Zechs Merquise Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 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. Actually, I think you're the one that is confused - a pointer or reticule can be controlled via an analogue stick, a mouse or by the use of something like a Wii Remote. If the pointer or reticule is controlled by the Wii Remote, you are using motions to control it, you move your hand left or right to move the pointer left or right. So as the reticule in Star Fox Zero is controlled by moving the game pad - is that a motion control or a pointer control? Essentially, if you look at any game like COD or Resident Evil 4 that offered both analogue controls and motion controls, the pointer controls as you term them were always referred to as 'motion controls', so stop nit picking. In fact, using the pointer has always been referred to as motion controls, even from the earliest examples of games using it as such. Turning off motion controls doesn't help when the level design is based around them? Well, Resident Evil 4 was designed to be played with a conventional pad, it was improved with motion (or pointer if we are nit picking) controls. COD was designed for conventional pads, but played really well with motion controls. I played both with motion controls, I played online with motion controls on COD - but some people still played with conventional pads. As neither of us have played Star Fox Zero, neither of us know how it plays with either control scheme - we do however know that the difficultly can be adjusted in the game to cater for a range of skill levels. Finally, I'm not really sure why you added the bit about Super Mario 64 on the DS. I didn't claim that, stop with the straw man arguments.
dazzybee Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 I guess my main issue is people slagging nintendo off for this decision. You may not like it, it may not be for you tastes, but I find it weird to slag them off as clueless and not understanding what gamers want is just plain bizarre. They feel the game could benefit from having these controls, they have trued something a bit different; I'm dubious, many are; but I don't think it says anything more than that is what they feel benefits the game. Also, has any hands on yet said they make the game worse? Everything I've read has actually said really positive things about them.
Serebii Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 (edited) I guess my main issue is people slagging nintendo off for this decision. You may not like it, it may not be for you tastes, but I find it weird to slag them off as clueless and not understanding what gamers want is just plain bizarre. They feel the game could benefit from having these controls, they have trued something a bit different; I'm dubious, many are; but I don't think it says anything more than that is what they feel benefits the game. Also, has any hands on yet said they make the game worse? Everything I've read has actually said really positive things about them. It's the calling Nintendo arrogant thing that caused me to bite. It's pretty arrogant to claim that just because Nintendo are trying something new that people may not like. Edited April 6, 2016 by Ashley Automerged Doublepost
Ronnie Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 (edited) What does this even mean? Can you give an example? Or is it bait.. *Goron ran away* Mass Effect 3. The fanbase whined, complained and demanded Bioware change their ending because they themselves didn't like it. The devs refused citing the need to stick to their creative vision, something they were praised for. Yes they added an extended ending but plot wise it was virtually the same. Bioware were applauded in the gaming industry for sticking to their guns and making THEIR game how THEY wanted it. Imagine someone calling them arrogant for not compromising their vision, the very same accusation someone is now levelling at Nintendo. They just can't win, hence one rule for them one rule for everyone else. Developers make the game they want to make, that's their right and it's a good thing. Nintendo want to add motion controls to their game. That doesn't make them arrogant, it makes them creative. Edited April 6, 2016 by Ronnie
Ashley Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 It's the calling Nintendo arrogant thing that caused me to bite. It's pretty arrogant to claim that just because Nintendo are trying something new that people may not like. It's arrogant to claim that anyone that doesn't like it is "stuck in their ways". Arrogance is easy, humility isn't.
somme Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 I guess my main issue is people slagging nintendo off for this decision. You may not like it, it may not be for you tastes, but I find it weird to slag them off as clueless and not understanding what gamers want is just plain bizarre. They feel the game could benefit from having these controls, they have trued something a bit different; I'm dubious, many are; but I don't think it says anything more than that is what they feel benefits the game. Also, has any hands on yet said they make the game worse? Everything I've read has actually said really positive things about them. I guess, for me, it's just a bit sad/annoying that we don't get Star Fox games very often and the fact I hate motion controls means I have wait even longer for one I can enjoy. Ah well, Battlefront's Fighter Squadron mode will keep me going 'til No Man's Sky.
Blade Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 It's arrogant to think your way is the only way and that things need to conform to that way. Thats the exact point I was making! You have hit the nail on the head. Give gamers the option - motion controls or traditional especially given the negative feedback Nintendo has received from some gamers about motion controls.
Retro_Link Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 (edited) @Hero\-of\-Time That's where Level 5 come in Edited April 6, 2016 by Ashley
Serebii Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 (edited) Thats the exact point I was making! You have hit the nail on the head. Give gamers the option - motion controls or traditional especially given the negative feedback Nintendo has received from some gamers about motion controls. But the game is designed around it. It's not arrogant to create a game like that at all. Edited April 6, 2016 by Ashley Automerged Doublepost
Ronnie Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Give some solid examples and we'll talk. I gave a high profile example above, but you don't think game developers should have the freedom to make games how they want to make them? That not abandoning their creative vision to appease complaining fans is 'arrogant'?
