-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
More than 4 years later: What did you think of Star Fox Zero?
- Thread starter Oscarzx n
- Start date
My thoughts on Star Fox: Zero, pieced together from other posts over time. I won't blame anyone for not reading all of this
My Assessment of Star Fox: Zero's Controls:
Before release
I was disappointed learning about the strange controls and found the "aim in a different direction from where the ship is flying," off-putting as it meant gyro aiming would be unavoidable, something I'd never used comfortably in a game. I was also put off by the visuals, speed, amount of enemies and various comments from Miyamoto about the game's features (no bombs [which suggested a lack of concern for high scores and options], no plans for multiplayer, only planned for a short turn around, no plans for branching paths, etc.). Just a bunch of things Pretty down on the game, even up to release.
Post release
All of this was after playing for 20+ hours, getting all medals and playing a few hours with friends/family.
Arwing:
The Arwing controls clicked for me to my surprise, and much quicker than I expected. I did two runs through the training for the Arwing. I got used to glancing between the two screens and while I wasn't going to be comfortable doing any involved steering while shooting in other directions, I could wrp my head around moving in a general direction while shooting in another, or doing complex maneuvering, then focusing on shooting. There's nothing in the game that outright demands simultaneous complex movement and complex aiming, but it would theoretically be doable.
Barrel-rolls on the right stick seemingly don't affect directional movement that much, so the problems brought on by having "double tap joystick," as an input are mitigated because it usually doesn't matter which way you're rolling (that that does affect the Walker). These can also be done by quickly hitting left-to-right or vice versa, and joystick inputs like that tend to be wonky for a lot of reasons (hard to reliably move a joystick directly back-to-forward without it registering as diagonal-back-to-foward or something else, and double tapping non-digital inputs leaves too much room for the game misreading them). All that said, they work okay, though I'd rather have the left shoulder button be a "hold, then move left/right to roll," unput that is currently only used for canceling the lock-on, something I don't find much use for since I don't go for super-high scores.
Loop-de-loops and u-turns being on the sticks actually is good in my eyes as I like not having to move my thumbs/fingers away from their default positions I seem to accidentally perform loops/u-turns more now than when I first started playing the game, for some reason. It can be easy to do them on accident (breaking while tilting upward has close inputs to the u-turn, same with boosting while tilting up) and it'd just be better to have an option to turn off stick maneuvers altogether (those can be done with face buttons). Still, I appreciate that they're doable in that way, and I never have a problem performing them, it's just that they sometimes happen when I don't want them to not sure what could be done to mitigate that problem. PvE isn't quite so demanding that the accessibility advantage by not needing to move one's right thumb to the face buttons is really needed, so it's not a big deal. If there were multiplayer, that would be a different story.
Arwing on-rails:
Arwing on-rails is great in that it's very close to Star Fox 64's gameplay with the added ability to aim within a half-sphere field ahead of the ship. I came to genuinely like using cockpit view, (in part because it doesn't actually flip all the way around when barrel-rolling like it did in 64. That view no longer being locked to the ship's orientation means it isn't as restrictive and becomes useful in myriad situations, rather than a novelty that puts the player at serious disadvantages. It's still a bit occasionally hard for me to get a feel for the ship's presence in that view and I find myself clipping scenery that I would more easily avoid in 3rd-person view, especially when tilting the ship on its side to pass through tight spaces. Still, the cockpit view is good for most situations, and I've played through every (non Gyrowing) level entirely through the cockpit view.
The vehicle/3rd-person view in on-rails missions is great too overall, classic SF 64, but the way the reticule works can make it seem really off the cockpit view reticule is always dead-on of course, but since the 3rd-person reticule shows the angle of the cockpit view, that can sometimes be almost useless for far away targets from the 3rd-person camera perspective, even with the gyro aim centered and held stationary. I've seen a few ideas as to how that could be mitigated, and I believe the best way would be to focus on making the 3rd-person view's reticule give a better representation of where shots will land, first and foremost, as opposed to showing the angle/direction the cockpit view is facing, since the latter isn't useful when using the 3rd-person view. Switching between views is ideal, but I still see no inherent good in having the cursor be as off as it is in the vehicle view it doesn't need to somehow show the extreme side-views possible using the cockpit view (e.g. all the way to the left/right, which would be impossible), but it should be better than it is.
Arwing all-range mode:
While the on-rails gameplay gyro aiming is helpful and neat at times, it's when in all-range mode that the controls justify their existence. The all-range dogfights in 64 and even in Assault and Command felt pretty rote and simplistic against NPCs, and other people alike, in that players could only u-turn, loop, or turn sharply, and you could only boost for a short time and do either of those special maneuvers with a predictable cool-down.
