Star Fox Zero

[Hero-of-Time]

Make up your mind

 

Somme is very much undecided about the game and control schemes.

[dazzybee]

Providing you can put up with the tosser of a presenter, NintendoLife have a video about the controls in the game.

/QUOTE]

 

He is staggeringly awful isn't he? I don't watch any of their video content. The quality is terrible too. Aren't they quite a big site?

[nekunando]

Hello there, lovely people..

 

I'm genuinely excited to have an entirely new control scheme to learn for Starfox Zero but I imagine I'll be all over the place for the first few hours

 

For independent arwing control and aiming, the Wii Remote & Nunchuk would have been fantastic, as in Sin & Punishment: Successor of the Skies, but I'm certainly not against using the Gamepad : peace:

 

Bring it on!

[Hero-of-Time]

 

He is staggeringly awful isn't he? I don't watch any of their video content. The quality is terrible too. Aren't they quite a big site?

 

Indeed.

 

Yeah, they are a pretty major Nintendo site. I visit the site but I personally don't rate them that highly. They have some good articles now and then but a lot of the time they post rubbish just to have something to put up on the site, due to it being a slow news day. I do like their new layout, though.

[Fierce_LiNk]

After all, if I wanted it to control exactly like Star Fox 64...I'd just keep playing that!

 

It wouldn't control exactly the same because now we are living in an age of analogue shoulder triggers, dual analogue sticks, more buttons on a controller, etc. All of these things would have an impact on how we play the game, camera control for one thing. If you were going to do a Starfox 64 sequel, all of these would vastly improve on the basics.

 

Plus, the control scheme is just how you control the character/arwing. The "what you're actually doing/experiencing" is what differs game to game. I've played Arkham Asylum earlier in the week and am now playing Arkham City. The combat is similar, although City is more refined and now you are given a much wider space to navigate through (the City) and more side missions than you had before which makes use of that space. So, it may control exactly like Asylum, but the gameplay, what you do and experience on screen and what the overall effect is changes.

 

People are excited for No Man's Sky not because of how you control the game, but because of the nature of what you are playing and doing. It's times like this where I think maybe Nintendo have missed the point completely about why we game. Making the initial input (the controller) more complex isn't necessarily going to make the game itself better.

[Hero-of-Time]

Making the initial input (the controller) more complex isn't necessarily going to make the game itself better.

 

It's crazy to think that just last gen Nintendo had success by making things simple with the invention of the wiimote. A generation later and we now have a hulk of a controller and are discussing about having to look up at the TV and down to another screen, while moving left and right with the motion controls, just to play a game.

 

We may as well be doing this.

 

 

No wonder the console has been a sales disaster for them.

[dazzybee]

It wouldn't control exactly the same because now we are living in an age of analogue shoulder triggers, dual analogue sticks, more buttons on a controller, etc. All of these things would have an impact on how we play the game, camera control for one thing. If you were going to do a Starfox 64 sequel, all of these would vastly improve on the basics.

 

Plus, the control scheme is just how you control the character/arwing. The "what you're actually doing/experiencing" is what differs game to game. I've played Arkham Asylum earlier in the week and am now playing Arkham City. The combat is similar, although City is more refined and now you are given a much wider space to navigate through (the City) and more side missions than you had before which makes use of that space. So, it may control exactly like Asylum, but the gameplay, what you do and experience on screen and what the overall effect is changes.

 

People are excited for No Man's Sky not because of how you control the game, but because of the nature of what you are playing and doing. It's times like this where I think maybe Nintendo have missed the point completely about why we game. Making the initial input (the controller) more complex isn't necessarily going to make the game itself better.

 

Huh, one minute you say modern controllers would vastly improve things with regards to control, the next you say control doesn't matter it's what you do.... which is it?!

 

And are you speaking specifically about the comment about replaying Star Fox 64 or also talking about Star Fox Zero? Because using your example surely the different levels, the different vehicles etc are still opening the game up?

[Kaepora_Gaebora]

I guess a fair bit of my stance comes down to financial situation as well, then.

 

The glory days of buying every new release has gone for me, real life and commitments take precedent for me over just picking up the games as and when they come.

 

Literally, if Zero wasn't bringing something new to the table that interested me I wouldn't pick it up as I would essentially have the game already with 64 on the VC. It's why I resisted halo 5 and played the MCC through instead as I already had it and I knew 2 weeks later I would regret it!

 

I also loved the controls for Splatoon so that comparison excites me too. I can still remember trying to control MH4U by moving my 3DS around and being frustrated I couldn't!

