Wii U basically averages two "big" games a year.

[midrange]

Goodnightmoon said:

midrange said:

It's big in name alone and that's it. It's budget doesn't seem big, the graphics are awful, the gameplay doesn't seem new, etc. People just like to call it a big game to add it to the list of 'big' wii u games

Bullshit

Star Fox is big because the last real Star Fox sold 4 milions and it was universally praised as one of the best action games ever made, to say that the game is not big because the graphics is absurd, and to say that is not big because it plays similar is just stupid, the vast majority of big games this days does nothing new at all.  And if games with not extremely big budgets are not big, then I guess New Super Mario Bros is not big at all despite having sold more than 70 milions of copies with only 4 non-multiplatform games.

Soooo...... Star fox zero is gonna be big because the last one was big? Isn't that what I said, it is big on name alone.

You provided no real reason as to why star fox zero will be big. The graphics aren't impressive not is the gameplay impressive nor does the budget seem promising not does the development time of the game seem promising. The game might not be bad, but there is really nothing to distinguish it as a 'big' title.

New super mario bros wii introduced local multiplayer to mario. New super mario was a stellar and unique ds platformer that revived 2d mario games. Both also had decent budgets while having the benefit of the company's mascot.

everything goes back to how you define big. But star fox zero is definitely not one in my book as it portrays nothing unique or noticeable about the development, marketing, or the game itself