By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Star Fox Zero controls....Easy peasy.

After all the controversy, I picked them up pretty quickly as well. I think the key here is that we played the training before jumping into the campaign.



Retro Tech Select - My Youtube channel. Covers throwback consumer electronics with a focus on "vid'ya games."

Latest Video: Top 12: Best Games on the N64 - Special Features, Episode 7

Around the Network
Mar1217 said:

Then why don't you go play Sector Omega ? 

That level must be my favourite, it's just insane! Dodging obstacles and kicking enemies' asses top-speed is really cool.

So, after getting all the gold trophies (it took me about 13 hours) and getting better with the controls I'm having a blast. It's really, really fun to play now. The game has grown for me a lot since I've first played it, so that's good I guess! Still dissapointed with the side missions. That's now my biggest complain.



cycycychris said:
Arlo said:
I'm glad that some people are cool with it. I've beaten it and am currently unlocking secret levels, and I think the game and its controls are absolute butt.

You going to make a review on the game?

Yeah, soon.  I'll give you the inside scoop:  It's going to be extremely critical.  This game is messed up for so many reasons even beyond the controls.



Similar complaints were made about Wonderful 101 and Kid Icarus Uprising, so I wasn't really too concerned about the criticism.

It seems that reviewers, and many gamers as well, just don't like dealing with new control schemes. This became abundantly clear with Bayonetta and Wonderful 101...

Wonderful 101 is incredibly similar to Bayonetta 2. It has the same combo system, rating system, a lot of the same mechanics (down to witch time, magic meter, stinger, rising attacks, etc. etc.). The games were of similar lengths and had a similar amount of extra content and unlockables. Only major difference, aside from aesthetics, was that Bayonetta 2 used a traditional heavy light attack system while Wonderful 101 decided to do something different that, after practice, gives the player far more options than in Bayonetta.

Both wonderful games, and somehow one is scored significantly higher than the other. Cause people don't like learning new things I guess.

I only played the demo of starfox, which seemed quite intuitive, so I can't tell if this is the case, but I'm happy with it so far.



Mar1217 said:

Yah ... it's obvious they could have done so much more with these missions :P

Yep, too much recycling. Though there was a side mission I really loved, because it was really epic XD. Not a fan of the rest.



Around the Network
Mar1217 said:
Volterra_90 said:

Yep, too much recycling. Though there was a side mission I really loved, because it was really epic XD. Not a fan of the rest.

Are you talking about that one with Peppy ? Barrel roll, barrel roll, BARELL ROLL !!

Oh, yeah, that was not a particulary outstanding level, but it was really, really funny because of that XDDD. No, I'm talking about this level:

When you fight against the giant bird again, but you have to lead it in front of the Great Fox to blast it to hell! It was pretty epic to work with the Great Fox as a team :P. Also, talking about funny, I chuckled a lot with the bird fight in the main missions, when Slippy said to Falco that it was his cousin. That was hilarious XD.



Jeez, that scared me. I had to scroll up and recheck the title because I thought I'd wandered into the "Passive Aggressive Complaining" thread by mistake.



JWeinCom said:
Similar complaints were made about Wonderful 101 and Kid Icarus Uprising, so I wasn't really too concerned about the criticism.

It seems that reviewers, and many gamers as well, just don't like dealing with new control schemes. This became abundantly clear with Bayonetta and Wonderful 101...

Wonderful 101 is incredibly similar to Bayonetta 2. It has the same combo system, rating system, a lot of the same mechanics (down to witch time, magic meter, stinger, rising attacks, etc. etc.). The games were of similar lengths and had a similar amount of extra content and unlockables. Only major difference, aside from aesthetics, was that Bayonetta 2 used a traditional heavy light attack system while Wonderful 101 decided to do something different that, after practice, gives the player far more options than in Bayonetta.

Both wonderful games, and somehow one is scored significantly higher than the other. Cause people don't like learning new things I guess.

I only played the demo of starfox, which seemed quite intuitive, so I can't tell if this is the case, but I'm happy with it so far.

W101 is way longer than Bayo 2.

In terms of content Star Fox Zero looks super barren. This game needs more free updates, Splatoon-like. More maps, more planets, more extra modes.



JWeinCom said:
Similar complaints were made about Wonderful 101 and Kid Icarus Uprising, so I wasn't really too concerned about the criticism.

It seems that reviewers, and many gamers as well, just don't like dealing with new control schemes. This became abundantly clear with Bayonetta and Wonderful 101...

Wonderful 101 is incredibly similar to Bayonetta 2. It has the same combo system, rating system, a lot of the same mechanics (down to witch time, magic meter, stinger, rising attacks, etc. etc.). The games were of similar lengths and had a similar amount of extra content and unlockables. Only major difference, aside from aesthetics, was that Bayonetta 2 used a traditional heavy light attack system while Wonderful 101 decided to do something different that, after practice, gives the player far more options than in Bayonetta.

