A Deep Dive into Star Fox Zero’s Controls | Game Maker’s Toolkit


Hey. This is Game Maker’s Toolkit. I’m Mark
Brown Star Fox Zero is a game that was made to prove
a point. In a briefing with investors in 2014, Nintendo CEO
Satoru Iwata said that while the Wii U Gamepad was great for local multiplayer games, Nintendo
hadn’t yet “been able to offer a decisive software title that enriches the user’s
gameplay experience when playing alone with the GamePad”. Which is to say they hadn’t made a singleplayer
game that could only work on a system with two, distinct screens – the TV, and the Gamepad.
A game that would be awesome precisely because of this unique set-up. Shigeru Miyamoto’s department was tasked with
coming up with this decisive game, and so we ended up with Star Fox Zero. A game that completely
revolves around the gamepad. You cannot play without it. And so the question is… did it work? Did
Star Fox Zero prove that the Gamepad could give us an essential game – and one that could
only work on the Wii U? It’s fair to say that reviewers weren’t convinced.
There’s no shortage of articles that call the game’s control scheme confusing, terrible,
tricky, unusually unintuitive, and a multi-screen mess. But I want to take a closer look. Figure out
exactly what developers Nintendo and Platinum were trying to pull off, see where they succeeded
and, yes, look at where they failed. So Star Fox Zero’s unorthodox controls can
largely be grouped into two aspects. One of which is, I think, fine. The other of which
is, a bit of a trash fire. The thing that’s largely fine is the motion
controls. First, some background. Every Star Fox game
from the Super Nintendo original to Star Fox Command on DS has you exclusively steering
the Arwing, and so your gunfire is always just shooting out in front of the ship, out
from the Arwing’s nose. And that’s fine. It works great on a system with just a d-pad or an analogue stick. And it gives the games an accessible
and arcadey feel. More like Space Harrier than a combat simulator. But it does have
some limitations: because you must essentially put yourself in the enemy’s line of fire to
shoot at them, the games have a funky back-and-forth pace where you jump in front of foes, fire
off a few laser beams, and then barrel roll away when the enemy fires back. This also gives the games a heavy focus on
your charge shot as you can charge up a missile in safety, flick the arwing over to an enemy
for a split second to lock on, and then let it rip. This is all important because Star Fox Zero
is the first game that lets you independently steer your ship and aim your guns. Sorry,
first Star Fox game: we’ve seen on-rail shooters do this already, like Kid Icarus Uprising,
which uses the analogue stick and stylus on the 3DS to move and aim. And Sin and Punishment
2 on the Wii which lets you move with the nunchuck and aim with the Wii remote. But what you don’t see is a lot of space shooters
that let you steer with one analogue stick and aim with the other. Games like Ratchet
and Clank ignore the right stick and use the same system as classic Star Fox games. Now we already know that analogue sticks aren’t
great for fine motor movement, and trying to wrestle with one while also moving up and
down and left and right in space is probably about as much fun as rubbing your tummy and
patting your head. And that’s likely why Nintendo opted to use
the more fluid and accurate gyroscope in the Wii U Gamepad for aiming in Star Fox. A very
similar system to the one it used in Splatoon though, this time, you can’t turn the motion controls off and
revert to more traditional twin-stick aiming. And that’s probably also because the right
analogue stick is already being used for advanced Arwing manuveres. You flick it up to boost, flick
it down to brake, left and right give you a tighter turning radius. And all that’s great.
But it’s also used for somersaults and u-turns and barrel rolls and firing off bombs, all
of which I often do when I don’t want to, and can’t pull off when I do. Anyway. I think the motion controls are mostly
fine. I prefer the Wii remote and its pointer for faster access to every corner
of the screen. And you don’t need to recalibrate the Wii remote every five seconds. Side note,
but the fact that Star Fox Zero needs a dedicated button to fix the controls doesn’t bode well. But there’s one thing that the gyro can do that the
Wii remote cannot: aim outside of the boundaries of the TV. and that’s how we come to… dual
screen gameplay. Okay, so here’s the pitch. The TV shows something
that looks like classic Star Fox. The camera lingers behind the Arwing, giving you a complete
overview of your surroundings. The Gamepad shows inside Fox’s cockpit. Not only does
this give you more accurate aiming, but you can also turn the Gamepad to the side, or
