Star Fox Zero the victim of trying to innovate

I want to ask people a question. Now people consistently ask for games to bring something new to the table. I mean just look at how people complain about Call of Duty every year. Now Star Fox Zero tried and I mean tried to innovate and failed miserably. Was Star Fox Zero the case of a developer trying to hard to innovate?

After playing star fox zero I picked up nano assault on 3DS.

After some time with nano assault I thought "why is my reticule attached to the movement of my ship?" Makes no sense. Then it hit me. The motion controls in star fox zero are genius. I really can't go back to the old way of doing things. It's a shame gamers are so afraid of new things. That second analog stick should have been replaced by motion aiming years ago.

I won't buy an NX if they have a gimmick for their primary controller just like I didn't buy a Wii-U. My wife bought me the Wii and it was essentially a glorified Netflix box that collected way to much dust.

If I don't buy the system... I won't purchase the game. So yeah, I suppose you could say that Star Fox is a victim of a failed attempt to innovate.

No. Nintendo objectively made a bad control scheme.

Instead of designing the controls of Star Fox with the consumer and 'easy of use' in mind and fun, they made something that nobody wanted, that the majority of people didn't like, and they did it on top of essentially remaking the game people have been asking for a sequel to.

IMO Nintendo complete missed the mark because they don't know what their audience wants.

So basically you have no idea what you're talking about but here's your opinion anyway.

Starfox was just a game for Nintendo to justify their gimmick controller

No, that honor belongs to super mario maker. Wii U should have launched with that game. And it rightfully justifies the gamepad controller.

The game doesn't look all that visually impressive.

Star Fox 64 / Rogue Squadron Cube - looked great for there time.

I expected much more from a WiiU game since visually this looks worse than some Wii/360/ps3 games.

It doesn't scream a next gen star fox to me

@Bread_or_Decide so question for you. Like is it not difficult to use both the controller for aim but having to look at the tv for making sure the ship doesn't take damage? Like has it not become disorientating?

Half the time the audience doesn't know what the audience wants.

@Bread_or_Decide: Negative. I hate motion controls in general. I've only seen a developer use it well once and that was the flight mechanics in Warhawk (PS3) which like morons they took out of Starhawk. Not even in Drake's Fortune did I like motion controls which is why I was incredibly relieved when they took them out of the remaster. The worst offender in motion controls was Zelda SS (Wii). Ruined the entire game for me. Force retarded controls on the player when traditional controls would work far better and you get backlash.

Nintendo needs a standard primary controller for the NX or it will do just as abysmal of sales as Wii-U.

The majority of levels in star fox zero are free range. You only need to look up to see where your targets are in relation to you. Locking in and then act accordingly via the gamepad screen. It's great to aim one direction and move in another. Makes for a much more realistic sense of flight.

I'm flying and star wolf is somewhere around me. I use the tv to find out where, try to navigate around him, then use the gamepad to shoot and aim.

It requires a learning curve but it's possible and then becomes second nature.

Innovation doesn't mean a game is going to be better.

Generally innovation is risky. This is why we don't see a lot of innovation done by big budget games. Innovation is usually done on a smaller budget scale and the big budget titles sample from that.

From what I can tell the controls for Starfox don't make the game better or worse. In the end the actual game was just average. They were banking a bit too much on the innovation making up for lacking design.

That's been the fate of most motion control gimmicks. Once the gimmick wears off and just becomes a normal part of the game, you now are playing the game without any distractions. If the motion controls didn't add to the experience, then the game still has to stand on its own legs regardless of the control scheme. Generally a dev has to balance their motion controls with gameplay and is less willing to take on gameplay risks when also introducing a new control scheme. This often leaves games that utilize motion controls as a primary gameplay mechanic lacking in the actual gameplay department.

Agreed.

BUT the control scheme of SFZ is objectively bad. It is clearly a step down from the OG controls, and clearly the only reason then made it this way is to incorporate the gamepad. If they had given the player the option of those control and a more traditional control scheme, I think the game would have been much better...

...but then you have the fact that they didn't make a new SF game, but a remake of the old one. All around (IMO) this game was doomed from jump.

I find it interesting most people ignore the one area Nintendo improved upon. Not motion controls but the wiimote pointer. I don't ever want to play resident evil 4 again without it. Makes for precise and fast aiming. It's smooth and works in tandem with normal game controls.

