• 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.

Star Fox Zero |OT| The Fox Awakens

Theognosis

Member
May 30, 2014
1,655
44
385
Just played through it at my friend's house today. How can anyone even play with these controls? They seem fucking impossible. We played through the whole game in co-op and I controlled the Arwing while he did the shooting and the whole time we were both wondering how playing this game alone was even possible. His brother (who had bought and beaten it) watched us play and said "yeah I beat it with Nicole, I would never play this game by myself".

Out of curiosity I played a mission on my own and found it to be a total nightmare. Co-op was tolerable, but the camera was horrible. I kept feeling like my control was being taken away or challenged in bizarre ways, which I never felt in Star Fox 64.

The story was awful and doesn't get enough shit. Complete waste of time, didn't feel even a hint of emotional investment and honestly only four hours later I barely even remember it.

6/10. If they wanted to make a co-op Star Fox they should have given it a control scheme usable by humans and let P2 be Falco. I was wishing I was playing that the whole time I played this. As it is we saw the credits roll and after doing the secret mission on Corneria (his brother said it was cool) we both got frustrated and went back to Smash, which we played with Gamecube controllers. Had a good time.
I read that you enjoyed UC4 and gave it a 10/10. I happen to have "played" that game too while having dinner. The best B-movie I've seen in a long time. As a game, I give UC4 a generous 6/10.
 

goldenpp72

Member
Nov 29, 2005
14,344
327
1,585
Is there any benefit to beating the training mode stuff? Like are there any medals/trophies/unlocks or anything, or does it just jot down whatever you did? Just curious if I should put a lot of time in, I just started the game about 2 days ago and have 40 medals in the campaign.
 

Sami+

Member
May 2, 2013
10,666
1
0
Tallahassee
Summary: Don't try new ways of playing games.
VR is pretty cool actually! I tried the first prototype of the Rift a few years ago and was blown away, really excited to try it again. Me and my buddy actually talked about how cool a VR Star Fox could be while we played this one.

I read that you enjoyed UC4 and gave it a 10/10. I happen to have "played" that game too while having dinner. The best B-movie I've seen in a long time. As a game, I give UC4 a generous 6/10.
Oh no, truly you have wounded me. Please, take it back.
 

Simbabbad

Member
Nov 26, 2014
1,880
5
315
So I beat the adventure mode for the first time and I'm now trying to get medals and get into the arcade mode. Trying to figure out the scoring system, I read about shooting an already shot airship for a +1 and about charge unlocked shots (holding L and indirectly shooting enemies), and of course there is not letting your allies getting hit, but is there another main scoring method, I'm struggling to reach 300 in the first level? Does getting hit yourself, collectibles or time affect the score? I've watched videos, and I noticed a star/octagonal reticle, what does it mean? When I hold L it doesn't look like this?

 

Boem

Member
Jun 16, 2012
4,877
0
510
I read that you enjoyed UC4 and gave it a 10/10. I happen to have "played" that game too while having dinner. The best B-movie I've seen in a long time. As a game, I give UC4 a generous 6/10.
This seems like you're taking his opinion way too personally.
 

TheMoon

Member
Jul 1, 2014
21,766
5
415
So I beat the adventure mode for the first time and I'm now trying to get medals and get into the arcade mode. Trying to figure out the scoring system, I read about shooting an already shot airship for a +1 and about charge unlocked shots (holding L and indirectly shooting enemies), and of course there is not letting your allies getting hit, but is there another main scoring method, I'm struggling to reach 300 in the first level? Does getting hit yourself, collectibles or time affect the score? I've watched videos, and I noticed a star/octagonal reticle, what does it mean? When I hold L it doesn't look like this?

time doesn't matter.

do you remember to brake a lot? I'm not sure right now but the reticle might be indicating what laser strength you currently have (getting hit a few times bumps you down) and grabbing laser upgrades even after having it maxed nets you extra hits, too.
 

Simbabbad

Member
Nov 26, 2014
1,880
5
315
time doesn't matter.

do you remember to brake a lot?
I did when I beat the game for the first time, but I was unsure about time being important, so I tried not to brake. Now I will, thanks.

I'm not sure right now but the reticle might be indicating what laser strength you currently have (getting hit a few times bumps you down) and grabbing laser upgrades even after having it maxed nets you extra hits, too.
In the video he has that reticle during all the playthrough. Maybe it's the reticle of an unlockable ship?
I just read about the laser upgrades, do you know if rings or bomb upgrades also bring up points? I guess getting hit matters because it lowers your laser, and therefore breaks the collectible bonus points?

Also read about releasing a locked shot right as it locks for an especially powerful shot.

EDIT: eh, found partial answers in a video description:

zallard1 said:
Thanks to the tips from Mauze in my last video's comments, I completely changed up how I play the entire stage. Now, bomb management and laser management are a huge part of score, because once you have max bombs, any subsequent bomb will reward you a HIT+3. Same goes for laser upgrades when you already have hyper lasers. This also means that I cannot get hit 2 times (I believe) once I get hypers, or else I lose them & a HIT+3 bonus along with it.

Another thing that Mauze points out is leading the missiles on the boss into the dishes ends up giving you FOUR times the amount of points per dish!
Apparently the black arwing also helps, maybe the reticle is specific to it.

I understand having scoring elements being "hidden" or not revealed, but a "how to score" tipping section in the manual could have been handy.
 

DownGrader

Member
Jun 7, 2014
5,304
0
0
Russian Federation
Apparently the black arwing also helps, maybe the reticle is specific to it.
The star-shaped reticle means that you use "Motion on ZR" control option. The diagonal square part shows only while you are shooting, giving you an indication that you can move the reticle with the gyro.

Also, the color of the reticle depends on shots being charged/locked-on. You can check it by cancelling the lock-on shots by holding L.
 

Stalk

Member
Apr 19, 2015
735
0
0
Cambridge
I picked it up over the weekend and I'm dipping into it in like 10-20 minute segments. It's fun, I can see the controller hate and have definitely felt it at some points but overall the presentation is very strong and I think the use of the gamepad is nifty if a bit flawed.

Need to sit down with the missus and try the co-op stuff next.
 

Peltz

Member
Apr 26, 2014
16,507
11
515
Do people really consider this game hard to control???????. The controls are so easy man. I didnt even need practice to get used to it. Most of my errors was because of me. My girlfriend got used the controls on the second go of the game. I swear the control criticizing is really baffling!!!!!
I feel the same way, but watching my friend try to play this game was a revelation: some people suck at video games and are totally uncoordinated.

