mcj metroid Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 Its not what I think I want, its simply what I want. The fact is the best SF games have been the ones that just concentrate on the flying and shooting which is why many in this topic have suggested handing the game over to Treasure as its what they do best. Mario may get taken out of his platforming adventures but most of the titles they bung him in end up being gold where as SF Adventures and Assault weren't. Saying the fans want the game to stay the same and not evolve is rubbish. All Nintendo have to do is get the core gameplay back like it was in Starwing and Lylat Wars and then add an local/online co-op campaign with Wii Speak, this will keep us happy but also add a new dimension to the gameplay. The only problem with this idea is that many players will only have a 3 strong team as no one will want to be Slippy. This being Nintendo though they will probably go in the complete opposite direction. ! but mario titles aren't always good either but like mario pinball things are tried but failed .... It's just when something goes wrong for any nintendo franchise fans are very quick to claim back to roots.. It's kinda annoying and If it were up to the fans we would never have had a cel-shaded zelda or any change in the series..People do have very good imagination Sometimes. With assault and adventure things just went very wrong.. Adventure wasnt even meant to be a starfox game and assault was well..... namco..
Shino Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 Don't want that spiteful asshole anywhere near my games. Its largely known that Nintendo had heavy hand on the Starfox SNES and he did nothing else besides Starfox Command. Why does every cheap ass dev has the need to take a shot at Nintendo?
Blue_Ninja0 Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 By the level of butthurtery in his words, I would say that he got some kind of rejection from Nintendo after StarFox Command or something.
Hero-of-Time Posted April 5, 2009 Author Posted April 5, 2009 Dylan comments on his comments †Um.. just like to point out here that I wasn’t having a dig at Miyamoto at all. I was just explaining how he works - he gets on and does his thing. He is an amazing creator and that’s what amazing creators do. And the comment regarding not wanting to make a Wii Starfox is clear, it would take a very large team and right now I am having a lot of fun with smaller teams. That’s all there is to it really. That’s how I intended the comment not as “Dylan spurns Starfox, shock horror!â€. I also say the Wii is “more†of a toy and it is. It’s not derogatory, the Wii is a great machine with lots of bells and whistles and this makes it feel (to me) to be more toy-like. In comparison the PS3/XBOX360 are more “media centerâ€-like.â€
darkjak Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 (edited) These are very sad news. However, I hope that Nintendo do make a Starfox for the Wii. All video games are toys. Its no big deal. I'd rather see the Star Fox team retired for this gen, with a big, quality comeback in HD next gen. That is false. All videogames are NOT toys. A toy cannot have a goal, while a videogame cannot avoid having a goal. That's gameology 101 (yes, thats a legit research area). Don't want that spiteful asshole anywhere near my games. Its largely known that Nintendo had heavy hand on the Starfox SNES and he did nothing else besides Starfox Command. Why does every cheap ass dev has the need to take a shot at Nintendo? Game developers are artists, and when a company changes the rules, and forces others to make stuff they don't want to make, they get pissed. Edited April 5, 2009 by darkjak
dwarf Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 These are very sad news. However, I hope that Nintendo do make a Starfox for the Wii. That is false. All videogames are NOT toys. A toy cannot have a goal, while a videogame cannot avoid having a goal. That's gameology 101 (yes, thats a legit research area). Have you played Noby Noby Boy? just kidding, there are always rare exceptions.
Retro_Link Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 Dante, they've just poorly photoshopped/paint'd those pictures in, even leaving the backgrounds on! They don't look convincing as MM masks in the slightest!
K-project Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 That is false. All videogames are NOT toys. A toy cannot have a goal, while a videogame cannot avoid having a goal. That's gameology 101 (yes, thats a legit research area). Game developers are artists, and when a company changes the rules, and forces others to make stuff they don't want to make, they get pissed. Sorry, but I just don't agree. Video games and consoles, as they are at the moment, are just toys. You'll not find anyone in the industry in a position of importance willing to claim an artistic principle when making games. They are simply entertainment. They are in essence toys. Some games are dressed up to throw you off the scent, but at the end of the day they all involve simple play mechanics. Maybe some developers feel otherwise, but other the odd one or two as exceptions, I cannot think of many games I would consider as being "art". The potential is there to offer more, but it hasn't happened yet. That's a whole other debate though I reckon...
Dante Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 Dante, they've just poorly photoshopped/paint'd those pictures in, even leaving the backgrounds on! They don't look convincing as MM masks in the slightest! Because it not about the look of the masks, it is about what kind of animals they are.
nekunando Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 Dante, they've just poorly photoshopped/paint'd those pictures in, even leaving the backgrounds on! They don't look convincing as MM masks in the slightest! ..uhh.. the pictures are meant to be placed on there.. they are to compare the Starfox Team to the masks directly above each member!
nekunando Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 yeah Dante just said. ..hmm.. yeh, sorry, I just didn't think that what Dante said had explained anything at all
darkjak Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 Have you played Noby Noby Boy? just kidding, there are always rare exceptions. Videogames which lack goals, such as Second Life and Wii Music don't count as games, but as toys. Sorry, but I just don't agree. Video games and consoles, as they are at the moment, are just toys. For years people researching videogames have stated that videogames should be regarded as a form of culture, like comics, movies, musics etc. And last year the EU started to count videogames as culture. You'll not find anyone in the industry in a position of importance willing to claim an artistic principle when making games. They are simply entertainment. Do you know the definition of art? It quite simply means that it's an object with no actual function. People whom write music or make movies are artists, the same goes for game devs. They are in essence toys. Some games are dressed up to throw you off the scent, but at the end of the day they all involve simple play mechanics. Maybe some developers feel otherwise, but other the odd one or two as exceptions, I cannot think of many games I would consider as being "art". The potential is there to offer more, but it hasn't happened yet. That's a whole other debate though I reckon... Simplicity does by no means contridict an artistic factor. Like I said, the only definition of art is that it can't fill a function.
Emasher Posted April 5, 2009 Posted April 5, 2009 Games aren't art for the same reasons as paintings or music. They're art for their own reasons. And not all games are art, juts like some finger-painting done by a 3 year old isn't art, shovel-ware isn't art.
Recommended Posts