-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Jimquisition (April 25, 2016) - Newtendo
- Thread starter L~A
- Start date
What a great argument; surely you're proud of it.
DownGrader
Member
You can invert X axis controls in the pause menu, although at this point it's probably better for you to stick with it.
James Scott
Banned
Well, if VR takes off that's Gyro controls.
Do people just have awful motor control paired with a hardwired hatred of anything new? The latter is definitely true in most things, but I'm still stunned to see the reactions to anything that involves the ability to move your wrists in a precise way.
It's like the early reactions to basic motion controls all over - while you get bad shit like waggle, done well motion control is fantastic and far better than analogue sticks for precision.
It's like the early reactions to basic motion controls all over - while you get bad shit like waggle, done well motion control is fantastic and far better than analogue sticks for precision.
not at all! for me at least lol
Alright, i'll bite.
Before you get banned, explain how.
Walk me through the explanation for why motion controls are harder for fat people.
Also I don't necessarily disagree with Jim on the premise of "Nintendo doing Nintendo things for Nintendo's sake", but Zero is very much a playable game with the motion controls.
Lair actually patched in analog controls and it's not too bad a game anymore.
Wowfunhappy
Member
That's not the point as I see it.
The problem is that people have trouble adapting to new control schemes. A new control system may well be better than the common one, but we dislike it because it's not what we're used to.
A Link to the Past
Banned
lol, is this what the discussion has come to? When you cannot dispute a point, attack the person making it?
Zomba13
Member
Agree about the attention split between gamepad and TV (where neither one gives you enough to be used on its own) but I never had an issue with the calibration or the chicken mode.
The calibration is on a button and it's simple enough to just "neutral position" you tilt and press the button and then be back to comfortable aiming in no time. Now, whether that is acceptable at all depends on who you are, but I found just pressing a button to recentre was fine, same with how it was in Skyward Sword.
Chicken wasn't as good as flying but it was fine. And the Gyrowing was just boring and slow as fuck and the exact opposite of what I want in a Star Fox game.
The worst bit for me is definitely the TV crosshair not being aligned for the TV view, instead just being aligned for the cockpit view on an entirely different screen. That is just stupid and prevents you from being able to play entirely like a classic SF game but with more accurate shots thanks to the motion aiming (apart from the times it forced the TV view into an all range lock on thing where you circle around something).
The calibration is on a button and it's simple enough to just "neutral position" you tilt and press the button and then be back to comfortable aiming in no time. Now, whether that is acceptable at all depends on who you are, but I found just pressing a button to recentre was fine, same with how it was in Skyward Sword.
Chicken wasn't as good as flying but it was fine. And the Gyrowing was just boring and slow as fuck and the exact opposite of what I want in a Star Fox game.
The worst bit for me is definitely the TV crosshair not being aligned for the TV view, instead just being aligned for the cockpit view on an entirely different screen. That is just stupid and prevents you from being able to play entirely like a classic SF game but with more accurate shots thanks to the motion aiming (apart from the times it forced the TV view into an all range lock on thing where you circle around something).
NOLA_Gaffer
Banned
Holy shit dude.
Candescence
Member
Wait, what? Have you not played a Star Fox game before Zero came out? Everything listed is standard fare for a Star Fox game, but it only works with a regular gamepad if you tie aiming to the ship's angle of movement. Once you make the movement and aiming independent, you can't make it work with dual-analog without forcing the player to use vital functions without being able to aim. Zero's gyro setup completely avoids this problem in a beautifully elegant fashion by not having to move your fingers and thumbs away from the sticks and triggers, the only exception being the transform button, which doesn't interfere with aiming anyway since you're essentially locked out of shooting for a short time while the transformation happens.
Hindsight is 20/20. Mario 64 took time to get used to also.
I grew up in the 80's and I suck at all dual analog shooters. COD:BOWii, I was a boss at tho. The Wii controls on shooters was just so fucking good, DA users complained so much at wiimote users, KB/M I am fantastic at also but DA is just too imprecise for me.
