Topic: Is Retro Working on Star Fox Wii U?

[GoldenPhoenix]

I had a lot of fun with DKCR. The controls would have been better without the waggle roll but they worked pretty well. I beat every level of the game without the Homebrew patch. The areas I had trouble with had nothing to do with the controls. Rather, jumping on the tires and and timing jumps made me want to haymaker a basket of kittens. In that instance, it's not the control's fault that I suck at videogames.

Anyway, I think Star Fox is better suited as a downloadable title. Keep Fox in the Arwing. Taking Fox out and into grind missions makes it an entirely different game. Retro Studios or whatever company handling Star Fox could easily just make an entirely new IP and really go nuts with it, instead of making half a Star Fox game. I mean, I get it in terms of marketing but in terms of artistic integrity, I really don't get it. It's a shame that Nintendo doesn't have enough faith in themselves (anymore?) to establish new IPs based on just great ideas. To me, I don't get it because what made Nintendo into the company they are today was their ability to create classic characters. Don't stop making Mario and Star Fox but not every great idea had to be retro-fitted to be part of those franchises.

Couldn't it be argued that they created new characters out of necessity, since the SNES there really hasn't been many classic characters created. There have been plenty of new franchises, but recognizable characters? Not so much. I mean look at Smash Bros., besides the Pikmin theme, virtually all the franchise characters are from the NES/SNES/GB days and older.

[NWR_DrewMG]

I reviewed DKCR at a 9/10 and I stand by that review.  It was an incredible joy to play through that game.  My only regret was I needed to sell it to get my 3DS at launch. 

[Luigi Dude]

It's a shame that Nintendo doesn't have enough faith in themselves (anymore?) to establish new IPs based on just great ideas. To me, I don't get it because what made Nintendo into the company they are today was their ability to create classic characters. Don't stop making Mario and Star Fox but not every great idea had to be retro-fitted to be part of those franchises.

Looks like I need to post the list, AGAIN.


Legend of Starfy
Drill Dozer
Rhythm Heaven
The bit Generations series
Band Brothers
Nintendogs
Ouendan/Elite Beat Agents
Polarium
Another Code
Electroplankton
Jump Super Stars
Magnetica
Brain Training
Big Brain Academy
Magical Starsign
Hotel Dusk
ASH: Archaic Sealed Heat
Soma Bringer
Fossil Fighters
Style Savvy
Tomodachi Collection
Geist
Chibi-Robo
Odama
Endless Ocean
Captain Rainbow
Disaster: Day of Crisis
Tact of Magic
Zangeki no Reginleiv
FlingSmash
Xenoblade
The Last Story
Pandora's Tower
Steel Diver
Pushmo
Sakura Samurai
Dillon's Rolling Western




Once again, Nintendo still makes a lot of new IP's.  Just because some of you don't like some of these games doesn't change the fact they're new IP's Nintendo has made in the last decade.

[Adrock]

Couldn't it be argued that they created new characters out of necessity, since the SNES there really hasn't been many classic characters created. There have been plenty of new franchises, but recognizable characters? Not so much. I mean look at Smash Bros., besides the Pikmin theme, virtually all the franchise characters are from the NES/SNES/GB days and older.

Not necessarily. Couldn't the original Star Fox have just been Spaceship Mario? I feel like that's the difference between pre-N64 Nintendo and post-N64 Nintendo. Today's Nintendo is far more apprehensive about releasing a game based on a great new idea without slapping an existing IP on top of it (i.e. Epic Yarn). If Star Fox had come out today, there's a chance it would have been a Mario game. It might be a safer bet in the market but it constricts creativity. There's significantly more artistic freedom in creating something brand new.

Star Fox with ground missions? Why? Just make a Star Fox game. I'm not saying it can't work but there's no need to reinvent the wheel. Let Star Fox be Star Fox. I feel like the series' main issues arose when developers strayed from what the first 2 games were all about. Focus on what made the series so great in the first place. It's a mostly on rails shooter. Stop trying to make it into something it's not. Like I said, don't make half a Star Fox game and shoehorn ideas that don't really work. Those ideas for ground missions could easily evolve into an entire game built around those concepts.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not railing against sequels and demanding new IPs. Rather, I'm advocating the idea that Nintendo stay true to a series. Every franchise must evolve or else risk becoming stale but sometimes the ideas don't make sense. That doesn't mean they toss those ideas out. Instead, save them for when it does.

