, stating that it was included to break up gameplay a bit and to have an "Adventure" stage present. Next, they discuss Miyamoto's involvement in the game, which was essentially that of director. Miyamoto goes on to say that he hasn't actually been credited as a director on a game since Super Mario 64, and that the next closest game where he had as much influence was The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time.
The whole thing can be found here; it makes for quite a fascinating read.
What do you think? Did you appreciate all the vehicle transformations? Can you believe it's been two decades since Miyamoto last directed a game officially? Drop us a comment in the section below.
It's been twenty years....no wonder Star Fox Zero was pretty awful. It's time for Miyamoto to retire. As much as that may sound horrible, he's done so much as it is. It's time for him to just kick back and let some others take charge.
I feel sorry for Miyamoto. He just wants to make games, but people are telling him to stop working on games and just retire. He was the person who created the IP in the first place, and Star Fox Zero was a fun game with cool concepts.
@rushiosan Someone is sensible to opinions.
inb4 patronising of and fierce hatred for Miyamoto's intellect
...oh wait, 1st comment.
@Oscarsome Wrong on all counts, except the one about Miyamoto having "done so much.."
Haven't played Zero yet, so I can't really bash Miyamoto for messing it up... however, I will never really forget the damage he did to the Paper Mario series. I'm not gonna say he should retire just yet (Pikmin is still pretty good, and he's all over that), but I would request that he, regardless of his role as original creator, please keep his hands out of series that don't have anything wrong with them as they are. I like simplicity as much as the next guy, but he seems to be determined to make everything, even series that didn't start that way, as bare bones as possible. If left to him, the entire medium of gaming would never be able to evolve past anything but pleasant distractions and nothing more. What's worse is that I swear he wasn't always that way. I wonder what caused that change of heart... age, maybe? Who knows... :/
@SaKo It's because Miyamoto hates things people like,and likes things people hate.
His dislike of story of story in video games, especially Mario(Which I will agree with Miyamoto), and his belief in simple controls that make him come up with interesting things, like the controls in Star Fox Zero(To which I also agree with, and defend).
I stand with Miyamoto on many things.
@Philo But video games shouldn't be much more than a pleasant distraction.
I don't know about you, but I for one am sick to death of hearing about how video games should replace movies, and sports. I hear it all the time.
It's like there isn't any other form of entertainment these days. TV, comics/manga, movies, sports. They're all out classed by video games. And every time I argue with them, they all call me closed minded, or that it's people like me holding video games back.
If Miyamoto wants to go back to the 80's with video games, then I will stand by him.
You do hundred amazing things, but mess up one time. What does everyone do? Point out the one time you messed up.
This is what it looks like to me.
Just want to say Starfox Zero is fantastic,it took me a couple of weeks to come to that verdict but there you go.The hate it has received has been a really poor show and it deserves better than that,especially as most of it has come from those who never played the game.Yes it's different, very different but be patient with it,give it a fair crack and you will realise there's a really great game in there.
I'm not asking for games to take everything else over. But they do have a lot of potential for creating a world around you, full of all kinds personality and character, all made more immersing thanks to gameplay. While that gameplay is definitely the main attraction, when you make a game focused on just that, you lose a lot in the process. Think of what Splatoon would have been like if they had just left it as cubes of tofu spraying ink; would it still be playable? Sure, but it wouldn't be near as interesting without the culture and lore they injected into it.
That's what Miyamoto did to Sticker Star; told them to leave the personality out of it, and it suffered, because half of what makes PM so great is its personality. It wouldn't have bothered me so much had PM not had that to begin with, but it did, and he stripped that away in favor of a focus on game mechanics. All while series of his own (like Pikmin) got to keep their character. And even then, Pikmin 3 has less lore in it than 2. It just feels like we keep moving backward.
So basically, simpler games are fine, and certainly have their place; just don't backpedal on the series that are trying to make something bigger. That's all I ask.
@Philo I'm all for personality and character, but immersive gameplay? I'm someone to which immersion doesn't work on. I'm fully aware I'm playing a game, or watching a show, but I'm getting off track.
I don't see why lore matters either, especially if it's all made up. Who cares in the end, especially if the sequel ends up doing something completely different story wise.
I don't need to know why the the bad guy captured the princess this week, I just know I want to save her. In the end, it doesn't matter, because a new guy will capture her next week for different reasons.
If you like more story focused games, that's fine. But please don't ask for storyless games to have story. Mario doesn't need story, Splatoon didn't need the sea scrolls, and I wish Zelda stopped with story.
Well then, I think we can agree to disagree. Like I said, many games don't have or need that character depth, and they definitely have their place. I totally agree that Mario (the main series, at least) shouldn't have story, for example. But as you ask to have the simpler games left as they are, I also ask that the more complex ones be left alone as well. For gaming to be considered as any kind of serious medium, it has to have content that hits both targets and appeals to anyone. Having one type does not have to mean excluding the other. Nintendo is more than capable of providing both; The important thing is that they identify which series has what strengths, and not try to change them into something they're not. And that works both ways, of course. I mean, I'm pretty positive I'd never buy a Kirby game with a story as intricate as an rpg... that would just be weird, haha.
