Star Fox Zero director comments on the game's visual style - Nintendo Everything

Submit a news tip

Star Fox Zero director comments on the game’s visual style

Posted on September 13, 2015 by (@NE_Brian) in News, Wii U

Yugo Hayashi, the director’s working on Star Fox Zero from Nintendo’s side, has weighed in one the game’s visual style.

Speaking with EDGE this month, Hayashi said:

“We decided to have two screens displaying 3D graphics at 60 frames per second. It was this and a few other factors, including it being the first time players will be using two screens like this on the Wii U, that led us to decide to base the graphical design on Lylat Wars. But I’m sure that seeing the Arwing, which everyone is so familiar with, transform naturally into a land-based Walker will be a fun and exciting new experience.”

This isn’t the first time someone involved with Star Fox Zero has commented on the game’s visuals. A few months ago, Shigeru Miyamoto said that they were made with a purpose. He additionally mentioned that games these days “look so realistic that they all look the same.”

Star Fox Zero was revealed during E3 2015 back in June. It’s due for release on November 20 around the world.

Leave a Reply

  • Booz

    it looks odd but cool

    • $98/HOURLY SPECIAL REPORT!!!!……….After earning an average of 19952 Dollars monthly,I’m finally getting 98 Dollars an hour,just working 4-5 hours daily online….It’s time to take some action and you can join it too.It is simple,dedicated and easy way to get rich.Three weeks from now you will wish you have started today – I promise!….HERE I STARTED-TAKE A LOOK AT…….jhj


      • link2metroid

        F*** off you turd!

  • Airsh Bornely

    It doesn’t have to look realistic, just something on Mario Kart 8 level. That said, I’m mostly fine with the current visuals.

  • uPadWatcher

    I’m still buying. I’ll continue supporting Nintendo and Platinum Games.

    • Andy24

      They made a completely understandable compromise. 60 FPS is practically a must in these types of games.

  • KnightWonder

    It’s a game featuring anthropomorphic animals that fly spaceships. If you want realism in any sense go somewhere else please.

    • MagcargoMan

      For crying out loud, people aren’t asking for it to look realistic. People are complaining about the graphics due to how low-poly they are for a HD game.

  • Joe

    In other words, in order for the gameplay to feel the way they wanted concessions had to be made graphically. I wish more developers would practice this philosophy.

  • Locky Mavo

    I’m still having trouble figuring out why and what people were complaining about, the looks great!

    • It’s simple. You think it looks great, but a lot of other people think it looks… the opposite of great.

      The standards to compare to are A) other Wii U games and B) other AAA games and conpared to both, SFZ is objectively way worse–you can quickly tell from the textures which look around PS2 or Gamecube level in some parts. At least if it looked as good as other Wii U games, I think people wouldn’t care because they’d expect the gameplay to make up for it, but despite what a lot of people say, graphics are actually pretty important in a game: after all a game needs to be visually appealling, there’s just a lot more ways to do that than making it highly realistic, and Nintendo usually does that… Just not here

      As for my personal opinion, all I will say for now is the water looks great.

      • ronin4life

        I think Locky means what I mean when I the same thing:

        And that is, the issue with the graphical style isn’t a matter of being okay with it personally or not, but that it LITTERALLY does not look as bad as people are saying. Memories are kind of failing people if they really think any noticeable portion of what has been shown look anything like a PS2 game.

        • Locky Mavo

          Yes exactly! Plus it looks way better than a PS2 or GC game.

        • Mega Man

          People seem to overestimate the graphical capabilities of the PS2 all the time…

        • That’s nothing but an opinion though

          In the end one opinion boils down to “it looks fine” and another boils down to “it doesn’t look fine”

          And right now all you people are doing are shutting up the people who think it doesn’t look fine because you think it is, which is sad but also typical of the internet (respecting others = too hard)

          If you really want to do a comparison and “prove” the bad-looking parts don’t look like stuff from 2 generations ago, go ahead, but even if you had the knowledge to, it wouldn’t change the fact that people find it visually unappealling. even if what you say is true and memories are biased and crap, it doesn’t change anything except how the point is brought across. The point is that it doesn’t look good to a lot of people.

          • ronin4life

            Why should it matter how people think they feel about something when I happen to point out how they are factually incorrect?

            I disagree with people who say the graphics look bad, but I tell people who say the game Technologically looks generations old(and actually mean what they say) they are wrong and that this is an untrue statement.

            The graphics are not PS2 era and a persons eyes are more than enough to see that. The tech behind the games overall engine and graphics certainly isn’t; you could probably count the number of solid 60FPS titles on 360 with your fingers. And if people dislike its graphics off what is an untrue comparison of generational quality then what exactly are they upset about but their own imagined dissaisfaction in the first place?

            And honestly, I think that is all this is: Nintendo’s E3 Was an overall dissapointment to People and that negative opinion has caused some to exaggerate. I heard very few people say that they thought Hyrule Warriors and Wonderful 101 looked low quality in a similar fasion before, but all of a sudden Star Fox with its comparitive, if not far better graphics looks like PS2 era?

            It is hard for me to take ‘opinions’ and feelings seriously or allow them much weight when the people posting them obviously aren’t themselves.

          • Taking it too literally, perhaps. Like I said (re-read my last paragraph), it doesn’t matter whether it’s true or not. All that affects is people’s ability to get their point across, at best. And that’s assuming you first proved your point about the graphics, since what you think is fact is only opinion until you prove it, sadly. Otherwise, someone could argue and say “you can easily tell by sight these are N64 level graphics”, lol.

            If you’re really just disagreeing with the opinion that it looks bad, fine, but don’t be one of those people whobhas to attack others for saying something negative. There’s really no point in arguing whether something looks bad or not, no amount of arguing is going to get you anywhere, and half the people here just take “the game looks bad” to mean “we eant realistic graphics in a non-realistic game”, which is not true at all. That kind of stuff is just starting conflict and an unwillingness to accept that other people have valid opinions, and that’s my only issue with this whole thing. I don’t, by any means, want you to prove anything, it would serve no purpose except possibly pissing people off (if anyone still cared)

            tl;dr, people need to stop trying to shut up or invalidate people’s opinions, it’s old and frustrating. Instead of arguing it just let people rage a bit or try to be empathetic to their woes… but this is the internet so that’s too much to ask for, so in the end I’m the true idiot, for expecting more of people, lol

      • Locky Mavo

        Wow, a people pleaser? Just sounds like a lame excuse to whine about nothing.

      • Nowhere Man

        You have never played a PS2 or GameCube game if you really believe that looks like PS2 or GameCube textures… Seriously, that’s asinine; it’s not even close, in any part.

        • Classic “i’m going to declare something about you based on your argument”


          • Nowhere Man

            It’s classic because that’s how arguments work. There is a basis of an argument; I responded to your response to his point. His daughter, if no one else, is at least asking for it, and then you contradicted your original post right after. But thanks for the meaningless response that usually comes when there’s nothing better to say.

          • How is that how arguments work? Or rather, actual good, sense-making arguments. The fact that I have played many PS2 and GC games does not change based on what I believe, so your declaration that I’ve never played one if ____ is dumb. There is no “if”. I have played them. That is a FACT. You cannot retrospectively change that fact. If you don’t believe me, that’s fine I guess, but how am I supposed to argue with someone who makes claims about what I have or haven’t done in that fashion?

            I said “please” because I can’t say anything to an argument formulated in such a fashion. You used a classic internet-style of arguing that I can’t take seriously because it’s not very intelligent.

            And that bit about his daughter or whatever is… irrelevant? What are you even talking about anymore? Do you even know yourself? lol. You can’t honestly expect me to humor you when, and I apologize for being blunt, you lack the communication skills to have an open-minded and reflective discussion over a topic.

            And if you still insist that’s just excuses or whatever, that’s fine. It’s only proving my point, and I only care enough to take 3 minutes out to type this post anyhow. Nothing on the internet (or at least this section of it) is personal, so unlike most people I don’t get butthurt over what others think; therefore, we can try to have a nice discussion, or you can continue being difficult and confusing and I’ll take my leave, lol.