above, or below you to see things that aren’t on the TV. In theory this would allow for things like
bombing runs where you fly your Arwing up over an enemy base on the TV, and then look
down using the Gamepad to fire laser beams at weak spots. And bits like that do crop up in Star Fox
Zero. These strider enemies have weak points on their underside so you can fly under them
on the telly, and then aim up and shoot the red bits on the Gamepad. And some of the bosses make the best use of
the two screens. Take mother strider: you use the TV to drive around the outside of
the massive monster, and then aim the Gamepad off to the side to shoot at its leg joints.
Then back to the TV to fly your Gravmaster up and over the boss and then look back at
the Gamepad to fire lasers down at the weak points and, yeah, that’s actually a lot of
fun. When you’re not dying over and over. But this sort of thing so rarely pops up in
the game. And there are so few times when you make the conscious, tactical choice to look
at one screen over the other. Because, the best Wii U games. Or, the best
singleplayer Wii U games that make full use of the Gamepad, are those that offer different
perspectives or different information on the two screens, and you have to choose which one to look at, while knowing that stuff is still going on on the other screen. Like when you’re rerouting power on the Gamepad
in Affordable Space Adventures, while your ship is changing and moving on the TV. Or
the tense action of rummaging through your backpack on the Gamepad in Zombi U, while
nervously glancing back to the TV in case a zombie is sneaking up on you. But in Star Fox Zero, both screens often just
show the exact same thing but in their own, uniquely crap way. And not just because one
is 6 inches big, low resolution, and covered in dust. So the Gamepad will warn you about enemies
on your tail, but the TV won’t. Then the TV will show you that a big boss monster is about
to squash you while the Gamepad says nothing. Are you supposed to look at both screens at
all times? how many eyes does Miyamoto have? And then there’s the reticule. Oh boy, the
reticule. Okay, so get this: the reticule on the TV screen is, for all intents and purposes,
inaccurate. If you aim at this grid of lights and fire, you will miss. See? Because if you
look at the Gamepad while you do this you’ll notice that you’re actually aiming over here. Now this is something to do with perspective
or whatever. But, you know, that’s nonsense. No other game does this. It’s just deliberately
broken to give the Gamepad a reason for existing. And that’s kinda messed up. So, the two screens largely show the same
thing, just one doesn’t let you aim properly and the other doesn’t let you see properly. And instead of making intentional choices,
based on the situation, I found myself just using one or the other. Especially in the on-rails bits where everything
is front of you so why bother looking off the boundaries of the TV? You don’t actually
need to look at the Gamepad to kill those striders because their weak points are so
big, and your charge shot can lock onto them anyway. But then there’s target mode. This is when,
during boss fights and other special sections, the TV screen shows a mad, zoomed out, skew-whiff
view of things. The target mode is almost a good idea
– it can work quite well in the dog fights against Star Wolf where you keep track of
the enemy on the TV, then somersault around, and peer into the Gamepad to let loose a flurry
of laser beams – but the camera’s so zoomed out, and the sparse starfields you fight on
offer so little in the way of orientation, that by the time you’ve mentally linked up
the geography of the TV with your gamepad display you’re already dead. And so the question is: why does target mode look like this? “I wanted see something really cool,” says Miyamoto. Which is like: What? But yes, he’s being serious.
“You’re able to use things like u-turns and somersaults to create some really cool visuals
on the TV while doing all of the fighting through the Gamepad screen,” he says. “It
also lets anyone who’s watching you play enjoy really cool scenes”. He likens it to how replays in racing
games, with their cinematic angles, look better than the in-car stuff. Which is true, I guess.
But how he got from that to “let’s do the important driving bits on a tiny, low-res
Fisher Price iPad” is anyone’s guess. Platinum is well known for ostentatious boss
fights that are as stunning to look at as they are to play, but rarely at the expense
of actual playability. Couldn’t it just have been a map like in Star
Fox Command on DS? Or is that too boring for the hypothetical person who might be watching
you play? So, Star Fox Zero puts visual spectacle before
