Zero Punctuation: Star Fox Zero

Piecewise

New member
Apr 18, 2008
706
0
0
Charli said:
Cid Silverwing said:
If Nintendo weren't the EA of Japan before, they sure are now.
Woah woah woah. Okay let's calm down. Konami haven't dropped out of existence YET okay? Let's not get all crazy and say things that are wildly over hysterical.

...Calling something the EA of anything... boy. I need to sit down, coming down with a case of the shakes.
Konami may be turning beloved franchises into Plinko machines and rapidly shitting the bed, but at least they didn't fuck up two console generations with terrible gimmicks.
 

Thanatos2k

New member
Aug 12, 2013
820
0
0
You knew this trainwreck was coming, and we couldn't do anything about it. When I saw Miyamoto playing the game at E3 a year ago and not even looking at the television I knew they had produced garbage. And look! We were right.

ENOUGH with the gimmick controls. You had years to learn from Star Fox Command how gimmick controls ruined a game. You had years to learn from Star Fox Assault that everyone hated ground missions. You are incapable of making games that people want to play.
 

angel85

New member
Dec 31, 2008
129
0
0
nintendo desperately needs to patch this game so we can play without motion controls, all they have to do is port the controls from Star Fox 64 3D and there we go.
 

babinro

New member
Sep 24, 2010
2,518
0
0
Only 1 positive in the entire game?

Welcome to the end of the year Worst Games of 2016 StarFox Zero.
 

Elvis Starburst

Unprofessional Rant Artist
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
2,234
206
68
Kyle Davis said:
The weirdest thing is that some people on Metacritic, Google+ and Facebook actually loves the game. They say it's perfect, innovative and engaging. I'm just sitting going "WHY?! Did you even play it? It's unplayable! No way is nostalgia holding all of it up!" It's baffles me beyond belief!
The weirdest thing is that so many people on Metacritic, Google+ and Facebook all hate the game, saying it's shit and impossible to play. I'm just sitting going "HOW?! Did you even play it for more than 1 hour?"

Hee hee, that was fun~ Yeah, there are some who can play it better than others, but to call it purely unplayable, when many can do it fine and extremely well tells me there's more to it. Something a lot of the critics did I assume was pick it up, play it for 30 minutes to an hour or two, and probably just slapped it down and called it shit. The game has a MUCH higher learning curve than the rest of the series. Do the controls make it harder than it needs to be at times? Oh god, fucking yes, absolutely. Is it really "unplayable?" No, not really.

Yes, they're unneeded. Yes, they make things harder in places. Yes the shoe-horned camera angles on some bosses are annoying too. What's one thing the controls actually do well? Let you hit ships at angles you never could before. I can't tell you how many times a simple tilt of my controller saved my score's ass in many levels. When you get good with it, the angles are actually really helpful. It's just a shame a lot of people don't take enough time to practice and find that out
 

Saika Renegade

New member
Nov 18, 2009
298
0
0
I'm reminded a bit of Steel Battalion, and also of what else happened to that franchise when it thought 'gee, this seems like a perfectly acceptable control scheme.'

Not being able to remap or adjust controls is pretty close to being a cardinal sin as far as game design goes. Not all of us still have all our fingers, after all.
 

xaszatm

That Voice in Your Head
Sep 4, 2010
1,146
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
I'd heard the controls were infamously bad, but I didn't know the game was this short (couple of hours).
It's a Star Fox game. They're all around 3 hours long tops. I mean, even the cancelled Star Fox 2 game had a run time of under an hour. These games are designed to be arcade-like. It's like complaining that Sin and Punishment 2 takes 3 hours to complete, they're designed to be short games. However, I do think the game could have stand to be a bit longer.

And I don't know if the controls are bad per say. Rather, I find the learning curve of the controls far outpaces the length of the game. Many people, like myself, who get really good at the controls say it takes around 4 hours to truly master the controls...but by that point you've probably beaten the game twice. Like, compare this to Wonderful 101. The Wonderful 101 has a truly bizarre control scheme that takes a good chunk of the game to master, but most people feel like they get a good grip on the controls usually by Operation 3. That's at around the halfway point.