I'm not literally talking about one thing.
@Philo We'll disagree then.
I just feel if you want good story telling then go read a book. If you want good visual story telling, then go watch a movie, or a TV show.
The medium should not be taken as seriously as it is, but I guess I'm the weird one.
Have a good day. (Not being sarcastic)
Miyamoto: "How I killed Star Fox!" (Part Deux)
@Neon_Blues A game with great gameplay but poor graphics, music, sound design and no story can still be a great game.
But a game with great gameplay AND great graphics AND great sound AND great story is going to be a better game than one that only has gameplay going for it.
You don't have to sacrifice one element of a game for any other, necessarily, but it obviously is likely to take more work to make it excel in all areas.
I suspect Miyamoto gets a raw deal in this respect - being Nintendo's numero uno game design consultant, he is probably often expected to make decisions for economic reasons, to speed up development, but then gets the flak from the audience because his name is credited with that decision.
I'll just leave this here.
There's so much more to the argument that Miyamoto should retire than whether or not Star Fox Zero was okay.
I still think SFZ would have been much better as a VR game, but hey at least the title screen music is awesome!
@rushiosan Actually your comment was the childish one. What he said was his opinion, and as a lifelong Nintendo fan who idolizes Miyamoto, I agree
@Rin-go You're acting like everyone is attacking him for this. People are saying they didn't like Star Fox Zero, that's it. It doesn't change the fact he's one of the best game creators of all time and a creative genius. No one is flawless.
@Mario-Man-Child I thought for myself, then I found pretty much the only YouTube video that reflected my own opinions well enough to share. Since, you know, most people who think like this don't even bother to express their thoughts because of people like you who will instantly accuse them of jumping onto some bandwagon.
And no, it doesn't seal anything. Obviously. It's an argument, not scientific evidence. My point was just that there's a lot more to the argument of Miyamoto's retirement than Star Fox Zero. Such as the fact that his misguided input has too much weight on the company's decisions and ends up killing off good ideas or even franchises as a result. And you say none of those things are facts, yet past interviews and the like show off Miyamoto's toxic feedback in multiple occasions.
Ah, but of course you'd know what I meant if you had actually read my comment, or actually watched the video. You were too busy dismissing them because they don't align with your view. Oops, my bad.
@gcunit But a game with great gameplay AND great graphics AND great sound AND great story is going to be a better game than one that only has gameplay going for it.
That conclusion seems a little hasty. While the concept of "being better" is entirely subjective (in this sort of matter, at least), if we compare two games from the same genre (therefore, both of them are judged by the same arbitrarily-created standard, creating an artificial sense of objectivity, to be clear), we might not be able to say that a particular game with technical gameplay quality equal to another particular game which is technically inferior in all other aspects is actually the worse game.
For example, both Mega Man X2 and Gunstar Heroes are side-scrolling p
run-and-gun platformers. Mega Man X2 has brutally beaten Gunstar Heroes in the story aspect, and technically-speaking, in sound and graphics, too. They both have very well-designed gameplay, however. So, isn't Mega Man X2 the "better" game since it is technically superior to Gunstar Heroes in most ways? Many people would say "no". Are those people ignorantly wrong? Considering we're judging by artificially-constructed concepts, who are we to make such a judgment about the matter in either direction? If there are people who declare the technically-inferior game the better one, perhaps we should re-evaluate our concept of what "better" means to understand why many people believe a technically-inferior game is "better" than a technically-superior one.
So, for the sake of analysis, let's redefine "better" as meaning "more entertaining" rather than "technically-superior". In the case of the aforementioned example, Gunstar Heroes puts much more emphasis on its gameplay than Mega Man X2 does on its gameplay. Many people who have played both of these notice this emphasis. These same people enjoy playing Gunstar Heroes more than Mega Man X2, though the two games are technically in the same genre. Ergo, Gunstar Heroes' emphasis on its gameplay makes it the better (more entertaining) game to many people, despite it being technically-inferior to Mega Man X2 in all other areas.
As the example demonstrates, sometimes it is the emphasis on a particular aspect of something that makes it better than something else that is generally technically-superior to it. In fact, this seems to be the focus in several of Miyamoto's games: that one aspect is emphasised over others so that the player will experience the fullness of that aspect. This philosophy obviously hasn't worked all the time (we all adore Sticker Star, after all), but it has given new enjoyment, perspective, and longevity to most all other of his (direct/indirect) designs. It's often a risk to make something intentionally different, but so it is for all revolutionary inventions.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Miyamoto in charge of Pikmin 3?
I'm not, though? I haven't said any of that. I was talking about those who want him gone. They point to Wii Music, Sticker Star and now Star Fox Zero, but completely ignore all the good things he has done and is likely doing even now.