gameplay. And the game, level and enemy design rarely encourage you to interact with the
unique controls in an interesting way. But beyond all that, the game’s just tough to
get to grips with. It’s hard enough that Zero expects you to
keep track of two things – the ship and the reticule – for the first time in Star Fox
history. One of which is done with a potentially unfamiliar gyroscopic control scheme. But
also keep track of two screens, each with unique information and, sometimes, camera
angle. And Nintendo and Platinum know this four-piece
juggling act is hard to understand. Read any interview with the developers and you’ll see
it. “Early in the game’s development, we’d
kind of assumed that we wouldn’t need to explain how to fly the ships – players would
just be able to get the hang of it,” says Miyamoto. They later added a training mode. The training mode also covers the other ships
that pop up, that are perhaps even stranger to control, like a chicken walker that inexplicably
uses tank controls from the mid 90s. Those training levels exist, according to
Nintendo’s Yugo Hayashi, so that the first time the Gyrowing or the Gravmaster or the
chicken walker show up in the game, players are “not just completely confused”. Completely
confused! That sounds more like Polygon’s review than a developer’s quote. Complaints from long time Star Fox fans “did
concern us,” says Yusuke Hashimoto of Platinum, “but we felt strongly enough to ask people
to get used to it.” GRANGA: My emperor! I’ve failed you! Well. Players can get used to it. I’ve gotten
used to it. And so have expert Platinum players who are starting to uncover the game’s clever
scoring system which has you doing critical charged shots and charged unlocked shots,
and shooting at enemy corpses that have already been blown up to get bonus points. zallard1, the world record holder for a 100%
speed run in Star Fox 64, is posting videos of his crazy high score runs on YouTube but,
guess what? “I really wish they had given more control options”, he says, admitting
that he’s had to abandon lots of record runs because he accidentally dropped a bomb or
did a somersault. “I just find myself not in complete control
of any vehicle 100% of the time,” and “it’s just a shame that the controls are confusing
for no reason”. If this guy doesn’t get it, no one will. But anyway, “getting used to controls”
is not really something I’d expect from Nintendo. It’s games are incredibly accessible, sometimes
to a fault, and to hear them say you’ll get the controls after 30 minutes, or an hour,
or on your second playthrough is weird. Even Platinum, who make incredibly rich and complex
games, makes sure that first time players have a good experience. Bayonetta 2 has a
mode where you can play with one hand. And here’s the kicker. “I do think that we
can take this control style and still find ways to apply it to, for example, a single
screen experience by switching back and forth between different view styles,” says Miyamoto. Because Star Fox Zero ultimately tries to
fix a problem that already has a solution. We’ve been zooming in for a better look in
shooters for years, and we haven’t needed to look at a different screen. you just…
zoom in. Even Star Fox 64 had a cockpit view. And how about moving the camera to look at
things off to the side, or above or below the player. For an example of how to do this
without a second screen, let’s look at a game called, what? Star Fox Zero? Oh yeah, when
you’re descending down these laser shafts or dropping a robot onto a platform you look
down by holding a button. So did Star Fox Zero complete its mission?
Did it prove that the Wii U Gamepad can lead to essential games? I don’t think so. The controls are so complicated that you need
training modes and an hour of playing to understand them, and even the world’s best players are
still struggling. But even if you do get to grips with them,
the game design so rarely rewards or encourages you to dart back and forth between the two
screens, outside of some good boss fights and these weird robot-dropping bits that don’t
fit the arcade speed of the game at all. Ultimately I think Star Fox Zero would not
only work okay on other input devices with minimal tweaking, it would probably be better
for 90% of the game. There are games that prove the Wii U Gamepad’s
worth as interesting, singleplayer controller but – for whatever reason – they’re just not made
by Nintendo. And, as a long time Nintendo fan, I’m not sure if I should be worried. Thanks so much for watching! Videos like this simply wouldn’t be possible
without the time and resources afforded to me by my Patreon people. Join them at Patreon.com/gamemakerstoolkit and you could see your name alongside these cool cat $5 donators.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Post navigation

