Each route in SF64 could take up to 1:30 hours to finish, there were like 5-6 different routes you could take, the meat of the game is replayability and I played over 1000 hours of SF64 back in the day, I used to warm up my N64 with a full session of SF before playing the game I was playing at the moment.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Star Fox Zero & Guard - Review Thread
- Thread starter maxcriden
- Start date
Each route in SF64 could take up to 1:30 hours to finish, there were like 5-6 different routes you could take, the meat of the game is replayability and I played over 1000 hours of SF64 back in the day, I used to warm up my N64 with a full session of SF before playing the game I was playing at the moment.
Really? I mean the single player on CoD games is pretty short but the time people spend on it mostly comes from multiplayer. For Starfox it's about finding all the hidden levels and score attacking.
Go back a few pages.
I don't remember him saying that, I always seemed to be gaffers speculation based on nothing.
Nope, there are only two options: Either tilting moves the reticle all the time or you can set it so that it only moves while you shoot.
Honestly, my problem isn't so much with this setup and moreso that it leads to relatively uninteresting gameplay decisions. Game feels like an unpolished tech demo at times.
I think what some of the more negative reviewers are struggling to say is not so much that the controls are bad, but that what the game does with it isn't really worth the learning curve. In a game like Bayonetta, I like learning how the game works because there's so much to gain from it. In Star Fox, you might be able to hit enemies a little better, but that was never a problem in star fox in the first place. They had to change the game to need this, and a lot of the ideas they came up with feel forced (enemy placement, bosses that force you into first person mode, etc,)
You could argue the same with Skyward Sword: You never needed the motion controls to fight enemies, but I liked it because at least 90% of the time, the challenges they came up for it were interesting. I think hitting a bokoboblin's shield in half at an angle did get old after a while, but it didn't feel terrible. We also get Zelda games a lot. Star Fox hasn't had a mainline game in a long time. It's just a lot of weird decisions that ended up disappointing me. Not unplayable or broken, but just not a great game in general. Cheers to those who click with it though!
My expectations for certain franchises are that they are longer. My expectations for an on-rail shooter sequel to star fox 64? For it to be slightly longer, but mostly the same, as starfox 64. It seems like this is. To say that every modern game has to fit into this list of criteria is silly, especially when we're now getting to a point where anyone can release any game of any length and graphical fidelity and genre for any price they want.
That said, I probably put in 30-40 hours in SF64 over time due to its re-playability. This game has more modes and difficulties AND has a bonus 2nd game included in some versions. This easily has more content than sf64.
Astral Dog
Member
Last time i saw new games at 1,100. They raised the price again!?
things are ugly. Local Gamerush closed off with a sale of every new game at 80% off.Miyamoto is a professed fan of Steel Battalion. It was what spawned his ideas for Steel Diver. Conceptually, Nintendo knew what they wanted to do with the controls before working with Platinum, at least that's what they made it sound like. Miyamoto unveiled the tech demo at E3 and said they hadn't found a partner to work with yet.
Cool! I had no idea. But you can see the influences.
These two things aren't the same. Legit criticism is saying the controls aren't for you and moving on. Saying they shouldn't put them in because you didn't want to take the time to learn them, when that's your job and your colleagues have done it, is not. If you'll notice, no one has a problem with lunar explaining how he feels about the game, because he put in the time and effort. And some of his fellow reviewers disagree with him, so someone saying they flat shouldn't have been implemented is really just wasting everybodys time. I'd rather hear why they've failed in the reviewers eyes, like I want lunar to elaborate on
Could you give an example of this?
Inaba was the producer of that game, though I don't know if there were any other notable names involved.
I just listened to the GameXplain discussion with The Completionist & RogersBase. Jirard has put 50+ hours into Star Fox Zero and RogersBase 20 hours during the embargo period.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJQKwL95l1Y
So let's take the first level, Corneria: You're pretty much going through the exact same motions as Corneria from Star Fox 64, except now you can move the reticle around. This doesn't add a whole lot to the experience, quite frankly, and it was never an issue that you couldn't do this in the old games. There might be the occasional enemy that would be quicker to get by aiming the reticle, but it never feels so different from the original that you absolutely have to use it. This is where it feels stuck in the past, rather than actually using the controls to their full extent.
Then you get to the boss sequence in Corneria, which are the walking spiders with red weak points on their tops. This is a vast departure from the original game, but I personally didn't really find it to be all that fun or interesting to the point that I'm glad they added it to the series. You have to use the gamepad to aim down so that you can hit their heads, while also trying to fly straight in all range mode. It always feels wonky, even once you get used to the controls, and even once you master it, it feels just tedious and uninteresting.
Like I had said previously, a lot of the problems I had stemmed from that the game just feels really dated to me. I didn't find myself enjoying this style of game as much as I used to, and look, I understand: that's me. But had this come out and not been a classic franchise, I think a lot of us would have been scratching our heads as to whether or not it's really that great of a game, controls aside.