Star Fox Zero is controlled very differently from Star Fox 64.
Star Fox Zero's story and levels are very similar to Star Fox 64.
Unlike Adventures, Assault, and Command, which took essentially the same flight controls as 64 (I know, Adventures had crazy different playstyle due to the Zelda-clone Dinosaur Planet origin of the game), Star Fox Zero starts with the SNES/64 storyline and completely overhauls the controls for a much more authentic dogfight experience.
I think the game might have benefited from having a "Nintendo 64 mode" like the 3DS remake did – certainly that would have stopped a lot of the hate over the almost-entirely-required motion controls (yeah, I know you can turn off the gyro, but you have to turn it back on to fire your lasers!).
If you can adjust to the new controls, Zero is a really great game. But until you get the hang of them, the game feels messy and a bit of a cluster****. I think that's why (1) you can play levels over and over again rather than playing them linearly until you die like in 64 – so that you can really master a level and the controls required for it; and (2) there's a training mode for all of the vehicles in the game.
Take advantage of those two points above, and you'll be well on your way to mastering Star Fox Zero.
Also, the game is a lot more fun with a Player 2. Can't use P2 the first time you beat a level, unfortunately, and I don't think the medals count when you do multiplayer, but it's really something else to have two streams of lasers, and one of them coming from a player in cockpit view and the other coming from a player in 3rd-person view. It really drives home the experience of, say, Luke and Dak in the snowspeeder on Hoth. In fact, I'd love a new "Star Wars: Rogue Squadron" using similar 2-screen multiplayer and gyro controls!
I'm my opinion the gyrocopter levels are a distraction from the game. They should not be in Star fox. They are very slow.
I thought we heard this 'first time I've been this involved in a game for YEARS' thing about Pikmin 3. Don't Japanese games sometimes have multiple directors? But anyway, let's say he was intimately involved. Does he mainly prototype games standing up? I just don't like the SFX controls. They aren't comfortable and the gamepad screen swapping is weird. There are guys on Youtube who literally say they hated the game controls until they played it 40 hours (MULTIPLE play throughs), then they recognized the brilliance. UM>>>>WHAT? Brilliant controls would be something like, I don't know, Wii Tennis! IMMEDIATELY INTUITIVE!
@rushiosan Yeah I know right? He's making it sound like retiring is so simple to do when Miyamoto-San has roles that spiritually, he doesn't feel like he's done enough.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE I know I should be ignoring your comments but man are they annoying.
@Freeon-Leon Thank you.
@rushiosan It's pretty spot on. The past is great and all, but he's clearly out of touch.
Okay...since we are talking about Miyamoto and the whole retirement idea, let me simply speak up: do I think that Miyamoto should retire? No. However, I don't think that any sort of criticism against him should simply be dismissed. Miyamoto has done some great things over the years, created some amazing ips, but lately his decisions have been a bit...questionable. The controls for Starfox Zero. You CAN get used to them...however, when there are people who end up taking a couple of hours to get used them, there's a bit of a problem. A couple of minutes? Sure. A couple of hours? That's bad. Moving on, there's Paper Mario. Okay, Paper Mario is a series that is known for it's good story-telling and lovable characters. With that said, if you get rid of those two, you're pretty much taking away the series' identity. Yet he did it anyway. This could also be applied to the Galaxy games, where, after the more story-driven Galaxy 1 gave us Rosalina, a character who actually HAS character development, and paints Bowser as more of a maniacal tyrant than a bully, ultimately making him more of a threat, Miyamoto just made it stop...and then acted like it was something to brag about. And not only that, but there's also his reasoning behind there not being a new F-Zero. Miyamoto has said that a new F-Zero can happen...but only if they have the right controller. So...basically, instead of just making a new F-Zero game with the gameplay that people fell in love with, Miyamoto feels like the series can't continue unless he can shoehorn some gimmicky control scheme. The problem here is that Miyamoto is so caught up with "innovation", that it's leading to poor design choices. And people are apparently not allowed to criticize him for that because of his history. Kind of like how George Lucas didn’t have any criticism when making the Star Wars prequels because of his legacy, and we all know how that turned out…The point I am trying to make here, is that it is okay to criticize someone. And it helps both sides, really. It helps the consumers get more products that they’d be happy with, and it help the designers learn from there mistakes, and ultimately improve and make even better things.
The thing is that the game was developed with the gyro and second screen in mind. With allowing, ugh, "standard controls" the game would have to be toned down to fit both control schemes. Not allowing, ugh, "standard controls" to me means that it wouldn't be possible anyways, with the way the game is now.
You see hardly anyone give constructive criticism, though. It's usually insults and wanting him to get retired. Your comment about shoehorning a gimmick isn't really any better, by the way. That's the problem with this community. Those who spout rehash about Mario or Pokemon are then the ones who want a Star Fox or F-Zero just like those before.