          • Nowhere Man

            Pardon me, the “that’s how arguments work” was supposed to be about another comment I had read. That’s not meant for your reply. That was regarding the daughter comment that clearly came from elsewhere. A simple “is… irrelevant?” would have been a good point to end that, but you went on an incredibly stupid, in your own words, “classic internet-style of arguing that I can’t take seriously because it’s not very intelligent.” Of course I know myself. And I lack the open-mind. Okay. Using the term “butthurt” is also an asinine internet term. Please stop contradicting yourself in your comment.

            I didn’t “declare” anything; that’s why there was the condition of “if.” I stand by that statement, and you telling me otherwise doesn’t prove it. If you’re telling the truth, then you need to dig out a GC or PS2 game to see just how much worse the graphics, in every possible way, are than Star Fox Zero’s, regardless of whether SFZ’s graphics are on par with other Wii U games. Also, you’re flat out wrong. There are various factors that could have influenced your belief, and playing the games is one of them. Yes, it MAY be a fact that you’ve played those games (again, I’m leaning towards you haven’t), but it’s independent of your belief. You could have formed that belief from pictures, videos, or watching others play (and of course, by playing them). Therefore, I never even remotely tried to change that fact, because I’m not a moron trying to change facts. My statement implies that that is NOT a fact, and that your belief was formed from pictures or videos; by saying “if you really believe that,” I eliminated possibility, in my mind, that you have actually played games from those systems; to me, that doesn’t exist as a fact (and still doesn’t).

            Once again, you over-analyzed, and horribly misinterpreted, a very simple comment. But, yes, I did make a claim that you haven’t played them, and because of your asinine belief, your word doesn’t change my claim because it is factually and technically incorrect that the textures and graphics are on the level of a GC or PS2 game. Maybe bad Wii graphics at worst (Xenoblade Chronicles or something a little better).

            There’s your in-depth analysis of a silly internet comment that you
            CLEARLY took personal, which is why you went insane passive-aggressive
            (a sign of defensive behavior, which is of course triggered by an
            offensive remark). Also, that post took you far longer than 3 minutes,
            but go ahead and lie to yourself and me again. And let’s also continue to believe I’m the only one being difficult. You show traits of a person with no accountability. I’m sorry for that.

  • John Shepard

    No one asked for derpy, gimmicky 2 screen controls. You could have spared us the junk controls no one asked for and instead of making an average looking game, given us a Star Fox with the polish and shine of MK 8 or Pikmin 3.

    • Happy Stranger

      No one asked for Metroid Prime,no one asked for the original Starfox esp using a chip that made the game more expensive. No one asked for Mario RPG. No one asked for Wii sports.

      Besides motion is optional. You can play the game using just analog if you want. Or keep trolling for attention. Up to you.

      • Trolls are pretty obvious like hermione granger and such, this person just thinks it’s a waste of the hardware’s power to have it go to a gimmick (cockpit view on the GamePad or whatever) instead of to making a game that looks great (a lot of other Wii U games), from what I see/understand

        • Vigilante_blade

          “person disagrees with me. He is a troll”

          • Hey man, I don’t make the rules! lol. There’s a reason why we say “majority rules”. And if the majority of people think something dumb, then the rules are dumb too 😛

            That being said trolls do exist, but most people here are just really passionate about how they feel and don’t want to hear or respect anyone else’s opinion.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Well, I think that we can agree on one thing: Most of us are passionate, and we’re all “fans of Nintendo”. I think we’d be better off standing together and showing an open mind. I personally dislike a lot of the things Nintendo does, and being passionate about it is the reason i feel such frustration.

            When I see Nintendo fanatics insult other fans because some of us are critical, I don’t really want to be part of the “Nintendo community”.

          • Me neither, but I’m dumb and keep subjecting myself to the community anyway

      • John Shepard

        Do I really have to explain the difference between gimmicky controls and brand new realizations of franchises? This isn’t a new style of game for Star Fox. It’s just a gimmick control that, again, no one asked for. I’m well aware everything is “trolling” these days, especially if it’s something you personally don’t agree with, but next time come up with something substantive, and comparable.

        i can play the game analog, sure, but I still have to sit there the more bland and less interactive gameplay because of gimmicky controls that most people are going to turn off the second they learn you can.

        • Keithin8a

          Personally I think that, contextually the gamepad controls make logical sense. The graphics look more stylized than anything else, just like windwaker was when it was originally released. But like your opinion, that is mine, Im only saying it because I worry people are thinking too much about it. Yes it doesn’t look as good as mk8, maybe it looks like a really nice HD remake of a ps2 game or more likely it looks like a complete HD remastering of an N64 game where the creators didn’t want to lose the nostalgia built up in its visual appeal. Which from this article is looking like that is what it is, its just the hardware limitations helped them realize that idea.

        • Motion controls in Star Fox are definitely something people asked for. Heck, it’s perfect for those kinda games. It’s the kinda thing when Star Fox first came out people used to dream about; being able to guide your ship through courses without a clunky directional pad.

          Very excited for this.

          • John Shepard

            Can you demonstrate people asked for those controls *before* the game was announced?

          • Gus

            I did it! 😀

      • Vigilante_blade

        Actually…. many people wanted a first person Metroid and wanted to see 3D gaming, but I digress. It is clear that many did “not” want gimmicks, and you forget about the dual screen stuff.

        • Happy Stranger

          No they didn’t. The media back in 2001-2002 before release and fans were saying the same thing. It will suck. No one wants a FPS Metroid,Nintendo is taking Metroid in the wrong direction. I still have the magazines from back then. About all of them were not happy. They wanted Metroid but wanted it in 3rd person. Wind Waker same thing the fan outcry over how it looked. Nintendo more often then not delivers a great experience even if the reveal is not what we expect.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Actually… Ever since Goldeneye, people have been clamoring for an FPS Metroid. Furthermore, there is a major difference here. No one said they wanted SMRPG for example, but it was clear that people wanted RPGs and Mario games. Plus, it was clearly not a mainline game. It did not take away from those who wanted a traditional Mario. They already had it. It is just like how people accept Paper Mario as a series existing alongside Mario & Luigi. They see them as distinct series.

            In the case of Star Fox Zero, it takes a main game and gives it an already divisive technology and shoehornes it into a serie that worked well without it. Instead of adding to an experience, it takes a series people have been waiting a seqjel for for years and turns in i to a tech demo.

            Gameplay changes are fine. Those are experiments that can turn out good or bad. Gimmicks change the medium itself. It takes what people enjoy at its most basic form (classic gaming) and turns it into something unrecognizable. The 3D shift of Metroid Prime was accepted because at its most basic level, it plays in a familiar manner. Gimmicks on the other hand turn gaming into this alien thing that can’t be enjoyed the same way. Those who play games for relaxation and precision will not find fun in gimmick controls.

            You compare apples and oranges. You compare things that evolved gaming (software innovations) to things that mutate it into something different (gimmicks).

          • Nowhere Man

            No, he’s 100% right about the pre-release Prime stuff. It got incredibly mixed reaction from fans and some critics even panned the game before it was released (not actual review scores, but their expectations); people did not think a first-person shooter could replicate the exploration necessary of a Metroid game. It was the Wind Waker of Metroid upon announcement, but that quickly changed when critics got their review copies and people finally got to play it. That’s why it’s so easy to forget that skepticism surrounded Prime at first.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Yes, mixed. Meaning there was demand for it. My point remains.

            And in the end, the game did capture the essence of Metroid. It was what people wanted, but people were skeptical. The changes did not mutate Metroid into something unrecognizable. It controls like a Metroid game would be expected if translated into first person.

          • Nowhere Man

            Yes, the Prime announcement created demand for it, but there was VERY little before, not enough to even hear about it back then. Nintendo took a risk and it succeeded greatly. Trust us, people did not want it as much as you think back then. “What people wanted” is a term used for a ton of demand; the fact that there was a LOT more negative reactions than positive to its revealing means there was merely a market for it, not necessarily what people wanted.