 

Basically I'm a real penny pincher now, and I'm just glad I've still got £40 eshop credit from Christmas presents saved up to get this on launch

 

@Hero\-of\-Time I can understand you just want to come home after along day of work and just play games as you want. But I am getting increasingly bored of that status quo. I want to be challenged and enthused and new experiences and ways of playing given to me! I'm not saying Zero is that game, and believe me if this control method is shit I'll be the first to say it and I'll be gutted to have wasted my money on it!

 

But this excites me more than the comfort blanket of say Gears 4. I'll (probably) know what I'm getting with that and I'm sure I'll enjoy it, but I'm far more open to a different way to play than the same old same old

[Fierce_LiNk]

Huh, one minute you say modern controllers would vastly improve things with regards to control, the next you say control doesn't matter it's what you do.... which is it?!

 

And are you speaking specifically about the comment about replaying Star Fox 64 or also talking about Star Fox Zero? Because using your example surely the different levels, the different vehicles etc are still opening the game up?

 

I'm saying that modern controllers are different to what we had in the N64 era, so it would never control exactly the same as StarFox64 anyway by default. (e.g. due to controller evolution, we now have dual analogue as standard. So, even if you wanted it to control the same as StarFox64, it really, really wouldn't)

 

Having different vehicles and levels/level design does open up the game more and that's what I'm saying Nintendo should be spending the majority of their time focusing on, rather than how we actually interact with the Arwing on an input level. When this game does come out, you want to be having a great time playing the game rather than fighting with the controller to access the game.

[dazzybee]

I'm saying that modern controllers are different to what we had in the N64 era, so it would never control exactly the same as StarFox64 anyway by default. (e.g. due to controller evolution, we now have dual analogue as standard. So, even if you wanted it to control the same as StarFox64, it really, really wouldn't)

 

Having different vehicles and levels/level design does open up the game more and that's what I'm saying Nintendo should be spending the majority of their time focusing on, rather than how we actually interact with the Arwing on an input level. When this game does come out, you want to be having a great time playing the game rather than fighting with the controller to access the game.

 

Ah okay, well I guess he didn't mean EXACTLY the same feel and using an N64 pad, but more pretty much the same controls... I mean when we get a new mario game we don't want it to control like he did in SMB, but we like new moves; same with beat em ups; and even your Batman comparison, it controls similar, but not identical, we want controls for our games to evolve along the everything else. Nintendo see this as an evolution of that; whether we like it or not is another matter.

 

I'm personally really looking forward to it; I'm worried about the controls, but we'll see! I won't begrudge companies for trying new things though; even if it goes against what I think i want.

[Hero-of-Time]

I'm personally really looking forward to it; I'm worried about the controls, but we'll see! I won't begrudge companies for trying new things though; even if it goes against what I think i want.

 

Same.

 

I'll still be buying it on day one ( got the special edition ordered ) but if the controls don't suit me then expect a rant from me about how pants the game is. You have been warned.

[Zechs Merquise]

Talking about motion controls as some people do just makes me laugh! As if all motion controls are awful and motion controls are the worst thing to ever happen to gaming. As if there can't be good implementation of motion control and bad implementation of motion control!

 

For example, motion controls implemented well brought about games like Resident Evil 4 Wii Edition, largely accepted as the definitive edition of the game, where the pointer controls made for far more fluid game play and aiming. Sin and Punishment 2 is another fantastic example of using the pointer controls - the game was much more fun that the first because the controls were far more intuitive and fluid than using a thumb stick.

 

The controls in Call of Duty on the Wii were also superb and gave a superior level of aiming far closer to mouse and keyboard allowing you to run in one direction and shoot in another rather than the dual analogue controls where it feels like you are 'driving' the player and pointing yourself in the direction of your target.

 

Let's not forget the Tennis and Golf in Wii Sports or the fact that the Tiger Woods games on Wii not only sold better, but reviewed better too. Golf and Tennis both lend themselves to motion controls which enhance the experience.

 

Then you have the other side of the coin - games that either missed the mark like the first Red Steel which was sadly lacking as things like twisting the controller to zoom in with rifles were actually a pain and felt unnatural and threw off your aim, or games that simply didn't work - like when boxing sims tried to have you punch using the remote and nunchuk and it never quite worked or when games forced you to pull of complex shapes with the remote and you weren't sure where you were going wrong.

 

It is silly to say that motion controls were all good or all bad, as there are examples of both and the implementation is not down to motion controls themselves, but the skill of the developer and how that developer implements them.

 

I haven't played Star Fox Zero yet, but I am excited too. I welcome the fact they've done something new - if it works. Personally, I have reservations about this. Had the game gone down the Sin and Punishment route and used the Wii Remote as a pointer so you could aim and move independently I would understand exactly what they were doing. But two screens and the second or independent aiming, I don't get it, but I didn't get Metroid Prime 3's control scheme until I played it and realised that the game was far better for it!