Looks like I need to post the list, AGAIN.

No, you really don't. I'm aware that Nintendo has created new IPs so your list is unnecessary.

Don't stop making Mario and Star Fox but not every great idea had to be retro-fitted to be part of those franchises.

This is what I'm specifically taking about. Forcing ideas that don't really make sense or changing an entire game to be part of an established series (i.e. Dinosaur Planet into Star Fox) damages the brand and the game.

[Ian Sane]

Maybe I should specify that I want new IP from Nintendo that is actually, you know, GOOD and is actually released in North America.  I don't give a **** if Steel Diver is new.  It sucks.  Pikmin is the usual go-to example because it's comparible in quality to Nintendo's big guns.  It's also by EAD and Miyamoto.  It's not some fringe dev NCL owns that never gets games released outside of Japan.  It's Nintendo big guns making something new instead of sticking to Mario and Zelda the whole time.

Realistically Nintendo could have just re-used Mario, Samus and Link for everything.  Mario for present day stuff, Samus for futuristic/space stuff, and Link for fantasy stuff.  But they didn't and we all benefitted from it.  Nintendo could have easily told Rare to make Banjo-Kazooie a Donkey Kong game or Jet Force Gemini into Metroid 64.  They didn't because back then they took more risks.

It's Iwata's reign that is more cookie cutter.  I noticed the change partially through the Gamecube's life when Nintendo did that "Who are you?" marketing campaign.  The earlier Gamecube titles would have been greenlit when Yamauchi was still in charge.

You can argue that Nintendo HAD to create new IP early on but really what you're saying is that now they're resting on the laurels and that's okay.  So instead of Nintendo being creative for the sake of creating interesting and innovative games, they do so only because of necessity?

[King of Twitch]

They think that flying around in a spaceship has somehow become boring to people? I don't get it. What the heck has happened to video games these days.

[GoldenPhoenix]

You can argue that Nintendo HAD to create new IP early on but really what you're saying is that now they're resting on the laurels and that's okay. 

No what is being said is that this is hardly a new phenomena with Wii, and has dated back to the N64 days. I don't think anyone has said they aren't interested in new IPs and characters.

[NWR_insanolord]

As long as they're bringing new ideas to the table in terms of gameplay, I don't particularly care if they shoehorn them into existing franchises. Storytelling and world building have never been Nintendo's strong suit, and if they want to bypass that and just come up with new gameplay mechanics I'm okay with that.

[Adrock]

I'd appreciate some discretion. Not all new ideas are good ideas, especially within the confines of an existing property. Add them where appropriate. Storytelling and world building may not be Nintendo's strong suit but they're not going to get better unless they try to make them better.

[Ceric]

The only reason I like to see a WiiU Star Fox (or F-Zero for that matter) instead of a portable one is if the graphics made me seriously believe that I was really just remotely controlling someone really in space.  At that point I would like a Last Starfighter Homage level and for no point where I'm in control to not include a vehicle.

[Ian Sane]

Really what I don't want from Nintendo is mere product.  The numerous Mario sports games are mere product.  They release them for a quick buck.  Same with the incremental Animal Crossing updates, virtually any Pokemon game beyond the main series and stuff like Link's Crossbow Training.  The goal of those titles seems to be to merely get some product out to sell.

Games are a creative medium which arguably makes them art.  The best games are the ones where the creators clearly seemed passionate about their work.  For a creative person the ability to use that creativity is stimulating.  That results in a better game and that passion is noticeable in the game itself.  The big problem with a company like EA or Activision is that there is no passion in most of their games.  The dev team is assigned to make some safe conventional game designed by boardroom executives.  There is little freedom for the team to use their creativity.  The result is merely videogame product.

Nintendo has become a little too much like EA in that regard.  When Iwata or Miyamoto say "make another Mario baseball game" how the hell do the developers motivate themselves?  They're limited in their creativity so the process of creating the game is less stimulating and there is less passion.  I doubt it was a coincedence that Star Fox Adventures was so "bleh".  How would you feel if you had this original game in the works and then the bossman says "hey shoehorn in this existing franchise because we think it will sell better"?  This is no longer your creative work, it's just a product, and that comes across in the resulting game.

One thing I love about Super Mario Galaxy is that it feels like there was passion in the game design and why wouldn't there be?  This is the cutting edge for Mario.  It's trying a new way to do 3D Mario and pushing the whole 3D platformer genre forwad.  SMG2 is kind of cookie cutter but Nintendo said that it came about because of ideas for SMG1 that didn't fit.  I actually believe that because the sequel has much of the same passion.  NSMB Wii in comparison feels more like product.  It's good and polished but it doesn't push the genre at all.  It's a very safe game that seems like it was designed by executives.  The whole big unique element of it is the multiplayer and that actually feels sloppy like it was tossed in at the last minute because the suits demanded it be a four player game.

I want Nintendo to encourage creativity because it results in better games.  They still should have some corporate involvement because I don't expect them to make anything unmarketable.  They had this balance pretty good in pre-Iwata days.  On the N64 in particular it seems like every game was a go-for-broke ambitious title.  And they didn't go broke.  They don't have to be so safe.

I question how long Retro can stay motivated if they are just assigned IP by Nintendo.  They're clearly creative guys and that's why I want them to have the chance to fully explore that.  Getting to make major games like Metroid Prime still allows for a fair bit of creativity but making tracks for Mario Kart?  If you were just being brought in to help with someone else's game, eventually it would become "just a job" for you.  If Nintendo just lets their devs flex their creative muscles a bit more, they'll make better games.

[Adrock]

The numerous Mario sports games are mere product.  They release them for a quick buck.

I don't really mind them since those are the games they wanted to make. They weren't different games that the developers presented to Nintendo and then Nintendo told them to put Mario in them. From the outset, Nintendo wanted sports games with Mario characters and themes in them. There's a distinct difference there. The game is built around the Mario franchise so creativity springs from it rather than trying to make something unrelated into a Mario game. And they're still fun. Mario Strikers is a super fun game.

My hope for Star Fox whether or not Retro Studios handles the game is that the Star Fox part is done flawlessly. It better be so amazing that it makes up for the shortcomings of Adventures, Assault, and Command combined. I don't think they really need to throw in ground missions that neither fit the series nor work as well as the actual on-rails part. It reminds me of how Sega kept coming up with reasons to slow Sonic down in 3D Sonic games when all anyone wants to do is run really fast. Games like Sonic Unleashed are full of filler. I'd hate to see that happen with Star Fox. If the next Star Fox title ends up being a 3 hour game that took a year to develop, so be it. Don't spend more time, money and resources making it a worse game. If it's the best damn Star Fox game ever, isn't that worth it artistically and monetarily? It could easily be a downloadable game which Nintendo sells for less because they spent less on development.

[Ceric]

I tend to find it liberating to be in a box.  If Nintendo told me today to make a new franchise I be easily overwhelmed.  If they instead told me to make a new Ice Climbers I have a rough framework for my creativity to latch on to and grow.

I personally hate when people come to me with solutions to implement make me nothing more then a factory worker putting a cog on a doo-hicky.  I much prefer people coming to me with a problem to be solved.

[Adrock]

I was under the impression that new game ideas (like movies) are typically pitched rather than commissioned. It would be overwhelming if Nintendo aske someone to create something new and different.  99% of the time, however, Iwata or whoever is likely just giving them the green/red light. Or they're making them turn a game that Kirby has no business being in into a Kirby game...

[Ceric]

I was under the impression that new game ideas (like movies) are typically pitched rather than commissioned. It would be overwhelming if Nintendo aske someone to create something new and different.  99% of the time, however, Iwata or whoever is likely just giving them the green/red light. Or they're making them turn a game that Kirby has no business being in into a Kirby game...

By my understanding Franchise games tend to be commissioned.

[Adrock]

Of course. I meant, as in a new IP. For example, a designer comes up with an idea for a new game that's not an established franchise, he would have to pitch it to the higher ups for approval. This happens far more often than the higher ups approaching the designer to come up with something brand new.

[Ian Sane]

These aren't independent devs making pitches to publishers though.  They're Nintendo staff.  Nintendo expects them to always be working on something so once their current project is done, they're going to talk with Nintendo about what their next project is going to be.  In some cases Nintendo might ask the dev for ideas but for something like a Mario sports game they're probably saying "make us a new Mario sports game".  There is no way Retro approached Nintendo with a pitch to work on Mario Kart tracks.  They were assigned that.  Silicon Knights was assigned to port MGS to the Gamecube.  Rare never asked to make a James Bond game, they were assigned the project by Nintendo and by some miracle came up with one of the greatest games ever.

What Nintendo can do to encourage creativity is to discuss with the devs what ideas they have and greenlight one of those instead of saying "you work on this!"

[Luigi Dude]

These aren't independent devs making pitches to publishers though.  They're Nintendo staff.  Nintendo expects them to always be working on something so once their current project is done, they're going to talk with Nintendo about what their next project is going to be.  In some cases Nintendo might ask the dev for ideas but for something like a Mario sports game they're probably saying "make us a new Mario sports game".  There is no way Retro approached Nintendo with a pitch to work on Mario Kart tracks.  They were assigned that.  Silicon Knights was assigned to port MGS to the Gamecube.  Rare never asked to make a James Bond game, they were assigned the project by Nintendo and by some miracle came up with one of the greatest games ever.

What Nintendo can do to encourage creativity is to discuss with the devs what ideas they have and greenlight one of those instead of saying "you work on this!"

Only this isn't true at all.  Almost all the Mario Sports games are made by third parties who want to make the games.  This has been well documented in every interview possible.  Unlike what you think, a lot of studio's would love to use the Mario IP to make a game out of and actually contact Nintendo to use it.  The only Mario sports game that is made in house by Nintendo is Mario Kart which is why Mario Kart is the only Mario sports game that actually has a regular release on every console.  All the other Mario sports games appear whenever the third party studio who wants to make them feels like it.

Plus Retro's work on Mario Kart 7 just a small part of the company was used to help on that game while the rest is working on whatever the new Wii U game is, be it this rumored Star Fox or something else.  In the case of Donkey Kong Country Returns, Retro was asked if they wanted to work on a Donkey Kong game and they agreed.  Meaning they were given the choice if they wanted to do a Donkey Kong game or something else.  I'd imagine if they are indeed making a Star Fox game, they were given a choice if they wanted to do it.

Plus Silicon Knights was asked if they wanted to make the Metal Gear Solid remake and they happily agreed.  Just read the interview about that game and you'll see they were very excited to remake that game since many of the staff were huge fans.  And for Rare making James Bond, they were also very excited to make a James Bond game and most of the staff who made it publicly say they loved it.

Nintendo does give its developers choices and most of them are actually happy to work on the games they get.  Why else do you think Nintendo's been able to hold on to most of their top developers for the last 30 years, while other companies like Capcom, Konami and SquareEnix have lost almost all of their top developers over the years.

[Kairon]

Well, usually when you ask a third-party development studio if they'd like to make something, I bet they'd answer yes 95% of the time. It's work and they've got bills to pay, and I'd like to think that Nintendo is a very dependable publisher to work with when it comes to them paying you development invoices.

[Luigi Dude]

Well, usually when you ask a third-party development studio if they'd like to make something, I bet they'd answer yes 95% of the time. It's work and they've got bills to pay, and I'd like to think that Nintendo is a very dependable publisher to work with when it comes to them paying you development invoices.

No, it's the third parties that contact Nintendo.  Dance Dance Revolution with Mario was made because Konami came to Nintendo with the idea.  Mario Hoops and Sports Mix were made because SquareEnix got the idea and came to Nintendo with it.  Mario and Sonic at the Olympics was Sega's idea and they asked for permission to use Mario.  Almost all the other Mario sports games are the same way.

See that's the thing, most Mario games are the result of a third party wanting to use the Mario IP in a game and asking Nintendo if they can make it.

[Ian Sane]

I know in my job when my boss asks me if I want to work on something and I don't want to I always tell him that.  Oh wait, I'm not unemployed so I don't do that.  I instead say "yes" to literally everything asked of me and feign enthusiasm if it's not really there.  Silicon Knights could have been "asked" if they wanted to work on My Little Pony and they would have said "yes" because, um, they want employment.

I know third parties will ask to make some Mario spin-off because that's easy money.  I'm not denying that that is a safe hit.  I'm just asking Nintendo to make more of a conscious effort to be less cookie cutter.  It's good longterm planning anyway.  Someday everyone will be sick of Mario and no one wil care.  It will happen.  Every successful franchise Nintendo has at some point started as something completely brand new.  They have to eventually create the big franchises of tomorrow and that won't happen if they focus to much on Mario.

[Kytim89]

Please check this awesome Star Fox video:
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXLmDRwxAUU&feature=g-all-u