She looked at me like some sort of mystical legend when I played this game very naturally upon picking it up. I really think it all comes down to skill level. This game has a somewhat high barrier to entry and you need to be relatively good at video games to play it. It's not for new players at all.
 

Simbabbad

Member
Nov 26, 2014
1,880
5
315
The charge unlocked shooting isn't explained though, nor the bonus for extra laser or bomb upgrades, or the "release just as you lock" mechanic. Having everything in a section would have been helpful. When you see that even pros discovered that stuff pretty late, it's revealing of a lack of explanation and maybe hurt game reception.

@DownGrader: thanks, the reticle shape thing was puzzling me.
 

Spring-Loaded

Member
Apr 16, 2012
28,436
11
0
I feel the same way, but watching my friend try to play this game was a revelation: some people suck at video games and are totally uncoordinated.

She looked at me like some sort of mystical legend when I played this game very naturally upon picking it up. I really think it all comes down to skill level. This game has a somewhat high barrier to entry and you need to be relatively good at video games to play it. It's not for new players at all.
my dad was able to play this game and he hasn't played video games since the 64 era. It's definitely something beyond skill and familiarity with games, and it's likely that the controls are just weird. Looking around in VR is intuitive because it replicates looking around in real life — there's nothing else quite like the gamepad. The controls work, but they are not the best implementation of gyro, mostly because of tech.

The bolded is pretty crazy for the base controls to a Nintendo game too. Even if the controls are sound, they game barely has enough content to really make good use of them.

Sounded like a good parody of his post, honestly, it was absurd.
What about his opinion is absurd? There's no non-VR console game that controls like this, and until you figure out when it's best to look at which screen, it can be disorienting. And not everyone wants to put forth effort to learn something they find to be demanding that has real life benefit, let alone for enjoying a video game.

It's genuinely more baffling that people can't fathom what people dislike or are confused about with the game — I've played it for 26 hours (including playing with friends) and I can still see why it's gotten middling/bad reception across multiple demographics.
 

DownGrader

Member
Jun 7, 2014
5,304
0
0
Russian Federation
my dad was able to play this game and he hasn't played video games since the 64 era. It's definitely something beyond skill and familiarity with games, and it's likely that the controls are just weird. Looking around in VR is intuitive because it replicates looking around in real life — there's nothing else quite like the gamepad. The controls work, but they are not the best implementation of gyro, mostly because of tech.
Actually, Wii U GamePad uses 9-axis motion controls - six-axis gyro and three geomagnetic sensors. GamePad's motion capabilities are very progressive.
 

Sami+

Member
May 2, 2013
10,666
1
0
Tallahassee
I feel the same way, but watching my friend try to play this game was a revelation: some people suck at video games and are totally uncoordinated.

She looked at me like some sort of mystical legend when I played this game very naturally upon picking it up. I really think it all comes down to skill level. This game has a somewhat high barrier to entry and you need to be relatively good at video games to play it. It's not for new players at all.
Lol dude I've beaten every Kid Icarus Uprising level in the highest difficulty, I'm not really a stranger to rail shooters. The controls are just fucking weird.

I do appreciate the implication that me and my friends are all bad at video games though.
 

Spring-Loaded

Member
Apr 16, 2012
28,436
11
0
Actually, Wii U GamePad uses 9-axis motion controls - six-axis gyro and three geomagnetic sensors. GamePad's motion capabilities are very progressive.
Poor choice of words on my part — the gyro itself is fine, but the gamepad isn't he best motion controller ergonomically, and the tech surrounding the gyro (low res gamepad screen, low power console) means it's use here is something more of a half measure, a poor man's VR that, for some, will be worse than more traditional controls and worse than actual high quality VR. Star Fox: Zero in true VR would likely be better received purely because of the interface.
 

DownGrader

Member
Jun 7, 2014
5,304
0
0
Russian Federation
Poor choice of words on my part — the gyro itself is fine, but the gamepad isn't he best motion controller ergonomically, and the tech surrounding the gyro (low res gamepad screen, low power console) means it's use here is something more of a half measure, a poor man's VR that, for some, will be worse than more traditional controls and worse than actual high quality VR. Star Fox: Zero in true VR would likely be better received purely because of the interface.
Ah, I've got you now. The screen does hurt such games as Nintendo Land, Wii Sports Club and, well, Star Fox Zero. I think its resolution is serviceable... the huge borders and colors being washed-out (due to resistive touch film and the general quality of the screen) are the main problems of GamePad screen for me.
 

Llyranor

Member
May 17, 2006
12,169
0
1,355
I remember playing my first dual analog shooter (Gears of War) on easy, and for me it was a bigger learning curve than this game. It felt like molasses compared to KB/M. By the end of the game I still wasn't 100% comfortable with the game. I was still able to do everything on a functional level, but slowly and clumsily. Dual analog is pretty much second nature now.

In comparison, it took Zero a few levels to get used to it. I do pretty well with it now, but I still find the "move the gamepad completely sideways" to look on the side during the all-range sections clumsy. I mean, it's functional and does the job (it's "fine"), but in an awkward way.

I read that you enjoyed UC4 and gave it a 10/10. I happen to have "played" that game too while having dinner. The best B-movie I've seen in a long time. As a game, I give UC4 a generous 6/10.
You're taking this too personally, man.

Lol dude I've beaten every Kid Icarus Uprising level in the highest difficulty, I'm not really a stranger to rail shooters. The controls are just fucking weird.

I do appreciate the implication that me and my friends are all bad at video games though.
You're taking this too personally, man.
 

kunonabi

Member
Dec 2, 2010
17,784
2,977
895
Beat Arcade mode so pretty much done although I'm going to finish all the various arcade routes as time goes on. Looked up stuff I missed like unlocked and critical charge shots so hopefully I'll be able to improve on my fairly pedestrian scores. I kind of wish I had the game digitally as I could totally see myself popping it in on a whim.

With the disappointing port of Twilight Princess, the butchered localization of Tokyo Mirage Sessions, and the Wii U Legend of Zelda getting delayed Star Fox Zero might end up being my favorite Wii U game of 2016. I don't see Mario & Sonic or Color Splash really topping it.
 

Llyranor

Member
May 17, 2006
12,169
0
1,355
I just found the Kid Icarus deflection funny given the other poster's Uncharted 4 deflection :D

But if you can't comprehend how anyone can play with Zero's impossible controls (when others can handle them well), it's okay to acknowledge you are bad at the game's unconventional controls without having it be a stain on your honor as a gamer otherwise. That "personal insult" quote wasn't even singling you out.
 