To be more positive, there are some missions I liked. There's one mission where you go really fast, and the game is more focused on making you dodge obstacles and feels a lot more like the original game. However, this is pretty much the only level of its kind, and it feels incredibly short because half of the level is a drawn out all range boss battle.
I also didn't hate the main Gyrocopter level. I think there's some cool ideas there that could have been fleshed out even more. But it's not used very much, unfortunately.
Or, alternatively, you could transform in the chicken, hoover above them and shoot them from above. It's much more practical that way.
morthbound
Member
I dislike situations like this. I don't know if it's the games fault or the reviewers, but I feel things like this make devs hesitant to put motion controls in their games. It would be great if more devs allowed for things like gyro aiming (optional of course).
You definitely can. But on the first playthrough you don't have that option. You get it the second way through, and it definitely helps and it's how I did it on subsequent playthroughs, but it's still not a particularly challenging or interesting mission.
You also get the flying landmaster that has this express purpose, but I really found using that to be a major encumbrance. Shooting down in this game never felt good to me, even using the gamepad to line up my shots with precision. I just don't think much is being added here in terms of fun.
I think the walker is my biggest point of contention of the game. I never really mastered that part of the game.
I know. When I first started the story mode I had no idea what I was doing so I went back to the training stage until I got it down. Like practicing combos in a fighting game. After about 1 hour I was able to complete the training stage in time and that is when I felt like it finally clicked.
SkyTurnsRed
Banned
My copy came early and unfortunately, as much as I want to love this, I'm finding it to be really just okay. A lot of what Lunar is saying lines up with my thoughts, especially the "stuck in the past" post he made a little higher up above.
This game is not BAD. So far, though, I don't find it particularly interesting.
You know what is surprisingly fun, though? Guard! My friend and I keep trading the controller to play Guard. We've only got about 30 minutes in on it so far, but man, it's actually pretty cool!
This game is not BAD. So far, though, I don't find it particularly interesting.
You know what is surprisingly fun, though? Guard! My friend and I keep trading the controller to play Guard. We've only got about 30 minutes in on it so far, but man, it's actually pretty cool!
Zomba13
Member
You can't. I mean, if you don't use the gamepad for aiming then your shots will be off target and miss because the TV crosshair doesn't match up to the gamepad crosshair. So like, the gamepad might have a direct aim on something but on the TV screen it'll lookm a little to the left or right or something.
I dont believe that is the case. You can play largely without even looking at the gamepad (as I am doing right now).
SkyTurnsRed
Banned
Also want to add that I didn't find the difficulty curve of the controls to be that steep. Amazes me that Arthur Gies struggled with it so much that he quit the game.
The programmers are from Nintendo in the credits. Not sure how a graphic artist could be responsible for the way you shoot.
Zomba13
Member
Whenever I've tried that I always end up missing and then when I look at the gamepad it turns out that even though I thought I was on target on the TV I was off by a bit on the gamepad meaning my shots won't hit. The gamepad aim trumps the TV aim.
I had played it early on at an event and HATED it and Im a big Nintendo fan so I wanted to love it.
The controls in the Test levels are awkward, the graphics didn't look WiiU Standard especially so far into the life of the console so I didn't bother buying it and am not surprised it doesn't get rave reviews.
It feels rushed and I don't know why they would rush it.
The controls in the Test levels are awkward, the graphics didn't look WiiU Standard especially so far into the life of the console so I didn't bother buying it and am not surprised it doesn't get rave reviews.
It feels rushed and I don't know why they would rush it.
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
Fuck, I forgot to cancel my pre order, I hate having to deal with returns.
Have you tried locking on? I have no idea how you are playing, but I only look at the gamepad when I want to shoot directly below.
I'll agree and say that nothing in the game is really worth not finishing it. The controls are an initial frustration that probably lingers in reviewer's minds, but there's other problems that would keep me from giving it a super high score.
Zomba13
Member
I don't really bother with the lock on because in all-range mode you just strafe around the thing and in on-rails mode it just doesn't seem useful.
Some reviewers, like many gamers to be fair, just never gelled with motion controls for one reason or another. I'm with the crowd that feels like they make a positive difference, especially for aim assist in shooters.
Played it during two hours. This game is very strange. It's not a bad game but it's not particularly fun either. The approach is totally novel, more like a succession of missions wich requires skills and technics and less of a true adventure. It's sometimes okay (the rail shooter sections or the Walker missions) sometimes bland (the StarWolf battles or the Gyrocopter events). The controls are hostile/inimical but in the other hand, if you remove that there's nothing left, because the level-design was made in accordance with them. It's very difficult to figure when you should watch TV or GamePad and you can quickly multiply mistakes if you lose ground. It definitely won't be an easy game to master, medals for now look like impossible and tiresome tasks, but despite all the flaws I must concede I found these two hours uh... let's say, interesting. Somewhere between inept and bold.