          • Vigilante_blade

            You forget the tons of people who demanded an FPS Metroid after the success of Goldeneye. Besides, as I’ve said, 3D Metroid was not a detour from what made Metroid great. It had good, classical controls, it had the same exploration aspects, the same sort of level design, tight precision, great puzzle elements. It was basically what was expected of a 2D Metroid, in 3D. The only difference was that it was in first person. In the end, people were into it and gave it a shot because it was what they wanted. A real Metroid game. No gimmicks, just a solid game.

          • Nowhere Man

            I know that, I never said it failed to capture what makes a Metroid game “Metroid.” I said there was skepticism that it was possible to do that around the time of its announcement. And the Wii motion controls are incredibly intuitive, so you unnecessarily use “gimmick” as a negative term when that’s entirely subjective (it’s also not a gimmick, it was a revolution that is still around today – a gimmick is generally a fad).

          • Vigilante_blade

            You say it’s intuitive, but I don’t find that so. If anything, I have to
            spend every game figure out what works or not, and most of the time,
            even if I did figure it out, it doesn’t works 100% of the time and
            demands that I be right-handed. I use the term gimmick negatively, yes, as motion controls have almost made me quit gaming altogether. The PS3, believe it or not, thanks to a little game called Valkyria Chronicles reminded me that games can still be fun. I owe this game a debt. And yes, a gimmick is a fad, and this is what motion controls are. It is that by definition.

            The X-Box One only managed to sell well after they flat-out removed the Kinect. The PS4 and Vita hardly ever use motion controls, and even when they do, they almost always make them optional. And PC? They stay away from that. Nintendo is the only company that still uses it, and even they seem to be scared to force it on people anymore because their fans are turning on them. Motion controls still exist because Nintendo is trying to keep it alive on life support. I sincerely hope that motion controls remain a mobile only thing from this point on.

            Motion controls divide this fanbase. Nearly 100% of Nintendo’s dedicated fans would buy a system without a gimmick controller, but not the other way around.

            There is a reason why the Wii U is not selling. The Wii damaged Nintendo’s brand with its hardcore gamers whom jumped ship a long time ago. It forced an ex-fanboy like me to buy Sony consoles and play PC games after all. People still don’t know if they can trust Nintendo to deliver gimmickless content, but if they work hard to regaint hat trust, I think that they could become very strong.

          • Nowhere Man

            That’s why I said it’s intuitive, not better. Better is subjective (and I believe it was better for certain games like Okami, Metroid Prime, and Pikmin). You not finding so doesn’t change that that’s one man’s opinion. If you have to figure that stuff out, then that sucks; it’s second nature to me and usually implemented well in Nintendo games (e.g. Mario Galaxy very limited motion controls).

            Motion controls aren’t even remotely a fad, it’s very clearly around for the long haul. Same with touch screen, much to your chagrin. Nintendo innovated in the 7th generation, whether you like/agree with it or not. It’s why every Sony and Microsoft immediately tried to copy it and continues to implement it. A fad in gaming wouldn’t last 9 years when this is a rapidly changing industry.

            The Xbox One sold well because of the massive price decrease and Phil Spencer’s movement on Microsoft exclusives; don’t even try to act like the Kinect was a bigger factor LOL. It’s only related because the removing the Kinect from the packaging made it cheaper.

            I agree, it divides the fanbase. Let me put it to you this way, the Wii U would be struggling if they still had their core fanbase. The N64 and GameCube pretty much consisted of their core fanbase and they failed to sell well. It might have doubled or tripled the Wii U’s sales, which is nice, but even with that fanbase it’d probably end in the 20-30 million units sold range, just like those other consoles did, and that is still bad. Hell, the Wii U still has potential to catch the GameCube. Face it, those fans jumped ship long ago, and I’m no losing any sleep over it; they’re the ones missing out on great games because of personal biases while I’m able to enjoy great games from all three companies.

            With all that said, that was an irrelevant rant.

          • Vigilante_blade

            It’s not really intuitive. I spent the first few hours of Skyward Sword holding the Wiimote the wrong way, until I realized that I had to slant it. Nothing in the game actually showed me that. I had to figure it out by fiddling with it. To me, it’s counter-intuitive. There is nothing more simple than pushing a button. Motion controls have a larger margin of error.

            I found that it didn’t really improve on Okami, though making the game pause really did prevent screwups. Metroid Prime on the Gamecube is a much superior games in terms of controls and feel. Pikmin works perfectly well on a gamecube controller. It is precise, works well. You thinking it improves them doesn’t make it so. (Yes, I took your arguments and turned them against you).

            I wouldn’t say Mario Galaxy implemented them well. Having to waggle to spin jump means there is a lot of latency for something that could be tied to a button and work much, much better.

            And yes, motion controls are demonstrably a fad. There is not a single other logical way to interpret it. It is clearly hanging out by a thread because Nintendo stubbornly is keeping it around. You not accepting that fact shows your bias.

            Nintendo has indeed “changed” thing sin the seventh generations, but the changes made by Nintendo did not stick. Sony is this generation’s new innovator. And seriously… it is getting old… Nintendo fanboys keep accusing Sony and Microsoft from copying Nintendo every single time. Truth is, The share features of the PS4, the bluray disks… these are all useful hardware innovations Nintendo hasn’t even thought of…. and the best thing is, it doesn’t mutate our gameplay experience. I don’t even own a PS4, and I can see how influential Sony is right now. Besides, copy is part of art. In this industry, taking what others do and making it better is just as, if not more important. Innovation is merely a buzzword. Don’t buy into corporate innovation culture.

            Phil Spencer’s decision to remove the Kinect has demosntrably show a large spike in sales of the X-Box One. It was obvious that people did not want to pay for motion controls or be forced to have the thing connected. My point remains. People don’t care about this fad anymore… which was also shown by the Wii becoming the most successful dust collector ever made.

            The Gamecube did turn a profit, but it didn’t sell as well as anticipated for various reasons. It marketed to children while being a hardcore system. It used a silly proprietary mini disk, making it difficult for third parties to make decent ports on it. Plus, Sony had the DVD craze on its side. Take these elements away, and I am certain that the Gamecube would have performed much better. The Gamecube was an amazing system that innovated through software mostly, and evolved gaming in great directions. I’ve nothing but respect for this underdog.

            Nevertheless Nintendo needs to start appealing to core audiences, and that means going full hardcore. Core gamers needs a commitment. That is all they are waiting for. The first step is making a system with a traditional controller and enough power to compete or even crush the others in term of power while maintaining a good architecture that allow for easy ports. just that will change everything.

          • Nowhere Man

            You are completely missing my point. I’m not definitively saying they improved these games, I’m saying I think they’re improvements. This is all subjective, you telling me I’m wrong is pointless because I’m neither wrong nor right, and neither are you. You’re stating your opinion as fact and it’s not. And on the flipside, just because you struggled to adjust to it doesn’t mean it’s not intuitive. I didn’t even realize holding the Wiimote a certain way was a thing because I never ran into that issue; that’s also what re-centering was for. I literally played that whole game either sitting or laying on my bed. It was that easy to use.

            Rattling the Wiimote accurately represents a spin while keeping it basic. Everything in the Wii series accurately represents how we perform those actions in real life while keeping the controls incredibly basic. Pointing your Wiimote at targets to shoot accurately represents shooting a gun while, again, keeping it incredibly basic. THAT’S what intuition mean. It doesn’t mean it’s good; that’s up to the player. As long as it’s accurate (which they almost always have been for first party games), then it’s up to the players whether it’s good or not. Also, ignore the comparison with regular controllers; that wasn’t even remotely my point. I never said it was better than pushing a button or that those games didn’t work well without the motion controls, I merely said I enjoyed it and thought it improved SOME games. That is not a fact that was worth arguing. You continue to go off topic and am now wasting my time, in all honesty. You’re also very myopic in your thinking and continue to assert your opinion as fact, and it’s not. You didn’t “turn my argument against me” because it was an opinion that won’t change because of your own.