Theognosis

Member
May 30, 2014
1,655
44
385
Oh no, truly you have wounded me. Please, take it back.
Sorry about that. It breaks my heart that the videogame industry is going in a direction that I personally don't like. My comment was not aimed at your taste in particular, but the trend of videogames embracing Hollywood in general. SFZ is a love letter to hardcore gaming and only a few in this era will get to appreciate its brilliance.
 

James Scott

Banned
May 24, 2014
11,386
2
0
So I beat the adventure mode for the first time and I'm now trying to get medals and get into the arcade mode. Trying to figure out the scoring system, I read about shooting an already shot airship for a +1 and about charge unlocked shots (holding L and indirectly shooting enemies), and of course there is not letting your allies getting hit, but is there another main scoring method, I'm struggling to reach 300 in the first level? Does getting hit yourself, collectibles or time affect the score? I've watched videos, and I noticed a star/octagonal reticle, what does it mean? When I hold L it doesn't look like this?

The different reticle is when you enable limited motion controls.
The way you get that many points is shooting down fighters without locking on/homing attacks. Shoot them down and while they're falling to the ground in flames shoot them again.
Additionally, if you do charged shots while holding the L button and shoot near an enemy you get a +1 hit. If there's a ground enemy (tank) and you shoot near it you get extra points. If you shoot a wall and hit multiple enemies in the air and then shoot them down again with normal shots you get a ton of extra points.
 

Sami+

Member
May 2, 2013
10,666
1
0
Tallahassee
Sorry about that. It breaks my heart that the videogame industry is going in a direction that I personally don't like. My comment was not aimed at your taste in particular, but the trend of videogames embracing Hollywood in general. SFZ is a love letter to hardcore gaming and only a few in this era will get to see its brilliance.
I appreciate and respect you coming back to say this. I find myself getting in heated back and forth with Nintendo fans a lot because I'm very passionate about storytelling and presentation in video games and often feel like they intentionally hold themselves back from capitalizing on what could be truly special.

I assume we've all been playing games our whole lives and care about them a lot seeing as how we've bothered to make accounts and post on this site. But priorities are different between everybody. On the Nintendo side, I see Mario Galaxy breaking new bounds with its stunning opening and finale setpieces, slower pace with greater contextualization, and touching story with Rosalina. Then Miyamoto gains greater control over Galaxy 2 and ALL of that gets cut. Today we have 3D World going even further in this direction. Wtf. Why?

It's not about copying Hollywood man, it's art. I do photography as a hobby, and the fact that video games are capable of taking advantage of the aspects of film that makes that medium so compelling is a huge reason why I love them so much. I hate this reductive stance people take on video games just "becoming" movies when all that's happening is the adaptation of the strengths that medium can provide gaming.

To focus more on Star Fox and not get too far off topic- what is Star Fox to you? What can it be? What should it be, and why did the idea of a Star Fox game in 2016 excite you before Zero was announced? I'm genuinely asking. I've been excited for both Star Fox and F-Zero revivals for years, you could probably dig up old posts on here or other forums every E3 saying "F-Zero and Star Fox pls" or whatever. In my mind I picture a Saturday morning space opera with a charming, colorful cast of characters, beautiful and imaginative environmental design, jaw dropping cinematic setpieces, and high speed action. Kid Icarus Uprising delivers all of this. Star Fox Zero delivers literally none of this.

It's been about three or four years since I last played Kid Icarus Uprising, but I still vividly remember the first fight with Dark Pit, the reset bomb, Pandora's labyrinth, the Palutena fight, the huge tower with the joke about the loading screen, Hades, etc. etc. etc. I can tell you now I'll remember almost nothing about Star Fox Zero other than the shit it copied from 64, and that's only because I've beaten that game so many times.

It just bugs the hell out of me. Star Fox could be amazing, like 64 was relative to its time. But this isn't, at all. The fact that it forces me to take my eyes off the screen at all to do its weird and pointless gamepad nonsense already breaks what could have been decent because it's completely immersion breaking. Most of the game's challenge just feels like it comes from wrestling with the camera, struggling to control the ship (movement would feel infinitely more fluid and satisfying if the boost meter didn't exist IMO), and the horrendous lock on system all with the borderline offensively terrible story, immersion breaking game mechanics, and mediocre visuals being icing on the cake.

I can see people liking the scoring mechanics but I just don't see a good game here. All I see is a game with nothing to say, literally nothing to add to the Star Fox universe, that exists for the sake of existing. It felt like a chore to me.
 

TheMoon

Member
Jul 1, 2014
21,766
5
415
The charge unlocked shooting isn't explained though, nor the bonus for extra laser or bomb upgrades, or the "release just as you lock" mechanic. Having everything in a section would have been helpful. When you see that even pros discovered that stuff pretty late, it's revealing of a lack of explanation and maybe hurt game reception.
Charge Crit is explained. (the pics are all from the OP btw^^)

 

Simbabbad

Member
Nov 26, 2014
1,880
5
315
@TheMoon: it doesn't mention charging without locking by pressing L adds bonus points, does it?

Again, even pros spent some time understanding some scoring mechanics. When a pro like Zallard who scored 400+ points at Corneria says: "Thanks to the tips from Mauze in my last video's comments, I completely changed up how I play the entire stage.", how can you expect the average gamer to figure it out?

I don't even understand why you nitpick the fact the game could be a lot more clear about some scoring elements.
 

anothertech

Member
Oct 1, 2014
3,259
16
400
Finally beat this game. Definitely some nostalgic moments.

But overall completely underwhelmed unfortunately :( too much wonk in the control scheme from beginning to end for my taste.

Guess I was hoping for more regardless of the visuals. *sigh
 
Feb 5, 2009
9,008
65
715
I feel the same way, but watching my friend try to play this game was a revelation: some people suck at video games and are totally uncoordinated.

She looked at me like some sort of mystical legend when I played this game very naturally upon picking it up. I really think it all comes down to skill level. This game has a somewhat high barrier to entry and you need to be relatively good at video games to play it. It's not for new players at all.
Was taking about the same thing exactly previously, some people just lack coordination. The control scheme is no harder to grasp than a dual analog shooter. However, the extra layer comes from the sight shifting but this also plays into the coordination or lack there off.

i' ve seen this even with people that play games all the time. Some friends that are way beyond my skill level in FPS had problems coordinating attacks in Skyward sword and the complexity of the controls didn't have anything to do with their problem. They just grew too acustomed to the same control scheme.