Ashley Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 I've moved this Pokémon talk to a different thread. Please take it there while I try and tidy up.
Ashley Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 I gave a high profile example above, but you don't think game developers should have the freedom to make games how they want to make them? That not abandoning their creative vision to appease complaining fans is 'arrogant'? I never said Nintendo was arrogant. I simply said it's good that the option is there but it's a shame the confirmation has been a drawn out affair. I did say its arrogant to define other people's opinions as dated just because you don't agree with them. I asked for a concrete example because you were simply once again harping on about how anti-Nintendo everyone is and I wanted to see some parallels.
Ronnie Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 I never said Nintendo was arrogant. I simply said it's good that the option is there but it's a shame the confirmation has been a drawn out affair. I did say its arrogant to define other people's opinions as dated just because you don't agree with them. I asked for a concrete example because you were simply once again harping on about how anti-Nintendo everyone is and I wanted to see some parallels. @Blade called them arrogant. I challenged him on it, eventually citing a very high profile example of developers sticking to their guns. It's quite common to see such strength and confidence in a dev's vision applauded in the gaming community. Not with Nintendo though, when they make the game they want to make they're 'arrogant'.
Goron_3 Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Actually, I think you're the one that is confused - a pointer or reticule can be controlled via an analogue stick, a mouse or by the use of something like a Wii Remote. If the pointer or reticule is controlled by the Wii Remote, you are using motions to control it, you move your hand left or right to move the pointer left or right. So as the reticule in Star Fox Zero is controlled by moving the game pad - is that a motion control or a pointer control? Essentially, if you look at any game like COD or Resident Evil 4 that offered both analogue controls and motion controls, the pointer controls as you term them were always referred to as 'motion controls', so stop nit picking. In fact, using the pointer has always been referred to as motion controls, even from the earliest examples of games using it as such. Turning off motion controls doesn't help when the level design is based around them? Well, Resident Evil 4 was designed to be played with a conventional pad, it was improved with motion (or pointer if we are nit picking) controls. COD was designed for conventional pads, but played really well with motion controls. I played both with motion controls, I played online with motion controls on COD - but some people still played with conventional pads. As neither of us have played Star Fox Zero, neither of us know how it plays with either control scheme - we do however know that the difficultly can be adjusted in the game to cater for a range of skill levels. Finally, I'm not really sure why you added the bit about Super Mario 64 on the DS. I didn't claim that, stop with the straw man arguments. There has always been a big difference pointer controls and motion (or 'waggle' as many called it. With your logic your TV remote uses motion control. It's not nit picking - they are fundamentally different things. This is genuinely the first time I've heard someone try to claim otherwise. Resident Evil 4 is a great example of a game not being balanced around an alternative control scheme. The game, set pieces, enemy placements and enemy movements are designed around Leon having a relatively slow horizontal and vertical aim (i.e. using a control stick). If you use the Wiimote Leon becomes way too overpowered as the enemies are not made any quicker to compensate. You can very easily get through Professional mode on RE4 Wii: Edition with the basic handgun and shotgun because Leon is just far too quick relative to the enemies (who are designed around the Gamecube movement set). You don't even need to get a sniper rifle outside of the re-generators...The Gamecube version is far more balanced as the game and its enemies are designed around the GC controller. With Starfox, they have based the game around motion controls, just as a game like Skyward Sword was.
Ronnie Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 IGN preview: http://uk.ign.com/articles/2016/04/05/star-fox-zero-we-took-nintendos-flight-combat-game-for-a-spin The most important skill necessary to succeed as a pilot in Nintendo’s new Star Fox game is, believe it or not, the ability to multi-task. The controls split your attention between a ship view on the TV and a cockpit view on the GamePad. It's a demanding setup, but it’s also an interesting concept. Once you gain the confidence to gracefully bounce from one screen to the other you can show off some slick skills, as you shoot down enemy aircraft. It took me (roughly) two-hours of flight time to really understand this two-screen piloting system, but I feel like a better pilot for it. I suspect people having similar complaints about the motion controls in Splatoon before release. Then they tried them and, shock, they worked well.
Mr-Paul Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Motion controls are great when they are fun, easy to use, and feel natural and fit with the game. I love most of the uses of motion controls on the Wii. They shouldn't be a hindrance in any way. Star Fox Zero's are, from what I've played, which admittedly isn't as much as the people reviewing it/putting out these videos, bloody awkward. They don't feel natural and for me, they're just there for the sake of having motion controls and the game would be a lot more fun without them. We'll wait and see how they've turned out when it comes out, but the bad impression they left on me from the demo I played means I won't be rushing out for this one.
Blade Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 @Blade called them arrogant. I challenged him on it, eventually citing a very high profile example of developers sticking to their guns. It's quite common to see such strength and confidence in a dev's vision applauded in the gaming community. Not with Nintendo though, when they make the game they want to make they're 'arrogant'. The point I was making is not about the dev's vision but about Nintendo's attitude which basically is "we know some of you dont like motion controls but we couldn't give a shit" Similarly... "We know you want voice/party chat but we couldn't give a shit" "We know you want cross buy but we couldn't give a shit" Etc etc This is the vibe i'm getting from Nintendo. You get the point i'm making surely. Nintendo's general attitude is stubborn and arrogant.
Retro_Link Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 One of the best examples of motion controls... that Goldeneye 007 peek.
Ronnie Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 The point I was making is not about the dev's vision but about Nintendo's attitude which basically is "we know some of you dont like motion controls but we couldn't give a shit" Similarly... "We know you want voice/party chat but we couldn't give a shit" "We know you want cross buy but we couldn't give a shit" Etc etc This is the vibe i'm getting from Nintendo. You get the point i'm making surely. Nintendo's general attitude is stubborn and arrogant. There are actual reasons for all those decisions though, it's not just a case of crossing their arms and saying 'we don't care'. They wanted to make a game built around motion controls and that's what they've done. They'll then listen to feedback and will refer back to it for the next Starfox game, as they do all the time. You constantly hear them talking about putting fans first and wanting to please them. To label them arrogant is unfair.
Ashley Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Blade did miss one very real example of Nintendo's arrogance: We don’t think streaming 30 minutes of gameplay by itself is a lot of fun. Your specific question of just purely streaming gameplay, what we’ve got to think through is, so what’s fun about that? From a consumer standpoint, what’s fun about it? However, the popularity of streaming and Nintendo doing the Smash tournament hopefully means they've seen there is a demand for it. (Although that always felt like an excuse to cover up the console's technical limitation, but let's take him at his word)
Zechs Merquise Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 There has always been a big difference pointer controls and motion (or 'waggle' as many called it. With your logic your TV remote uses motion control. It's not nit picking - they are fundamentally different things. This is genuinely the first time I've heard someone try to claim otherwise. Resident Evil 4 is a great example of a game not being balanced around an alternative control scheme. The game, set pieces, enemy placements and enemy movements are designed around Leon having a relatively slow horizontal and vertical aim (i.e. using a control stick). If you use the Wiimote Leon becomes way too overpowered as the enemies are not made any quicker to compensate. You can very easily get through Professional mode on RE4 Wii: Edition with the basic handgun and shotgun because Leon is just far too quick relative to the enemies (who are designed around the Gamecube movement set). You don't even need to get a sniper rifle outside of the re-generators...The Gamecube version is far more balanced as the game and its enemies are designed around the GC controller. With Starfox, they have based the game around motion controls, just as a game like Skyward Sword was. You are basically rebranding this to suit your point. A quick google search and you will see that everyone, both consumers and critics refer to the Wii Remote controls in both COD and Resident Evil as motion controls. You choosing to call them pointer controls makes no difference, you can't alter widely used terminology to suit yourself and your argument. Also, your argument about Resident Evil falls a little flat if you are choosing to condemn motion controls, as if the difficultly in your game arises from a cumbersome control scheme or a control scheme which in some way hampers your movement or aiming then that is not a positive thing, that is bad. If the only argument for analogue control in Resident Evil 4 is that it is more difficult that way, then maybe that control scheme is flawed, as difficult should come from what is going on in the game, not you wrestling with a control scheme that makes it difficult for you to keep up with the action. Hence why the Wii version of RE4 is so often regarded as the superior version. And of course, it offers multiple control schemes, which offers the player choice as well.
Guy Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Nintendo should have coded regular controls behind an amiibo.
dazzybee Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 I guess, for me, it's just a bit sad/annoying that we don't get Star Fox games very often and the fact I hate motion controls means I have wait even longer for one I can enjoy. Ah well, Battlefront's Fighter Squadron mode will keep me going 'til No Man's Sky. I sort of feel the same to be honest, I haven't had my fix of star fox 64 type gameplay so I want more. Also why I'd like the same game as excite bike 64, f zero TX and wave race blue storm. Same game, structure, controls everything. Don't try and spice it up But I'm becoming more hopeful it'll be a good game and maybe the controls will be decent; for me it's the fast, High score, Arcade style gameplay I want it to retain. We'll see very soon.
Retro_Link Posted April 6, 2016 Posted April 6, 2016 Why is that GameExplain video the first I've heard about you being able to significantly speed up or slow down your ship?... Have all the slower gameplay videos we've seen just been because it's being demoed on slow? That level that looks a bit like the Death Star trench has frustrating design!!... "Fox!!..." "Just fly 5 meters to your left or right and you'll avoid all the obstacles and asteroids"
Recommended Posts