Vampirolol
Member
But that will be fine for most people 'cause marketing aimed to hardcore.
James Scott
Banned
I think a lot of the problems come from it being a very different control scheme from what people know and they do have a bit of a learning curve. Negative first impressions from e3 (the controls have been altered since then based on what I've heard) and unverifiable rumors of NoE trying to get the game delayed because it was broken didn't help people want to adapt to it.
I'm pretty used to gyro by now. Been a fan since Wii Sports Resort so with that mindset I went into Skyward Sword and Star Fox Zero thinking that gyro is usually fun to use and I ended up loving both.
I'm pretty used to gyro by now. Been a fan since Wii Sports Resort so with that mindset I went into Skyward Sword and Star Fox Zero thinking that gyro is usually fun to use and I ended up loving both.
A lot of the focus in this thread is on the controls, but I think the bigger picture here is his point about Nintendo overhauling games that don't need it just for the sake of "innovation". I haven't played Star Fox Zero yet, so I can't speak for it in this case, but I do know that Nintendo has a tendency to drastically change things up, whether it's for better or worse.
Take a look at Paper Mario. We had 2 games in that series that followed the usual RPG format. Then they drastically changed it up for Super Paper Mario. I can't speak for that game, because I haven't played it, but response is generally decent for it. Then you have Sticker Star, which Miyamoto stepped in and gave input like:
Did the Paper Mario series need an overhaul? Not at all. Yet that's what we got, for some reason. Twice, I guess (unsure on how "overhauled" SPM was).
Back to Star Fox, Jim's right on this - the series didn't need any sort of overhaul. There were 4 games total before SFZ. The series hasn't been done to death, and it has easily identifiable potential in the formula that already existed. Again ,haven't played SFZ yet so I can't say anything about it (except I'm really disappointed that they're rehashing the same story AGAIN).
I'd have loved to see a Star Fox game with the classic Arwing missions combined with new on-foot stuff, but instead of doing it like Assault did (a game I loved, mind you, but the on-foot stuff was poorly controlled), you have it control in a more polished way. Think Ratchet and Clank style for Star Fox on-foot.
Anyway, Nintendo has been great over the years for creating new experiences for us. Look at Splatoon, that's fantastic. But not every series needs to be revamped. Some do! But not all.
Take a look at Paper Mario. We had 2 games in that series that followed the usual RPG format. Then they drastically changed it up for Super Paper Mario. I can't speak for that game, because I haven't played it, but response is generally decent for it. Then you have Sticker Star, which Miyamoto stepped in and gave input like:
- Remove RPG elements like levelling up and gaining experience from battles
- Remove plot, who needs plot
- Only use characters from the Mushroom Kingdom. No originality allowed, please.
- Please, no world to explore. Just give them a map to travel on.
Did the Paper Mario series need an overhaul? Not at all. Yet that's what we got, for some reason. Twice, I guess (unsure on how "overhauled" SPM was).
Back to Star Fox, Jim's right on this - the series didn't need any sort of overhaul. There were 4 games total before SFZ. The series hasn't been done to death, and it has easily identifiable potential in the formula that already existed. Again ,haven't played SFZ yet so I can't say anything about it (except I'm really disappointed that they're rehashing the same story AGAIN).
I'd have loved to see a Star Fox game with the classic Arwing missions combined with new on-foot stuff, but instead of doing it like Assault did (a game I loved, mind you, but the on-foot stuff was poorly controlled), you have it control in a more polished way. Think Ratchet and Clank style for Star Fox on-foot.
Anyway, Nintendo has been great over the years for creating new experiences for us. Look at Splatoon, that's fantastic. But not every series needs to be revamped. Some do! But not all.
A Link to the Past
Banned
The worst thing about exploration in Sticker Star is that you kind of need to do it, but only to find what are essentially keys to make progress that you probably forgot about long ago.
Jim uses motion in Splatoon, so no, I don't think that people are shitting on motion controls full-stop.
Jim uses motion in Splatoon, so no, I don't think that people are shitting on motion controls full-stop.
