Topic: Star Fox creator says some stuff

[Stratos]

That is most certainly not empirical evidence.

Did anyone complain about SFA before it came out? No one had tried that before and no one knew how the fans would react. I don't recall scathing editorials against it back then. It was only after the game was released that people complained about it.
And Celda? People now, including the RFN crew, agree that the Celda issue was not as big of a problem as people made it out to be in retrospective. In fact minus the sailing most people look back with fondness at Wind Waker and people enjoyed Hourglass. When Spirit Tracks was announced people weren't complaining about the style. The Celda outcry was a bunch of children with identity issues afraid they'd once more be labeled kiddie.

Miyamoto has to go against the flow or else we'd have gotten none of the greats we love. Many of the things we balked at originally we actually enjoyed when it came out. Doesn't mean he always hits his mark (WiiMusic in my case) but it's how he gets it right so many times.

Also, why is this guy's opinion important for Star Fox? He was a programmer on the SNES ones and then wasn't involved with the series again until he directed the DS version with his little studio which I hear was mediocre to OK at best. He didn't have anything to do with the creative process of the old games. Why are people giving him more credit than he deserves?

That second article was him backpedaling in the face of the poor reaction it got from gamers methinks.

I don't think the 3rd party situation is as dismal as you put it, Ian. There are a number of titles from 3rd parties that are good or promising to be good in the coming year. But I agree that there are some that are problematic and the 'toy' comment shows some devs feelings on this. I guess it just boils down to them refusing a profit in the name of saving face and pride.

[Ian Sane]

It's alright tho, cuz these bonehead developers are dying out.

Yeah but I like some of those bonehead developers, you know?  It's kind of like a self-destructive friend.  Yeah he's an idiot and he's creating his own problems and deep down he will deserve everything that happens to him... but he's still your friend.

I want talented devs to survive and thrive making the games they want to make.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Then they'd better jump ship and get on the proper LOVE BOAT.

Otherwise, sink.  Henry Royal's not gonna jump off a dumptruck to bail them out.

[BeautifulShy]

Mr.Cuthbert (or someone posing as him?) clears the air.

The source. Go to the fourth page.

Ummm...bow and shake hands? Beef over?

So I take it nobody saw this.

[UltimatePartyBear]

That is most certainly not empirical evidence.

Did anyone complain about SFA before it came out? No one had tried that before and no one knew how the fans would react. I don't recall scathing editorials against it back then. It was only after the game was released that people complained about it.
And Celda? People now, including the RFN crew, agree that the Celda issue was not as big of a problem as people made it out to be in retrospective. In fact minus the sailing most people look back with fondness at Wind Waker and people enjoyed Hourglass. When Spirit Tracks was announced people weren't complaining about the style. The Celda outcry was a bunch of children with identity issues afraid they'd once more be labeled kiddie.

I'd like to introduce you to my friend Reading Comprehension, of the New Hampshire Comprehensions.

Edit: Let's see if I can make this more constructive.

I was referring to empirical evidence of Miyamoto doing things his way even though fans hated the idea, not empirical evidence that Miyamoto was wrong or that the haters were right.  You didn't need to jump to his defense because I was not attacking him.  I don't believe Cuthbert was, either.

I don't think his comment on Kotaku was backpedaling.  One bad interviewer got a developer to call the Wii a toy again, and all the worthless Intermotron bloggers trumped it up to get hits.  I'm surprised he bothered to reply at all.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

He could've called the interview a saboteur douche.  That would've helped.

[Stratos]

That is most certainly not empirical evidence.

Did anyone complain about SFA before it came out? No one had tried that before and no one knew how the fans would react. I don't recall scathing editorials against it back then. It was only after the game was released that people complained about it.
And Celda? People now, including the RFN crew, agree that the Celda issue was not as big of a problem as people made it out to be in retrospective. In fact minus the sailing most people look back with fondness at Wind Waker and people enjoyed Hourglass. When Spirit Tracks was announced people weren't complaining about the style. The Celda outcry was a bunch of children with identity issues afraid they'd once more be labeled kiddie.

I'd like to introduce you to my friend Reading Comprehension, of the New Hampshire Comprehensions.

Edit: Let's see if I can make this more constructive.

I was referring to empirical evidence of Miyamoto doing things his way even though fans hated the idea, not empirical evidence that Miyamoto was wrong or that the haters were right.  You didn't need to jump to his defense because I was not attacking him.  I don't believe Cuthbert was, either.

I don't think his comment on Kotaku was backpedaling.  One bad interviewer got a developer to call the Wii a toy again, and all the worthless Intermotron bloggers trumped it up to get hits.  I'm surprised he bothered to reply at all.