Is quite interesting to see the level of detail the developers went into ratioanlizing the control system. In the first trainning when starting the game, you see that the left stick and right stick corresponds to each of fox's hands. The aiming is explained as the motion of his head been picked up by the headset in his head XD

@TheMoon: it doesn't mention charging without locking by pressing L adds bonus points, does it?

Again, even pros spent some time understanding some scoring mechanics. When a pro like Zallard who scored 400+ points at Corneria says: "Thanks to the tips from Mauze in my last video's comments, I completely changed up how I play the entire stage.", how can you expect the average gamer to figure it out?

I don't even understand why you nitpick the fact the game could be a lot more clear about some scoring elements.
Is not nitpicking Simbabbad, you had made some factually worng statements and the Moon adressed them. There's is a section of the manual detailing aspects of the scoring system and they do explain the charge shot mechanics.

It's good that there's more depth in the scoring system for dedicated players to explore. The same happened with StarFox 64, the indirect charge shot mechanic is not explained in that game either and had to befigured out by dedicated players.
 

goldenpp72

Member
Nov 29, 2005
14,344
327
1,585
I don't tend to do this but, I felt I should throw my hat in the 'review' arena so maybe one person would see value in it. I play a LOT of games and I rarely do any write ups on it, but this game compelled me a lot. As of now, i'm at about 50 medals and will conclude all of them by the end of the week for sure, then i'll start Guard.

To start, i'm a big fan of Star Fox in theory, I adored the Snes and N64 titles and always held the N64 game in a very favorable light, a very replayable and extremely fun game. I even enjoyed Adventure somewhat, though consider it only 'good' with Assault and Command being games I dislike quite a bit. Assault felt like some kind of horrible fan made interpretation of the game and Command while interesting was just too far removed from the concept to be a legitimate mainline entry. A solid spin off if you really like that genre I guess.

With that said, I was out of state working when the news of the forced motion controls came in, and a lot of tepid reviews and such came driving in making me think yeah, Nintendo ruined another game with motion controls. I should also mention I do not like motion controls in almost any game, despite being open minded, my method for any kind of motion controls is simple. If the mechanic can be done more fluidly using a button press then it should be done as such, if the desired action is actually superior using motion and works better, than this is acceptable (so think Wii Sports Resort or Metroid Prime as good examples, where as Skyward Sword is a mixed example of good and extremely bad depending)

I played through the campaign once and indeed did struggle at times, trying to wrap my head around the unusual mechanics, multi tasking and basically trying to figure out what the game is wanting me to do, or the purpose of the mechanics. Upon beating the game one time, I felt it was pretty solid but clunky. Upon going for the medals and really trying to master the controls though, I feel the game is a revelation and is in fact almost wonderful. The cinematic camera used to piss me off, but I adjusted to it and learned how to use it to my favor and alternate the different views, the cockpit view used to be hard to dodge things for me, it is not any longer. All the complexities of switching vehicles and the drastic control changes have mostly worked the kinks out now, and with all of it finally gelling in a good way I can say this is easily the most exhilarating game in the series. The dog fights with Star wolf are intense and incredibly well done, to a point that the fights in 64 look like primitive crap in comparison. The mixture of cinematic touches and legitimate mechanic upgrades make the dog fights the real showcase of what all these new mechanics are best at.

Eventually you start learning the cinematic side views can aid in aiming your secondary view to the side (which is often the point), and while the alternating views and such can be jarring, once you learn the levels and replay it enough, you'll get into the groove and start kicking ass. With all that said, I would say the game despite all its extremely creative use of new mechanics, it comes with some baggage. The barrel roll being mapped to the R stick is not always intuitive and often results in me braking/boosting at the same time. As well, the shortcuts for doing a somersault and such did screw me over a bit by activating when I did not want them to, but maybe some could overcome that flawlessly. As well, while I am very good at controlling the walker, they could have done more to improve the controls on it to be more fluid, even if I understand why they did it as they did. Aside that, the Gyrowing is kind of fun, but really should have been a side mission only kind of thing because it's too slow and plodding to fit into the overall scheme of the game.

Aside that, the framerate goes to hell in some segments, and at times the transitions in controls to fighting can be a bit rough around the edges. Really, this game feels like an extremely creative and well crafted meal that just needed some more smoothing out and polish to really hit home, however, this does not justify the reception it has often got. The mechanics are mostly well done and once learned serve a purpose, leading me to believe that a person who outright hates this game must simply not be good at it. I don't like summarizing a point as 'git gud' as many would say, however I would love to see someone get all 70 medals and then come back and say yep, that game is shit. I feel people are too afraid to experiment and be challenged these days, especially when using an IP that is mostly going to be appealing to older players who are stuck in their ways. If I had to fix ONE thing to make things easier for access, it would be to make the main screen crosshair as accurate as the second screen one, I know that in some ways it would defile some of the games spirit, but it would likely have aided in the games reception and helped softer players manage more enjoyably.

Overall, this is one of the most compelling games on the Wii U in part because of how well it executes its new mechanics, but they are not for average players at all. If you really strive to enjoy this game but can not due to the multi tasking, I advise you to get a co-op buddy. The co-op is extremely fun in that it allows one person to handle all the gyro aiming and cock pit view stuff, while giving the other player a basic gun and full control of movement. If you want a more traditional Star Fox experience and can find a person willing to be your wing man, it is a very good option.

Great game with a lot of rough edges, it's either my first or second favorite of the series, and I hope it doesn't mark the end. If you're a hardcore gamer who loves innovation and being challenged, it's worth a legitimate effort, if you're just looking for something to run through once and know it all from the start, probably not a good game to jump into unless you have a co-op buddy.
 

Nerrel

Member
Oct 13, 2014
1,631
0
0
I don't like summarizing a point as 'git gud' as many would say, however I would love to see someone get all 70 medals and then come back and say yep, that game is shit. I feel people are too afraid to experiment and be challenged these days, especially when using an IP that is mostly going to be appealing to older players who are stuck in their ways.
There's a point where you have to decide how much time you want to invest in a control scheme itself vs the game. In the case of Zero, the learning curve seems to be longer than the entire length of the game itself. Platinum has other titles, like Bayonetta 1/2 or Wonderful 101, that might be considered hard at first but become more rewarding over replays... but those games aren't 3 hours long.