And like that game, Star Fox Zero allows you to do insane stuff once you master the controls. From turning the Star Wolf dogfights into incredible, intense fights to using the enemy's guided missile to destroy a boss, the controls gives you a new level of control once you master it...but the curve to get there is so high, you'd already beaten the game twice before.

TLDR: The game was built to be short, but I think you do have a point when it comes to the control level curve.

OT: I personally like this game a lot. However, I do understand why people don't like it. I think this game was ultimately forced into something it was not and the game suffered from it. Oh well, the game did well enough in Europe and North America that the series really isn't in any real danger.

Though this does mean I have to see "educated" opinions of how Miyamoto was never a good game designer for the next couple of months. Joy.
 

Metalix Knightmare

New member
Sep 27, 2007
831
0
0
Cid Silverwing said:
If Nintendo weren't the EA of Japan before, they sure are now.
So, Nintendo has been buying up companies, forcing them to put out yearly releases despite the impact that has on the game's quality, proceeding to completely dismantle said companies when they run out of steam until they're nothing but a shell of their former selves?

Seriously dude, Nintendo's thing with Youtube is BAD, but they've still got a lot of puppy kicking to do before they reach EA's level of evil.

Piecewise said:
Konami may be turning beloved franchises into Plinko machines and rapidly shitting the bed, but at least they didn't fuck up two console generations with terrible gimmicks.
They also screwed over Kojima pretty badly with their claim on the engine used for MGSV, an engine that Kojima and his team worked on SPECIFICALLY for that game, thus making him pay them if he ever wants to use it again. Not to mention that whole thing with the new Silent Hill game.

Seriously, Nintendo screwed up trying something new, and is being stupid with Youtube gameplay videos. Konami fucked over the people who made them tons of money, and canned what could've been the best horror game in years out of spite. Nintendo ain't even CLOSE to Konami in terms of evil.
 

Gatlank

New member
Aug 26, 2014
190
0
0
darkrage6 said:
Yeah the controls are complete and utter ass and there's no reason for it, Nintendo is just pathetically trying to convince it's audience that the gamepad wasn't a unnecessary gimmick that nobody was asking for. I like this game but the controls really hamper the experience and I totally see where people are coming from with the negative reviews, hard to decide if these controls are better or worse then those of Kid Icarus Uprising.
I'm always amazed when game companies are trying to reinvent the wheel by making it a square.
After the first controllers for the PS3 that nobody wanted, the Power Glove, the Kinect, etc. i think Nintendo would have gotten the idea that these kind of gimmicks don't work if they aren't a suitable replacement to the regular gamepad.
 

renegade7

New member
Feb 9, 2011
2,046
0
0
"Sci-fi usually contains a contemporary message, and in this case the message is apparently 'don't run out of tasty bananas'".

Now that you mention it, I did see something like this in the news a while ago: http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/19/news/bananas-banana-crisis-disease/
 

4Aces

New member
May 29, 2012
180
0
0
marioandsonic said:
Also, I hate the fact that it's another remake/reboot, because it's not like the game industry has been pumping those out with alarming regularity lately.
Just wait until they realize that they can just auto-loop. Reboot, reboot, reboot, wonderful reboot...

marioandsonic said:
Cid Silverwing said:
If Nintendo weren't the EA of Japan before, they sure are now.
I thought that was Konami's job?
We now have proof that competition can be a bad thing.
 

CrystalShadow

don't upset the insane catgirl
Apr 11, 2009
3,829
0
0
The controls are[/s] something you can get used to, and if you master it it has some small upside.
But seriously, for the most part it's absolutely pointless and painful to use.

game taking 2-3 hours is consistent with the history of the series though. But, if it's following that history, there should be at least 3 different paths.