Motion controls over all were a bust.

But the wiimote pointer improved gaming without getting in the way of normal game mechanics.

Star Fox Zero was a case of Miyamoto.. Dude needs to retire or take a back seat and let the younger developers take control

No, even Nintendo in some instances has abandoned mandating integration of GamePad, it just signals to me how dense Platinum is becoming. They pulled some poor design GamePad crap with Wonderful 101 too put I just wrote that off as early WiiU game flaw. Now there's really no excuse. Just them pumping out that shovelware for Activision goes to show where their heads have been in recent years. I have even less faith in their Nier and Scalebound projects now. I mean, screw up Star Fox? I guess anything is fair game.

I agree. The gamepad stuff in wonderful 101 was abysmal.

If that's how innovation goes, i don't want anything innovative...

This^

Yeah, I'm pretty sure "traditional" controllers grant much better sales by default. Oh wait... THEY DON'T.

Besides, Wii U is closer to traditional than the Wii ever was.

RE4 with the Wii pointer was godlike...but that was over 10 years ago. Objectively you can't say the pointer "improved gaming" is if was never really used again to "improve gaming" but for one title.

The only other pointer game that I think was good was the Prime Trilogy, and maybe a few 'light-gun'-esq games.

Edit: Oh, and one game that I feel motion controls improved was that Dragon Ball Z Budokai Tenkaichi 3game. That game was extremely fun with motion controls.

What's innovative about SFZ?

Internet folk give Nintendo the worst advice.

"You need third party games!" meanwhile that hasn't helped xbox.

"You need normal controls!" meanwhile Wii U has more normal controls than Wii and sold less.

"You need better graphics!" That didn't help N64 and Gamecube. Meanwhile the Wii with worse graphics trounced the competition.

The lesson here is: Don't listen to internet folk, Nintendo. Do whatever you want. And if that means we don't get a traditional controller then so be it. For goodness sake I own a PS4 and that's the most boring console I've ever owned.

@Bread_or_Decide: I'm not dictating to Nintendo what business decisions they need to make. I'm dictating what they need to do for me to personally buy the NX.

For me to buy the NX...

- Traditional primary controller

- At least as powerful as PS3 (yeah... PS3; I'm not a graphics whore)

- Couch coop capabilities

- A decent online infrastructure with friends last capabilities that are user friendly; not some 16 digit mandatory code BS like Wii had.

- $300 or less

Am I CRAZY or did you just describe the Wii U?

Pro controller with 50 hour battery life.

PS3 graphics

Couch co op.

Decent online.

$300.

Or am I crazy?

i think its a solid idea and would like to try it.

i just cant justify full whack for a game that is in the starfox 64 mould. im not one for saying older game design is outdated (great to see the isometric RPG making a come back) but starfox is an exception for me.

@Bread_or_Decide: You're crazy. Primary controller is the stupid tablet. That's not traditional controls.

Well, beside the big screen in the center, the rest is in fact traditional controls.

You don't ever buy a second controller for your systems? The pro controller is my go-to for most games. It's excellent.

@Bread_or_Decide: It took me a year to buy a second PS4 controller. Does Wii-U ship with the Pro Controller now?

@Telekill: The tablet controller is still used as a classic controller. Difference is that it has a screen in the middle. Most games only use the controller screen for maps, item menus and option menus. Sometimes you'll have to use it for puzzles like in Resident Evil Revelations. Only some games rely heavily on the touch screen and they are a minority which can be avoided by a quick youtube video review. You're acting like the touch screen is the only way to play games.

Nope. But it's worth the investment.

@Telekill: no, it doesn't. If nintendo knew anything about moving units, they would bundle the wii u with a pro controller, a copy of smash, a copy of mario kart for 300 dollars.

Shit would fly off the shelves.

Innovation comes in many forms. Some developers use it with their story development or their gameplay mechanics. Nintendo chooses to only focus on their control schemes to be innovative. They fail because they believe in only hardware innovation- never software innovation

It's kind of funny that the pro controller is the gamepad minus the screen. If you're going to complain about the tablet controller, the screen isn't the thing to bitch about. The thing to bitch about is the battery life. Arguing that the screen is the fault of the Wii U is irrelevant since the gamepad IS the pro controller with a built in screen.

@Bread_or_Decide: Then it's not the primary controller. And crappy gimmick controls are pushed on devs.