I don't like Pikmin 2 all that much. Those caves irk me to the point where I didn't want to finish the game. But that doesn't mean I go around insulting the guy and wanting him gone from the company. I don't like it and that's it.
@Gauchorino Hatred for his ignorance more like it.
His obsession with "innovative" controls really got in the way of the game being good.
@Mario-Man-Child The industry has seen plenty of innovation without the introduction to clunky control schemes AND Miyamoto.
You sound a bit preachy, might want to check that at the door. Most of respect what Miyamoto has accomplished, only recognizing that he's made some questionable decisions as of late and some of his ideals are clashing with modern game design, which may in turn be hurting Nintendo.
If Star Fox Zero was the best game ever, then it would have sold better, and would have had a better reaction from the community and critics.
Geez, people are upset that some feel that Miyamoto is past his prime? I mean, what has he truly done lately that has produced a quality game? Has he not instead hindered current games? Like Sticker Star and its lack of narrative and new characters. And now Star Fox Zero and the point that you have to "keep practicing and you will get good at these controls". What happened to simple and straightforward design?
He's done a lot already. But he's stuck in his own head that his ideas are gold. Unfortunately, he ends up making horrible decisions that people just let happen because he's Miyamoto.
"Gaming needs innovation. Gaming needs Shigeru Minamoto."
Sure sounds like preaching to me.
@Rin-go Allright, a couple things:
1. Yes there are people who hurl insults at him and say that he should retire, but that's not everyone. There are people who simply want him to listen to criticism and get with the times.
2. We do want new ideas. But not when those new ideas can potentially make controlling the game more difficult than it needs to be. OR when it gets rid of everything that made people like the series in the first place (lookin' at you, Sticker Star).
3. The reason that people are getting so fed up with him is that these decisions he's been making aren't just certain grueling parts of a game: they're decisions that affect the games in their entirety, and for the worse. And it's been happening a bit more frequently lately.
@Oscarsome "What happened to simple and straightforward design?"
In all seriousness, recent games (such as XCX) are complicated as hell when it comes to its HUD design side stories and all that jazz... Double hell, it might take months to get used to everything; and yet, it's still seen as one of the best games on Wii U. In all fairness, Star Fox Zero isn't even complicated at all. It's obvious: simple story, simple on-rails gaming, simple everything. Yeah, the controls can be a bit of a hassle admittedly, but once they click it's really nothing. SFZ isn't Miyamoto's best game in a long shot, but it's far from a failure as some seem to project.
@Rin-go Reminds me of Gunpei Yokoi with the Virtual Boy, Yoshio Sakamoto with Other M and now Shigeru Miyamoto with Star Fox Zero.
I think people are way too harsh on Miyamoto these days. Whenever he screws something up his intentions get misunderstood and gets a bunch of flak for it from the fans and whenever he does something good he still gets criticized.
On the other hand I can agree that Miyamoto (perhaps Iwata too when he was alive) is also the one holding Nintendo back on trying to get with times.
@Yalaa I don't agree. Business world doesn't work like that. He was the director. The buck stops with his creative decisions.
@SaKo "I want to enjoy this hobby of mine, and in order to do that, the game developers who make a livelihood and sustain for their families must be fired. So that I can enjoy my hobby for a long time to come."
So from your personal, hands-on experience with Star Fox Zero, what did you think of it?
"I think the game might have benefited from having a "Nintendo 64 mode" like the 3DS remake did – certainly that would have stopped a lot of the hate over the almost-entirely-required motion controls"
It might have stopped some of the hate but we'd have a drastically different game. Besides, outside of the addition of motion controlled aiming and the remapping of the shoulder buttons for 90 degree aircraft tilting/barrel rolling to the right analog, Zero controls largely the same as 64. Most enemies can be gunned down without having to move the Gamepad.
Turning off motion controls entirely would unnecessarily make some boss battles more difficult. Some weakpoints, etc. would be tougher to hit.
Even if the right analog was used for aiming, you couldn't brake while aiming or hover while aiming and firing in the Walker/Landmaster. A "Star Fox 64 mode" wouldn't be worth it to please naysayers just because they oppose having to occasionally move a controller.
It's just very important to point out that you are one of the people who have been unable to grasp the controls.
So your OPINION is that the controls are clunky and bad. Someone needs to remind you that you do not speak for everyone, so just because you believe something does not make it fact.
Just trying to help you argue effectively.
LOL not one comment about the article itself. 😆
You make an excellent point about Xenoblade Chronicles.
That game is a chore to slog through. I bought it day one upon recommendation by critics and fans of the series and I haven't touched it beyond the first 5 hours it took for me to finally understand what the heck is going on and what I'm even supposed to be doing. The HUD itself is a complicated mess.
THAT is more off-putting than needing 20 minutes of practice to get comfortable with the controls of a game like SFZ.
And yet Xenoblade is lauded as an "amazing game" while SFZ is "too complicated".