For some reason it reminds me the Metroid mini-game in NintendoLand, with more width, complexity and challenge.
For some reason it reminds me the Metroid mini-game in NintendoLand, with more width, complexity and challenge.
Spring-Loaded
Member
That "was a bad idea," was my takeaway from that review, not a quote, and it wasn't even the gist of the review you're addressing a comment that doesn't really exist. It was the GamesRadar review, and they seem to give the game a fair shake.
If that can be written off as "waaaa, I don't want leave the controls," then what's a fair, legitimate negative review? And I'm specifically asking the guy I was quoting before, who's a reviewer himself.
Juke Joint Jezebel
Member
Well after 8 planets and trying out all the vehicles I have to say I absolutely adore this game. I've got down pat everything I need to do to play this game properly. Using the ZL lock-on to roughly estimate where a target is in my vicinity, then using the gamepad and gyro aiming to hunt down and blast it! I'm used to it on both on-rails mode and all-range mode now. Got a few gold medal scores here and there as well. Even the gyrocopter stage was a welcome change of pace, much more slower and puzzly than the other stages and it didn't stay around too long to the point where it may get boring or tedious. I notice there's 20 stages total so after the path I took on my first playthrough so far, it looks like there'll be about 8 different stages to find and unlock over the course of the game. I can't wait to give the co-op mode a go with a friend (One person controls flight, the other controls the aiming in the cockpit.
Well worth the price of admission so far. Been a while since we've gotten a good space shooter! If it continues like this it'll be going on my GOTY list, fer sure!
Well worth the price of admission so far. Been a while since we've gotten a good space shooter! If it continues like this it'll be going on my GOTY list, fer sure!
Boy Wander
Member
He clearly had an agenda and had no intention of finishing the game from the get-go.
Vampirolol
Member
Remember thart hitting the broken pieces of the little flying enemies gives you another bonus point. It's marked with orange color.
D
Deleted member 752119
Unconfirmed Member
What's the verdict on using the default controls or the motion only when firing option?
I've seen a review or two favoring each and am curious what Gaf's impressions are.
I've seen a review or two favoring each and am curious what Gaf's impressions are.
At some point I was able to lock on to two enemies? Was it because of the power-ups?
also curious about this
Kagoshima_Luke
Gold Member
Of course, I don't like EVERYTHING he dislikes or vice versa. I'm posting on an online gaming discussion forum; give me some leniency if I want to slather on some hyperbole.
Vampirolol
Member
Yes, if you pick two laser powerups you can lock on 2 enemis until you get hit.
But nobody had issues with Star Fox 64, it having closer to around an hour's worth of a campaign. The idea here is to recapture the magic of 64, and give a decent-sized slew of levels for an arcade mostly-on-rails shooter with enough replay value to get many more hours worth from the game than just what the campaign will give.
I don't understand why people are always looking for this huge, long epic story and adventure with every beloved IP ever. Star Fox has always been about short burst playthroughs and high scores (excluding Adventures, of course).
It seems like a return to glory after missteps that followed 64. It looks like what a Star Fox game should be: an arcade-y space shooter with a bunch of mission where you can beat the game quickly but there are mission you missed to find and the fun of perfecting all of the missions.
Star Fox Assault was short and completely linear and had awful new gameplay additions.
To be honest it doesent really matter. As I said, you can play the game like SF64 until you need to shoot directly below you.
I turned it on and then I turned it off again, no real difference if you ask me.
Edit: you can keep L pressed down in order to execute the 'charge unlocked shot' (CUS), so you get additional +1 from the splash damage.
Ocarina of Time was also pretty short...back in 1998. Standards change.
I guess. Mine certainly haven't. I wanted a Star Fox game that allowed me to enjoy a story over the course of an evening, and giving me reasons to play it again and again, and they've delivered on that front. I don't know what happened with Assault, but I did not really like it at all. Most of that has to do with collisions with the Arwing and other things that seemed much sloppier than in 64. Command was fun, but the overworld map aspect of the game was a little unnecessary in my opinion and the multiple endings were horrible. Whether I'll enjoy the controls of Zero remains to be seen but I'm decently adaptable to strange and different control schemes.
I can see how a longer campaign would feel like it would have more variety, but honestly that just sounds like instead of there being replay value to go through the alternate routes in the game, we would just have every stage given to us in one go. That would be fun for maybe a short while, but doesn't seem to me like that would keep people coming back as often as branching paths would.
EDIT: And for what it's worth, Ocarina of Time was much longer than A Link to the Past, which was the latest console entry OoT could've been compared to at the time. For me as a kid, it was such a grand game with so much to see and explore. Comparing OoT to today makes it look incredibly short - because it is! But back then it wasn't considered to be short at all for the type of game that it was.