I doubt it. Gamers have already made their minds up about the Wii U. And the XBox One for that matter. It's a little scary how one sided this gen is. PS4 leads the pack, has fewer exclusives, less value, and people still eat it up in droves. I literally have no idea why or how it's selling as well as it is. The pack mentality has judged the Wii U and thus nothing can save it at this point. Which is a shame. It's really the best console out there if you're into real gaming.

The two downsides to the wiiu gamepad is the battery life and it's a little heavy at times. It plays like a normal controller. Two analog sticks, similar button layout. A far cry from the Wiimote and nunchuck which was nothing like a traditional controller.

It's less a gimmick than you think. But it seems like your mind is made up on the matter. If you gave it a shot you might be pleasantly surprised.

@Bread_or_Decide: how is it the best console if you're into "real" gaming, what does that even mean. Their are more games, and plenty of great games, on ps4 and xbox. The libraries are probably both bigger than wii us at this point.

I've asked a lot of my Xbox and ps friends about wii u- the ones that don't own it. a lot or them would want one just for smash or mario kart. I think it there was a cheap bundle, consumers would buy it.

That's the thing about innovation. It's a gamble and rarely a safe one. Hence why we see so few devs attempt anything new. And look at how gamers react to something new. Would you risk it knowing the internet mob will jump on anything they can't figure out in two seconds? Then they are the first to complain that games are stale and we get nothing but call of duty and assassin's creed.

Again, no it wouldn't. Not at this phase with Nintendo's reputation.

@Bread_or_Decide: last of us was the most innovative game in a long while. There's been a few this gen, mostly with the smaller indie titles. Not many AAA ones- Splatoon and witcher 3 come to mind. Even MGSV was great, although not really risky.

The same amazing library that can't save the xbox one from it's slumping sales? PS4 has momentum and hype and for some reason word of mouth. That's it.

There's no game on those systems you couldn't have done last gen just with worse graphics. Mario kart 8 has more gameplay additions than most games this gen. Where's Drake's anti gravity boots or underwater propellers? Master Chief doesn't have a glider that comes out when he jumps does he? This gen is second verse same as the first.

I'm curious, what was so innovative about the last of us? Please don't tell me it's the plank sections with Ellie.

Nintendo couldn't give them away.

No, trying hard to innovate in unnecessary ways. There was no reason to mess with the controls like that. Star Fox never had a control issue.

The XB1 is still selling better than the 360 did at this point in time. There is no slumping sales.

@Telekill: I was thinking about a traditional controller to be the main way you play 3rd party games on the NX. That would: Make gimmicks optional, relieve some 3rd party stress, and bring back a bit of their hardcore audience. As for Nintendo themselves, they can use whatever control scheme they want.

End of reply.

I said a bit because Nintendo also needs to cater the audience with games that NORMAL fans want AND if it's feasible for the company. For example: a proper Metroid, proper Paper Mario, F-Zero, new IPs, bring back dead franchises (Startropics, and Custom Robo are examples), put Mario on hold, only make 1 Zelda game for the console excluding cross-generation Zelda (be done with the series for now, and give Aonuma a well deserved, long break), and make sure 1 mainline Pokemon comes out every 4 years, no more Pokemon remakes and there needs o be fewer spinoffs. They also need to stop remaking games and do spinoffs of games so often, solution would be for example: 1 spinoff of 1 franchise and 1 remake or a game per 3 years.

All of these things will get their hardcore audience back and more. However, they need to purge the fanbase first. The fanboys are the only continuous link in driving away 3rd parties. Don't believe me? Look at GameCube multiplat sales. If GameCube sold as much as Xbox, then why didn't the 3rd party games sell the same amount? The only game that breaks the mold is Soul Calibur 2, but the only reason it sold more was the inclusion of Link. It catered to the fanboy. Sheep are detriments to Nintendo, and they need to be kicked out. Just like with Cows and Lems.

That their 3 hour N64 style game controls weirdly isn't innovation to me.

Innovation would shaking up the style of the series and expanding it, for the modern standards of gaming.

Yes, Star Fox was the bad case of Trying too hard.

Even the Developers knew it was the case, but Miyamoto insisted that Star Fox Zero NEEDED them when in reality he should have just been making a great game.

Playing Uncharted 4 and Star Fox Zero made me realize that innovation is nice, but sometimes you don't need it.