Taken directly from your own comments archive:
"First off all the controls force a posture on you, slight bumps and shakes mess up your aim. You have to sit still, in my case and probably most others, resting their arms on their knees for stability. This gets old fast. Furthermore intense action is going to force you to move the controller around and throw off your aim. Simply firing rapidly is going to move the controller enough to have your aim shaking all over the place. I want to see someone do expert area 6 from 64, or hell any arwing level from assault with these controls. Which brings up another point:
To make these controls usable they have to slow down the action. Rapidly pressing buttons applies pressure to the gamepad and messes up your aim. On top of that the need to go between two screens also means you can't have the most intense action because your attention is divided."
You can't figure the controls out. You don't understand how to focus on one screen at a time (looking at the gamepad is RARELY required) and you can't even seem to tap the fire button without bouncing your controller all over the place.
Another "problem" that I have never seen anyone else mention before you. I play Star Fox Zero laying on my side on my couch. Why would I be forced to sit in some ridiculous bent-knee posture to be able to accurately shoot?
You simply cannot grasp the controls. And that's fine, there is nothing wrong with that. But it does not make your opinion fact. You are one person.
You said it yourself, your comment history is there for everyone to see. You opened that door and now people will step through it and find out that not only have you hated this game since before you even played it (how fair!), but that you have trouble playing an intense action game with motion controls.
Again, it's not a big deal. You have simply found a game that you are just not good at. But it's completely preposterous to claim your experiences are the same as the majority's. Your experiences are unique to yourself. Just don't be so angry that someone points this out. You don't have to be good at everything you do.
I agree. Speaking of complicated controls, Zero was often regarded as having "a high learning curve". Like, how long does it take to competently play Street Fighter or Mortal Kombat? Even games like Skyrim, I didn't even use spells or craft items to like the 50th hour. Every game needs to be learned and they all vary from game to game and player to player.
There's an unfair bias towards games with even the slightest bit of motion controls it seems.
@Vandy I agree completely (well not completely... I adore XCX a lot 😆). The thing is that even if you've played Xenoblade Chronicles, you still have to sit down and figure out what you're doing in Xenoblade Chronicles X. The abundance of massive HUDs and menus (as well as the surprisingly tiny text) doesn't help things. Sometimes I watch my brother play the game - running around in the huge worlds and utlizing the menus - and I'm always thinking, "OK, what is he doing right now?" Don't get me wrong, I love the game but if someone says SFZ is more complicated than a game like XCX or even a game like Uncharted in any way... I'm sorry, but I think that's just out of dislike for SFZ. SFZ might as well be the simplest major game for the Wii U (quite literally, in fact).
And that's the difference here.
I did not enjoy XCX at all and am probably going to sell it. But am I claiming it's a terrible game and no one should like it and here's where they went wrong and they should have done this and blah blah blah and Miyamoto doesn't know what he's doing and it's a betrayal of RPGs and whatever?
No. I recognize that it's not the game for me. I did not have a good experience with it, but it doesn't mean the game is broken or unplayable or terrible by any means. I just don't happen to be very good at it and am not willing to invest the time to get better at it. There are a ton of other games out there for me to enjoy.
On top of that, Miyamoto causes fights on generally pleasant community comment boards everywhere!
My basic opinion here is that Miyamoto got tasked to throw marketing and business decisions to the wind leaving daily pressures to expand markets (like the Paper Mario thing) and try adding some games to the Wii U library that make inventive use of the GamePad. Unfortunately, he took the risks with a franchise that had decades of pent up fan hopes.
They did treat the characters with respect and I think did some really cool stuff with them, but confidence in Nintendo took a public dive at E3 and this game released into a hostile fan environment.
Heh, no wonder E3 presence is so measured this year.
Anyway, Miyamoto hasn't failed me personally as Star Fox has been a uniquely involving experience for me and mine. Damage was done to segments of the Nintendo fan base, however. No doubt there.
@Yorumi "I have said time and time again ... play starfox just fine ... "
Now I'm not trying to add fuel to any fire here, and I will admit right now that I haven't gone into every comment section you've commented in, so can you provide the particular comment (or comments, since you've said "time and time" again) that confirms the statement in bold fonts? Or are you talking about a Star Fox game aside from SFZ?
You're totally right. People have hated Star Fox Zero since they first announced it would be delayed because they wanted to refine the motion experience. It suddenly became "boo! motion controls! They've already ruined the game!"
What about Splatoon? Did it come naturally to you to understand that shoulder button = "turn into squid" and that you need to move the controller around to aim? And that you can call to your teammates with another button and throw a bomb with another?
You do not need to immediately understand the controls when you pick the game up blind as long as they provide a detailed tutorial.
Which Star Fox Zero does. It has a tutorial section for every vehicle as well as an introductory tutorial level to allow you to get used to the controls before you even begin the game proper.