I can see the value of the controls in certain scenarios, but no matter what I'll always see them as a desperate attempt to make the gamepad useful for something, not some revelatory innovation that Starfox was always in need of. They're forced at some many points without reason, and a lot of the new mechanics feel like they were specifically designed just to make sure that both screens got some use. I mentioned above how tired I got of all the lock-on boss battles where you circle an enemy and shoot weak points, and I've really got to insist that there's little fun about that endlessly recurring gimmick.

I also don't think the game is impressive enough in terms of its level designs and general gameplay to warrant the kind of learning curve the controls carry. It's not that I can't handle something new and get good at it... it's just not worth it to me to get good at this game. SF0 started as a minigame type collection where you wouldn't really have a traditional campaign, was developed in a year, and patched at the last minute to flesh it out into something resembling an actual Starfox game- all of that shows in the final product. It recycles nearly every major beat from SF64, and not in a fun or enjoyable way... I don't really think anyone wanted another remake of 64 out of this. If you take the controls away, would you still think this game is really interesting?

I remember playing Red Steel 2 and feeling like it was a great game, but after a while I realized it was just the novelty of the controls. Mastering something new and having that kind of rewarding experience can cloud your judgement of the actual game's quality. I don't think SF0 is anything more special than a 64 retread used to show off what the gamepad can do. I don't hate it or think that it's terrible, but it's a pretty underwhelming game for what was supposed to be the return of the series.
 
Feb 5, 2009
9,008
65
715
I don't tend to do this but, I felt I should throw my hat in the 'review' arena so maybe one person would see value in it. I play a LOT of games and I rarely do any write ups on it, but this game compelled me a lot. As of now, i'm at about 50 medals and will conclude all of them by the end of the week for sure, then i'll start Guard.

To start, i'm a big fan of Star Fox in theory, I adored the Snes and N64 titles and always held the N64 game in a very favorable light, a very replayable and extremely fun game. I even enjoyed Adventure somewhat, though consider it only 'good' with Assault and Command being games I dislike quite a bit. Assault felt like some kind of horrible fan made interpretation of the game and Command while interesting was just too far removed from the concept to be a legitimate mainline entry. A solid spin off if you really like that genre I guess.

With that said, I was out of state working when the news of the forced motion controls came in, and a lot of tepid reviews and such came driving in making me think yeah, Nintendo ruined another game with motion controls. I should also mention I do not like motion controls in almost any game, despite being open minded, my method for any kind of motion controls is simple. If the mechanic can be done more fluidly using a button press then it should be done as such, if the desired action is actually superior using motion and works better, than this is acceptable (so think Wii Sports Resort or Metroid Prime as good examples, where as Skyward Sword is a mixed example of good and extremely bad depending)

I played through the campaign once and indeed did struggle at times, trying to wrap my head around the unusual mechanics, multi tasking and basically trying to figure out what the game is wanting me to do, or the purpose of the mechanics. Upon beating the game one time, I felt it was pretty solid but clunky. Upon going for the medals and really trying to master the controls though, I feel the game is a revelation and is in fact almost wonderful. The cinematic camera used to piss me off, but I adjusted to it and learned how to use it to my favor and alternate the different views, the cockpit view used to be hard to dodge things for me, it is not any longer. All the complexities of switching vehicles and the drastic control changes have mostly worked the kinks out now, and with all of it finally gelling in a good way I can say this is easily the most exhilarating game in the series. The dog fights with Star wolf are intense and incredibly well done, to a point that the fights in 64 look like primitive crap in comparison. The mixture of cinematic touches and legitimate mechanic upgrades make the dog fights the real showcase of what all these new mechanics are best at.

Eventually you start learning the cinematic side views can aid in aiming your secondary view to the side (which is often the point), and while the alternating views and such can be jarring, once you learn the levels and replay it enough, you'll get into the groove and start kicking ass. With all that said, I would say the game despite all its extremely creative use of new mechanics, it comes with some baggage. The barrel roll being mapped to the R stick is not always intuitive and often results in me braking/boosting at the same time. As well, the shortcuts for doing a somersault and such did screw me over a bit by activating when I did not want them to, but maybe some could overcome that flawlessly. As well, while I am very good at controlling the walker, they could have done more to improve the controls on it to be more fluid, even if I understand why they did it as they did. Aside that, the Gyrowing is kind of fun, but really should have been a side mission only kind of thing because it's too slow and plodding to fit into the overall scheme of the game.

Aside that, the framerate goes to hell in some segments, and at times the transitions in controls to fighting can be a bit rough around the edges. Really, this game feels like an extremely creative and well crafted meal that just needed some more smoothing out and polish to really hit home, however, this does not justify the reception it has often got. The mechanics are mostly well done and once learned serve a purpose, leading me to believe that a person who outright hates this game must simply not be good at it. I don't like summarizing a point as 'git gud' as many would say, however I would love to see someone get all 70 medals and then come back and say yep, that game is shit. I feel people are too afraid to experiment and be challenged these days, especially when using an IP that is mostly going to be appealing to older players who are stuck in their ways. If I had to fix ONE thing to make things easier for access, it would be to make the main screen crosshair as accurate as the second screen one, I know that in some ways it would defile some of the games spirit, but it would likely have aided in the games reception and helped softer players manage more enjoyably.

Overall, this is one of the most compelling games on the Wii U in part because of how well it executes its new mechanics, but they are not for average players at all. If you really strive to enjoy this game but can not due to the multi tasking, I advise you to get a co-op buddy. The co-op is extremely fun in that it allows one person to handle all the gyro aiming and cock pit view stuff, while giving the other player a basic gun and full control of movement. If you want a more traditional Star Fox experience and can find a person willing to be your wing man, it is a very good option.

Great game with a lot of rough edges, it's either my first or second favorite of the series, and I hope it doesn't mark the end. If you're a hardcore gamer who loves innovation and being challenged, it's worth a legitimate effort, if you're just looking for something to run through once and know it all from the start, probably not a good game to jump into unless you have a co-op buddy.
A fair critique of the game covering most of it's strong and weak points, certainly most useful than some professional reviews. Thanks for sharing, it was worthwhile to read your views.

It is a shame however that this game is used as a catapult for different groups of people with certain agendas. Either fervent Miyamoto, Motion or alternative controls detractor (maybe all of them at once?) then StarFox Zero is the perfect game for your venting pleasures XD

i think this game turned out to be a critique by itself. A critique of some flaws with the more conventional review process and maybe even of the gaming community itself.
 

goldenpp72

Member
Nov 29, 2005
14,344
327
1,585
There's a point where you have to decide how much time you want to invest in a control scheme itself vs the game. In the case of Zero, the learning curve seems to be longer than the entire length of the game itself. Platinum has other titles, like Bayonetta 1/2 or Wonderful 101, that might be considered hard at first but become more rewarding over replays... but those games aren't 3 hours long.