100 thoughts on “A Deep Dive into Star Fox Zero’s Controls | Game Maker’s Toolkit

  1. This kind of system would probably be great in a co-op game, where one player focuses of piloting and not getting hit while the other fires away with a variety of weapons

  2. So in your Twitter AMA when you hit 300,000 subscribers you said this is your favorite video. And now I'm curious as to why? You've seem to do so many other fun videoes that a video where you crap on a game and it's controls seems to be the odd one out. So I'm confused why did you pick this? Are there more insights into control design that you have that aren't in this video? Why this one?

  3. 0:21
    in other words:
    why don't we have a crappy tech demo that's more worried about gimmicky controls in a genre that did perfectly fine with normal controls?
    when you set out to make a tech demo, a tech demo is all you're gonna get.

  4. Ratchet & Clank (2016) yes, one stick for both
    Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction uses both, the left steers the ship, the right aims the reticule

  5. i found it very strange that nintendo's multi-screen devices never (or at least very rarely) allow for good use of their multi-screen design. most DS games will let you go through the menu on the touch screen, but pause the game while you're doing it as if you can't walk around the overworld while fiddling with your menu, and it's absolutely absurd that a person playing mario kart on the wiiu gamepad not only takes up a section of the TV in split screen but ALSO HAS THIER ALREADY TINY SCREEN SPLIT????????? it's the perfect design to reduce the clutter of split screen and somehow managed to fail to do anything with it.

  6. I like games that push boundaries. This game was a test on how this system would work. I think with some tweeking the game could've been a hit.

  7. I respectfully disagree with your claim that the reticle being "inaccurate" and it's wrong on purpose to "give the gamepad a reason for existing." It's actually just more accurate ebcause of, as you even stated, "perspective or whatever." It'd have to ignore perspective and angle for anything at any distance to get hit within that reticle. It's just too accurate for people who don't want to mentally estimate angles, and i get that that could not be fun for most players, but inaccurate it is not.

  8. I don't like the way how nintendo made star fox zero to make the gamepad have a point when the whole of the gamepad was to play around your house but no I guess they have to make it required to play with the tv and the gamepad.

  9. I dont understand how people dont get this game. The ONLY control issue i had was with the chicken walker when you first use it, outside of that It was easy, and worked perfect for the dogfights.
    Now Im not under the impression most gamers have flown before, but if you cant figure out starfox, dont bother joining the airforce as a pilot. The multitasking and quick eye needed for this game isnt a flaw of the design, its a flaw of the player who was either unwilling or unable to learn how to manage the screens. Had they not tied the pad camera to shooting, no one would use the pad camera, and so no one would be forced to leave their comfort zone.

    Go back and play this game, but this time keep your arms locked into a frame, dont play in your lap like a dewritos eating slob, if you must, bend your arms into a "V" and rest your elbows on your thighs, then every time you need to aim turn your vision to the gamepad and move your entire torso to aim, not just your arms.
    I swear to god, its exactly like cursed mountain, where people claimed the game was broken because they didnt follow the EXPLICIT control instructions. If i remember, red steel 2 even had to introduce a live actor to explain the controls because so many idiotic games journalists couldnt honestly figure out how to use the sword.

  10. Skyward Sword is another example of where meddling with the traditional controls failed. although, it does sound like Star Fox Zero was worse.

  11. "Target mode" reminds me a lot of "Assistance OFF" in Tom Clancy's HAWX. Except, in that case, I thought it was very well implemented, easy to get used to, and looked better.

  12. On rewatching this video, I realized Nintendo could actually do the "look off the screen boundaries" thing right with the Switch, which, for the first time, has 4 independent 360° axes with 2 analog sticks and motion controls on both joy cons. Use the right stick to control the camera, Use the left stick to move, and use the right Joy-Con's gyros to aim a reticle. If you want to add style attacks and don't have extra buttons, map it to the left Joycon's gyros.

