Topic: Star Fox Zero (Wii U) Review

[Soren]

The description of the controls sounds unappealing enough to me that it does not seem worth it to risk $60 on it, particularly when my personal experience with motion controls has been almost universally unpleasant.  If there was a demo then I would absolutely try it out.

This game wouldn't demo well at all. Also, it's $50 on the eShop.

[broodwars]

Yeah, regarding Star Fox 0's controls and motion controls in general, I'll just post this week's Jimquisition because I could not agree with it more:

[Khushrenada]

Ugh. You can stand watching/listening to that kind of stuff? I couldn't take that video after 4 minutes. It's just the same old jargon from complainers who want to whine about the controls but can hardly make any substantial reasons why from the game. I tapped out at the point where he started complaining about the chicken walker stating it controlled even worse or like ass while then moving on to complain about Miyamoto being allowed to use a new control scheme for the game. How does the walker control worse? What is so bad about it compared to the other vehicles? Why would the controls be worse for those sections than other sections? Who knows. The "reviewer" just wanted to mention the chicken walker and say it was crap to probably appease the fan base that actually watch these videos and who probably already feel that way about the game without actually playing it themselves and just want their non-factual opinions validated.

As a counter-point, I checked in on the site Pietriots today and was surprised to see some new articles there. One is on the current Star Fox Zero game and can be found here. Although it may have its own editorial slant just like the linked YouTube video above, at least it actually contains descriptions, examples, and real experiences to help you understand why the reviewer is positive on the game and the controls.


The fascinating thing I'm finding about this game is that although I've always planned to buy it at some point, I was going to wait for a potential sale or price drop down the road since $75.00 for a Star Fox game seems pretty pricey for games that traditionally don't take too long to beat. I know there are various replay factors like different paths or medals to collect but mileage on that varies and after playing through the story, it can be hard for me to keep playing for high scores. With Star Fox Command, once I unlocked all the endings, I was done with that game. With Assault, I started to play for some high scores but moved on to other games and let that quest drift away. As such, I'm a bit reserved about plunking down that much cash for Star Fox when it is the equivalent cost of Xenoblade Chronicles X which will give you a lot more bang for you buck.

However, this whole control controversy has me seriously considering paying for the game now just so that I can see what all the fuss is about and make up my own mind on the matter to see who's right. In the end, the motion controls are actually becoming the selling point after all. Plus, the Star Fox Guard game intrigues me as to how that all works and what it plays like. In the end, the motion controls are now my main interest in the game and they never were until the game released and the current debates on them started so well played Nintendo.

[mudjah]

Im confused about the first print edition.


What to do with all these cases. Use the metal one? Throw away the blue ones?

[broodwars]

Ugh. You can stand watching/listening to that kind of stuff? I couldn't take that video after 4 minutes. It's just the same old jargon from complainers who want to whine about the controls but can hardly make any substantial reasons why from the game. I tapped out at the point where he started complaining about the chicken walker stating it controlled even worse or like ass while then moving on to complain about Miyamoto being allowed to use a new control scheme for the game. How does the walker control worse? What is so bad about it compared to the other vehicles? Why would the controls be worse for those sections than other sections? Who knows. The "reviewer" just wanted to mention the chicken walker and say it was crap to probably appease the fan base that actually watch these videos and who probably already feel that way about the game without actually playing it themselves and just want their non-factual opinions validated.

Actually, that was just an editorial. This is his actual Star Fox 0 review: link (tldr: 2/10)

And no, I'm not a fan of Sterling, either. I actually find him an egotistical blowhard. However, much like the likes of Anita Sarkeesian and some on this site, I read/listen to his work even if I don't like it so I can be well-versed on the various aspects of current video game news.

[Khushrenada]

I'm sorry I clicked that link and gave that idiot some more traffic. The 2/10 was warning enough. Blowhard doesn't even come close. If that's the state of current video game news, no wonder this industry is in the state it is.

Out of curiousity, have you played Star Fox Zero yet, Broodwars? Just wondering since you say you aren't a fan of Sterling but linked the video stating you were in 100% agreement of it.

Reading that review just made me think of Roger Ebert. He was one of the best examples of a critic. I know he'd get vilified or mocked if his opinion on a movie seemed to differ from the majority but reading his reviews always gave you his reasons why and even if you disagreed, it could make you see things in a film you may have missed. He could give you that different perspective and you could understand where he was coming from and even appreciate his points. And when he was critical of a bomb of a movie, he could eviscerate or highlight its flaws without having to resort to such insufferable statements like Sterling's review of the game like "Star Fox Zero is a dumpster game for people who want to have a garbage time, and it belongs in the toilet." With that, the reviewer has given up all credibility to me for all-time. You can't trust someone willing to make such embellishments.