SmartWaffles
Member
Ugh it's too late my mind is not THAT clear. What I meant is the current control scheme takes consideration of the existence of motion control, if we want to see a non-motion control scheme with all the basic Star Fox functions, the lack of motion control has to be taken into account as well.
Well I think I should take some sleep and come back to this later.
digita1alchemy
Member
I've been too busy playing the game to read every negative review of it, but what exactly is supposed to be "bad" about Star Fox Zero's controls? The game is designed tightly around them, and mastering the controls allows you to play the game at a very high level. To me, that is the definition of good controls, especially in an action game. Are people complaining because they have to practice to become good using the controls? That in and of itself doesn't make them bad.
Maintenance
Member
Good, he was also right about KIU's control scheme being shit.
Zombie James
Banned
Jim's on a fucking roll. I haven't played the new Star Fox but I completely agree with everything he said about motion controls and Nintendo's stubbornness around just giving people what they want.
Star Fox is another example of Nintendo just not getting it and just adds to the worry that they never will get it.
Star Fox is another example of Nintendo just not getting it and just adds to the worry that they never will get it.
James Scott
Banned
Wanting a Ratchet and Clank style segments is definitely a overhaul/revamp.
And I definitely think Star Fox needed some change.
A classic SF64 styled game wouldn't sell, and all the experiments since then have been worse.
SF0 is the best game in the series
Pro from Dover
Member
Haha yeah I saw that. And yes, I'm totally sticking with it.
Why? I want to control the plane like a plane.
Something did occur to me about the controls though...
When playing it, we need to ask:
How must we sit?
How do we wish to sit?
and
How are we able to sit?
I think, honestly, that certain body types will be hindered.
I agree with the idea that innovation shouldn't be done for innovation's sake, but as I explained at length in detailed posts on previous pages, Zero is a case where the innovation actually works.
The setup here dramatically expands the scope of what's possible while sharply increasing your spatial awareness, speed and precision. This is a case where the setup is 100% justified by the new gameplay it enables and the scenarios built around that new gameplay, and by how fun and addictive it is once learned.
Just like there was a learning curve to dual-analog, tank controls, command inputs, KBM, etc, so too is there a learning curve here, and one that is worth mastering. And again, I say this as someone who had no hype going in, and who was vocally critical of the idea before I played it.
The setup here dramatically expands the scope of what's possible while sharply increasing your spatial awareness, speed and precision. This is a case where the setup is 100% justified by the new gameplay it enables and the scenarios built around that new gameplay, and by how fun and addictive it is once learned.
Just like there was a learning curve to dual-analog, tank controls, command inputs, KBM, etc, so too is there a learning curve here, and one that is worth mastering. And again, I say this as someone who had no hype going in, and who was vocally critical of the idea before I played it.
Davey Cakes
Member
To be honest I'm more worried about the continued inability of people to adapt to something new.
Vampirolol
Member
The reason is precisely that one. Controls are hard to master, and will take practice, just like I did with Bayonetta and Dark Souls but those are fine because... I don't know. Maybe when you have motion controls it's just easier to say "was it hard to make it the good old way?" even though the game is designed around this control scheme.
NinjaCoachZ
Member
Eh.. while opposing something on principle is one thing, it seems a bit unfair to immediately discard an individual game without even playing it, when the general reaction to the controls is divisive at worst.
A Link to the Past
Banned
People don't like the idea of having to adapt to unfun. Has Nintendo done good changes? Yeah, look at A Link Between Worlds. But they've done a LOT of divisive ones, some that are inevitably going to be unfun for many.
Well, with regard to Star Fox, I was talking overhaul in controls as opposed to the game itself. But you're right, it wouldn't be an easy thing to just throw in. I'd see it as more of an addition than a revamp to gameplay, however.
People like change if it's fun and/or makes sense. Change for the simple sake of change is usually a bad idea.
Yeah I will say I agree with the overall point about Nintendo's innovation for innovation's sake policy. I don't particularly love SF0's Arwing controls but I don't hate them either. They're fine, they're serviceable. Not really something the series needed to go on a 10 year hiatus for though.