I can see the value of the controls in certain scenarios, but no matter what I'll always see them as a desperate attempt to make the gamepad useful for something, not some revelatory innovation that Starfox was always in need of. They're forced at some many points without reason, and a lot of the new mechanics feel like they were specifically designed just to make sure that both screens got some use. I mentioned above how tired I got of all the lock-on boss battles where you circle an enemy and shoot weak points, and I've really got to insist that there's little fun about that endlessly recurring gimmick.

I also don't think the game is impressive enough in terms of its level designs and general gameplay to warrant the kind of learning curve the controls carry. It's not that I can't handle something new and get good at it... it's just not worth it to me to get good at this game. SF0 started as a minigame type collection where you wouldn't really have a traditional campaign, was developed in a year, and patched at the last minute to flesh it out into something resembling an actual Starfox game- all of that shows in the final product. It recycles nearly every major beat from SF64, and not in a fun or enjoyable way... I don't really think anyone wanted another remake of 64 out of this. If you take the controls away, would you still think this game is really interesting?

I remember playing Red Steel 2 and feeling like it was a great game, but after a while I realized it was just the novelty of the controls. Mastering something new and having that kind of rewarding experience can cloud your judgement of the actual game's quality. I don't think SF0 is anything more special than a 64 retread used to show off what the gamepad can do. I don't hate it or think that it's terrible, but it's a pretty underwhelming game for what was supposed to be the return of the series.
I'd say I feel about 80 percent of the new additions are welcome changes that enhance the formula, and most of the level design and enemy encounters are quite good. Though they could have been better and the amount of on rails combat could have been increased a lot. There are a lot of really good adjustments too, the new braking and boosting systems are really good, and I would say that gyro aiming is an excellent addition to the series and should be a mainstay if there is ever a sequel.

The game certainly is not perfect, but learning to play it very competently makes it feel very immersive to me, I think subliminally the required multi tasking makes me feel like I am a pilot, likely aided by the impressive sound design. As someone who has beaten most Platinum games, I would say 101 is easily way less intuitive than Zero, in Zero you CAN mostly smooth out the process, but 101 really was an exercise of why couldn't this have just been a button press to switch weapons? It worked alright but didn't add anything, great game though.
 

illusionary

Member
Jul 16, 2013
2,327
1
435
That took a fair amount of effort, but 195 hits on Venom feels good!

Two medals to go... unfortunately, being both of the hit-count related medals on Corneria 2. Any tricks to this that anyone can suggest, or do I just have to get really good with unlocked charged shots? My best so far is only about 320 hits, so about 50 short. To misquote Star Wolf, while I may have gotten reasonably good, that's not nearly good enough yet...

Edit: okay, just managed 359, with the phase 2 medal. So that's 69/70 - suddenly it feels almost feasible - but any tips would still be *very* welcome!
 

Simbabbad

Member
Nov 26, 2014
1,880
5
315
Is not nitpicking Simbabbad, you had made some factually worng statements and the Moon adressed them. There's is a section of the manual detailing aspects of the scoring system and they do explain the charge shot mechanics.
No, I haven't. The "do stuff and you'll get more points" paragraph is ridiculously vague and isn't helpful whatsoever, it doesn't mention unlocked charged shots, it doesn't mention extra laser or bomb bonuses adding points, it doesn't mention the "release just as it locks for extra power" mechanic. Again, when pros redo entire walkthroughs after some YouTube comment highlight some mechanics, it's a sign you're being too obscure. So I maintain the game could use a clear "how to score" section, because it doesn't have anything that could pass as one, and that, my friend, is factually correct.

Having secret extra mechanics such as the wall jump in Super Metroid is nice, because you don't need it to play the game. Deliberately not mentioning base scoring mechanics in a scoring game that unlocks rewards for scoring while having characters say "use motions controls" again and again is... weird. The game already cuts itself from a portion of its audience with its controls (controls which I enjoy very much), it's obviously a very bad idea to voluntarily (?) hide core mechanics, and limit your audience and reception to people who will bother searching on the web to decipher the scoring system you didn't bother explaining - search which is BTW quite difficult because there is no clear FAQ explaining scoring online (but there are tons explaining medals). This is clearly hurting the game, and I'm not sure why some people apparently want to deny this.
 

bart64

Banned
Aug 22, 2006
556
0
0
Los Angeles
www.switchhype.com
It can be, but that doesn't discount video games emulating filmic techniques either. My only thing is believing that video games can and should be more than just their gameplay.
You made a nice case for your point of view, and I agree that games can do all those things--gaming uses a mix of a bunch of different media. But I don't agree that it should always do it, or that it is necessarily worse for minimizing some aspects. There are all kinds of art and the most bombastic commercialized kind is not necessarily the best.

With movies, some garage indie flick in black and white can be more effective than a $100M Transformers type movie. With concerts, some dive bar harmonica solo can be more moving than a fireworks finale at a Coldplay concert. A chess game played with golden pieces is the same game as with plastic ones, and I bet the first person that presented chess to the world was not worried too much about the quality of the finish.

It's a lot to ask a game maker to also be a photographer and sculptor and painter and animator and an editor, and when it all comes together for somehing like The Last of Us I celebrate it too. But there are so many different ways to approach it and experiment and participate in the artistry and evolution of gaming.
 

The_Intruder

Member
Feb 18, 2013
1,160
19
455
I don't tend to do this but, I felt I should throw my hat in the 'review' arena so maybe one person would see value in it. I play a LOT of games and I rarely do any write ups on it, but this game compelled me a lot. As of now, i'm at about 50 medals and will conclude all of them by the end of the week for sure, then i'll start Guard.

To start, i'm a big fan of Star Fox in theory, I adored the Snes and N64 titles and always held the N64 game in a very favorable light, a very replayable and extremely fun game. I even enjoyed Adventure somewhat, though consider it only 'good' with Assault and Command being games I dislike quite a bit. Assault felt like some kind of horrible fan made interpretation of the game and Command while interesting was just too far removed from the concept to be a legitimate mainline entry. A solid spin off if you really like that genre I guess.