  13. Hmm.. I don’t completely agree with one of the points in the video, although the rest was incredibly enjoyable with a lot of insight! The reticule makes a lot of sense to me, the second box is offset to show you how much it will deviate; and this is necessary. This is because of the two different angles. In the cockpit, you’re shooting directly at targets, which shown by the centre box not changing where it is in relation to the outer one. Yes, this isn’t realistic because you’d have to be shooting from your eyes instead of from the guns (CS:GO does this too, although I’m not too sure if there are many ways around this without making the reticule not represent exactly where the projectiles go). In the outer view, you’re behind the ship and the reticule has to account for the difference in angles, therefore not being exactly where you shoot. Although, it will be, only at a certain distance though. 3D and VR games have the problems that people can’t use reticules being at a fixed distance from the player. It’s impossible to look at both the enemy and reticule at the same time, unless the enemy is at the distance of the crosshair. That’s why 3D games project them at the position it will land. It works in 3D games and VR ones where they shoot from the eyes (not sure if there are any, it’d only be useful in very rare situations), because it looks as if the crosshair isn’t moving. In Starfox, the reticule would be bouncing around the screen because of the difference in angle. It could have worked though!

    >By eyes I meant the viewpoint: the player camera

  14. Indeed the walkers controls are from the mid 90's, Star Fox 2 started and ended development then and the walker was from that game. The game didn't come out till this year though because of 64

  15. I feel these controls could have worked if they were only two player. On person flies and the other shoots or bombs. Also it shouldn't be Star fox it just makes little sense there. Maybe a WW2 bombing game would be pretty cool or something like that.

  16. Imo because of the controlls this is the most easy star fox yet. Just sit in a corner and use tilt aim. To hit certain things in the old ones you actually had to get in harns way. I wish i could just turn em off

  17. I feel you got too personal on this one. It shows in lower quality work. Misquoting Miyamoto, cheap shots on the design of the game-pad, some other nonprofessional stuff. You still do make valid points, but please continue being professional.

  18. I’m kinda hoping there’s a Switch remaster or something. SF0 looks great, but I don’t want to fight through the control scheme.

  19. how the shit did anyone have troubles with controls? seriously, how? Don't get me wrong, they're more complicated than they needed to be, but i picked them up after a few minutes of playing, and the only time they proved any trouble was andross and battling in that enclosed area.

  20. I have high hopes for a new switch star fox game, they know what they did wrong and they know how to fix it.

  21. It's really disappointing we didn't get some kind of Okami game for the Wii U. The Gamepad was perfectly suited for it. I actually had an idea for a puzzle game based around connecting objects with different types of "tethers" that used the Gamepad to allow the player to freely change the lengths of active tethers. Unfortunately, since I was in high school I had neither the skills, time, nor resources to bring it to life.

  22. I feel like this would have worked pretty well in a SLOWER tank game where you play as driver and gunner at the same time

  23. This game encapsulates everything Nintendo wanted the Gamepad to be.

    The Switch encapsulates everything the public wanted from the Gamepad.

  24. It’s really sad that this game is, in many ways, the biggst insult to the WiiU, and it really made the GamePad seem like a gimmick more than any other game. Specially since it was clear that Nintendo of all developers had no idea how to make use of the console’s innovation/ gimmick
    Thank goodness the Joy-Cons are being put to better use, and when they are not, you can just pick up a Pro controller and play like a normal person

  25. I was gonna say "It's an Nintendo game, there isn't much of a hypothetical that a bunch of people would be watching the game." until I realized the mistake there. IT'S A NINTENDO GAME. No one is allowed watch the game!

  26. it's this game's gimmick. it wouldn't have been made if it wasn't for this. after all nintendo needs gimmicks to justify making a game.