The levels just happen to demand a higher skill level than some people are ready to play at. Much like your example of Kaizo Mario. Not every game will be the right game for every person. Does that mean the game is broken?
@Gauchorino I might have expressed myself more clearly, but I was meaning the same game i.e. take a game with great everything, including gameplay, then take that same game with all the good stuff taken out of it apart from the gameplay - the better version is obvious.
But thanks for the essay.
@Vandy "But am I claiming it's a terrible game and no one should like it and here's where they went wrong and they should have done this and blah blah blah and Miyamoto doesn't know what he's doing and it's a betrayal of RPGs and whatever?"
Exactly! It's okay to criticize a game or a person. Constructive criticism does exist, after all. I don't like a particular game because of this or that. OKAY. WE GET IT. But coming into every god-forsaken comment section and complaining about the same thing over and over and over again and sparking left-and-right arguments isn't constructive criticism. Heck, it isn't even destructive criticism. It's just plain annoying.
What I do is that I underscore my own beefs about a certain game or person I do not like or agree with and let it be. I don't have time to hang around the internet, waiting in camouflage to ambush the next person who says something I don't agree with (You're a great user to me Vandy, but I think you might be guilty of this too ).
Oh, I'm definitely guilty of that at times, I won't deny it. But I don't do it out of an angry "you have to agree with me or else" attitude. It's more when someone is citing their personal opinion as fact. I try and back everything I say up with some sort of source. And if I can't, I make sure its clear that it's just my opinion. Like people who say that Star Fox Zero is "hated by everyone". Well, I point out the Metacritic user ratings. I point out that I and many others on this site happen to enjoy it. Just making it clear that their opinions are not a universal fact.
And what I do is more a "defensive" thing in that I'm not going into every article and making the same tired points and starting the same arguments. It's mostly just been articles pertaining to SFZ and calling out the same people who have been making the same complaints since before the game was even released. Even worse, the people who haven't even PLAYED it who think they can attest to the quality of it! There are a lot of others who hate SFZ that I just ignore and let them do their own thing because they're not obnoxious and overbearing about it.
I just happen to want more proof and evidence behind some of the absurd claims people make. And for them to stop trying to force their opinions as facts.
Also, I happen to have a lot of time to kill at work every week so I'm on the message boards more often.
Why am I not surprised to the see the same unusual suspects on here defending Star Fox Zero? They can't let a negative view expressed about the game go unchallenged.
Oh, there are plenty of negative opinions that I let slide. The problem is when people push their opinion as fact.
Or when negative opinions are expressed in spite of the person not even having played the game.
I think this is all pretty easy to understand.
I've defended many times why I think the controls are perfectly suitable. They are natural and make sense. You can't seem to get over how Fox, the anthropomorphic space animal is able to independently aim and fly the plane. Suspension of disbelief in favour of gameplay. We've been over this.
You barrel roll as you would in a real plane. You have a throttle that controls your speed and brake. You have a stick that controls your altitude.
Many others have given you the exact same explanation of why the controls make sense, but again you conveniently choose to ignore them.
And yet again, the user reviews on Metacritic reflect that an overwhelming majority of people have been able to understand and utilize the controls. A small, but VERY vocal minority has not. And from the critic reviews, it appears that the majority of them are annoyed that they have to use motion controls and it takes time to learn them.
I don't know what else people can say to present a counter argument to everything you say. If you don't like the game, that's your right. Just find one you DO like and move on.
If I may... I'd like to add a very good point that someone made on another Star Fox Zero related forum about why motion controlled aiming had to be mandatory. Even if the right analog controlled aiming you wouldn't be able to brake while aiming and firing (in the Airwing) or hover while aiming and firing in the Landmaster/Walker. A very useful technique which wouldn't be possible with motion controls completely removed. And that's without even addressing how the Gyrowing would be controlled. You need both analogs to fly that thing.
Glad you added that, because it's an excellent point. Braking while aiming down AND shooting was absolutely CRUCIAL for me in passing the mission where you have to stop the missiles from entering the wormhole.
I have absolutely no idea how I would have done that one if I was using the "perfect" Star Fox 64 controls. That mission was fun as hell, too, so I wouldn't want them to change it completely to suit a non-motion control scheme.
Yup, same thing with shooting those drones off the Great Fox on the Great Fox mission. Without hovering + aiming/firing I wouldn't know how to complete that stage.
You hardly see constructive criticism, though.
And what is this getting with the times about? Is getting with the times releasing one of the most popular fighting games with little content? Is it releasing PC ports, which don't even work properly? Is it 30fps for that cinematic feel?
Yes, I'm being quite sarcastic, because all this going with the times seems like a buzzword to me.
You could easily turn it around and say not allowing motion controls and second screen gaming is being behind the times. You don't even have these options on PS4 and X1 games.
@Vandy That point about the mission with the missiles is a good one. Star Fox 64 had a similar mission yet there was something a little "different" about the missiles. in SF64 the whole missile was a hit box, they all were heading towards the Great Fox.