This is a case where the game is tons of fun once you adapt. You have to acclimate to the setup in order to fully engage all of the scenarios that would be impossible without it. When it clicks, it clicks big time. It's the fastest, most fluid and intense Star Fox ever.
Zomba13
Member
I stand by the idea of implementing motion controls (with the ability to turn them off) is the right way to go. With motion aiming you get more precision than a stick and you can do small little movements and then big wide movements all very quickly and accurately without needing to take into account analogue stick sensitivity and acceleration.
Now, where SF0 fucked up was by 1) giving you inaccurate cross-hairs on the TV (as in calibrated to the cockpit view and not the view of the camera behind the ship) and 2) forcing you to take your eyes off the screen and look at the gamepad for accurate shots. This doesn't work because each screen gives you half of the puzzle, the TV has the situational awareness you need in an on-rails shooter to dodge obstacles, shots and see enemies chasing you while the gamepad gives you the accurate cross-hairs which are needed to shoot stuff with accuracy, a big part of these kinds of games.
The easy fix for 90% of the game would be to just make the on-screen cross-hairs calibrated to the TV camera view. That way you can play most of the game no problem on the TV screen alone and still have the motion benefits of better aiming.
Now, where SF0 fucked up was by 1) giving you inaccurate cross-hairs on the TV (as in calibrated to the cockpit view and not the view of the camera behind the ship) and 2) forcing you to take your eyes off the screen and look at the gamepad for accurate shots. This doesn't work because each screen gives you half of the puzzle, the TV has the situational awareness you need in an on-rails shooter to dodge obstacles, shots and see enemies chasing you while the gamepad gives you the accurate cross-hairs which are needed to shoot stuff with accuracy, a big part of these kinds of games.
The easy fix for 90% of the game would be to just make the on-screen cross-hairs calibrated to the TV camera view. That way you can play most of the game no problem on the TV screen alone and still have the motion benefits of better aiming.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Some things Star Fox Zero could have done:
A big multi-player VS. mode with a lot of ways to play it (1V1, team vs. team, survival, co-op, in Arwings, in Landmasters, etc.)
Sakurai-style achievements (ie, a huge grid that you gain hints to what to do next as you clear achievements)
Customizable vehicles
Level creator
Would it be that strange though? After all, Star Fox has had two on-foot games.
A big multi-player VS. mode with a lot of ways to play it (1V1, team vs. team, survival, co-op, in Arwings, in Landmasters, etc.)
Sakurai-style achievements (ie, a huge grid that you gain hints to what to do next as you clear achievements)
Customizable vehicles
Level creator
Would it be that strange though? After all, Star Fox has had two on-foot games.
Davey Cakes
Member
Fun is entirely subjective.
"Git gud" is a legitimate defense of Dark Souls, after all. Does everyone find that game's approach of "kill you until you're good enough not to die" fun? Absolutely not.
Yet, it's one of the most celebrated series in gaming.
Having to get better at something is only acceptable if it's unrelated to the input method, apparently.
But how would people know if that change actually was more fun and/or makes sense unless they go and make that change, and see it for themselves?
And sometimes a change takes time to click. You have 20+ years of conditioning on how Star Fox used to play. Of course out of the gate people are going to find the new controls inferior.
And some people are just going to be naturally resistant to change and will lash out regardless of how much sense it might make.
I think the controls in SF0 are serviceable at worst, and actually pretty enjoyable at best. It's not a change that needed to be made, but I don't fault them for taking a chance on it.
NOLA_Gaffer
Banned
If Star Fox Zero is Nintendo "not getting it" I hope they never get it.
It's fine to dislike the control scheme in this, or Splatoon, or Kid Icarus Uprising, or any of Nintendo's recent "experimental" titles. You're more than welcome to that opinion.
But I'd much rather Nintendo experiment and try new things rather than stay rigid and remake the same games over and over with shinier graphics forever.
James Scott
Banned
I agree that change for the sake of change isn't always good with Sticker Star just being bad game design.
Though being gameplay focused franchises they need to change up somewhat to keep selling and experimenting isn't always bad.