  27. The thing I always thought was detrimental to Nintendo's design philosophy was: "Make the unique control scheme first, then design the game's mechanics around that control scheme" instead of the other way around. In some form, this works in nintendo's favor, like Mario and Zelda, but their gameplay is often complex enough to justify the control scheme. But when you do this in what should be a simple game like Star Fox, and trying to make it more complex without being complex, it comes off as unnecessary. Skyward Sword had this problem. A majority of that game was designed around the Wii Motion Plus controls, instead of the game's mechanics justifying the Wii Motion Plus control scheme. They made a 1 to 1 motion control of the sword, so a lot of the combat revolves around playing a short game of Simon Says with enemies hilarious blocking in a specific way that leaves one opening for you to slice at. It's purely simple mechanics, because they were focusing more on trying to create an innovative control scheme than an innovative game mechanic. And it's especially a grievance when the moveset in Skyward Sword are attacks you can already do in past Zelda titles. Besides diagonal attacks, you can already do horizontal and vertical slashes, as well as a stab attack.

  28. If a remake or sequel were to be made for the switch, would the handheld mode of just the joycons work for this game?

  29. When this game first came out I remember it getting alot of criticism. I just can't help but laugh about those who said they were put off by the controls. It's got to be the best aspect of the game. The only gripe I ever had with the game is it feels shorter than I would have liked. It's got replay value but I feel like it could have used maybe 4 or 5 more stages.

  30. I consider Star Fox Zero to be a beautiful disaster. It's a great game while also being a terrible one. What I mean is that I personally think the design around the game is genius. The controls work exceptionally well and add so much depth and freedom once you understand them. The game is truly one of a kind.

    That's the problem though, you have to understand the controls, and they are one of a kind. The game asks you to forget how to play every other game you have ever played before, and learn a new way to play a game, and it's a fast passed challenging game so you aren't really eased into it where we had Super Mario 64 to ease us into analog sticks.

    So personally, I think the game is a lot of fun once you figure it out, and I believe 10-20 years from now it will be remembered as a cool one of a kind game, though unfortunately unintuitive.

  31. This was Nintendo's biggest and most confusing mistake – that they didn't have a game to exploit the features of the Wii U this late in the day. They should have had such a game planned before the Wii U even got out of the prototype stage! Otherwise what was the point of it existing?

  32. The aiming reticule is just fine

    They are a set distance away from the ship

    I think it's best with an example
    Let's say looking straight is 0°
    Pretend the first reticule is 10m away
    The second 20m away
    Let's say the camera is 10m from the ship (and for simplicity, imagine the ship is a point)

    Let's say a target is 25m away at a 45° angle
    That means it's ~17m away in the z axis and 17m in the x axis

    When viewing from 3rd person, that means the first reticule will be roughly 3/5 of the way to the target is the x axis (on the screen)
    And the 2nd will slighty over shoot the target in the x axis

    But that's not how you see it
    Your brain wants it to be as if you're shooting where the camera is, not the plane

    That means that you're putting the 2nd reticule over the target
    The hypotenuse is 20m
    The x axis distance is 17m
    Some trig and you find out you're actually aiming at a 58° angle
    Meaning you're shooting too far to the left

    Even star fox 64 had this aiming style

  33. the sad thing to me is that this would have worked IF they had made it a 2-player game, which would have defeated the point they were trying to prove, but if the TV player flew and shot in front, while a gamepad player had a first-person gunner seat on the gamepad, it would have been great. you would have had to communicate and strategize your unique POV together to win.

  34. i personally had a great time with star fox zero and the only real problem i had with the controls was the accidentally shooting a bomb sometimes which rarely happened. I don't understand what the problems with the controls are. But i do agree that the sections that did utilize the dual screens weren't fun and that the game would not suffer without the dual screen mechanics. And yeah, the stupid robot dude totally ruined the pacing of that level.

  35. My first reaction to this video was "that could work really well with a Double Dash style co-op mode", with one player flying and one player shooting.