            And yes, there is a correlation with removing Kinects from the packaging and Xbox One sales. You are BLATANTLY ignoring all of the factors that caused that correlation. You’re right, people didn’t want to be forced to buy the Kinect. These are things that need to be options for players because the Kinect is an entirely different market (one that clearly exists). It also made the console cheaper, which historically has been one of the biggest causes of sales spikes, so that’s the worst thing to ignore. You’re so blindly set it your ways that you refuse to see the reality that drives your opinions. I am factually correct about the price drop selling more consoles as history, in a LARGE sample, has proven me correct about this. Your point is also right that their core gamers didn’t want it, but I guarantee you that accounted for far less than the actual price drop. People would buy the Xbox One with a Kinect for the same price of the Xbox One, even if they never intend to use it, which shows you price is the most important thing. And people do care about this fad, that’s why the Wii U is struggling. They captured the market that cares about it with the Wii but that market flocked to mobile gaming when that blew up and left Nintendo in the dust. That doesn’t mean the market disappeared and no one cares about it, it means the market shifted and that millions still care about it. That’s why mobile gaming is probably more profitable than console gaming (I don’t actually know, but I’m willing to bet it).

            I also didn’t say the GCN didn’t turn a profit. I said it probably represents the population of Nintendo’s hardcore fanbase now. Nintendo has always marketed to kids and has always thought of themselves as a toy company long before the GCN, and that hasn’t changed since then. The people who flocked to Sony during the 5th and 6th gen didn’t come back with the Wii; even if the Wii U used a “real” controller, it would only sell 20-30 million units because that’s their market size until they get 3rd parties back, which, admittedly, is easier to do with a regular controller. You’re entirely right that if the GCN didn’t have those issues (particularly 3rd parties and DVD) that it would have performed better, but they had already lost most of their fanbase to Sony during the 5th gen and that only got worse in the 6th gen. None of that was my point as my point was that the GCN and N64 sales probably accurately represent the number of Nintendo’s core fanbase now if the Wii U had regular controls. You’re arguing an entirely different thing at this point. I don’t know how it got there, but this will never end if this continues to spiral off topic.

          • Vigilante_blade

            To me, if a significant amount of gamers don’t like it, I don’t see it as an improvement. However, there is fact in my opinions. The fact that motion controls were a fad is demonstrably right. It has died everywhere except for smartphones and Nintendo desperately trying to keep it relevant.

            if you have to struggle to understand something, especially if you’re an expert competitive gamer, it is not intuitive. If the game has to flat out explain it to you instead of just being able to understand it with a mere button check, it is not intuitive. Pressing a button on a controller represents pressing a trigger. Touching a stick to move something around represents steering. Quite intuitive. Besides, who says they have to to target babies? Something that knocks you over the head with over-simplicity becomes something you grow out of.

            There really is not way in which something could have accurately been represented with the Wii. It is by design, inaccurate. I can’t even make it up, the motion technology approximates things all of the time.

            The thing is…. you’re the one wasting my time… I’ve been quite clear this entire time. I’ve called motion controls a fad. I have demonstrated it with evidence. You keep arguing away. I have turned your argument against you, as you’ve stated your opinion as fact and treated it as superior to mine. I have demonstrated that you were wrong, you keep arguing.

            The Kinect was aimed at the exact same market as the Wiimote, gamepad and iOS. It is the same kind of consumer…. casuals. The price drop certainly might have helped, but no one is buying the separate version of the Kinect. It is clear that people don’t think that the Kinect is worth having or ups the value of the system. Nintendo doesn’t need to market to casuals to have success. The NES and SNES proved that. Them not marketing to casuals doesn’t mean gaming can’t be for everyone. iOS exists for this.

            What Nintendo could do is make a small studio to make their casual games on iOS and keep them off their consoles. That would really help differentiate between low end and high end gaming.

            Also, part of the shift towards Sony is Nintendo’s poor treatment of third parties, as well as the N64’s use of cartidge mediums (albeit the NX might benefit from it if they do as cartidges have greatly lowered in price and are better storage media nowadays). Their fall was a long time coming and was due to their own overconfidence.

            What fans need is a strong commitement. Many of those who left for Sony and Microsoft system would buy a high end Nintendo system in a heart beat if they pulled and equivalent system. With exclusives becoming rare, Nintendo could have an edge.

          • Nowhere Man

            If the mobile market is bigger and mobile gaming more profitable, it is, factually, no longer a fad. It has been adapted by more people and is continuing to be innovated upon. That’s definitively not a fad. Just because you disagree or because it’s not the console market, it doesn’t mean it disappeared when the console market is seen as a niche to the rest of the world, regardless of whether it actually is or not, and the market for mobile gaming is more rampant. That’s just factually incorrect. Nintendo is only trying to keep it relevant in console gaming; it’s still relevant to more people than there are console gamers. In fact, by your definition, console gaming has disappeared and become irrelevant in their eyes (they obviously don’t believe that as it’s a very big industry).

            Again, more people understood it than not. If they didn’t, it wouldn’t have sold so well. If they didn’t, these wouldn’t be critically acclaimed games. The Wii Series, in just one generation, became the fourth highest selling franchise behind Super Mario, Pokemon, and GTA. One generation. That alone shows you how enjoyable and intuitive the motion controls were TO A LOT OF PEOPLE (not to you). When those games account for 200 million sales in 7 short years (no other franchise will probably ever do that again), it’s probably safe to say you’re wrong. You don’t have to agree with it, but you can’t change it. You and other “hardcore gamers” not getting it does not mean it wasn’t intuitive. In fact, you’re a MUCH smaller population that it probably says more about your intuition.

            Dude, button games have to explain controls to you. All good games do; this isn’t exclusive to motion controlled games. I’m replaying Banjo right now and I have to be taught how to use the moves (same thing as motion control) throughout the game. Fighting games have an option to show you the various combinations. This has always existed in gaming. And they’ve never targeted babies, now you’re just being asinine to grasp for some straws. They provide their target market age and babies have never been included. Quit resorting to ridiculous statements. Over-simplicity because of motion controls? Skyward Sword and Mario Galaxy had a lot more depth than most games in that generation did. I know, I’m wrong because you hate motion controls, but it’s true.

            It was inaccurate by design, but pressing a button is accurately representing a punch? Another asinine statement that I’ll ignore.

            I never said you weren’t clear. You’ve been very clear, just with points that I never even brought up. With each response, you bring up irrelevant things that didn’t exist in the previous comments. And I have OCD, so I feel the urge to respond to all of these irrelevant points. It’s become tedious at this point.

            No, you haven’t provided evidence that it was just a fad, and I haven’t “treated” my opinion as superior to anyone’s. I’m clearly telling you not to argue opinions, which is all you’re providing as fact. I’ve given you my opinions and have ended it there with no comparison to yours in any which way, you just lack reading comprehension. Evidence is telling you the bigger market is embracing and utilizing motion controls even after 9 years, which definitely does not make it a fad. Evidence is telling you the Wii series is one of the fastest and highest selling series gaming has ever seen, which tells you that it was intuitive to a LOT of people. You counter that with “I had trouble with Skyward Sword” or “expert gamers cannot grasp it.” That’s anecdotal evidence, not scientific proof. That’s high school-level arguing. Basically, what you’re doing is repeating what I’ve said to you and claiming it as you’re own, even though I’ve separated facts (applying strictly to the arguments) and opinions (independently included in the comments that do not apply to the arguments). And again, historical data proves that price drops sell consoles more than anything, not “maybe having something to do with it.” If no one was buying the Kinect, it’d be bleeding money; if it was bleeding money, it would be discontinued. It’s a very expensive product that’s obviously at least breaking even, or has a small loss that’s able to be mitigated with software sales. Again, anecdotal evidence from you.

            I already said part of the shift towards Sony was the lack of third parties, and I already know it had to do with cartridges (the latter factoring in to the former). And no, cartridges wouldn’t benefit anyone. The reason cartridges hurt the N64 was because of its inferior storage space to CDs. It’s also WAY more expensive to produce as you actually need to pruchase plastic parts that are screwed together with hardware inside. CD’s are simple. You make the game and burn them onto multiple CDs. Nintendo would make inferior quality games if they went back to cartridges, and they would spend more money doing so. Why do you think companies love digital games? Because it has no material production costs outside of actually developing the game and releasing it on its server. But again, you’re repeating what I already agree and adding irrelevant things to my point. And Microsoft has the most exclusives lined up next year; one of the factors I stated for selling more consoles. Phil Spencer knows what he’s doing.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Of course, it is a fad for console gaming. It has been relegated to phones, but consumers invested enough to buy consoles don’t want motions. The demographic that buys console is now different from the demographic that exclusively games on smartphones.