The new Zeldas strive to change the formula resulting in LBW and the new Zelda game
Giving options in a game like this would limit the potential game design which would negate the need for such controls.
Though being gameplay focused franchises they need to change up somewhat to keep selling and experimenting isn't always bad.
The new Zeldas strive to change the formula resulting in LBW and the new Zelda game
Giving options in a game like this would limit the potential game design which would negate the need for such controls.
Daria Morgendorffer
Member
I still can't play first person shooters with dual analogue sticks, they really aren't intuitive to me, but that doesn't mean the controls are bad, learning how to play a game can be part of the experience.
LegendofLex
Member
If I were at Nintendo, I would've focused on three things with SFZ:
1) Gyro aiming controls that move independently from your ship
2) Tons of on-rails levels and all-range battles that make everything in SF64 feel obsolete
3) Making the Arwing Walker as perfect as possible to emulate the original vision for Star Fox 2
Nintendo somehow managed to drop the ball on every one of these points:
1) They went in way too hard with the cockpit view as the most precise way to aim, which isn't intuitive in intense combat situations
2) I haven't totally finished the game yet, but so far there are only 3-4 on-rails levels that I'd say stack up remotely favorably against SF64; even levels like Meteo which should have been a given were awful
3) The Arwing Walker is horribly flawed and the controls aren't intuitive at all, and the SF2-style infiltration stuff was barely (and often badly) implemented
And then on top of that they somehow thought the Meteo escort mission, Gyrowing, and Andross battle were good ideas.
1) Gyro aiming controls that move independently from your ship
2) Tons of on-rails levels and all-range battles that make everything in SF64 feel obsolete
3) Making the Arwing Walker as perfect as possible to emulate the original vision for Star Fox 2
Nintendo somehow managed to drop the ball on every one of these points:
1) They went in way too hard with the cockpit view as the most precise way to aim, which isn't intuitive in intense combat situations
2) I haven't totally finished the game yet, but so far there are only 3-4 on-rails levels that I'd say stack up remotely favorably against SF64; even levels like Meteo which should have been a given were awful
3) The Arwing Walker is horribly flawed and the controls aren't intuitive at all, and the SF2-style infiltration stuff was barely (and often badly) implemented
And then on top of that they somehow thought the Meteo escort mission, Gyrowing, and Andross battle were good ideas.
Agreed for sure. There were a lot of things that haven't even been done before in Star Fox that could've/should've been done.
Well, that's where I'm coming from initially. I think James' point is that Ratchet and Clank is clearly not thrown together, it'd be a vast amount of work to get that to a level of quality that would make people forget about the Assault on-foot levels. I still maintain that those levels weren't bad enough to ruin the whole game, but I'm mostly alone on that one.
It's really sad (imo) that people prefer to stick with dual sticks forever, even though motion controls have so much more potential if mastered.
I can remember when I first played Mario 64 when I was a kid. And guess what, I couldn't follow a path with the new controls. ^^ But it was exciting.
For me, getting used to motion controls is the same thing.
I can remember when I first played Mario 64 when I was a kid. And guess what, I couldn't follow a path with the new controls. ^^ But it was exciting.
For me, getting used to motion controls is the same thing.
Agreed. I'll never say to stop changing games. But there's a point where they seem to feel it needs to be done every time, vastly, and it happens to the detriment of some games. Like you and I have both said, Paper Mario Sticker Star is an example of changes not working out at all.
The iteration v innovation argument is a difficult one. Devs across the industry are bollocked for playing things safe, and there are many instances where attempts at innovation are branded as innovation for innovation's sake.
I don't think it's an easy balance to reach, and I suppose the argument could be made that Nintendo have failed to reach that balance more often that not recently.
I don't think it's an easy balance to reach, and I suppose the argument could be made that Nintendo have failed to reach that balance more often that not recently.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Because the items are consistently useful throughout the game, and do not have the same problem that TP had where an item had virtually no good use beyond the dungeon you find it in. I'd sooner not have one of the best things about ALBW ruined for no good reason.