Zero's gyro aim allows for enemies to be more mobile than before, and I really came to like being able to turn and break sharply, then shoot an enemy chasing behind me without needing to resort to a loop-de-loop. Being able to aim more accurately and leading shots is much more exciting, and those dogfights can be made to be more demanding than before with more enemies and more aggressive opponents (i.e. Star Wolf's special attacks in some scenarios). There's enough boost in the boost meter to do two loops or u-turns back-to-back, and breaking/boosting can be done for much longer. This is the main reason I lament there being no multiplayer, because for the first time the Arwing vs. Arwing gameplay (not including the Star Fox: Assault ship exiting/switching shenanigans, which was fantastic) could be genuinely engaging by being less predictable and stilted. Having a high degree of control (or at least, a much higher degree of control than in previous SF games) would make for a fun multiplayer. the 3rd-person view can let you keep track of the ship/boss you're locked onto and once I got used to it, I could make good use of it by seeing where an enemy started flying while I was doing a loop or u-turn, then quickly aiming the cockpit view at their location while turn toward them. Before I would've just lost track of them for a bit, and in a couple fights in Zero, this is really useful.
Weak points on bosses can actually be challenging to hit now that the player can have more control over aiming. I appreciate enemies with hard-to-reach weak spots (like the spider walkers top/bottom spots) and it's a welcome change of pace (in that you're still shooting things and maneuvering a fun-to-use ship) to have to do bombing runs, passing over them, looking down and landing shots.
Doing loops and u-turns shouldn't lock the players view during their duration though I want to be able to still aim around while looping, and so forth. It's nice that it's a way to reset the view, but I can do that at any time already with the left joystick, which is always going to be at my disposal.
Walker:
Only a few instances where the Walker on-rails used can happen actually, but it's fine there.
Most of the time, it's all-range mode for it. I like using it when locked onto something the ship will adjust to face what you lock-onto, and you can then strafe around it while aiming with the gyro. You can hold the lock-on button to strafe when not targeting an enemy, though I didn't use that too much, and only found it useful to mitigate problems while moving in tight spaces.
I found the Walker's movement fiddly, and still do. Having turning left/right be on both joysticks (can use both to turn quicker) has led to me barrel-rolling when I didn't want to, and since rolling in Walker form is a side-flip, that can be a problem when trying to maneuver onto small platforms or enemies (which is needed to hack a few control panels in the game). The "left-to-right," right joystick input has messed me up too many times since that will do a flip, even though I'm just looking from one direction to another quickly.
It's a neat addition to the arsenal, but I don't find the walker much fun in tight spaces, one of the only few places where it's useful over the Arwing. It's faster on land than the Landmaster, but not fast enough to be faster than the Arwing low above the ground. It isn't like controlling a traditional on-foot character since it seeks to emulate controlling a ship, but it's too fast and too fiddly for me to accomplish that feeling (something I find the Landmaster to do very well). I'd have preferred this to essentially control like Vanquish, and move extremely fast on land, yet provide functional dodging and snappier aiming to allow dancing around enemies. If this ever comes back, that's what I'd hope for it should feel liberating and exhilarating when using it.
Gyrowing:
My biggest criticism of the Gyrowing is how it's used. I don't especially like using the ship itself, but it's functional. There are some quality-of-life improvements it could use, namely being able to move while reeling in the Direct-i bot and not being locked in place and just faster movement. That said, it's fine.
The level it gets all to itself is meant to be a stealth mission, but it's mostly just open space that you drift through really dull and uneventful, and isn't even demanding as a stealth op. Had where the level lacked in high-speed action, it made up for it in being a tense stealth situation that demanded precise movement and timing, it would've been more engaging. As it is, even when trying to avoid spotlights, it's just slow and empty. This is another area I think multiplayer would allow aspects of the game to shine more a mode where other players have to cover a Gyrowing user while they do a bombing run or something would be inherently more exciting, especially if it allowed two-player-one-ship co-op.
Was a better experience in the level it makes a brief appearance since that scenario had a soft time limit.
Landmaster:
Has virtually nothing I dislike. Just feels awesome to use and has better aiming than its 64 counterpart, yet still feels like steering a heavy, cool tank thing where you have to manage strafing while firing missiles, and so forth. The addition of three lock-on missiles at a time is great and a welcome advantage over other ships. Its levels make good use of what it offers the spider boss makes evident how nice it is to be able to precision-aim through the cockpit while doing the hover/strafe to dodge its legs/laser fire. Then, when it tries to land on you, you have to switch to the Gravmaster (flying Landmaster, essentially) to outrun it. Just a high degree of control, and a situation that demands some mastery of those controls. Makes each portion of the Landmaster sequences engaging.That the Landmaster is slower than the Arwing helps with selling the use of gyro aiming too while one could argue classic "locked to ship's nose direction," aiming in the Arwing could be just as fast as gyro aiming (aside from really far up/down/to the sides), in the Landmaster, there was no way to aim this well in 64.