            The people you mention are irrelevant to this discussion. They will not go on consoles. Smartphones took them. They are staying there. Besides, it is easy to learn how to waggle at a basic level, but if you’re going to try to master a game, it will not work. Wii sports has absolutely no depth to it. Waggle to win. Buttons are alternatively very easy to learn about. After all, we have TV remotes and almost everything we own utilizes buttons to some extent. What sold the Wii was not the motion controls… it was the health craze. People wanted to use this to get fit. Motion controls are a horribly unintuitive thing to use for any left-handed gamer. Even it it was intuitive, it is just not fun for the majority of now relevant gamers. Reality has changed. You are now the minority.

            Games don,t have to explain button setups. They do because people are just lazy. A simple button check is very easy to do and takes a few seconds. Those that actually need to explain it don’t require any more explanation than any sort of motion. Press A+B. Simple prompt, done.

            Super Mario Galaxy had controls that could have been relegated to simple traditional inputs. Skyward Sword could have had its sword slashes relegated to B and a direction. It is very easy to remap almost every single Wii game to a traditional controller and have it work better. Both fo these games could have been better games, but this took away from their depth. While Super Mario Galaxy added waggles, Skyward Sword had laggy and unreliable sword swipes as opposed to a superior alternative. They added nothing that couldn’t be done better with a traditional controller.

            By design, a traditional controller is very accurate. If you tap a button on a working controller, 100% of the time, it will register that input. On a motion controller, there is a vast margin of error. You changed the meaning of my sentence to create a strawman, but I won’t fall for such tricks.

            And dude, you’re going to have to deal with it, because this is a point I am passionate about. I will not let go.

            The fact that motion controls for gaming is a fad (discounting smartphones, which is a different entity) has been demonstrably proven. It is no opinion. Kinect demosntrates this tendency. Dwindling Wiimote use and Nintendo being forced to render it optional for most games demonstrates it. People no longer want to deal with it. I have provided more evidence for my case than you have, which is none. Whether some people still use it is irrelevant. Some people still use VHS tapes. You are also using the Wii as evidence, a console that is no longer relevant in today’s discussion. Evidence of motion controls dying off is around all over you. it may remain in a small form, but I believe that as a main control option, it no longer has a reason to exist.

            Also, you say that we “can’t” grasp motion controls, assuming that we don’t understand it. You miss the point. It’s not necessarily that expert gamers don’t understand it… they just don’t enjoy it… which makes this controller style divisive.

          • Nowhere Man

            Fine, I’ll let it go without reading this (I saw your “passionate” part in email), much to my chagrin. At the very least, we agree on why Nintendo’s struggling.

          • roboshort

            Your argument is just fuzzy, conservative thinking. First, among many other things you need to come up with a clear definition of gimmick.
            Here is your definition ->
            “You compare things that evolved gaming (software innovations) to things that mutate it into something different (gimmicks).” You should know that something evolving and something mutating are just two words for the same thing. But since you don’t, this distinction will just be completely arbitrary….. Some people thought gyro controls were gimmicky so they didn’t use them for Splatoon at first. It turned out though that gyro controls were much better the standard controls and the majority of people are now using them. Anyway, I think it is better to be open minded. EAD rarely doesn’t deliver.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Actually, it’s not that they gyro controls are necessarily better. Many of the top players play using stick only. However, the biggest issue is that Splatoon doesn’t have good stick sensitivity options. It’s either too sensitive or too sluggish. There’s no in-between. I think that people taking offense to people wanting classic controls because they like it better can easily fit as a definition of closed-mindedness.

            My definition of a gimmick is fairly clear. I consider that software innovations, things that keep the controls we know and love and push the boundaries of what gaming can do though sheer programming prowess or art direction are great.

            However, when these are hardware changes that take the gameplay we know and modifies it in a way where you can’t call this “gaming” in the usual sense, we’re talking about a gimmick. For instances, the spin jump in Super Mario Galaxy is a gimmick. A simple button push could have done that easily. The act of using a motion control controller cannot be compared to the feeling of using a classic controller. The experience of using a second separate screen does not compare to the experience of sitting on your couch while focusing on your TV. It’s not the same experience. It is not gaming in the sense that we have seen in in the past years. In other words, it is perfectly reasonable to assume that people who normally enjoy gaming may find this method of play unappealing… and this is often the case. It is a mutation, not an evolution.

    • Joe

      My teenage daughter sits on a spinning chair in the middle of our living room and twirls around, peering at the gamepad, lifting and angling to interact with her favorite games.

      Maybe not you, but someone is asking for these controls.

      • John Shepard

        Some people like Super Man 64 also. What’s your point? No matter what it is, you will find people who like things.

        • Joe

          I was responding to what you said – “It’s just a gimmick control that, again, no one asked for.”

          I’m sure some people are asking for it, because at least one of those people live with me.

          I personally dislike motion controls myself and I wish they’d disappear, but alas, people do enjoy and ask for them.

        • Nowhere Man

          Then why did you say “no one” asked for it if you’re going to contradict yourself right here?

          • John Shepard

            You can’t tell the difference between “no one asking” and “some people like”?

          • Nowhere Man

            Your response was to: “Maybe not you, but someone is asking for these controls.”

            Both our comments implied the same thing, whichever this one meant as this is the context we both responded to.

          • Joe

            Whatever you’re saying is what I’m saying.

    • people ask for Star Fox. Everytime people ask for one they refer to 64.

      Nintendo delivered a game like 64
      people complain it’s not what they wanted.

      There be a trend with Nintendo fans with Wii U
      -SM3DW it not Galaxy or this game look bland base off first trailer
      -Oh why another Donkey Kong Country game – post release Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze is the best 2.5D platformer evah/

      Then you have Nintendo Land, The Wonderful 101, Hyrule Warriors and bunch of others Wii U exclusive where many Nintendo fans on the Wii U complain from the get go.

      But after it’s releases they claim as a gold mine.

      Me being a Nintendo fan seeing this make me want to not associate with other Nintendo fans.

      • John Shepard

        People wanted a game like Star Fox 64, not Star Fox 64 with wonky, wobbly controls that split your attention on 2 screens

        • kalkon

          This. But, people like me are still interested in purchasing the game, it’s just that we (or I) are criticizing something that we feel deserves criticism.

          • John Shepard

            People can’t understand nuance in an argument. Just because I don’t want the game to be tooled down for controls doesn’t mean I think the game is bad. It means I think the controls are bad.

        • still complaining. It optional. Complaining about Option.

          • Complaining about optional stuff is 100% completely legitimate and only on the internet have I ever seen the argument that because something is optional, it is free from criticism, because you can just not deal with it

            It’s literally one of the stupidest arguments ever and to me, sounds like people simply can’t handle others complaining and criticizing things.

            On the other hand, some people complain way too much, and they need to shut up and get over it

          • Vigilante_blade

            Yeah, i think that complaints are legitimate if they at least have a reasoning behind it. For example, I don’t like the contests in Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire. People tell me I don’t have to do it. Sure, I don’t…. unless I want a mega stone for Lucario. Then I must spend hours on it.

            I think it is very sad that some people simply can’t handle “negativity”. I worry about people who need to be shielded from critique. Makes me think of the game We happy few…

            Mind you, I like options. I think those can be good, but when these “options” are actually in fact not options, or actually affect the game negatively (I would be against auto super using the touch screen in ladders of online fighting games), I will critique it.

          • Same, options are usually great, but even so there are times where options/optional content can detract (usually indirectly) from an experience, and like anything else, they’re not free from critique. After all, buying the game is optional, does that mean if we want to critique a game, we shouldn’t because it’s optional to have bought and played it? What a messed up world that would be >_>

          • kalkon

            I believe the issue some have mentioned is that supposedly the gamepad being made to run in 60 fps is taking up processing power that could have been used on the graphics

          • that was recently made clear. That wasn’t anything before.