With that said, I was out of state working when the news of the forced motion controls came in, and a lot of tepid reviews and such came driving in making me think yeah, Nintendo ruined another game with motion controls. I should also mention I do not like motion controls in almost any game, despite being open minded, my method for any kind of motion controls is simple. If the mechanic can be done more fluidly using a button press then it should be done as such, if the desired action is actually superior using motion and works better, than this is acceptable (so think Wii Sports Resort or Metroid Prime as good examples, where as Skyward Sword is a mixed example of good and extremely bad depending)

I played through the campaign once and indeed did struggle at times, trying to wrap my head around the unusual mechanics, multi tasking and basically trying to figure out what the game is wanting me to do, or the purpose of the mechanics. Upon beating the game one time, I felt it was pretty solid but clunky. Upon going for the medals and really trying to master the controls though, I feel the game is a revelation and is in fact almost wonderful. The cinematic camera used to piss me off, but I adjusted to it and learned how to use it to my favor and alternate the different views, the cockpit view used to be hard to dodge things for me, it is not any longer. All the complexities of switching vehicles and the drastic control changes have mostly worked the kinks out now, and with all of it finally gelling in a good way I can say this is easily the most exhilarating game in the series. The dog fights with Star wolf are intense and incredibly well done, to a point that the fights in 64 look like primitive crap in comparison. The mixture of cinematic touches and legitimate mechanic upgrades make the dog fights the real showcase of what all these new mechanics are best at.

Eventually you start learning the cinematic side views can aid in aiming your secondary view to the side (which is often the point), and while the alternating views and such can be jarring, once you learn the levels and replay it enough, you'll get into the groove and start kicking ass. With all that said, I would say the game despite all its extremely creative use of new mechanics, it comes with some baggage. The barrel roll being mapped to the R stick is not always intuitive and often results in me braking/boosting at the same time. As well, the shortcuts for doing a somersault and such did screw me over a bit by activating when I did not want them to, but maybe some could overcome that flawlessly. As well, while I am very good at controlling the walker, they could have done more to improve the controls on it to be more fluid, even if I understand why they did it as they did. Aside that, the Gyrowing is kind of fun, but really should have been a side mission only kind of thing because it's too slow and plodding to fit into the overall scheme of the game.

Aside that, the framerate goes to hell in some segments, and at times the transitions in controls to fighting can be a bit rough around the edges. Really, this game feels like an extremely creative and well crafted meal that just needed some more smoothing out and polish to really hit home, however, this does not justify the reception it has often got. The mechanics are mostly well done and once learned serve a purpose, leading me to believe that a person who outright hates this game must simply not be good at it. I don't like summarizing a point as 'git gud' as many would say, however I would love to see someone get all 70 medals and then come back and say yep, that game is shit. I feel people are too afraid to experiment and be challenged these days, especially when using an IP that is mostly going to be appealing to older players who are stuck in their ways. If I had to fix ONE thing to make things easier for access, it would be to make the main screen crosshair as accurate as the second screen one, I know that in some ways it would defile some of the games spirit, but it would likely have aided in the games reception and helped softer players manage more enjoyably.

Overall, this is one of the most compelling games on the Wii U in part because of how well it executes its new mechanics, but they are not for average players at all. If you really strive to enjoy this game but can not due to the multi tasking, I advise you to get a co-op buddy. The co-op is extremely fun in that it allows one person to handle all the gyro aiming and cock pit view stuff, while giving the other player a basic gun and full control of movement. If you want a more traditional Star Fox experience and can find a person willing to be your wing man, it is a very good option.

Great game with a lot of rough edges, it's either my first or second favorite of the series, and I hope it doesn't mark the end. If you're a hardcore gamer who loves innovation and being challenged, it's worth a legitimate effort, if you're just looking for something to run through once and know it all from the start, probably not a good game to jump into unless you have a co-op buddy.


Well written, very good arguments, well done sir!
 

BBboy20

Member
Sep 9, 2013
10,072
1
365
Even if the game is visually sparse at times, I'm really happy with Zero's art direction. Everything is slick and colorful, and Fox McCloud and company haven't looked this cool since HAL's Melee in 2001.
*points at avy* Hashimoto's quick white board drawing is one of the best depictions of a character I've ever seen.
 
Sep 2, 2007
17,992
3
0
I don't tend to do this but, I felt I should throw my hat in the 'review' arena so maybe one person would see value in it. I play a LOT of games and I rarely do any write ups on it, but this game compelled me a lot. As of now, i'm at about 50 medals and will conclude all of them by the end of the week for sure, then i'll start Guard.

To start, i'm a big fan of Star Fox in theory, I adored the Snes and N64 titles and always held the N64 game in a very favorable light, a very replayable and extremely fun game. I even enjoyed Adventure somewhat, though consider it only 'good' with Assault and Command being games I dislike quite a bit. Assault felt like some kind of horrible fan made interpretation of the game and Command while interesting was just too far removed from the concept to be a legitimate mainline entry. A solid spin off if you really like that genre I guess.

With that said, I was out of state working when the news of the forced motion controls came in, and a lot of tepid reviews and such came driving in making me think yeah, Nintendo ruined another game with motion controls. I should also mention I do not like motion controls in almost any game, despite being open minded, my method for any kind of motion controls is simple. If the mechanic can be done more fluidly using a button press then it should be done as such, if the desired action is actually superior using motion and works better, than this is acceptable (so think Wii Sports Resort or Metroid Prime as good examples, where as Skyward Sword is a mixed example of good and extremely bad depending)

I played through the campaign once and indeed did struggle at times, trying to wrap my head around the unusual mechanics, multi tasking and basically trying to figure out what the game is wanting me to do, or the purpose of the mechanics. Upon beating the game one time, I felt it was pretty solid but clunky. Upon going for the medals and really trying to master the controls though, I feel the game is a revelation and is in fact almost wonderful. The cinematic camera used to piss me off, but I adjusted to it and learned how to use it to my favor and alternate the different views, the cockpit view used to be hard to dodge things for me, it is not any longer. All the complexities of switching vehicles and the drastic control changes have mostly worked the kinks out now, and with all of it finally gelling in a good way I can say this is easily the most exhilarating game in the series. The dog fights with Star wolf are intense and incredibly well done, to a point that the fights in 64 look like primitive crap in comparison. The mixture of cinematic touches and legitimate mechanic upgrades make the dog fights the real showcase of what all these new mechanics are best at.