Star Fox Zero had separate moving pieces of the missiles have their own targets while you also had to manage protecting the Great Fox from drones with the Missiles heading towards a portal instead of the Great Fox, something that you needed breaking, boosting and aiming for. Star Fox Zero's controls allowed for more demanding, exciting and tense missions expanding on the original gameplay.
I think something some people don't understand is that the things you needed to do to complete each mission Star Fox 64 were made intentionally simpler as a result of the control limitations e.g. outside the final boss(which had a massive target and didn't chase you) whenever you fought a boss that had a small weak point it would only be in on-rails, whereas Star Fox Zero makes full use of 3D space and all-range-mode to fight these kind of bosses.
@Yorumi "This continues to bother me. Name one single fighter aircraft that uses gyro controls like sf0 does. Name one fighter that has guns that move independent of the aircraft and is used for dogfighting. You can't."
It's true that fighter jets have fixed guns, but radar lock provides a moving reticle that guides the pilot through his HUD so he can fly his bullets onto a target, and missiles can be fired on a target completely independent of the aircraft's heading, which is basically the same as a charge shot in Star Fox. And while fighter JETS may have fixed guns, attack HELICOPTERS do not. For example, an AH-64 Apache pilot can "slave" the gun to his helmet mounted display so that the gun moves where the pilot looks, which is practically the same as Star Fox Zero's targeting system, only in Star Fox you move the gamepad with your hands instead of your head. Different control method, same effect.
A lot of people seem to be missing the point here. It really shouldn't be a question of whether or not Miyamoto retires or not.
There are a lot of MUCH bigger problems that need to be dealt with at HQ before even going to such minor issues with Miyamoto.
For one, plenty of the developers at the company really need to either grow a backbone or actually think about whom their target audience is. A lot of things people are criticising him for are not "decisions" and rather "suggestions" he makes. Just looking at any of the past interviews will verify this aspect.
Sticker Star is actually a VERY good example of this. He suggested to Intelligent Studios about trying to make a game with only Mario characters and a less complicated storyline. Rather than think about whom their target market was, it seems the studio straight up agreed to do this and then proceeded to also "simplify" the gameplay which I'm pretty sure Miyamoto didn't suggest. He may have made a mention to the gameplay being "good" (after it was changed to a puzzle game) but I doubt a man in a position as high up as himself would have been able to truly play the game from start to finish given his limited time for managing other games at the same time.
There's simply too much hero worship in the company; that needs to change before anything else is done. The developers really need to learn to think for themselves.
The F-Zero comment from him is silly as it's doubtful a control change would bring more people into the series. The biggest problem with that series is simply it's just really niche. If they want to make it have a wider target audience, they should probably just make it a budget title sold at a lower price. A full retail game for it would just cost too much with some of the things the core fan base has been clamouring for like full HD effects, resolution, top of the line graphics, frame rate, and content amount especially considering the series doesn't really sell a lot of copies at least not at a level where it would be worth that kind of effort. Making a budget title would attract the curiosity of other people hopefully increasing the fan base size and then a more fleshed out title could be produced.
AGAIN, the Arwing is a fantasy aircraft in a futuristic world populated by anthropomorphic animals.
If you want to play a realistic flight simulator, there are plenty of those out there. This game values gameplay over realism.
Perhaps in this reimagined universe the Arwing is redesigned to have those types of weapons?
Why not take issue with the fact that the animals don't wear space helmets? How do they breathe in space? How do they handle the extreme forces of the moves they perform without some sort of oxygen-providing apparatus connected to their mouths?
Apparently you find it acceptable that Arwings are "immune to G forces" but it blows your mind that they would have a weapon layout similar to an attack chopper.
You just pick and choose what's most convenient to your argument.
I love Star Fox Zero. The Arwing is controlled with the left stick and handles exactly they way you think it would. It's the gyro aiming where people have their problem. I think it's a great game, but I can understand why some may not like it.
What I find galling (particularly among the "professional" gaming press) is that, in one breath, Nintendo is scorned for their "gimmicky" motion controls, and in another, VR is praised as some grand revolution. Never mind the fact that Nintendo laid the foundation for motion/gyro controls. The only thing these "VR" systems have added to what Nintendo has already done is a screen to strap to your head. Total hypocrisy.
For the record, I think VR is incredibly dumb and destined to fail.
It's kind of along the same lines when the "professional" gaming press criticizes Nintendo for underutilizing their motion controls, but then turns around and complains when they make it a point to do so.
Nintendo can't win!
@Vandy Exactly. And I'm no Nintendo apologist. In fact, the Wii U is the first Nintendo home console i've owned since the NES. I owned a Gamecube for about a month before I played Halo at a friends house and heard that Panzer Dragoon was coming to Xbox and sold it...