Co-op:
I posted about my experiences playing co-op with my dad in another thread; here's an excerpt pertaining directly to the controls:
That about sums up my experience with the controls themselves. I would've preferred a much better showcase for the Gyrowing, or to just not have it featured tbh, and the Walker should be more swift and more like Vanquish, in short. The Arwing and Landmaster could've carried this game entirely, and with a few tweaks to the controls, they would be pretty perfect for what they are.
There still needed to be more options (or more like any options, full stop), maybe have a demo stage for people on the fence, and a better way of teaching players how to use them (not that the training missions are bad, they could just be better). A refinement of what Zero has done could make for a truly great sequel, but that's really up in the air because of the skimpy content and negative feedback the game has received as a result. Multiplayer would be the best way of validating the higher degree of control, and would make evident how functional they are to everyone just from seeing others use them well in matches.
On Series Trajectory & Fan Expectations
Each entry in the Star Fox series was some bizarre experiment that that changed up the formula, yet each was never followed up with an improved sequel. The fans of each all would like sequels to the game they liked, but the Zelda-like Star Fox: Adventures can't reasonably be joined with the Battlefield/Warhawk-style open map on-foot+in-vehicle combat like from Star Fox: Assault. Those can't be squared away with 64's almost entirely on-rails score-attack type shooter approach, and the motion controls of Star Fox: Zero are too highly divisive to be central to the game and be positively received. No matter what a new SF game will be, it will have to disappoint large subsets of the series' already niche fandom.
Pro & Cons Directly Tied to Controls
There were myriad positives and negatives with the game, but the ones that were a direct result of the control scheme (as opposed to indirect stuff like distribution of development time leading to a lack of multiplayer modes):
The positives:
Possible Solution?
Trying this concept in VR. Looking around inside a cockpit of a ship has proven to be more intuitive than SF:0's control scheme, and if they still insist on having some kind of aiming that's separate from the ship's angle, looking around to aim while flying in a different direction could be a more elegant way to accomplish that.
Zero's cockpit view did add an element of immersion and higher degree of control, but it wasn't worth the negative backlash and relatively barebones experience for what was already a niche title. VR could provide the novelty of feeling like you're operating an Arwing from inside the cockpit, while also being a much smoother, better-realized experience.
On Port Potential
I think you'd have to somehow affix VR functionality to Star Fox: Zero to make it work without also having to change other things—the dual-screen motion aiming would require a lot of finagling to replicate on a console other than the Wii U. I think for most of the game having old-school controls would be fine, but you have to strip out the Gyrowing (which would make the game better), change the third-person perspective/reticule to make it useful for aiming (as it is, it on gives an idea of the direction the gamepad is being aimed), and make the the Star Wolf fights easier (especially the Wolf duel on Fichina).
The controls were so intertwined at the core of the game that it would take a non-negligible amount of work to make it functional on Switch—I wish the game had been designed with porting in mind, but alas. It also would need more/better levels with more branching paths and online multiplayer. I think the easiest way to port it would be making the "swap view" button a more prominent feature—the cockpit view would still be way more useful than the behind-the-ship view in terms of aiming, but you'd be able to play the entire game (except maybe the Gyrowing portions, not that those are worth keeping). It'd still be a lot of work though.
Here's hoping the series' direction is better considered moving forward.
My Assessment of Star Fox: Zero's Controls:
Before release
I was disappointed learning about the strange controls and found the "aim in a different direction from where the ship is flying," off-putting as it meant gyro aiming would be unavoidable, something I'd never used comfortably in a game. I was also put off by the visuals, speed, amount of enemies and various comments from Miyamoto about the game's features (no bombs [which suggested a lack of concern for high scores and options], no plans for multiplayer, only planned for a short turn around, no plans for branching paths, etc.). Just a bunch of things Pretty down on the game, even up to release.
Post release
All of this was after playing for 20+ hours, getting all medals and playing a few hours with friends/family.
Arwing:
The Arwing controls clicked for me to my surprise, and much quicker than I expected. I did two runs through the training for the Arwing. I got used to glancing between the two screens and while I wasn't going to be comfortable doing any involved steering while shooting in other directions, I could wrp my head around moving in a general direction while shooting in another, or doing complex maneuvering, then focusing on shooting. There's nothing in the game that outright demands simultaneous complex movement and complex aiming, but it would theoretically be doable.