 

Ultimately, it is odd that Nintendo moved down this route - as with the Wii Remote they simplified gaming and the control scheme. The gamepad does the opposite, it is more confusing. Where as for the vast majority of things I knew right away what the remote would do - tennis, golf and rail shooters were just three easy to understand applications. The gamepad is much harder to explain - and I think that is evident in the fact you are constantly reminded by on screen prompts where to look and where to shoot!

 

But with Star Fox Zero you can at least turn off the motion controls - and what more could you want? You see more options are better than fewer options and if some people like the motion controls, they can use them - and if you don't, turn them off! Surely everyone is a winner then?

Edited April 6, 2016 by Zechs Merquise

[Hero-of-Time]

But with Star Fox Zero you can at least turn off the motion controls - and what more could you want? You see more options are better than fewer options and if some people like the motion controls, they can use them - and if you don't, turn them off! Surely everyone is a winner then?

 

You can't fully turn them off, though. They guy on the video said you can only partially turn them off because...reasons. He said if you don't like motion controls then you have to get over it, find another game or play in local co-op.

[Blade]

Nintendo must know that not everyone loves motion controls. On this basis they should allow gamers to either switch them off and use a traditional set up or nothing at all.

 

Attitudes on here such as "people are stuck in their ways and won't give anything new a chance" are misplaced. People have tried motion controls and some don't like them. Nintendo having an attitude of "put up or shut up" is just plain arrogance.

[Hero-of-Time]

Nintendo must know that not everyone loves motion controls. On this basis they should allow gamers to either switch them off and use a traditional set up or nothing at all.

 

They know fine well.

 

Miyamoto: Yeah. With the last game, Skyward Sword, that was a game where you had motion control to use your weapons and a lot of different items, and I thought that was a lot of fun, but there were some people who weren’t able to do that or didn’t like it as much and stopped playing partway through it.

 

I have no issue with motion controls being in the game if they are optional. As you said, it allows players to play how it suits them, rather than having to force them to use something they aren't comfortable with.

 

There's no denying that there is a level of accuracy that comes from using them but i'm willing to sacrifice that for the sake of comfort.

[Ronnie]

Nintendo having an attitude of "put up or shut up" is just plain arrogance.

 

And yet when developers don't listen to gamers demands to change their game they're "sticking to their creative vision".

 

One rule for Nintendo, another for everyone else. Standard.

[Pestneb]

Hello there, lovely people..

 

I'm genuinely excited to have an entirely new control scheme to learn for Starfox Zero but I imagine I'll be all over the place for the first few hours

 

For independent arwing control and aiming, the Wii Remote & Nunchuk would have been fantastic, as in Sin & Punishment: Successor of the Skies, but I'm certainly not against using the Gamepad : peace:

 

Bring it on!

 

That bolded bit is where I switched off

I tried to watch through a second time.. just about made it through. The guy reminds me of someone I know trying to be Jeremy Clarkson. That's not a good thing.

My nephew doesn't like him either, and seeing some of the crappy minecraft video he loves... well..

 

I'm really looking forward to the game to be honest, the motion controls will be awesome if it is like splatoon

[Ashley]

Nintendo must know that not everyone loves motion controls. On this basis they should allow gamers to either switch them off and use a traditional set up or nothing at all.

 

Attitudes on here such as "people are stuck in their ways and won't give anything new a chance" are misplaced. People have tried motion controls and some don't like them. Nintendo having an attitude of "put up or shut up" is just plain arrogance.

 

Yeah basically this.

 

I think the reason there's been a resurgence of discussion about it is because its been confirmed as optional. And for most people that's enough; the option to choose whether they like motion controls or not. Nintendo has given us several different controllers for the Wii U, to then turn around and say "no, only this one" is bound to send mixed messages at least. Thankfully that isn't the case with SFZ now but its amazing its taken this long to get some kind of clear answer to a question that has been asked for a long time.

 

This whole "stuck in their ways" line is toxic and crippling to the industry. People should be ashamed of trying to belittle and dismiss others' preferences. You're insulting people based on the fact they don't share your opinion and its repugnant.

 

And yet when developers don't listen to gamers demands to change their game they're "sticking to their creative vision".

 

One rule for Nintendo, another for everyone else. Standard.

 

Give some solid examples and we'll talk.

[Retro_Link]

People are so resistant to change and different stuff

I know right. There are those that can't even fathom a Pokémon adventure on the home console.