I can't think of a gaming company that gets as much crap as Nintendo. I don't think there was this much of an uproar about Halo 5 taking away split-screen. Horizon Zero Dawn and No Man's Sky were delayed, but you wouldn't even know it because were given a free pass. Zelda was delayed again and everyone loses their minds. Don't get me wrong, Nintendo has made a lot of poor decisions lately and acts like a company that just doesn't give a darn anymore, but they also can't win for losing.
@Yorumi If by "aircraft" you mean "jet" then that is true, but not entirely, as I outlined in the use of radar lock for missiles and gun target designator displayed on the HUD of a pilot. But again, an attack helicopter can be considered a "fighter aircraft". They don't usually engage in a lot of air-to-air dogfights, but neither do most jet fighter platforms these days. So I guess it's probably safe to say that the arwing in SF Zero behaves more like an attack helicopter than a fighter jet in terms of its weapon controls, which means that it's not entirely lacking in relation to some real-world fighter aircraft.
Personally, I don't put much stock in all that anyway, because Star Fox is an arcade-style shooter, not a flight combat simulator. Still, I think some semblance of real world air combat components have made their way in to Zero, whether on purpose or by accident, and I think they've made the game more immersive and enjoyable, but that's just me.
"I think they've made the game more immersive and enjoyable, but that's just me."
It's not just you. 367 people on Metacritic appear to feel the same way. Heck, you could even add in the 48 people in the "mixed" category because they clearly found a lot to enjoy about it, too.
@Yorumi I don't care if it is or isn't a criticism of the game. Think whatever you want about it. It's just a game. Criticism is nothing more than opinion, and the opinions of others generally have no bearing on my own.
What baffles me in this case is your insistence that your opinions are irrefutable facts, but seemingly to your chagrin, they are not. Your personal sentiments don't magically become self-evident truths just because you keep following them up with statements like "this is a fact." You don't find the controls immersive? That's fine. Clearly there are other people who disagree, and their conclusions on the matter are no less valid than yours.
I love everything he does, and everything he has made. But I think there are some ideas of him that he should left behind or should listen to the fans to make them better. For example, I think he had a lot of potential on Wii U to make a real multi-player mode in Star Fox Zero, just like the other Star Fox games. Zero is an amazing game, but with the specifications Wii U has to offer, I think it could have been a lot better.
??? Really, has everything he's done been brilliant? It's been a while since he's done something great. Read "great", not o.k, or alright. Pikmin being his last real contribution I think. He's been fiddling about for the past few years on Wii U projects, Project Guard and Giant Robot, neither of which are brilliant. Miyamoto is a genius and has conributed so much but he has also been a hindrance to Nintendo moving forward. I don't know if his time is up.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE For what it's worth I actually enjoyed Wii Music AND I think it's an underrated game. The game's reveal was awful, though...
@Vee_Flames Don't you mean underrated game? And yes its reveal is legendary for a lot of reasons. Not least for this infamous gif.
@SLIGEACH_EIRE Oops, I did mean underrated lol Thanks for that correction.
And there's really no denying it, no other reveal in the world of gaming can lose to Wii Music's. I mean, the latter was one of the cheesiest things I've ever seen in my life...
20 years, and it shows to be honest.
Don't wanna be too hard on the guy. He's probably the sole reason the Pikmin series is ongoing.
Oh, and the reason it exists in the first place.
And so many other Nintendo franchises.
He's essentially the reason Nintendo became such a phenomenal games publisher.
But Sticker Star was bad, and Wii Music wasn't for us HARDCORE gamerz, so he sux.
@Yorumi I agree Star Fox did go far away from its roots after SF64 where imo it really started to get bad with SF Command.
-How about Nintendo giving us the option to add/message/invite/party chat with our friends the modern way and without the FC hassle?
-How about an unified account (hint: eShop) for all your Nintendo hardware like Sony and MS?
-How about Miyamoto letting Koizumi and other developers create games with their own creative vision instead of butting in all the time and forcing his vision on their work, like Koizumi's philosophy for a more focused narrative in Nintendo games instead of the basic 99% gameplay 1% story mindset.
-How about Nintendo embracing Youtube content from their loyal fans without the bull loyalty program.
Believe it or not all of this is not because of Nintendos incompetence rather that the old masters over at Nintendo are stuck in the past and are not willing to get with the times. I'm all in for innovation but the sales of the PS4, XBO and the terrible sales of the WiiU prove that's not what gamers are looking for they just want more of the same but better which is exactly what the old school Star Fox fans were hoping with SF Zero.
@gcunit Sorry for misunderstanding. The context of the comment you first replied to and the air of this page's article makes your comment seem as if you were assuming a limitive rule about what makes some games better than other (different) games.
In Star Wars at the least – think Luke's gun cockpit in the Millennium Falcon.
You do have a little bit of a point – perhaps when you move the gyro screen, the guns on the arwings should move on the TV screen. Or it should immediately angle the whole ship.
I meant more authentic because it feels more like I'm in the cockpit.
Tap here to load 89 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...