Barrel-rolls on the right stick seemingly don't affect directional movement that much, so the problems brought on by having "double tap joystick," as an input are mitigated because it usually doesn't matter which way you're rolling (that that does affect the Walker). These can also be done by quickly hitting left-to-right or vice versa, and joystick inputs like that tend to be wonky for a lot of reasons (hard to reliably move a joystick directly back-to-forward without it registering as diagonal-back-to-foward or something else, and double tapping non-digital inputs leaves too much room for the game misreading them). All that said, they work okay, though I'd rather have the left shoulder button be a "hold, then move left/right to roll," unput that is currently only used for canceling the lock-on, something I don't find much use for since I don't go for super-high scores.
Loop-de-loops and u-turns being on the sticks actually is good in my eyes as I like not having to move my thumbs/fingers away from their default positions I seem to accidentally perform loops/u-turns more now than when I first started playing the game, for some reason. It can be easy to do them on accident (breaking while tilting upward has close inputs to the u-turn, same with boosting while tilting up) and it'd just be better to have an option to turn off stick maneuvers altogether (those can be done with face buttons). Still, I appreciate that they're doable in that way, and I never have a problem performing them, it's just that they sometimes happen when I don't want them to not sure what could be done to mitigate that problem. PvE isn't quite so demanding that the accessibility advantage by not needing to move one's right thumb to the face buttons is really needed, so it's not a big deal. If there were multiplayer, that would be a different story.
Arwing on-rails:
Arwing on-rails is great in that it's very close to Star Fox 64's gameplay with the added ability to aim within a half-sphere field ahead of the ship. I came to genuinely like using cockpit view, (in part because it doesn't actually flip all the way around when barrel-rolling like it did in 64. That view no longer being locked to the ship's orientation means it isn't as restrictive and becomes useful in myriad situations, rather than a novelty that puts the player at serious disadvantages. It's still a bit occasionally hard for me to get a feel for the ship's presence in that view and I find myself clipping scenery that I would more easily avoid in 3rd-person view, especially when tilting the ship on its side to pass through tight spaces. Still, the cockpit view is good for most situations, and I've played through every (non Gyrowing) level entirely through the cockpit view.
The vehicle/3rd-person view in on-rails missions is great too overall, classic SF 64, but the way the reticule works can make it seem really off the cockpit view reticule is always dead-on of course, but since the 3rd-person reticule shows the angle of the cockpit view, that can sometimes be almost useless for far away targets from the 3rd-person camera perspective, even with the gyro aim centered and held stationary. I've seen a few ideas as to how that could be mitigated, and I believe the best way would be to focus on making the 3rd-person view's reticule give a better representation of where shots will land, first and foremost, as opposed to showing the angle/direction the cockpit view is facing, since the latter isn't useful when using the 3rd-person view. Switching between views is ideal, but I still see no inherent good in having the cursor be as off as it is in the vehicle view it doesn't need to somehow show the extreme side-views possible using the cockpit view (e.g. all the way to the left/right, which would be impossible), but it should be better than it is.
Arwing all-range mode:
While the on-rails gameplay gyro aiming is helpful and neat at times, it's when in all-range mode that the controls justify their existence. The all-range dogfights in 64 and even in Assault and Command felt pretty rote and simplistic against NPCs, and other people alike, in that players could only u-turn, loop, or turn sharply, and you could only boost for a short time and do either of those special maneuvers with a predictable cool-down.
Zero's gyro aim allows for enemies to be more mobile than before, and I really came to like being able to turn and break sharply, then shoot an enemy chasing behind me without needing to resort to a loop-de-loop. Being able to aim more accurately and leading shots is much more exciting, and those dogfights can be made to be more demanding than before with more enemies and more aggressive opponents (i.e. Star Wolf's special attacks in some scenarios). There's enough boost in the boost meter to do two loops or u-turns back-to-back, and breaking/boosting can be done for much longer. This is the main reason I lament there being no multiplayer, because for the first time the Arwing vs. Arwing gameplay (not including the Star Fox: Assault ship exiting/switching shenanigans, which was fantastic) could be genuinely engaging by being less predictable and stilted. Having a high degree of control (or at least, a much higher degree of control than in previous SF games) would make for a fun multiplayer. the 3rd-person view can let you keep track of the ship/boss you're locked onto and once I got used to it, I could make good use of it by seeing where an enemy started flying while I was doing a loop or u-turn, then quickly aiming the cockpit view at their location while turn toward them. Before I would've just lost track of them for a bit, and in a couple fights in Zero, this is really useful.