  36. My buddy and I thought this game controlled fine. But I am a chameleon and he is a hammerhead shark, so…

  37. The core issue with Nintendo is that they first make consoles with weird gimmicks for seemingly no reason, and then forcefully trying to figure out how to use these gimmicks to create unique and enjoyable gameplay mechanics, instead of doing so the other way around

  38. I feel that robocraft's (a computer game utilizing mouse but hold on) controls would work well here, in robocraft you could control your robot and your camera independently, camera was also the aim and thus you could be going somewhere while firing off in another direction (or looking) while still being able to look in front of you like normal and… I don't know where I'm going with this. What are your thoughts? I'd love to have a discussion about this I just don't know where to go on my own. BTW these thoughts mainly popped up in my head as mark talked about the "bombing run" section, and then thoughts started to wander. ALSO I haven't played any starfox game so I'm probably just rambling nonsense so, my b

  39. I honestly love the gyro aiming and think it does a lot to make Star Fox more fun and interesting. but the dual-screen stuff is total nonsense. Should've just made the reticle on the TV accurate

  40. this game would be awesome with a sibling so two players can co op controlling and communicating to deal with the game short coming.. could be alot of fun in a way.

  41. This exactly demonstrates why I refused to buy a wii U, no game I saw (first player) ever really did anything with the glorified (bad) ipad that couldn't be done with a normal controller. The star fox controls felt more forced on you than to help. I was kind of hoping this game would be the equivalent of phantom hourglass on the ds, really utilizing the screen as more than an awkward gimmick.. but was very disappointed.

  42. I got the game at my library to try out and honestly the arwing stuff was fun to me. The controls were weird but interestingly different. It was every other part of the game that I could not stand. The bits where you drop the robot were painfully boring and the controls for all the vehicles besides the arwing made the game nearly unplayable. I think it was at one of these sections that I just stopped and returned it.

  43. As someone who sucked at classic star fox, I actually really enjoyed Star Fox Zero and it's control scheme. Granted, I almost never looked at the gamepad. I was decent with the gyro controls thanks to my time in splatoon and utilized the screen switch button actively. So I was always switching between the 2 views, when I needed. Which rarely happened, outside of boss battles, but yeah, I still actively enjoy the game all these years later, though I rarely play it anymore. I think the last time I played it may have even been over a year ago, but I think I'll pop it in tomorrow for a quick run through coneria

  44. It's funny that you use R&C as an example of sticking to the classic Star Fox style, when the series dabbled in twin-stick rail-shooter controls in the starfighter bits of Tools of Destruction. One stick moved the ship like in Star Fox, the other aimed the guns. It was pretty great.

    As is par for the course for the series, though, this didn't stick beyond this game. I love Insomniac and the R&C series, but I do wish they would be a bit more consistent with mechanics from game to game sometimes…

  45. It would have been better to have a brand new title built around the gamepad, like they did with Nintendo Land. With Star Fox Zero, it's liek they are improving on a few small things with the game pad, and then ruining everything else with it.

  46. Nice video, I've been on the fence with this game for a long time and now I can really strike it off my list. I think the original Splatoon used the gamepad effectively by displaying the map and allowing for quick jumping, it's something I really miss in the sequel.

  47. Wait, the gamepad is a second touchscreen, right? so they have made games that uses that layout a large number of times, they have all the ds and 3ds games that already make use of a second screen, they already knew how to do good games with two screens.

  48. Hot take: I played this game while staying at a relative's house, no HDMI cable with me, gamepad only. Controlled perfectly fine the whole way. In fact, given OP's preference for games that make you infer things for yourself, he should be praising this style, as you do need some situational awareness with this method (such as the boss he claimed can't be read on the gamepad blatantly showing a shadow of where it is in that shot.)

  49. Never played a starfox game, but wouldn't it have been super simple to just display all the technical stuff like ammo, health, mission briefing etc. on the smaller screen while leaving you with a tv screen that's completely free of annoying numbers that just focuses on how it looks to Fox?
    Edit: Ok I hadn't watched the whole thing, it's basically something that's proposed by Mark.

  50. Sounds like how my dad must have felt when we got a Playstation. He never managed the jump from keyboard and mouse to a controller.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *