Support NeoGAF

[TheJoRu]

He doesn't commit to giving the game its' due diligence. That's what's wrong with it. Star Fox Zero is a very short game, like 2-3 hours long. The fact that he couldn't commit that amount of time to play the game disgraces him, the site he works for and his profession. It's unprofessional and embarrassing. He had 2 weeks to spend that much time with the game, and he couldn't be asked to simply do his job.

I mean, it's not for us to decide what "his job" is, but I agree with the rest. To me it's not about right or wrong, and it's definitely not about liking or disliking a game; rather it's that I don't want to read shitty articles written by editors who care so little about the quality of their work that they can't even bother giving games their fair due (in this case finishing the game at least once, considering the short length) just because it wasn't fun enough. It comes off as self-serving rather than serving the audience.

Frankly, thinking about it further, it's disrespectful to the developer and to the publisher who handed you that review copy to write garbage impression pieces like this based on limited experience, perhaps even more so than if you simply don't bother writing anything. Do this repeatedly and publishers may just ask themselves why they are even sending you review copies in the first place if you aren't going to do proper work about the games.

 

[The_Intruder]

Also he complained too much about the technical and visual aspect of the game. It's not that bad looking to me. And Starfox has always been a short game so...
I think I'll get it cheaper, I don't need to play it absolutely day one.

Honestly I find the game visually good in space battle(sometimes it's really a looker) but on planets levels it depends unfortunately.

 

[Milly Osworth]

"There is a good game somewhere inside Star Fox Zero, but its forced reliance on the Gamepad's screen and motion controls cause it to barrel roll right into mediocrity."

-GamesRadar

I think that quote says it all.

 

[Henkka]

I wonder what the game would have looked like if Platinum had been given complete creative control and a decent, 2-year budget. Star Fox: Refurgeance could have been great.

 

[JoeM86]

"There is a good game somewhere inside Star Fox Zero, but its forced reliance on the Gamepad's screen and motion controls cause it to barrel roll right into mediocrity."

-GamesRadar

I think that quote says it all.

"Waaa I have to learn a new control method"

I'm enjoying it so far

 

[Candescence]

I wonder what the game would have looked like if Platinum had been given complete creative control and a decent, 2-year budget. Star Fox: Refurgeance could have been great.

Speaking of which, I would not be opposed to a pure Platinum-developed Adventures redo. A refresh take on the game with Platinium's pedigree and a much more focused vision rather than the original's messy development would probably do wonders, and one Platinum guy has gone on record saying that he'd be thrilled to have Krystal debut in the sequel to Zero.

 

[jariw]

He doesn't commit to giving the game its' due diligence. That's what's wrong with it. Star Fox Zero is a very short game, like 2-3 hours long. The fact that he couldn't commit that amount of time to play the game disgraces him, the site he works for and his profession. It's unprofessional and embarrassing. He had 2 weeks to spend that much time with the game, and he couldn't be asked to simply do his job.

But would a review just playing through the 2-3 hour game be of any use? It's not a game where the main objective is to reach the end as fast as possible.

In the context of all reviewers that don't bother to review the game, it's kind of refreshing to read this review. It's one of the few reviews that actually gives some tips on an approach on how to learn the controls:
http://www.cheatcc.com/wiiu/rev/starfoxzeroreview2.html

 

[Kagoshima_Luke]

I've seen this kind of "rebellious" attitude before in this thread and it still makes very little sense. First of all because I can bet that you haven't played all the games that he dislikes and secondly because it would make much more sense to find a reviewer that has a similar taste to yours and follow that one instead of following someone you have nothing in common. But i guess you showed him or something.

There are three reviewers who have, time and time again, given grossly different scores, on both ends of the spectrum, to games that I have played and assessed (I also write reviews). Two of them are at Giant Bomb. Thus, when I see a review from one of these individuals, I anticipate having a very different assessment of the game in question. Because I have been looking forward to Star Fox, I was excited to see Dan's 2/5 and was even more so after reading his article and seeing his biggest complaint, which is a non issue for me.

Not rocket science, really.

 

[Annoying Old Party Man]

I just wish it was the good ole days where we weren't arguing over whether a Nintendo game was good or not. They were just good. The argument was whether they were great or excellent. Amiibo Fesitval, Mario Party, Mario Tennis...what the hell is going on?

Maybe Star Fox is great, but at this point (and I'm a huge Nintendo homer) I'm not buying this game. The media has been hitting them hard, and for the right reasons. Even on the 3DS front I'm having a hard time with their games. I'm half way through Fire Emblem and have no desire to finish. Paper Mario Jam I'm about a tenth of the way through and haven't even considered picking it back up. New trend this past year. Besides SMM (which the novelty wore off fast) and Splatoon it's been a massively weak past year.

I've had a hard time finishing Yoshi on Wii U. Had to force myself to finish Kirby and Treasure Tracker. They are good games, but they just lack something, can't put my finger on it. But I've left more Nintendo games on the shelf this past year than I have any other publisher/system in the 20 years I've been playing games.

Not to burst your bubble, but this is -mainly- you. There were always crap releases in Nintendo's calendar, among mediocre, excellent, and truly fantastic ones.

Though to call it as it is, it is becoming increasingly difficult to produce exemplary content in such quantities, and Nintendo has been producing content non-stop, trying to support its systems.

 

[peaceiscloser]

"Waaa I have to learn a new control method"

I'm enjoying it so far

Now this is a review I can trust. Thanks Joe.

 

[KingBroly]

But would a review just playing through the 2-3 hour game be of any use? It's not a game where the main objective is to reach the end as fast as possible.

In the context of all reviewers that don't bother to review the game, it's kind of refreshing to read this review. It's one of the few reviews that actually gives some tips on an approach on how to learn the controls:
http://www.cheatcc.com/wiiu/rev/starfoxzeroreview2.html

Considering it seems like it takes about that long to learn said controls...yes, it would be of use. But apparently to some, like Gies, it's above their "paygrade" to even think about trying to learn the rules of a game.

 

[JoeM86]

Now this is a review I can trust. Thanks Joe.

It does require a fair bit of concentration. I've only had a quick play as I have some work to do until lunch time, but then I'm going to jump back in and fully experience it.

 

[TrueBlue]

"Waaa I have to learn a new control method"

I'm enjoying it so far

That's not exactly controversial coming from you.

Spoiler

I'm jesting please don't hurt me

 

[JoeM86]

That's not exactly controversial coming from you.

Spoiler

I'm jesting please don't hurt me

Hey, be fair, when a Nintendo game or a Pokémon game sucks, I point it out.

For example, I'm currently playing Pokémon Comaster for my site and it's just awful.

I'm not blindly loyal

 

[GavinGT]

Nothing, if you're writing a blog. As the basis for a review? No. At that point you're describing a preference not giving a fair assessment of a game's quality.

Reviews are inherently subjective.

 

[KingSnake]

There are three reviewers who have, time and time again, given grossly different scores, on both ends of the spectrum, to games that I have played and assessed (I also write reviews). Two of them are at Giant Bomb. Thus, when I see a review from one of these individuals, I anticipate having a very different assessment of the game in question. Because I have been looking forward to Star Fox, I was excited to see Dan's 2/5 and was even more so after reading his article and seeing his biggest complaint, which is a non issue for me.

Not rocket science, really.

No, still doesn't make sense. It is a logical fallacy. And a big one. And if you are writing reviews, it's even more concerning.

Would you say that you like everything that Dan dislikes? What other on rail shooter you liked and Dan disliked?

A dislikes C and B likes C. If A dislikes D, "B likes D" is not necessarily true. More so if C and D have very few characteristics in common.

 

[TrueBlue]

Hey, be fair, when a Nintendo game or a Pokémon game sucks, I point it out.

For example, I'm currently playing Pokémon Comaster for my site and it's just awful.

I'm not blindly loyal

I know, I know! I do think you get a bad rap for your loyalty sometimes.

 

[AntMurda]

Is it true that Platinum was complaining in the Japanese gaming press about the motion controls being forced on them? There's a guy posting continually in the comments section of Gies' review about that.

Nintendo programmed the game. The reason the game exists is because Miyamoto wanted to use the game system to promote the gamepad. People want to extrapolate that Platinum did everything from the mere sight of their logo. Read the interviews and look at the credits - it corroborates the truth.

 

[A Link to the Past]

It's really a shame that Nintendo took the approach that they did with having smaller, shorter-development games. Star Fox Zero could have really benefited from an extra year of development, maybe give it a solid multi-player component to give it strong lastability.

 

[GhostTrick]

"Waaa I have to learn a new control method"

I'm enjoying it so far

The problem is when such new control method brings nothing to the game. Kid Icarus Uprising was a new control scheme, but in exchange, it allowed to be crazy fast and accurate. For Star Fox Zero ? This is just a gimmick. Wiimote would've been a far better control scheme for this game.

 

[DidntKnowJack]

Reviews are inherently subjective.

Yes they are. But when their foundation is built upon a fairly narrow point of view, I consider them flawed. Its like having a guy who no longer likes rpgs review an rpg. Little wonder they're not going to like it. It becomes an opinion piece rather than a review. A review worth a damn anyway.

 

[peaceiscloser]

Twitch Streamer Retro Gaijin has been getting wrecked by final boss for like 20 minutes now lol

harder than DSIII apparently

 

[Vampirolol]

The problem is when such new control method brings nothing to the game. Kid Icarus Uprising was a new control scheme, but in exchange, it allowed to be crazy fast and accurate. For Star Fox Zero ? This is just a gimmick. Wiimote would've been a far better control scheme for this game.

The correct way to play SF Zero is using dual screens especially if you aim for golden medals. This is one of the few times that a control scheme is justified by the design.

 

[GhostTrick]

The correct way to play SF Zero is using dual screens especially if you aim for golden medals. This is one of the few times that a control scheme is justified by the design.

Because it was shoehorned. But Star Fox never needed dual screen.

 

[KingBroly]

Twitch Streamer Retro Gaijin has been getting wrecked by final boss for like 20 minutes now lol

harder than DSIII apparently

He says 'oh, if you're a gamer you'll be fine' and I'm just shaking my head going 'I can beat this thing first try at this point.'

It looks fun as fuck though.

 

[Englebert3rd]

"It's the Star Fox game you wanted...in 2002." LOL

Yeah, that makes me want to play the game. 2002 was awesome for gaming!

 

[Maxrunner]

Im tempeting to buy this since the last starfox ive played was the n64 one.

 

[Tevious]

$50 seems kind of steep for a 3 hour game with no multiplayer. I liked Star Fox (SNES) and Star Fox 64 and I was considering buying this, but given the reviews, I'll just wait for it to go on sale for ~$20 someday.

 

[RagnarokX]

"Waaa I have to learn a new control method"

I'm enjoying it so far

"There is a good game somewhere inside The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, but its forced reliance on the controller's analog stick and 3D camera control cause it to roll right into mediocrity." - Egoraptor ;P

 

[Vampirolol]

Because it was shoehorned. But Star Fox never needed dual screen.

When you build a game around a mechanic it's not shoehorned, it's just made that way. It's like saying that first person was shoehorned in Metroid. Many reviewers didn't like the controls but the game is still correctly built around them.

 

[GavinGT]

Yes they are. But when their foundation is built upon a fairly narrow point of view, I consider them flawed. Its like having a guy who no longer likes rpgs review an rpg. Little wonder they're not going to like it. It becomes an opinion piece rather than a review. A review worth a damn anyway.

Dan ranks Starfox 64 as one of his favorite games. For him to not like the follow-up is something that is definitely worth a damn. It's been 20 years since that game came out. His view on it is likely shared by plenty of people. If you don't value his perspective on it, then move on to one of the other hundred reviews out there.

 

[Big Nikus]

shoehorned, gimmick... all my favorites criticisms right here, yay.

 

[Boy Wander]

$50 seems kind of steep for a 3 hour game with no multiplayer. I liked Star Fox (SNES) and Star Fox 64 and I was considering buying this, but given the reviews, I'll just wait for it to go on sale for ~$20 someday.

FFS, it's NOT 3.hours unless you deliberately want to not play through it multiple times as intended.

 

[Branduil]

Star Fox is basically Nintendo's Sonic to be honest. Golden age was decades ago, no coherent gameplay direction for the franchise, disregard for the tight gameplay of the originals, furries.

Nintendo might be better off putting the SF franchise on ice for a while. Bring back F-Zero instead, at least with that it will be hard for them to turn into a third-person adventure or something.

 

[Shiggy]

FFS, it's NOT 3.hours unless you deliberately want to not play through it multiple times as intended.

Does the average gamer play through games several times? The only time I did that was with Super Mario Galaxy and maybe Another Code.

 

[professor denim]

Star Fox was always an arcade shooter.
Im ok with the game being short, Ikaruga has 5 stages "only" as most of Cave shmups.
Since this is basically a 3D shmup im ok with that.

 

[Red Devil]

Speaking of which, I would not be opposed to a pure Platinum-developed Adventures redo. A refresh take on the game with Platinium's pedigree and a much more focused vision rather than the original's messy development would probably do wonders, and one Platinum guy has gone on record saying that he'd be thrilled to have Krystal debut in the sequel to Zero.