Weak points on bosses can actually be challenging to hit now that the player can have more control over aiming. I appreciate enemies with hard-to-reach weak spots (like the spider walkers top/bottom spots) and it's a welcome change of pace (in that you're still shooting things and maneuvering a fun-to-use ship) to have to do bombing runs, passing over them, looking down and landing shots.
Doing loops and u-turns shouldn't lock the players view during their duration though I want to be able to still aim around while looping, and so forth. It's nice that it's a way to reset the view, but I can do that at any time already with the left joystick, which is always going to be at my disposal.
Walker:
Only a few instances where the Walker on-rails used can happen actually, but it's fine there.
Most of the time, it's all-range mode for it. I like using it when locked onto something the ship will adjust to face what you lock-onto, and you can then strafe around it while aiming with the gyro. You can hold the lock-on button to strafe when not targeting an enemy, though I didn't use that too much, and only found it useful to mitigate problems while moving in tight spaces.
I found the Walker's movement fiddly, and still do. Having turning left/right be on both joysticks (can use both to turn quicker) has led to me barrel-rolling when I didn't want to, and since rolling in Walker form is a side-flip, that can be a problem when trying to maneuver onto small platforms or enemies (which is needed to hack a few control panels in the game). The "left-to-right," right joystick input has messed me up too many times since that will do a flip, even though I'm just looking from one direction to another quickly.
It's a neat addition to the arsenal, but I don't find the walker much fun in tight spaces, one of the only few places where it's useful over the Arwing. It's faster on land than the Landmaster, but not fast enough to be faster than the Arwing low above the ground. It isn't like controlling a traditional on-foot character since it seeks to emulate controlling a ship, but it's too fast and too fiddly for me to accomplish that feeling (something I find the Landmaster to do very well). I'd have preferred this to essentially control like Vanquish, and move extremely fast on land, yet provide functional dodging and snappier aiming to allow dancing around enemies. If this ever comes back, that's what I'd hope for it should feel liberating and exhilarating when using it.
Gyrowing:
My biggest criticism of the Gyrowing is how it's used. I don't especially like using the ship itself, but it's functional. There are some quality-of-life improvements it could use, namely being able to move while reeling in the Direct-i bot and not being locked in place and just faster movement. That said, it's fine.
The level it gets all to itself is meant to be a stealth mission, but it's mostly just open space that you drift through really dull and uneventful, and isn't even demanding as a stealth op. Had where the level lacked in high-speed action, it made up for it in being a tense stealth situation that demanded precise movement and timing, it would've been more engaging. As it is, even when trying to avoid spotlights, it's just slow and empty. This is another area I think multiplayer would allow aspects of the game to shine more a mode where other players have to cover a Gyrowing user while they do a bombing run or something would be inherently more exciting, especially if it allowed two-player-one-ship co-op.
Was a better experience in the level it makes a brief appearance since that scenario had a soft time limit.
Landmaster:
Has virtually nothing I dislike. Just feels awesome to use and has better aiming than its 64 counterpart, yet still feels like steering a heavy, cool tank thing where you have to manage strafing while firing missiles, and so forth. The addition of three lock-on missiles at a time is great and a welcome advantage over other ships. Its levels make good use of what it offers the spider boss makes evident how nice it is to be able to precision-aim through the cockpit while doing the hover/strafe to dodge its legs/laser fire. Then, when it tries to land on you, you have to switch to the Gravmaster (flying Landmaster, essentially) to outrun it. Just a high degree of control, and a situation that demands some mastery of those controls. Makes each portion of the Landmaster sequences engaging.That the Landmaster is slower than the Arwing helps with selling the use of gyro aiming too while one could argue classic "locked to ship's nose direction," aiming in the Arwing could be just as fast as gyro aiming (aside from really far up/down/to the sides), in the Landmaster, there was no way to aim this well in 64.
Co-op:
I posted about my experiences playing co-op with my dad in another thread; here's an excerpt pertaining directly to the controls:
That about sums up my experience with the controls themselves. I would've preferred a much better showcase for the Gyrowing, or to just not have it featured tbh, and the Walker should be more swift and more like Vanquish, in short. The Arwing and Landmaster could've carried this game entirely, and with a few tweaks to the controls, they would be pretty perfect for what they are.
There still needed to be more options (or more like any options, full stop), maybe have a demo stage for people on the fence, and a better way of teaching players how to use them (not that the training missions are bad, they could just be better). A refinement of what Zero has done could make for a truly great sequel, but that's really up in the air because of the skimpy content and negative feedback the game has received as a result. Multiplayer would be the best way of validating the higher degree of control, and would make evident how functional they are to everyone just from seeing others use them well in matches.