The original made you choose the difficulty level at the start (with each one having either changed, or outright different levels)
Starfox 64 has those 3 paths but which you end up on is determined dynamically by your results in the level.

Fairly sure this one follows the Starfox 64 logic.
Which means there should be somewhere near 3x the levels of any one playthrough.

But, yes, if you ignore that it does seem exceptionally short.

And I got bored before I tried to continue.

But if starfox 64 is any indication it'll be about 15-20 hours of gametime total, even if each playthrough can be done in about 2-3 hours.

But since I couldn't bring myself to keep going, I am only guessing here.
This is Starfox 64 with worse controls, and less interesting level design, and way too many vehicles.

Yes, I do know 64 had the landmaster and a submarine, but this has the arwing, landmaster, gyrowing, and transformed modes of each of them. And seriously, why does that exist? Yes, I know the arwing walker was a thing in the unreleased starfox 2, but it looks hilariously silly. And honestly, I don't like what it does to the gameplay either.

It used to be really fun to fly into a large ship through a narrow tunnel at breakneck speeds trying not to hit any of the many obstacles...
But now you have the walker mode meaning if you get a scene like that you'll just go...
"Eh. I'll use the walker mode".
Takes all the pacing and thrill out of it and turns it into a slow-paced, plodding 3rd person shooter...
 

CrystalShadow

don't upset the insane catgirl
Apr 11, 2009
3,829
0
0
Gatlank said:
darkrage6 said:
Yeah the controls are complete and utter ass and there's no reason for it, Nintendo is just pathetically trying to convince it's audience that the gamepad wasn't a unnecessary gimmick that nobody was asking for. I like this game but the controls really hamper the experience and I totally see where people are coming from with the negative reviews, hard to decide if these controls are better or worse then those of Kid Icarus Uprising.
I'm always amazed when game companies are trying to reinvent the wheel by making it a square.
After the first controllers for the PS3 that nobody wanted, the Power Glove, the Kinect, etc. i think Nintendo would have gotten the idea that these kind of gimmicks don't work if they aren't a suitable replacement to the regular gamepad.
Well, to be fair, the wii U gamepad IS a regular gamepad (with a touchscreen and motion sensor bolted on).

Ignore the screen and it's basically the same controller as consoles have been using for the last 20 years.
Trouble is not that it can't replace a regular gamepad. (it can. because it is a superset of one).
But rather, the way extra features are needlessly shoehorned into the games just because they're there.

There's nothing inherently wrong with the controller itself. It's no worse than taking a regular controller and adding 5 extra buttons that happen to be in an awkward spot.
That doesn't make the controller inherently worse, it just makes those extra buttons kind of useless.

They have extra features. They don't know what to do with those extra features, but they insist on using them anyway, and for reasons that make no sense.

Art academy and some of the Nintendoland minigames show what you can do with it. But star fox Zero definitely shows what you shouldn't

If you have extra features above and beyond a standard controller, but they don't make a good fit for general gaming, they should be used as EXTRA features where they make sense. NOT shoehorned into every situation regardless of if it works or not.

and for instance, Offscreen play is an amazing optional feature if you only need a conventional control scheme.
And it only works when the game doesn't need 2 screens.
Useful, but not essential, and thus an actual benefit, rather than a negative.
(optional benefits that aren't essential are still benefits. But when something doesn't work, being forced to use it is a real painful experience.)
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Saika Renegade said:
I'm reminded a bit of Steel Battalion, and also of what else happened to that franchise when it thought 'gee, this seems like a perfectly acceptable control scheme.'