 

Note: subsequent conversation has moved to separate thread

Edited April 6, 2016 by Ashley

[somme]

 

Make up your mind

 

Haha that's what you get you try to post really quickly before running out to catch a bus. : peace:

[Goron_3]

Talking about motion controls as some people do just makes me laugh! As if all motion controls are awful and motion controls are the worst thing to ever happen to gaming. As if there can't be good implementation of motion control and bad implementation of motion control!

 

For example, motion controls implemented well brought about games like Resident Evil 4 Wii Edition, largely accepted as the definitive edition of the game, where the pointer controls made for far more fluid game play and aiming. Sin and Punishment 2 is another fantastic example of using the pointer controls - the game was much more fun that the first because the controls were far more intuitive and fluid than using a thumb stick.

 

The controls in Call of Duty on the Wii were also superb and gave a superior level of aiming far closer to mouse and keyboard allowing you to run in one direction and shoot in another rather than the dual analogue controls where it feels like you are 'driving' the player and pointing yourself in the direction of your target.

 

Let's not forget the Tennis and Golf in Wii Sports or the fact that the Tiger Woods games on Wii not only sold better, but reviewed better too. Golf and Tennis both lend themselves to motion controls which enhance the experience.

 

Then you have the other side of the coin - games that either missed the mark like the first Red Steel which was sadly lacking as things like twisting the controller to zoom in with rifles were actually a pain and felt unnatural and threw off your aim, or games that simply didn't work - like when boxing sims tried to have you punch using the remote and nunchuk and it never quite worked or when games forced you to pull of complex shapes with the remote and you weren't sure where you were going wrong.

 

It is silly to say that motion controls were all good or all bad, as there are examples of both and the implementation is not down to motion controls themselves, but the skill of the developer and how that developer implements them.

 

I haven't played Star Fox Zero yet, but I am excited too. I welcome the fact they've done something new - if it works. Personally, I have reservations about this. Had the game gone down the Sin and Punishment route and used the Wii Remote as a pointer so you could aim and move independently I would understand exactly what they were doing. But two screens and the second or independent aiming, I don't get it, but I didn't get Metroid Prime 3's control scheme until I played it and realised that the game was far better for it!

 

Ultimately, it is odd that Nintendo moved down this route - as with the Wii Remote they simplified gaming and the control scheme. The gamepad does the opposite, it is more confusing. Where as for the vast majority of things I knew right away what the remote would do - tennis, golf and rail shooters were just three easy to understand applications. The gamepad is much harder to explain - and I think that is evident in the fact you are constantly reminded by on screen prompts where to look and where to shoot!

 

But with Star Fox Zero you can at least turn off the motion controls - and what more could you want? You see more options are better than fewer options and if some people like the motion controls, they can use them - and if you don't, turn them off! Surely everyone is a winner then?

 

Most of your examples (RE4 and CoD) refer to pointer controls, not motion controls. I think you got a bit confused there

 

Oh, and turning off the motion controls doesn't mean much when the level design is based around motion controls. You're at a inherent disadvantage (unless the game rebalances). It's like claiming that playing Mario 64 DS on a 3DS gives you full analogue control. Good grief.

[Serebii]

Nintendo must know that not everyone loves motion controls. On this basis they should allow gamers to either switch them off and use a traditional set up or nothing at all.

 

Attitudes on here such as "people are stuck in their ways and won't give anything new a chance" are misplaced. People have tried motion controls and some don't like them. Nintendo having an attitude of "put up or shut up" is just plain arrogance.

 

If only they did something, for the more casual player, to allow for them to play such as an invincible mode, so people can play and get to grips with things.

 

Developers are allowed to try new things and not provide alternatives. Come on. It's arrogant to think your way is the only way and that things need to conform to that way.

 

Take Tearaway. Is it arrogant for Media Molecule to create a game where you have to use the touch pad, even when people don't necessarily like using the touchpad?

Edited April 6, 2016 by Ashley
Automerged Doublepost

[Goron_3]

And yet when developers don't listen to gamers demands to change their game they're "sticking to their creative vision".

 

One rule for Nintendo, another for everyone else. Standard.

 

What does this even mean? Can you give an example?

 

Or is it bait..

 

*Goron ran away*

[somme]

Using the touchpad is hardly the same as flailing your arms around with a wiimote or getting backache because you're trying to twist a GamePad around in an uncomfortable position.

Edited April 6, 2016 by Ashley

[Serebii]

Using the touchpad is hardly the same as flailing your arms around with a wiimote or getting backache because you're trying to twist a GamePad around in an uncomfortable position.

 

And I'd lap up a home console Pokemon. Won't bother with the portable ones though.

You do realise that the controls on games like this, Splatoon etc. are subtle motion controls, not ridiculous ones right?

 

This isn't Skyward Sword motion where it's 1:1, these are small subtle motions

Edited April 6, 2016 by Ashley