Maybe I didn't respond coherently enough. Did fans not want SFA? I seem to remember people being excited about the game and the potential it had. Everyone was optimistic about it before it came out. Sure it didn't turn out too favorably in the end but no one was condemning it as wrong or a misstep for the series. Granted, it may have been Rareware optimism that carried the game till it's launch but people still game it a chance. Fans were not condemning it as an unholy marker in the series.

And my point about Celda was that fans were bothered by the kiddie image and not with the game itself so I discount those opinions as 'what the fans wanted'.

Is that a better way to describe what I am conveying as a disagreement regarding your statement?

[UltimatePartyBear]

I'm still not convinced you understood me in the first place.

And my point about Celda was that fans were bothered by the kiddie image and not with the game itself so I discount those opinions as 'what the fans wanted'.

This doesn't even make sense.  Some* fans were bothered by the image, yes.  We can stop there, because we've already established that there was something that some fans didn't like.  It wouldn't matter if every other facet of the game caused spontaneous joygasms, because the base idea was that there was something that some people didn't like.  I was around back then, and I'd go so far as to say it was outright hatred.

The original supposition was "Miyamoto [is] willing to do things with franchises that a lot of fans hate."  We've established that some fans hated the change to cel-shading in the Zelda franchise, and the fact that it happened is sufficient proof to me of Miyamoto's willingness.  Why do you have a problem with the statement?  It's not a condemnation of Miyamoto or his work.  It's a sign of genius.  He's figured out that if you put too much emphasis on a franchise's traditional trappings, it stagnates.


*I've decided to start saying "some" because I think part of the problem may be that you assumed I meant "all."

[Stogi]

I don't think Nintendo will ever make that mistake again; showing Zelda, then showing a completely different version of it two years later.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Current-gen Celdas still outnumber current-gen matoor Zelda.

[Ian Sane]

I don't think Nintendo will ever make that mistake again; showing Zelda, then showing a completely different version of it two years later.

That was ultimately the problem.  The bait-and-switch.  It's like last E3 when Reggie made comments about having something for core gamers and then E3 was incredibly non-gamer focused.  Creating the false expectations created the fan backlash.

For the record I didn't like how Star Fox was shoehorned into Dinosaur Planet at the time, mostly because I was looking forward to Dinosaur Planet and changing the franchise would deny me of the unique IP Rare was creating.  Plus I figured people who didn't know the development history of the game would insist that Star Fox elements be put into the game and thus we got the Airwing sections and such.

SFA was basically a game for NOBODY and Miyamoto goofed on that.  Rare fans had become excited about Dinosaur Planet and that's what they wanted to see.  Star Fox fans want Star Fox to play like Star Fox.  SFA denied both fans of what they wanted.  It's a compromise game, designed to please two different audiences and that never works.  Nobody gets what they want, nobody is happy.

[Stogi]

I don't think it was a bad idea in theory.

The problem was the shoe-horning. If the team started out thinking about a StarFox Adventure game, then I bet it would have been much better.

[UltimatePartyBear]

I didn't intend for these old arguments to flare up again.  I don't regret this, but I both rue and lament it.

[Stratos]

OK, Ultimate PB, I'll agree with you. I was trying to go at it on a different wavelength from you and completely overshot your original point in the process. I concede defeat.

[UltimatePartyBear]

You're all right, Stratos.  Sorry if I sounded harsh.

[Stratos]

It's all good. I don't take offense easily online so you didn't do anything wrong that I saw.

[Luigi Dude]

The problem was the shoe-horning. If the team started out thinking about a StarFox Adventure game, then I bet it would have been much better.

No the game still would have been poor because Rare had become a slacker studio by then, which is why Nintendo got rid of them.  Even if the game got to remain Dinosaur Planet, the mediocre gameplay would have remained.  Instead of getting a poor new IP, we got a poor Star Fox game instead.

People have to stop blaming Miyamoto for the way Star Fox Adventures turned out.  Miyamoto didn't tell Rare to make the game one big boring collect-a-thon with lame combat and gameplay.  This was all Rare's doing and only Rare's doing.

[Spinnzilla]

Considering the last couple of Star Fox games have been pretty meh, I'm glad he's staying away from the franchise. 

[Mikintosh]

I liked Assault, though it was still not as good as 64 (though much more enjoyable then Adventures). I'd buy any Star Fox game in a second, which is why I'm mystified that not only is Nintendo not producing a new game in the series, but they haven't even released Star Fox 2 on the VC even though the damn thing's been finished for fifteen years.

[Luigi Dude]

I'd buy any Star Fox game in a second, which is why I'm mystified that not only is Nintendo not producing a new game in the series

We don't know that Nintendo isn't producing a new Star Fox.  Look at the upcoming Excite Bots coming out later this months.  According to Monster Games, they worked on that game for over 2 years and yet, Nintendo didn't reveal it until the end of Febuary, 2 months before it's release later this month.

So for all we know, Star Fox Wii could already be 98% done and Nintendo is just waiting until E3 to reveal it.

[Stratos]

I'm with Luigi Dude on this, I think it will show up at E3 in one form or another.

It will go back to being more of an on-rails game and people will complain about the on-rails part of it.

[EasyCure]

I'm with Luigi Dude on this, I think it will show up at E3 in one form or another.

It will go back to being more of an on-rails game and people will complain about the on-rails part of it.

I'm with Stratos on this one. People will complain that it has online vs modes but not online co-op. Or they'll complain that it should be a giant space MMO game and other things that will push it as far away from a standard Star Fox game then ever.

To be honest, i'd be happy with either of these two outcomes:

a. A game on par with Star Fox 64
b. A game that borrows from Star Fox: Assault, but with Star Fox 64 quality.

Thats right. I actually didn't mind all the runnin' and gunnin'. The part i did mind was that it took precedent over piloting an Arwing.
A good Star Fox game would find a way to balance it all out.

I mean Star Fox 64, the game heralded as being the best in the series, introduced us to the LANDMASTER!, and its multiplayer had Star Fox Team on foot with blasters, so i've always hated the argument that those didn't "feel" like Star Fox or just didn't FIT. Hell those familiar with SF2 know that even it had vehicles other than Arwings and also had "all-range mode" levels, so it all fits.

I know i've mentioned this before, but i'd even be happy with a compromise that kept on-foot missions but made them on rails. It'd keep the controls from being clunky and would still have some (slight) diversity in gameplay.

[BlackNMild2k1]

If they do on foot missions then I really hope its not Factor 5 handing the new game

[EasyCure]

If they do on foot missions then I really hope its not Factor 5 handing the new game

Damn thats a really good point!

[Ian Sane]

No the game still would have been poor because Rare had become a slacker studio by then, which is why Nintendo got rid of them.  Even if the game got to remain Dinosaur Planet, the mediocre gameplay would have remained.  Instead of getting a poor new IP, we got a poor Star Fox game instead.

Rare's previous games before SFA were Conker's Bad Fur Day, Banjo-Tooie and Perfect Dark.  All were absolutely awesome.  Okay, they did make Mickey's Speedway USA in that time as well which wasn't as hot but since that's a licenced title I cut them some slack for that since they were assigned it and likely weren't that interested in making it (and even then it sounds like a competent game from reviews).  Star Fox Adventures is probably Rare's WORST game from their time with Nintendo.  So I see it as an exception.  Even Donkey Kong 64 was quite good, just a little over-ambitious with the collecting.

Rare's last Nintendo game was quite meh and Nintendo sold them to the competition so of course fanboys started acting like Rare was never that great or was clearly losing it.  To suggest otherwise would mean that Nintendo screwed up and dropped one of their greatest assests and well we obviously can't have THAT.  Yes Rare has not been the same since but I think the Rare/Nintendo team was what was special.  That's what we lost.

I'm willing to cut some slack with SFA because of the situations regarding the development.  First they had to move the game from the N64 to the Cube.  Second they had to shoehorn Fox in there.  All of this eats up time.  Suddenly they have come up with some excuse to have Arwing stages.  Suddenly they have to change the whole storyline to include the Star Fox characters.  This is time and effort that could have been spent polishing the game.  How well do you think Eternal Darkness would have turned out if SK had been asked to shoehorn the Zelda licence into it?

Keep in mind also that if you came up with this world and these characters and then some guy came in and told you to ditch them and turn it into an established franchise that that MAY be demoralizing.  What Miyamoto did was a very corporate thing to do.  I work as a programmer and when some higher-up commands some major change from above the product suffers because you lose your passion for what you were creating and cease giving a ****.  The best games are the ones where you can tell the designers were really passionate about the game they were making.  The best games are labours of love.  Dinosaur Planet was an ambitious original title.  Star Fox Adventures might as well be a licenced title since the situation regarding the design was almost identical.  I don't think it's fair to say that if they were allowed to make the game they wanted to make that it would have turned out as poorly as it did.  And keep in mind it was a very competent game it just seemed to have no soul.  Kinda of suggests a team of very talented developers that were not passionate about the game they were working on and I think there's a pretty damn obvious reason WHY they would have no passion for it.