Not being able to remap or adjust controls is pretty close to being a cardinal sin as far as game design goes. Not all of us still have all our fingers, after all.
I personally had less problems with Heavy Armor's motion controls then Star Fox Zeros.
 

darkrage6

New member
May 11, 2016
478
0
0
Gatlank said:
darkrage6 said:
Yeah the controls are complete and utter ass and there's no reason for it, Nintendo is just pathetically trying to convince it's audience that the gamepad wasn't a unnecessary gimmick that nobody was asking for. I like this game but the controls really hamper the experience and I totally see where people are coming from with the negative reviews, hard to decide if these controls are better or worse then those of Kid Icarus Uprising.
I'm always amazed when game companies are trying to reinvent the wheel by making it a square.
After the first controllers for the PS3 that nobody wanted, the Power Glove, the Kinect, etc. i think Nintendo would have gotten the idea that these kind of gimmicks don't work if they aren't a suitable replacement to the regular gamepad.
Indeed, the Six-Axis gimmick was quickly phased out when it became apparent nobody gave a shit about games that used it for movement controls like Lair and Warhawk. The Move was also a complete joke, it was little more then a Wii-mote with a light bulb on the end. At least the Kinect had good sales, almost nobody bought the Move(mostly cause Sony barely advertised the damn thing, I saw tons of TV commercials for Kinect, but not a single one for the Move).
 

shrekfan246

Not actually a Japanese pop star
May 26, 2011
6,374
0
0
Transdude1996 said:
The thing with Kid Icarus is that competent shooter controls for a 3DS game (Without the use of the touch screen, I should add) would entail either the old N64 control scheme (C-Pad for tank controls, face buttons to strafe and change pitch) or to use Southpaw controls (C-Pad to aim, face buttons to move).
Or, they could've actually capitalized on the control stick peripheral they came out with that was only ever good for Monster Hunter (and was practically required for the same, to be honest). Using it to just swap the already-existing stick's functionality to the other one is probably the least helpful thing they ever could've done. And there's no reason strafing couldn't be swapped with turning anyway, if actually implementing multiple control schemes (i.e. for people who don't have the circle pad pro and for people who do) is too hard for them.

In fact, giving people the ability to actually customize their controls to their liking would probably go a long way toward diminishing some of the most harsh criticisms that both Kid Icarus and Star Fox have received, and there's absolutely no bloody reason why console games shouldn't be allowed to customize the controls more than the pathetic pity dregs that developers currently offer.
 

shrekfan246

Not actually a Japanese pop star
May 26, 2011
6,374
0
0
Elvis Starburst said:
Something a lot of the critics did I assume was pick it up, play it for 30 minutes to an hour or two, and probably just slapped it down and called it shit.
Are you so cavalier with your job that when you encounter something that infuriates you in even the slightest manner you just abandon it and say it was awful without any further attempts at working it out?

I apologize if this seems needlessly hostile or anything, I just see a lot of people who seem to be under the belief that video game critics don't actually care about their work.
 

Sheo_Dagana

New member
Aug 12, 2009
966
0
0
shrekfan246 said:
Elvis Starburst said:
Something a lot of the critics did I assume was pick it up, play it for 30 minutes to an hour or two, and probably just slapped it down and called it shit.
Are you so cavalier with your job that when you encounter something that infuriates you in even the slightest manner you just abandon it and say it was awful without any further attempts at working it out?

I apologize if this seems needlessly hostile or anything, I just see a lot of people who seem to be under the belief that video game critics don't actually care about their work.
I agree, it seems that people don't understand what's involved as far as game reviews are concerned, or they read only as far into the review as it takes to find something that they disagree with and immediately go into attack mode. Hyperbole gets thrown around in a lot of reviews and people start making assumptions.

I don't like the controls myself and feel they make the game needlessly complicated. It has nothing to do with skill or lack thereof and everything to do with needlessly forcing players to use a particular gimmick. The thing is, I actually LIKE the gamepad. It was fun to have for the Wind Waker HD remake, since it makes managing your inventory and map a lot easier, plus whenever I was aiming at an enemy, it let me be lazy by tilting the gamepad just right. That was an option, something I didn't have to use, but enjoyed having. Star Fox Zero's forced gamepad controls were unnecessary, and people have a right to be annoyed at not being able to turn them off.