I wish the gaming industry had a voice like a Roger Ebert. However, unlike film which actually has fields that critique and discuss its art form, the videogame industry doesn't have that since it isn't regarded the same as being culturally enriching like movies, TV, or music. There's been a lot of discussion about the state of game journalism and reviewers these days and so much of it is tainted from all manner of things to bribes, personal prejudice or not even playing the product under review. Every review seems to be viewed as either a personal attack or personal confirmation of one's own views on the matter. The person is either attempting clickbait or is a fanboy. Yet, if video game criticism were able to find a way to become a serious and real endeavor, maybe it could find a voice like a Roger Ebert or other respected critics. If it could do that, maybe it would do away with a lot of the toxicity that clouds game reviews today and create something of value for gamers.

[Phil]

I think if Jim Sterling would get rid of his abrasive character, dressing up like a fool for his Jimquisitons, I could tolerate him more. Instead, THAT review belongs in a dumpster, not this game. I'm tired of snark, hyperbole, and bile being considered anything close to good journalism. It's tiring, it's childish, and it's about time the hobby evolved from pandering to idiots (though I am an idiot, I am of a different variety). I'm also tired of the peanut gallery who hasn't played and won't bother playing SFZ going "True. You tell 'em, Jim! Herp derp! LOLOLOLOLOLO"


Then again, I should just turn into that for my own site. Doing the opposite hasn't gotten me those easy clicks like it does with people of Sterling's ilk.

[broodwars]

Out of curiousity, have you played Star Fox Zero yet, Broodwars? Just wondering since you say you aren't a fan of Sterling but linked the video stating you were in 100% agreement of it.

No, I haven't, which is why I added "and motion controls in general". Plus, the video in general only uses Star Fox 0 as a stepping off point for a look at Nintendo's obsession with adding stupid gimmicks to their games just for the sake of having them, which I do whole-heartedly agree with. Considering his experience with the controls is pretty common across the board with critics and is pretty much my own experience with motion controls in other games, I doubt my experience would be much different than theirs.

If Nintendo finally sees reason and patches Star Fox 0 to add the option of playing with traditional controls, I'll pick the game up. Maybe I'll even give the gyro controls a try like I did Splatoon (though I didn't like them there, either). But I'm not wasting $50+ on a game I already know I'm not going to like because of how it plays, not after Kid Icarus Uprising.

[Phil]

Getting high scores is dependent on being able to look in different directions on the GamePad screen, particularly in on-rails stages. It's awesome seeing a foe leave the TV screen and being able to shoot them down from the GamePad screen.


Anyway, I don't feel this is an instance where unorthodox controls were thrown in just to be different. I feel they really add to the game experience. Obviously this is a point of contention between both players and those who have read impressions.

[Oedo]

Out of curiousity, have you played Star Fox Zero yet, Broodwars? Just wondering since you say you aren't a fan of Sterling but linked the video stating you were in 100% agreement of it.

No, I haven't, which is why I added "and motion controls in general". Plus, the video in general only uses Star Fox 0 as a stepping off point for a look at Nintendo's obsession with adding stupid gimmicks to their games just for the sake of having them, which I do whole-heartedly agree with. Considering his experience with the controls is pretty common across the board with critics and is pretty much my own experience with motion controls in other games, I doubt my experience would be much different than theirs.

If Nintendo finally sees reason and patches Star Fox 0 to add the option of playing with traditional controls, I'll pick the game up. Maybe I'll even give the gyro controls a try like I did Splatoon (though I didn't like them there, either). But I'm not wasting $50+ on a game I already know I'm not going to like because of how it plays, not after Kid Icarus Uprising.

If you don't like motion controls and avoid playing a game that relies heavily on them on principle, that's fine and I don't think people should be trying to convince you otherwise. But this whole "Miyamoto and Nintendo shoved these gimmicky controls in here just for the sake of having them" argument is baseless when it comes to Star Fox Zero. I've seen enough people say that the controls eventually felt better than they have in any other Star Fox game that I can't believe they were shoe-horned in here and had so many people like them by sheer coincidence. I know people often like to slam Nintendo and Miyamoto for stuff like this, but it's entirely possible that they put these controls in here because they genuinely thought it was the right choice for the game. Like I said, if you don't personally like motion controls in any capacity, that's cool, but to act like it's not even possible for motion controls to be a good design decision or the right idea for any game is an oversimplification. The world isn't as simple as "I don't like it and many other people don't like it so it's bad" or "this idea was bad in a lot of games, so it's going to be bad in every other game it appears in from here on out." Sometimes the right choice to make the game as good as it can be also ends up making it divisive.

I also don't get where this idea that the game is getting critically panned is coming from. There's basically one "positive" review for every negative one on Metacritic right now, and the majority of those are an 8/10 or higher. I know there was a discussion about review inflation in the other thread, but I can't see all these people giving out an 8+ to a game with bad controls.

[broodwars]

I find it very hard to believe that Platinum, a company renowned for their tight, responsive controls & near-flawless combat would think that tacked-on gyro controls was "the right choice" for Star Fox. For all my issues with Platinum's general failure as a company (for all the worship they receive, very few of their titles have been commercial successes) and the cult-like worship people have for them, the only games I can think of where their controls have been terrible have been on Nintendo consoles (Wonderful 101 & Star Fox Zero). That reeks to me of Nintendo interference. Hell, Team Ninja was generally known for excellent work as well before Nintendo stepped in had them produce Other M, which ALSO had a terrible control scheme for no real reason (among many other flaws). Miyamoto's never really gotten over the fact that motion controls died with the Wii, and they died because no one wanted them once the casuals went to mobile.

[Oedo]

My point wasn't that this was a decision made by Platinum and not Nintendo. The way they described Platinum's involvement in this and the way Miyamoto has talked about the game, they're pretty much on record as saying it was their decision. I didn't think that was really up for debate. My point is that it's possible that they genuinely thought it was the right choice (in other words, they didn't shove them in there "just for the sake of having them in there") and that these controls might have been in the right choice in reality as well. Nothing you've said so far has backed up the argument that the controls in Star Fox Zero are "terrible." If you're going to call the controls in Star Fox Zero terrible, then start talking about the controls in Star Fox Zero at some point. All you've done so far is trash Miyamoto's recent design philosophy, trash the motion controls in other games, and point to the half of the critics that might agree with you. All these things are tangentially related, but Star Fox Zero's controls ultimately stand on their own. If it was as easy as only looking at these factors to decide whether or not something is good, people wouldn't need to play games to actually review them.

[Enner]

Miyamoto's never really gotten over the fact that motion controls died with the Wii, and they died because no one wanted them once the casuals went to mobile.

You can't improve if you don't try.
And heck, I at least want to see them try.

[elanerobbi]

Is this going to be available on VR?


I watched the demos on YT.

[Phil]

Miyamoto's never really gotten over the fact that motion controls died with the Wii, and they died because no one wanted them once the casuals went to mobile.

This is blatantly untrue with the VR devices using motion controls as a control method. Then there's gyro usage that still gets action.

[Enner]

Miyamoto's never really gotten over the fact that motion controls died with the Wii, and they died because no one wanted them once the casuals went to mobile.

This is blatantly untrue with the VR devices using motion controls as a control method. Then there's gyro usage that still gets action.

in b4 "Like I said, NO ONE WANTED THEM (motion controls and VR)"

[broodwars]

Miyamoto's never really gotten over the fact that motion controls died with the Wii, and they died because no one wanted them once the casuals went to mobile.

This is blatantly untrue with the VR devices using motion controls as a control method. Then there's gyro usage that still gets action.

The new VR devices may support motion controllers, but we have had no sales data to support that anyone is buying or will buy them. The various VR companies are desperately chasing the Wii audience in a vain attempt to try to make lightning strike twice, but that doesn't mean motion control is actually successful again. I suspect that when VR fails this year (as it has before and likely will again, like 3D before it) due to having no compelling software; a high price tag/tech requirement; and there being no way to effectively market it, you'll see those much-vaunted motion controllers lining the bargain bins for years.

[Phil]

Miyamoto's never really gotten over the fact that motion controls died with the Wii, and they died because no one wanted them once the casuals went to mobile.

This is blatantly untrue with the VR devices using motion controls as a control method. Then there's gyro usage that still gets action.

The new VR devices may support motion controllers, but we have had no sales data to support that anyone is buying or will buy them. The various VR companies are desperately chasing the Wii audience in a vain attempt to try to make lightning strike twice, but that doesn't mean motion control is actually successful again. I suspect that when VR fails this year (as it has before and likely will again, like 3D before it) due to having no compelling software; a high price tag/tech requirement; and there being no way to effectively market it, you'll see those much-vaunted motion controllers lining the bargain bins for years.

Well see, I'm seeing so-called hardcore gamers and message board dwellers seem more interested in VR than the casual crowd. It's VR this, VR that, VR is a game-changer stuff on GAF and the like. While some VR devices are being catered towards the more casual of gamers, things like PSVR are heading straight towards those who play a lot of games. The pricing of the devices is hardly something I would say is for the casual anyway.

[pokepal148]