On Series Trajectory & Fan Expectations
Each entry in the Star Fox series was some bizarre experiment that that changed up the formula, yet each was never followed up with an improved sequel. The fans of each all would like sequels to the game they liked, but the Zelda-like Star Fox: Adventures can't reasonably be joined with the Battlefield/Warhawk-style open map on-foot+in-vehicle combat like from Star Fox: Assault. Those can't be squared away with 64's almost entirely on-rails score-attack type shooter approach, and the motion controls of Star Fox: Zero are too highly divisive to be central to the game and be positively received. No matter what a new SF game will be, it will have to disappoint large subsets of the series' already niche fandom.
Pro & Cons Directly Tied to Controls
There were myriad positives and negatives with the game, but the ones that were a direct result of the control scheme (as opposed to indirect stuff like distribution of development time leading to a lack of multiplayer modes):
The positives:
- Added another dimension to on-rails Arwing gameplay and ostensibly allowed for more complex enemy patterns
- Made the Landmaster better to control since having split aiming and steering made more sense for a tank
- All-range mode for Arwing and Landmaster allowed for enemies and bosses with harder-to-hit hitboxes (e.g. fly under/over enemy and shoot straight up/down at them)
- Aerial dogfights against general enemies and Star Wolf were vastly improved, moving away from "somersault>shoot>somersault" to being able to track enemies during their loops/u-turns and allowing the enemy ships to be much more aggressive and evasive
- Co-op with one person steering and the other shooting managed to be fun
- Moving gamepad to aim while steering with joystick was not intuitive for many people—it was a crapshoot if someone could get used to the controls regardless of whether they were series fans
- No control customization, gyro sensitivity adjustment or options (outside of a "lock aiming to steering when not holding fire" which wasn't very useful to anyone since it both limited the gyro aiming and didn't entirely turn it off if you try using charge shots)
- The aiming reticule in the third-person view gives an idea of the direction you're aiming (has two squares like in past games), but doesn't give a good sense of where you're aiming when using gyro to aim to the sides/up/down—the third-person view's reticule is notably worse in on-rails levels compared to past games and is almost entirely useless for all-range mode since you're turning sharply much of the time, and particularly worse in a couple boss encounters where the third-person camera is farther away from the arwing
Possible Solution?
Trying this concept in VR. Looking around inside a cockpit of a ship has proven to be more intuitive than SF:0's control scheme, and if they still insist on having some kind of aiming that's separate from the ship's angle, looking around to aim while flying in a different direction could be a more elegant way to accomplish that.
Zero's cockpit view did add an element of immersion and higher degree of control, but it wasn't worth the negative backlash and relatively barebones experience for what was already a niche title. VR could provide the novelty of feeling like you're operating an Arwing from inside the cockpit, while also being a much smoother, better-realized experience.
On Port Potential
I think you'd have to somehow affix VR functionality to Star Fox: Zero to make it work without also having to change other things—the dual-screen motion aiming would require a lot of finagling to replicate on a console other than the Wii U. I think for most of the game having old-school controls would be fine, but you have to strip out the Gyrowing (which would make the game better), change the third-person perspective/reticule to make it useful for aiming (as it is, it on gives an idea of the direction the gamepad is being aimed), and make the the Star Wolf fights easier (especially the Wolf duel on Fichina).
The controls were so intertwined at the core of the game that it would take a non-negligible amount of work to make it functional on Switch—I wish the game had been designed with porting in mind, but alas. It also would need more/better levels with more branching paths and online multiplayer. I think the easiest way to port it would be making the "swap view" button a more prominent feature—the cockpit view would still be way more useful than the behind-the-ship view in terms of aiming, but you'd be able to play the entire game (except maybe the Gyrowing portions, not that those are worth keeping). It'd still be a lot of work though.
Here's hoping the series' direction is better considered moving forward.
The controls were fine, but I just found the whole thing boring. I've never finished it though so possibly it picks up towards the end?
Take Sector Omega/SF64 and blend it with Starlink and you'd have my perfect Starfox game. I think the cutscenes inbetween Starlink missions did more than enough to satisfy "story" while getting to the meat and potatoes of open space exploration. Having missions or instanced areas of planets to fit the old linear style would balance out the more open gameplay, or you could even have a linear mission when you first get to a planet with alternate free roam/exploration after the fact upon planet revisits. Tons you could do with it.
It's really fun and the controls are good once you get used to them. Not having any multiplayer was a huge bummer. If the final mission is any indication, it would have been incredibly fun to have dogfights with other people online.
It's not a GOAT, but... it's fucking Star Fox. People were way too hard on the game and didn't appreciate it for what it is.
It's not a GOAT, but... it's fucking Star Fox. People were way too hard on the game and didn't appreciate it for what it is.