          • kalkon

            I seem to somewhat recall having heard about this before. Even if you’re right though, this is what some of us are addressing, and rightly so if it’s true that it impedes the visuals.

        • Then don’t buy it. All it does is let Miyamoto and Nintendo know that Star Fox is not needed and they will kill of the franchise. Just let them appear in what ever Smash game and that it because clearly you guys don’t care about Star Fox future.

    • Vigilante_blade

      I fully agree with you.

      • Joe

        Random thought – Would your response to the screen on the gamepad be any different if the display was vivid high definition?

        I can’t think of anything that would make motion controls useable, but a much higher quality display in my hands might make the second screen enticing.

        I don’t know if this would change the eye focusing delay at all, but one reason I can’t stand using the gamepad screen is because it is tremendously inferior to my tv. Train wreck.

        This question is for John Shepard and Vigilante_blade, and anybody else who’d like to comment.

        • Vigilante_blade

          Well… my reason is much more simplistic. I simply don,t like the gamepad controller in general. I find it uncomfortable personally, and I don’t feel like using a second screen while I should be playing on my TV.

          Even if more power was given to the gamepad, I don’t think I’d care much more about it. Really, my only problem is that I don’t need this controller, but I have to buy it with the system, which makes it more expensive in the first place. Plus, some games force you to use it when you’d rather use a default classic controller. I’d be okay with the gamepad, as an optional thing you buy appart.

          I do see this as something that can be useful to some people, but not to everyone.

          • Joe

            If it were an optional accessory would you have ever bought it?

            What would it have to be/do for you to want to buy it?

          • Vigilante_blade

            Well… I would never have bought it to be honest. I just don’t need it. Making it optional would have given me the option to not have it though.

            I think that one way to sell me on the concept would be to take the portable system and give it the functions instead. Being able to stream the home console games for remote play would be a decent feature on a portable system. Plus, it could be used as a controller. Now that it doesn’t need an additional cable like in the GBA days, I think the concept could work.

          • Joe

            That’s a great idea.

    • Andy24

      I’ve heard crap about the controls but I’m gonna hold off my judgement till release. If they work along the lines of Splatoon motion controls, fine by me. While they can be gimmicky perhaps they’ll be enjoyable. I, however, sympathize with your disappointment because let’s face it, the game could run with much better textures if the gamepad would have other lesser functionalities. That being said, if they don’t use the gamepad, it’ll keep fuelling the argument of it being completely unnecessary.

    • roboshort

      Another fan who thinks he represents everybody and calls controls gimmicky without realizing that pressing buttons to make a character move on the screen is about as gimmicky as it gets and that the controls.. much more gimmicky than the controls they are aiming for in this game.

  • Happy Stranger

    Wii U is working overtime rendering the game twice. Shows the Wii U has some muscle. Hyrule Warriors could do the same but lower framerate and Nintendo made it 60 which also shows how good Nintendo is. People judge to much on graphics these days as people are spoiled and there isn’t enough games with color and style. I like some gritty or realistic games myself but we could have a non playable boring movie like the Order or a game will will enjoy 20 years from now like Starfox Zero.

    • Super cliche’d comment, bla bla gameplay is what matters, etc. lol

      Balance man

      Balance is key. Good gameplay, good graphics, good story, good music/sound. You can have an entertaining game with just a couple of these, but a good game tries to prevent any one category from detracting from the enjoyment of another. And a great game often tries to do it all (or else skip story and do everything else spectacularly). And good graphics don’t need to be realistic, but they do need to be quality (SM3DW, the latest Kirby and Yoshi games, Xeno X, and more aren’t very realistic or high-tech but are visually appealling anyway)

      • ShadyKnights

        Yeah, but balanced doesn’t necessarily mean an even or equal split. It means the appropriate distribution for the desired effect. So far we know their focus on the game is to make it look good. Maybe not excellent or whatever, but it looks good (as in it doesn’t make the eyes bleed). What will make this work is if the mix of the music, gameplay and such help immerse the player in the game world which generally makes up for whatever is visually lacking.

        As I’ve said once before (I believe on this site) It’s like how RockStar focused on making an honest and genuine feeling world with San Andreas rather than bumping up the graphics to say~ FFX or FFXII standards. Actually, GTA San Andreas is the perfect antithesis of your point of getting rid of story and doing everything else well as they did that with the visuals and it’s a spectacular game. They kept the graphics good enough for the player to more or less get what was going on and compensated on the basic visuals with world detail, gameplay, an excellent sound track, and a great story. These things worked so well it is still debated to be the very best of the series to date. Heck, some people (myself included) swear the game feels bigger than most modern open world games by virtue of the believable landscape and diversity that they didn’t need to add for game/story/plot reasons, but were there for the world itself.

        So I agree, I don’t think graphics need to be “top quality”, I feel they need to be appropriate and work for what the designers are trying to do. The thing is people are kinda jumping the gun and making assumptions on exactly what the game will be like, or how everything will roll together without really giving it a fair shot. I understand some worry with what the game will be like, but considering Platinum’s track record, it’s quite unfair for people to be getting all nervous and what not.

        • Correct/agreed

          I wasn’t really concerned because I figured the game is still in development and it’ll get better, but the problem is Miyamoto is instant on being a hipster and has shown no signs of wanting to improve the visuals. Furthermore, these hipster sayings SOUND great–“gameplay over graphics!” “Realistic graphics are boring! — I agree with these statements and have even said them myself but I realized that a sort of mob mentality came up where people forget that those things actually have value. MGS V has amazing graphics and it’s definitely part of why it’s so great. Bayo 2 was so epic partially because you had these high-speed battles in beautiful settings.

          I just don’t want people to be so stuck in their ways that they fail to see value in other things. Whether that’s not seeing value in graphics, online multiplayer, doing the same thing instead of forcing innovation for the sake of innovation, story (Nintendo is guilty of often not valuing all of the previously mentioned things, though they sometimes do), PlayStation games for Nintendo-only players, Nintendo games for PlayStation-only players (etc. etc. for all the platforms)… Oh and Sakurai not valuing the competitive scene that blossomed in Smash when he didn’t intend that, lol

          Yeah, I’ll leave it at that

          • Vigilante_blade

            We seem to agree a lot today.

            What people forget is that many games achieve their greatness in part due to their aesthetics. Guilty Gear would not be half the success it is without it’s badass metal music. I actually went to a tournament and when we got a sound glitch, the matches got paused as the players said “Guilty Gear cannot and must not be played without music”.

            When I was working on Project M (I am now much too busy), our alternate costumes and stage makeovers gave us spikes in the downloads. That’s because people care about these things. Sure, they need to enjoy the gameplay in the first place, but it helps.

            Heck, some games have very little gameplay and do well. It’s about being entertaining. Visual novels are hardly even games, and they rely on graphics and story-telling… if there’s any graphics at all. I remember the Hitchickers guide to the galaxy being just a black screen with white text. My friend huddled over around me, playing it for hours.

            The truth is that there are very few absolutes in terms of dosing the various elements in order of importance. I argue that the dynamic music in Banjo Kazooie was part of the game’s general success. The amazing hand-drawn storybook visual style of Valkyria Chronicles drew me into the game on a much deeper level than its sequels in large part because the sequels used a more generic art style.

            To say that so and so is not important is to denigrate the artists who create the work. If these things were not important, you’d only have designers creating minimalistic games.

            In a good game, the pieces work together as opposed to separately. The visuals enhance the gameplay (the shadows in stealth games, the flashy critical hits in Fire Emblem, etc…), sound enhances gameplay (the incrementally louder sounds from Link swiping at enemies in Wind Waker), etc… When I was working on Roy in Project M, I had the deepest amounts of respect for the artists who managed to give them the exact poly count needed for him to look as good as he could without slowing down the frame-rate. Their ability to work under huge limitations was impressive.The modellers may not have tweaked his moveset directly, but they are the reason they don’t slow the game down. They affected gameplay through their art.

            And one thing people fail to mention is that good gameplay is subjective. What’s good to one isn’t for others. I like competitive smash after all.