If there's ever a sequel with Kyrstal on it it'll likely be another Star Fox game and not an Adventures like game.

FFS, it's NOT 3.hours unless you deliberately want to not play through it multiple times as intended.

Shhh, don't stop people from singling out reviews in a wide array of reviews

 

[Boy Wander]

Does the average gamer play through games several times? The only time I did that was with Super Mario Galaxy and maybe Another Code.

How the fuck would I know? I would because I know that's how Starfox 64 is played and I know because I can read with my eyes that this game is similar. It's disingenuous to call out game length when you know full fucking well the design and structure of the game.

 

[Kinsei]

Does the average gamer play through games several times? The only time I did that was with Super Mario Galaxy and maybe Another Code.

The average gamer doesn't even play through a game once. Who knows, maybe they'll see a game so short they can beat it as a positive.

 

[professor denim]

Does the average gamer play through games several times? The only time I did that was with Super Mario Galaxy and maybe Another Code.

Surely not since the average gamer prefer long, hand holding, "story" driven games.
I reckon the average gamer has never witnessed the words "Game Over" on their screens.

 

[KingBroly]

How the fuck would I know? I would because I know that's how Starfox 64 is played and I know because I can read with my eyes that this game is similar. It's disingenuous to call out game length when you know full fucking well the design and structure of the game.

You can only guarantee a single playthrough, and some don't even do that. You cannot assume every customer will play through a game multiple times.

 

[Rodin]

Does the average gamer play through games several times? The only time I did that was with Super Mario Galaxy and maybe Another Code.

It's not even remotely the same thing considering that SF games are designed to be played more than once. Other types of games aren't, especially modern ones.

 

[peaceiscloser]

He says 'oh, if you're a gamer you'll be fine' and I'm just shaking my head going 'I can beat this thing first try at this point.'

It looks fun as fuck though.

He died so many times to final boss. I think he was on it for about an hour.

 

[Vampirolol]

Btw I have to admit I was positively biased to this game because they completely erased Krystal. That alone makes it a good Star Fox game.

 

[WillyFive]

Does the average gamer play through games several times? The only time I did that was with Super Mario Galaxy and maybe Another Code.

The average game doesn't play like Star Fox, it's style of game hasn't been seen much since the 90s.

Just look at all the people saying Yoshi's Story was short when it was rereleased on VC. That game is structured just like Star Fox, people got to the end credits without realizing they only played less than a quarter of the game in.

Is it the fault of the game to have a structure that is alien to modern gamers? Maybe, it's a valid problem; albeit one that shouldn't be.

 

[RagnarokX]

He says 'oh, if you're a gamer you'll be fine' and I'm just shaking my head going 'I can beat this thing first try at this point.'

It looks fun as fuck though.

He also referred to Star Fox 64 as the very first game

 

[Shiggy]

How the fuck would I know? I would because I know that's how Starfox 64 is played and I know because I can read with my eyes that this game is similar. It's disingenuous to call out game length when you know full fucking well the design and structure of the game.

I assume people expect a bit more for a full priced title without online multiplayer. After all, it's not 1998 anymore. At least for me, high scores and replaying stages is little incentive to keep on playing after the game has ended. Not a fan of backtracking in Zelda or Metroid games either.

The average gamer doesn't even play through a game once. Who knows, maybe they'll see a game so short they can beat it as a positive.

I certainly prefer a short game over a game with too much filler content. A 3 hour campaign is not necessarily a bad thing imo.

The average game doesn't play like Star Fox, it's style of game hasn't been seen much since the 90s.

In the 2000s it was still a multi million seller. It was Nintendo's choice to alienate fans with subpar quality.

 

[Boy Wander]

You can only guarantee a single playthrough, and some don't even do that. You cannot assume every customer will play through a game multiple times.

I get that. But people in this day and age should know what they're getting in to. There's enough media and discussion around. It's fine for people to say "The way this game is structured is not for me", but don't act all surprised as if this is a big shock and the game should have an end to end 12 hour campaign.

 

[FunkyDealer]

I ended up cancelling my First Print Edition, but I might still get it digitally if there's a deal with Project Guard as I'm definitely picking that up.

 

[Filter]

I assume people expect a bit more for a full priced title without online multiplayer. After all, it's not 1998 anymore. At least for me, high scores and replaying stages is little incentive to keep on playing after the game has ended. Not a fan of backtracking in Zelda or Metroid games either.
.

I guess star fox isn't for you. Or any shootemup.