It's techincally very good, but what I don't see people talk about is how much it suffers for having the slide pad instead of the N64 stick. the way the deadzones and snap back to the center work, it really just doesn't control well without the original controller.
It is the single most disappointing game I have ever played.
I felt like Fredo betrayed me and broke my heart.
I felt like Fredo betrayed me and broke my heart.
The fact that no one over all these years has just stood up to Miyamoto and said "Hey, maybe an iterative, 'more of the same' sequel to a beloved franchise without any dumb gameplay overhauls or control gimmicks is something people would appreciate, especially for a franchise who's last 'classic' entry is over 20 years old at this point" is just kinda sad.
It was complete and utter garbage. The controls, the gameplay, the graphics, ugh. There's a reason it is one of a very small handful of games that did not get a port over to the switch.
I'd guess it's because Miyamoto himself is the one pushing for these games, considering how there's no Star Fox team within Nintendo itself nowadays. If it weren't for that, Starfox would have fallen in the same hole F-Zero or WarioLand did once they lost their internal teams and became outsourced franchises that underperformed.
OP
OP
I like it quite a bit, it's Starfox 64 but with much better graphics, some of the best the 3DS has to offer, and a solid 3D effect, I'd say it's the definitive way to play it though some find the 3DS button layout to be a kind deal breaker for some reason so take that in consideration. Also the multiplayer is different
I put down the game after about an hour, as I was ready to snap my Wii U game pad in half & hurl the pieces at my TV. Maybe there's a decent game behind the gamepad integration & everything, but it totally soured my experience and I don't intend to give it another chance. A uniquely terrible experience for me personally, as I don't think I've ever felt miserable playing a game before or since.
I can appreciate the idea they were going for, but the execution was ass. The controls were weird as shit. Once you got used to them, there wasn't a particularly deep or meaningful game behind it. In a lot of ways it felt like a remake of 64, but worse in pretty much every way.
The very first segment that was like Star Fox 64 with modern graphics was absolutely sublime... And then they forced the dual-screen gameplay and it went downhill from there.
So basically, an ambitious intro and then a major disappointment for the rest.
But hey, at least it got us this awesome short film. I wish Nintendo had done more of them...
So basically, an ambitious intro and then a major disappointment for the rest.
But hey, at least it got us this awesome short film. I wish Nintendo had done more of them...
Honestly, it's one of my favorite games on the Wii U. I really like the controls & thought the game was a blast the whole way through. Star Fox Guard was also really good.
I pushed through the motion controls until I got to the final level, and just couldn't coordinate it anymore.
Star Fox Guard was legit though. I had a LOT of fun with that game.
Star Fox Guard was legit though. I had a LOT of fun with that game.
It's among the worst games I've ever played. Even after "understanding" the two screen gameplay, it still wasn't fun. I don't know why I would ever even consider playing it over Star Fox 64 or 3D.
I definitely had way more fun with this. Hell, I sold Star Fox Zero but I still have this game.I thought it was a boring retread of Star Fox 64, which was a reinterpretation of the events from Star Fox SNES. I had to force myself to play through it, hoping it would do anything interesting or had an interesting spin with the narrative, but that didn't happen.
And to be honest with you, the game that was bundled with Zero (Star Fox: Guard) was much more fun and became a fun party game my friends and I played with.
Honestly? It's okay.
The controls didn't end up being as bad as I thought they would, though I still never liked some of the fights that required precision shots, as I think using a control stick would have been preferable.
While I did enjoy some of the twists on old levels, it's still the original Star Fox story for the fourth time, and it's really wearing thin when you do the same storyline and planets over and over again.
I hope for the next one we get an actual sequel to Assault or Command to help mix things up.
The controls didn't end up being as bad as I thought they would, though I still never liked some of the fights that required precision shots, as I think using a control stick would have been preferable.
While I did enjoy some of the twists on old levels, it's still the original Star Fox story for the fourth time, and it's really wearing thin when you do the same storyline and planets over and over again.
I hope for the next one we get an actual sequel to Assault or Command to help mix things up.
First, I was glad they tried it as the Wii U needed more games showing the possibilities afforded by the game pad.
I thought Conera was fun and actually thought the gyrocopter controller well. the controls never fully jelled for me, I didn't like the Landmaster and HATED the space dogfighting sections.
I for some it worked but it frustrated me to no end.
I thought Conera was fun and actually thought the gyrocopter controller well. the controls never fully jelled for me, I didn't like the Landmaster and HATED the space dogfighting sections.
I for some it worked but it frustrated me to no end.