          • Yup, well put

            In the end there are few if any absolutes and many exceptions, not to mention countless valid perspectives on a single subject… Just wish people could be a bit more respectful and open-minded in these areas. Learning not to attack someone’s opinion even if they think it’s dumb or they don’t understand it. But it’s tough~

          • ShadyKnights

            Yes, but I think you’re misunderstanding what Miyamoto means. Now this is just my own interpretation of his words, but it sounds more like he’s saying visuals are only a small part of the game as a whole and he’s not saying they can’t be realistic or that he doesn’t appreciate the value of realistic graphics, but that it makes some games less unique when so many devs go for realism which is true. It’s just an art style, and when you see the same style emulated everywhere it genuinely does become a little difficult to discern between what you’re looking at at, at first glance. All graphics are for are just to represent the game world to the player and a focus on representing that world though just visuals, as most modern games do, just make the worlds feel less special. It’s not really him saying this is for how the entire industry to work, but to him, that is how it is for how he views the industry, that game play should be first and as long as people can tell what’s going on, that should be just fine. And it should be. Nidhog and Hotline Miami don’t suffer from their art style so to put so many games on visual pedestals by their looks alone is kinda silly. Star Fox Zero looks like it’s the art of Star Fox so really that should be good enough. People wanted a new SF game after all.

            Nintendo never really devalues anything, so much as they don’t have an interest in going a certain direction and just share their reasoning as to why. They’re artists who prefer to paint with water colors and acrylics, while the rest of the industry is pimpin’ oil paintings. Nothing’s wroth with either, they just say they have no interest in oil paintings cause X, Y, Z reasons. It’s how they feel and if we want oil they don’t begrudge gamers to go where you can get them.

            If anything they value new things, but they just value personal, physical innovations to random social ones. More controllers for more people close to you to play rather than internet for you to play with some random stranger, motion controls and new controllers every gen for you to get immersed in games in different ways than strict reliance on what has worked before and just focusing on that. It’s not that they put no value in these social things like internet gaming and such, as I said, they’re just doing their own thing. The thing is rather than finding it’s own thing, Sony jumped on Microsoft’s social bandwagon rather than found a direction of it’s own to look, which is why it seems like Nintendo is just “going the wrong way” or “behind the times” when it’s just they’re concerned with painting different landscapes and different seasons. There’s nothing really wrong with Nintendo focusing on their own things while slowly integrating what the rest of the industry has into that style, but i feel it’s more important for them and the industry, for them to make sure they do things their way first then worry about adding the other things people like from the competition into their products, but to also do so in a way that is uniquely them.

            As far as the Smash competitive community is concerned though, if Smash wasn’t intended to be competitive, they should just play it how they like and shush. Sakurai not caring about the game being played that way because he’d rather have noobs having fun more than high skill players feeling everything is balanced and equal is his business and if they don’t like how he does it they should go else where, otherwise fasten their faces.

          • Sounds like you just interpreted his comments differently

            To me it sounds like an actual aversion to or dislike for quality, somewhat realistic graphics (which is weird because Pikmin 3 looked great)

            To you, it doesn’t sound so bad and just seems like a harmless comment on Miyamoto’s viewpoint on how art is handled in the industry :O

            Can we leave it at that?

  • dannyxzero

    Now give mii my Arwing transforming amiibo please!

  • The problem is while Nintendo’s games aren’t really leading in graphics technology like, ever, they’re generally at least good enough or otherwise visually appealing (e.g. due to a unique art style/take on the visuals) that it’s enjoyable/doesn’t hurt the experience at all. Someimes a nice art style is so refreshing it’s better than realistic graphics, which “age” pretty quickly. This is nothing new here, it’s been said probably thousands of times.

    But for a game like SFZ to have grass textures that look like they’re PS2 graphics, that’s a serious problem. I can overlook some of the other stuff like the crappy Arwing, enemy, building, etc. textures even though they’re also kinda lacking but Nintendo has proven that not only they can do better and they’ve been getting a lot of praise for the visual appeal of a lot of their serious Wii U games lately–maybe not Devil’s Third or Wii Party U but Smash, MK8, Splatoon, Bayo 2, Xeno X, HW, WWHD, there are lots of great-looking AND great-playing games on the Wii U, and if you can get the best of both worlds, why make excuses to defend bad graphics?

    At least for me, I’ve been playing Nintendo games since the 64 and graphics practically never bothered me but now that I’ve branched out into a lot of other games, I can tell you that SFZ looks so bad, even compared to Wii U games, that I literally do not think I could play and enjoy it much due to it breaking my immersion. I really hope the graphics have improved since E3 because if not, I’m considering cancelling my pre-order, which would be really sad. I buy like half of Nintendo’s 1st-party releases and I can’t justify $60 for what will probably be a 2-hour game where I’m constantly bugged by the fact that part of the game looks fine (albeit not good) and others look horrible but it’s 2015 and this is one of Nintendo’s big titles of the year.

    Honestly to me it looks like a $40 game right now, if it had online and looked on par with other Wii U titles (instead of that hardware power going to the GamePad gimmick) I’d fork over $60 because I really like StarFox dangit and I was really looking forward to a new one, but if you at least fix the “these graphics are so poor it breaks my immersion” problen I’ll fork over $60 anyway.

    And I’m not a graphics freak but a game needs to neet some kind of standard if it doesn’t want to look bad and graphics are a huge part of any game, say what you want but a game involves 3 senses, your visual, auditory, and touch senses, meaning graphics, sound, and gameplay are all important (gameplay is just a bit more important since its exclusive to games and what makes them different from movies).

    I still play old games on occasion: SNES, GBA, GC, PS2, PSP, old PC games… But those games either have a good style or looked good for their time or at least aren’t like StarFox where the water looks way prettier than the grass and it’s actually distracting

    I might be exaggerating a little bit, but the whole graphics vs. gameplay debate is annoying because both extremes are dumb and narrow-minded IMO. I want a game that looks good AND plays good, and dangit, most games I play do because plenty of devs realize they’re both important, look at how much praise Shin’en’s racing game is getting, that’s not JUST because it looks fun, lol. People take pride in how visually appealling that game looks, and that’s fine.

    Just don’t let me down, Nintendo, I want to remember StarFox fondly.

    • Kenshin0011

      I agree and have thought the same myself. And it’s not only the graphics, but the lack of online multiplayer, or any online or branched out modes at all, that makes it hard to shell out $60 day 1. I think it’s obvious the game is being rushed, or rather the bar has been set very low.

      • TalesOfBS

        Or maybe they want to port it to the 3DS later, so…. who knows.

    • kalkon

      Yeah I haven’t played the game or anything but from what I’ve seen the gamepad function doesn’t seem worth the effort of cutting down on visuals. It seems to be an attempt at trying to show off what the gamepad can do, but in this case it just doesn’t amount to much.

      Younger players might be into this “gimmick”, but it just doesn’t appeal to me.

      Maybe they were going for a nostalgic type of visual style, but then again who knows, could just be an excuse.

      • Maybe… hopefully in the end it’s pretty fun anyway

  • Annie

    Graphics are ok, The Wonderful 101 (another collaboration between Platinum Games and Nintendo) also has unimpressive graphics yet it is one of the best games of this generation

    And what Mr. Miyamoto said about games that aim for a realistic look is true, you could see a screen of Dying Light with no zombies in it and think it’s probably Call of Duty, Battlefield or any other FPS, meanwhile series like Mario, Pokémon and Kirby are instantly recognizable

    • Joe

      You really think Wonderful 101 is one of the best games of this gen? I’m honestly asking because I’m on the fence about buying it.

      • Stuart

        I know you didn’t asked me,but yes the game is amazing,buy it you will not regret.

      • get it get it get it……epic epic epic…

      • Happy Stranger

        Fantastic game but a long learning curve. If you can be patient it’s one of those gems be talked about for years.

        • Joe

          That sounds like exactly my kind of game. I’m convinced. Thanks!

          • ben

            If you need convincing watch this review.

            This guy destroys video games. He thinks it is awesome. I recommend all this content creators work! Platinum games even blogged about this review.

          • Joe

            Fantastic. Thank you for sharing this. I ended up watching a couple of his videos. Will watch more.