Both wonderful games, and somehow one is scored significantly higher than the other. Cause people don't like learning new things I guess.

I only played the demo of starfox, which seemed quite intuitive, so I can't tell if this is the case, but I'm happy with it so far.

As someone who adores Bayonetta 2 and strongly dislikes Wonderful 101, controls and aesthetics both played a part, but weren't the only factors.

I'll come straight out and say I hated the control scheme, (drawing on the Pad didn't seem to register my shape properly half the time, drawing with the sticks felt slow and clumsy, and both kept breaking the flow of combat with awkward pauses) and despised the art style. (I don't mind cartoonish graphics when done well but W101 just looked tacky in my opinion)

But other presentational issues also presented significant hurdles. The fixed camera was often annoying, the framerate could dip south of 30fps, and my blows always felt impotent, with little sense of real impact.

But the single biggest fault with the game was the crowd system; it was just so confusing to look at both from a graphical and a gameplay point of view. All these little figures all jumping and swarming around made it way more difficult than it should've been to judge my position and hitboxes, and to read the battlefield at a glance. Plus having to run around and collect your stunned members after being hit was massively irritating.



curl-6 said:
JWeinCom said:
Similar complaints were made about Wonderful 101 and Kid Icarus Uprising, so I wasn't really too concerned about the criticism.

It seems that reviewers, and many gamers as well, just don't like dealing with new control schemes. This became abundantly clear with Bayonetta and Wonderful 101...

Wonderful 101 is incredibly similar to Bayonetta 2. It has the same combo system, rating system, a lot of the same mechanics (down to witch time, magic meter, stinger, rising attacks, etc. etc.). The games were of similar lengths and had a similar amount of extra content and unlockables. Only major difference, aside from aesthetics, was that Bayonetta 2 used a traditional heavy light attack system while Wonderful 101 decided to do something different that, after practice, gives the player far more options than in Bayonetta.

Both wonderful games, and somehow one is scored significantly higher than the other. Cause people don't like learning new things I guess.

I only played the demo of starfox, which seemed quite intuitive, so I can't tell if this is the case, but I'm happy with it so far.

As someone who adores Bayonetta 2 and strongly dislikes Wonderful 101, controls and aesthetics both played a part, but weren't the only factors.

I'll come straight out and say I hated the control scheme, (drawing on the Pad didn't seem to register my shape properly half the time, drawing with the sticks felt slow and clumsy, and both kept breaking the flow of combat with awkward pauses) and despised the art style. (I don't mind cartoonish graphics when done well but W101 just looked tacky in my opinion)

But other presentational issues also presented significant hurdles. The fixed camera was often annoying, the framerate could dip south of 30fps, and my blows always felt impotent, with little sense of real impact.

But the single biggest fault with the game was the crowd system; it was just so confusing to look at both from a graphical and a gameplay point of view. All these little figures all jumping and swarming around made it way more difficult than it should've been to judge my position and hitboxes, and to read the battlefield at a glance. Plus having to run around and collect your stunned members after being hit was massively irritating.

Those could have been your issues, but I didn't see those cited very often in reviews.   

The tacky look was intentional.  It's meant to look like action figures, which is why characters come in capsules.  The whole thing has a kid playing with his toys kind of vibe to it, which isn't quite cartoony.    It looked pretty much exactly as it should have whether you like that style or not.

If your blows felt impotent, then that was a problem on your end.  There are obvious physical cues, and compared to Bayonetta 2, you probably do more damage per attack.  The impact also depends on how big you make your weapon.  I can't see anyone feeling the attacks were impotent once you got a good combo going.  Especially if we're comparing this to Bayonetta, where against any reasonably strong enemy you need witch time or climax to really dent any moderately strong bosses.  If you liked Bayonetta 1 (where the default weapons do virtually no hitstun and even the shotguns won't really impact anything about a basic enemy), the issue was even more pronounced there.  

I agree with the camera.  There are certain parts where it was a pain.  Not often enough to really ruin my experience, but it did happen.

The rest of what you're talking about falls into the category of controls, and is pretty similar to what people are saying about star fox with how you have to pay attention to multiple things at once.  It's definitely more complex than traditional light/heavy system that Bayonetta uses, and it's definitely more confusing at first.  It also undoubtedly gives you more options in combat.  You have access to all of your weapons at any given time, and can switch between all of them in mid combo.  You can also send off chunks of your team to do support attacks for you, and of course there are things like recovering fallen squadmates, picking up and throwing enemies, stunning them with Pikminish attacks, etc.  

So that kind of goes with my point that some people prefer familiar systems.  And that's fine, but I much prefer mastering something new, which is why I enjoyed 101 more than Bayonetta 2.  And that's why I figured I'd probably like Star Fox's controls even if reviews were panning them.