Eventually you start learning the cinematic side views can aid in aiming your secondary view to the side (which is often the point), and while the alternating views and such can be jarring, once you learn the levels and replay it enough, you'll get into the groove and start kicking ass. With all that said, I would say the game despite all its extremely creative use of new mechanics, it comes with some baggage. The barrel roll being mapped to the R stick is not always intuitive and often results in me braking/boosting at the same time. As well, the shortcuts for doing a somersault and such did screw me over a bit by activating when I did not want them to, but maybe some could overcome that flawlessly. As well, while I am very good at controlling the walker, they could have done more to improve the controls on it to be more fluid, even if I understand why they did it as they did. Aside that, the Gyrowing is kind of fun, but really should have been a side mission only kind of thing because it's too slow and plodding to fit into the overall scheme of the game.

Aside that, the framerate goes to hell in some segments, and at times the transitions in controls to fighting can be a bit rough around the edges. Really, this game feels like an extremely creative and well crafted meal that just needed some more smoothing out and polish to really hit home, however, this does not justify the reception it has often got. The mechanics are mostly well done and once learned serve a purpose, leading me to believe that a person who outright hates this game must simply not be good at it. I don't like summarizing a point as 'git gud' as many would say, however I would love to see someone get all 70 medals and then come back and say yep, that game is shit. I feel people are too afraid to experiment and be challenged these days, especially when using an IP that is mostly going to be appealing to older players who are stuck in their ways. If I had to fix ONE thing to make things easier for access, it would be to make the main screen crosshair as accurate as the second screen one, I know that in some ways it would defile some of the games spirit, but it would likely have aided in the games reception and helped softer players manage more enjoyably.

Overall, this is one of the most compelling games on the Wii U in part because of how well it executes its new mechanics, but they are not for average players at all. If you really strive to enjoy this game but can not due to the multi tasking, I advise you to get a co-op buddy. The co-op is extremely fun in that it allows one person to handle all the gyro aiming and cock pit view stuff, while giving the other player a basic gun and full control of movement. If you want a more traditional Star Fox experience and can find a person willing to be your wing man, it is a very good option.

Great game with a lot of rough edges, it's either my first or second favorite of the series, and I hope it doesn't mark the end. If you're a hardcore gamer who loves innovation and being challenged, it's worth a legitimate effort, if you're just looking for something to run through once and know it all from the start, probably not a good game to jump into unless you have a co-op buddy.
What a great review, exactly what i like and my problems with the game.

If only you were a youtuber with 1 million views, maybe a good review like this will get through all the crap people have said about it, some not even trying it, and other never giving it the proper chance.
 

Simbabbad

Member
Nov 26, 2014
1,880
5
315
It can be, but that doesn't discount video games emulating filmic techniques either. My only thing is believing that video games can and should be more than just their gameplay.
That's nice and all and I agree in principle, if I was asked which game struck me the most and which I love the most, I'd answer without batting an eyelid "American McGee's Alice" whereas "American McGee's Alice" has mediocre/serviceable gameplay.

But by saying "believing that video games can and should be more than just their gameplay", you're saying that immersion (to speak broadly, immersion being a wider concept than just copying cinema) is more important than gameplay, and should be mandatory in all games, which IMO would be a complete disaster and would eradicate entire genres. Sorry, but that's bullshit, pure arcade games are perfectly fine and have a right to exist and I'm happy the story elements in Star Fox are minimal. You already have tons of games in the genre you like, let the other genres be.
 

Dimentios

Member
May 21, 2014
424
0
320
but any tips would still be *very* welcome!
I never used uncharged shots. Didn't know about them on my medal run. So, yes, it is possible with charged shots. Never use bombs, brake a lot, and I mean, A LOT. The battleships (two at the beginning) have canons on the side, which you can destroy first and then the ship itself. You can destroy enemies while in cut-scenes, even tho the points are not added till the next phase.

50-60 once you reach the shore
150-160 once you go down the waterfalls with slippy
200-210 once there are two paths (up and down) while rescuing peppy
270-280 end of the phase

of course, more points are even better.

+ 25-30 for your friends health
+ 10 for Gigarilla
+ 40 (30 destroyed enemies plus some enemies bring more points) (+5 if you make it)
 

Llyranor

Member
May 17, 2006
12,169
0
1,355
Braking a lot of as the easiest way to rack up more hits goes against what I like about the on-rails sections.
 

kunonabi

Member
Dec 2, 2010
17,784
2,977
895
Braking a lot of as the easiest way to rack up more hits goes against what I like about the on-rails sections.
I found that braking isn't overly necessary unless you're dealing with capital ships/saw blades using the default laser. Otherwise knowing the level and keeping the gamepad view to the sides for off-screen enemies will work just as well.
 

SCReuter

Member
Apr 16, 2007
2,299
73
1,180
There's a point where you have to decide how much time you want to invest in a control scheme itself vs the game. In the case of Zero, the learning curve seems to be longer than the entire length of the game itself. Platinum has other titles, like Bayonetta 1/2 or Wonderful 101, that might be considered hard at first but become more rewarding over replays... but those games aren't 3 hours long.
It's why I have such a disdain for 2D fighters. I'm not going to bother learning a control scheme for a game that can be technically finished in 20 minutes. There's just no reward there.
 

illusionary

Member
Jul 16, 2013
2,327
1
435
I never used uncharged shots. Didn't know about them on my medal run. So, yes, it is possible with charged shots. Never use bombs, brake a lot, and I mean, A LOT. The battleships (two at the beginning) have canons on the side, which you can destroy first and then the ship itself. You can destroy enemies while in cut-scenes, even tho the points are not added till the next phase.

50-60 once you reach the shore
150-160 once you go down the waterfalls with slippy
200-210 once there are two paths (up and down) while rescuing peppy
270-280 end of the phase

of course, more points are even better.

+ 25-30 for your friends health
+ 10 for Gigarilla
+ 40 (30 destroyed enemies plus some enemies bring more points) (+5 if you make it)
Cheers! I made it to 364 last night before running out of time (frustratingly, having forgotten that there was a window between phases 2 and 3 where cockpit view could have got me those six further hits, as you mention), so I'm determined that I'll get it done this evening.

There's the incentive of Uncharted 4 having arrived today to spur me on!

Edit: 369! :(
 

DownGrader

Member
Jun 7, 2014
5,304
0
0
Russian Federation
There's a point where you have to decide how much time you want to invest in a control scheme itself vs the game. In the case of Zero, the learning curve seems to be longer than the entire length of the game itself. Platinum has other titles, like Bayonetta 1/2 or Wonderful 101, that might be considered hard at first but become more rewarding over replays... but those games aren't 3 hours long.
But what is a "length of a game" for Star Fox Zero? One run from Corneria to Venom, with half the levels and bosses missing from player's view? With games like these, people need to stop thinking "yeah, I've seen the credits and I've heard the story, so I'm finished with the game".