    • Andy24

      Eh I still feel W101 looks far better because the cartooney/comic book like style was emphasized more.

    • TalesOfBS

      This is a Star Fox game, a Nintendo “AAA”. Not a random platforming game.

      Who cares if games look realistic or not, as long as they look good? And right now, this doesn’t look good. Stop blindly defending everything they screw up.

      • Annie

        Hypocrite sheep? blindly defending? I was merely stating MY OPINION which is that the graphics are ok, they’re ok FOR ME, they’re ok IN MY OPINION, is the concept of people having different opinions really that hard for you to understand?

  • Melatelo

    Whilst I always agree gameplay is far more important than graphics. Graphics should not be shoved to the side. We all love a nice looking game. Both Pikmin 3 and MK8 had absolutely gorgeous graphics and it really added to those experiences for me. Games like Devil’s Third look shocking, and I noticed It did lower the overall experience I had with that game. Star Fox on the other hand- the graphics honestly look good to me. Not sure what people are fussing over.

  • I say let’s try the game before we criticize it. Look at Splatoon new control scheme. It was frowned upon and now it’s majoritarily described as better than traditional twin stick control.

  • errantrazor

    It amazes me that people still continue to jump to conclusions about gameplay or control methods or art styles that Nintendo announces.

    “Oh my God that’s terrible! I hate it! Nintendoomed!” For months on end, every time something new is shown.

    Then when the game/console/whatever comes out “Oh my God this is great! Nintendo has done it again!”

    You’d think at some point people would learn to keep their knee-jerk reactions to themselves or at least in check after having to eat their words time and again.

    • TalesOfBS

      I wonder for how long sheeps will pretend that Nintendo has a free pass for halfassed development effort.

      • errantrazor

        Until they actually do some half-assed development. Their track record over the past 30 years does not warrant that. Which was my point. Thanks for making it for me.

        • TalesOfBS

          Another delay. Looks like your half-assed SF Zero needed it.

          • errantrazor

            Which exactly proves my point. They put the effort and polish in to make it right, even if it means they take hit financially by missing a prime retail window. Nothing half-assed about what they do.

  • Operative

    “He additionally mentioned that games these days “look so realistic that they all look the same.””

    Ahahaha.. I can’t take him seriously if he’s gonna make some gross over generalizations. That’s like when people say all of Nintendo’s games look the same because they’re filled with bright colors to appeal to children. Pro-tip: If you feel the need to defend your art style, don’t do so by lambasting others.

    • ben

      I am sure he, the most famous game artist in the world, is going to be worried about your “Pro tip”. How stupid are you?

      • Operative

        How insecure are you that you take such offense at a random strangers comment? My guess is alot 😉

        • ben

          Not offended at all. Just sad that people are so arrogant./

          • Operative

            Haha, okay

          • TalesOfBS

            Maybe it is time for Nintendo sheeps to stop being so arrogant then.
            Thinking they are playing the best games while they are actually playing poor messed up attempts at HD.

      • TalesOfBS

        Sheep a bit more.

    • TalesOfBS

      I wonder how long until they move to pure wireframe games because “everyone else uses so much textures that they all look the same”.

      Also, maybe that is why Nintendo don’t even use Anti-aliasing anymore. lol

      • Operative

        Lmao pretty much, that’s the logic they seem to be using

  • Terra Nova

    The game was visually poor, could have more enemies on screen, more textures, more particles …

    I wanted a look at least similar to Mario Kart 8 …

    StarFox could more frantic, as countless enemies on screen a real star war as Baynetta 2.

    But in Starfox Zero gamepad is consuming 60fps forced the Wii U to process 120fps in its entirety … penalizing the rest.

    sorry for my English

  • if it looks anything like the Smash Bros StarFox stage im all in

  • Justmadeanaccount2

    I think they were just being lazy…None of their other games have realistic graphics and they all look great. This is probably the only first party Nintendo game that looks mediocre.

    • uPadWatcher

      You want realistic graphics, go to the movies. Star Fox Zero is basically spiritual successors of Star Fox 64 and the unreleased Star Fox 2.

      • Justmadeanaccount2

        Do you not know how to read?

        • Happy Stranger

          You sure don’t. Game is rendered twice and keeping a 60FPS and people who played it have loved it.

          • Justmadeanaccount2

            I don’t care. It looks bad.

          • Happy Stranger

            If you don’t care then stop complaining

          • What kind of logic is “people who played it have loved it”, therefore it’s good (this part beng implied by what and how you said it)? The only players whose comments you’ve even heard are those that liked it precisely because that’s what Nintendo wants people to hear. They’re not going to promote people saying anything else, lol. Even Mario Tennis Ultra Smash only got praise. loool.

          • Happy Stranger

            People who have yet to play it. Say it will suck or be mediocre and all those comments are based on graphics. People who played the game have said it’s really good. So it shows people need to stop basing how good a game is on graphics alone. Otherwise The Order is the best game ever made on consoles. People who played it have more clout than me or him or you as none of us played it so we can’t say either way fairly but if gives us an idea just saying something is terrible without playing it is just wrong.

          • Was anyone really saying the game is terrible though? If they are, they’re probably a little dumb, but neither I nor the original poster were saying that. It looks mediocre, that’s all. That still leaves the gameplay, music, and story: everyone values these things differently, some might be ok with crappy gameplay if the story is great, some might only want good graphics, some will buy games just for the music. I don’t think anyone is saying the game is terrible though just because the ground textures look plain and the polygon count might be low.

            Personally, I’m still getting the game even if it doesn’t end up looking better, the only thing I have in mind is if it’s worth $59.99 or less… So far I’m at about $49.99, but we’ll see as the launch gets closer

        • rofl, I agree with you and this is hilarious. You literally said “none of their other games have realistic graphics and they all look great” and yet he tells you if you want realistic graphics, go to the movies… LOL. Guess he actually can’t read (or messed up). So sorry you had to deal with that, this is why internet comments/forums are generally a bad time, lol.

          • ben

            pretty sure the texture work on the ground of pikmin 3 is worse than this. as is 3d world.

        • TalesOfBS

          Blind sheeps usually don’t read.

  • Happy Stranger

    If you think this looks like a gamecube game
    Game is not winning awards visually but a lot looks quite a bit better than Gamcube IMO. Hyrule Warriors not the greatest looking game I ever saw either but was really fun.

    • TalesOfBS

      Gamecube in HD.

  • Felipe M.

    Being developed by Platinum Games gives me high hopes. I’ve pre-ordered it already. ^_^

  • Personally, I think it would just look wrong to have the Star Fox crew look hyper-realistic. That would be equivalent to having Mario look like a real Italian fellow.

    • Don’t think anyone disagrees

      There is a difference between visually appealing graphics and hyper-realistic graphics in that you can have one, the other, both, or neither.

      All people are saying is that some parts don’t look visually appealling, whereas most Nintendo games do (despite Nintendo games not having realistic graphics).

  • miyamoto

    Man look at those textures!

    • TalesOfBS

      Textures? Look at all that aliasing, N64 poly models and Arwings so undetailed that even SF64 would take a laugh on them.

  • Lol, that could almost be a jab at realistic graphics, but it’s basically true. I appreciate a fresh art style, and something that helps characterize a project (doesn’t even have to be a game). Some games do work best with realistic art styles, but too many things rely on it needlessly.

    The game looks gorgeous, and I’m super excited to play it~. Seems like a reboot, and I really hope it is. (And I hope we get Krystal again, but with a better intro and more playability down the line.)

  • Christopher Williams

    The visuals are great like most of the games on Wii U. Gameplay comes first especially when SFZ is using new mechanics like the walker arwing and gyro gamepad targeting.

  • NotshaneTM

    Yeah, I was just gonna say, NO Wii U games ever truly did 60fps on both screens at once. I certainly wish that Black Ops II pulled it off because I loved that feature, but I am glad that Star Fox Zero is going to pull it off. I give them props for trying to focus on game-play this time around.

  • TalesOfBS

    In other words: So under powered that even Nintendo devs are having trouble to do what the console was supposed to do, and why now they have to resort to these silly excuses.

    What is next? Pure wireframe games because “games these days all have textures”?