If you can get through the controls the first playthrough leaves a decent enough impression. But after that, subsequent playthroughs reveal that the illusion of a Star Fox 64 branching paths through the story was just that--an illusion. There is one genuine branching path, all of the rest of the content is heavily, heavily recycled (and often just downright nonsensical). Ultimately, even discounting its controls it compares poorly to Star Fox 64.
Oh, and the Gyrowing suuuuuuucks.
Oh, and the Gyrowing suuuuuuucks.
It's the single worst Nintendo game I've ever played. Bad controls (and I think motion controls can be great), the other vehicles weren't fun, and the boss fights were just awful. I became actually mad that they thought this was a game worth releasing, it was so far from their usual standards. I only forced myself to finish it it because it was so short and in the hope that maybe, hopefully, something would click or I'd find a redeemable element in the game somewhere but neither happened.
I really would love to see Starfox be a much bigger series but at this point I just don't think it'll ever happen. I'm not sure Nintendo even knows what to do with it anymore.
I really would love to see Starfox be a much bigger series but at this point I just don't think it'll ever happen. I'm not sure Nintendo even knows what to do with it anymore.
First post nails it
I'll stand by this game... it wasnt crappy or garbage... it was very decent, people just aren't willing to put in 3 hours to adjust to controls. the game didn't teach you when to look at the TV and when to look at the gamepad very well... but once you found the flow and when to look it was pretty good.
Couldn't even get through the first level without flipping my lid. Sold it soon after, surprisingly it actually didn't piss me off as much as Xenoblade Chronicles X even though I put up with that games's problems a lot more.
I enjoyed it for what it was though the gameplay built around switching between two screens was tiresome and frustrating overall for me.
I thought I might like it better if I played it in co-op but unfortunately my husband wasn't drawn to it at all to help me out with that🤣
I thought I might like it better if I played it in co-op but unfortunately my husband wasn't drawn to it at all to help me out with that🤣
I think SFZ is one of the only times I've ever gone into a game expecting to be disappointed and ending up pleasantly surprised. Ever since the initial pitch of "bite sized slower missions" soured me on the game, there honestly wasn't much else to go but up.
Controls were great, made gameplay more exciting and raised the skill ceiling. Had a few missions that were fine enough to play through the first time, but some bad scoring decisions meant that a high scoring run became super tedious, and the lack of a venom 2 means that all runs end the same, giving a bit too much sameness. That said there was a lot of love put into it, like the side star wolf fights, and it had some insane highs like Sector Beta.
Ultimately I think the game's biggest problem is a lack of diverse runs, so if it had gotten 2-3 fresh planets as DLC (in retrospect, unlikely even if it had sold well) that would have alleviated a lot of the reptitiveness.
Also, roadmaster rules.
Controls were great, made gameplay more exciting and raised the skill ceiling. Had a few missions that were fine enough to play through the first time, but some bad scoring decisions meant that a high scoring run became super tedious, and the lack of a venom 2 means that all runs end the same, giving a bit too much sameness. That said there was a lot of love put into it, like the side star wolf fights, and it had some insane highs like Sector Beta.
Ultimately I think the game's biggest problem is a lack of diverse runs, so if it had gotten 2-3 fresh planets as DLC (in retrospect, unlikely even if it had sold well) that would have alleviated a lot of the reptitiveness.
Also, roadmaster rules.
Last edited:
didn't seem very good, maybe played a couple of hours before putting it down
didn't really intend to quit forever, just never felt like playing it
didn't really intend to quit forever, just never felt like playing it
I really loved it.
Felt like controlling RC vehicles, It was a very unique game.
I don't agree with all the hate it gets at all.
Felt like controlling RC vehicles, It was a very unique game.
I don't agree with all the hate it gets at all.
It's a very competent game, but it just came and went without making any mark. It doesn't spark any new interest in Star Fox, and its ambition lies in utilizing the Wii U Gamepad, which had divisive result at best and irrelevant by now. Platinum developing it doesn't make it any more unique. It's not a failure (regarding its ambitions, not sales) by any means but it's a complete non event.
If this happens and they map the controls better, I can see this title reviving the Star Fox brand.
The controls were awkward to get used to. But the rest of the game was great. Probably because of the heavy use of the Wii U Gamepad we will never see a Switch Port.
I just couldn't shake off the low budget feel.
What help make Star Fox 64 so special was that it felt it had the same amount of big budget effort put into it as a Mario or Zelda game.
What help make Star Fox 64 so special was that it felt it had the same amount of big budget effort put into it as a Mario or Zelda game.
Same reason 3D Sonic has slower-paced levels. It would be over quick otherwise.
A rail Star Fox level is usually done in two minutes.
Without Miyamoto, those games don't get made. He's the one soul pushing for them.
