• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

STAR FOX fans — What would be the STAR FOX game of your dreams?

Trevelyan9999

Banned
Feb 8, 2012
1,737
0
0
www.nintengen.com
My dream:

A true squeal to SNES Star Fox.

Same triangles and boxy polygons in 1080p 60fps. I actually loved the original's art style. Also bring the feel back from the first game by making the music in the same style as well; the SNES game has the best music in series imo.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,319
19,330
1,910
Best Coast
Variety. And nobody can say on-foot sections don't work -- only that they haven't worked well the way they've been done so far.

But picture this: For every 10 Arwing missions, you have one on-foot mission, and that on-foot mission plays like Sin & Punishment for the on-rails section, and like a mixture of Bayonetta (stylish character action) and Vanquish (high-speed TPS) for the all-range section, and then the boss section is a one-on-one rival duel in the style of Metal Gear Rising. Would this really be a terrible way to mix things up every 10 Arwing missions? Of course not. It would be welcome variety.

The key is that it's done well -- and certainly that much is possible, with the right developer talent (I.E. PlatinumGames).

It's nice to hope that it could be done well. Of course it'll be a good addition if it's done well. However, is it necessary? Are on-foot missions essential for a Star Fox game? Time and resources spent on developing a good on-foot gameplay design could take away from refining and perfecting the Arwing gameplay - and the Arwing gameplay is the primary focus of a Star Fox game.

Would Sin and Punishment, Bayonetta, and MGR have had as good gameplay as they have if the devs also had to have developed a deep and compelling flying vehicle aspect to their game as well? What you're describing for the on foot missions sounds like it could make a decent game on its own. I don't think that really needs the Star Fox IP.
 

Nostremitus

Member
Mar 24, 2012
8,868
2
0
Seoul, ROK
Why do some of you want more on foot stuff? I don't think it works well with the Arwing gameplay.

The reason it hasn't worked well is because they've tried to use the Arwing gameplay and apply it to the character on-foot. That's always been a dumb idea, an on-foot character shouldn't control just like the vehicles.

If done correctly the one foot sections could be a lot of fun...

It's nice to hope that it could be done well. Of course it'll be a good addition if it's done well. However, is it necessary? Are on-foot missions essential for a Star Fox game? Time and resources spent on developing a good on-foot gameplay design could take away from refining and perfecting the Arwing gameplay - and the Arwing gameplay is the primary focus of a Star Fox game.

Would Sin and Punishment, Bayonetta, and MGR have had as good gameplay as they have if the devs also had to have developed a deep and compelling flying vehicle aspect to their game as well? What you're describing for the on foot missions sounds like it could make a decent game on its own. I don't think that really needs the Star Fox IP.

At this point, Starfox is also known for it's on foot sections. Removing those, it's just another generic on-rails shooter. Why not remove the story and the landmaster and just have waves of enemies appearing? If they didn't waste time on those other aspects, imagine how complex the waves of enemies and the movement algorithms could be.

Starfox needs to move forward and beyond the limitations of the old consoles it used to be on. When I imagine the perfect Starfox, it's a combination Mass Effect 2 cover shooter when on foot and Rogue Leader while flying... I imagine the multiplayer from the Gamecube with better on-foot controls and various online modes, If done well, Starfox could be Nintendo's online multiplayer juggernaught. Make each character have different classes to choose from. Make your Arwing upgradeable. Have Great Fox "flying fortress" type battles where you're controlling the turrets. Make it "more."
 
Oct 20, 2004
3,309
0
1,405
36
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
More to add:

- Great Fox interaction mode similar to Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty's interaction inside the Hyperion. Inside there, you can manage everything, interact with your teammates, choose theirs roles, the budget, the routes, upgrade your vehicles, etc.
- Yes, exploration missions Descent-like would be a good idea, as long they later turn into a rail-mode or an All-Range mode mission when you encounter an enemy.
- Missions mixing rail and all-range mode missions would be interesting, too.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,319
19,330
1,910
Best Coast
The reason it hasn't worked well is because they've tried to use the Arwing gameplay and apply it to the character on-foot. That's always been a dumb idea, an on-foot character shouldn't control just like the vehicles.

If done correctly the one foot sections could be a lot of fun...

Right, that is part of the problem. Also agreed that it could be a lot of fun if done correctly. However...

There is only so much time you can spend on the game development, so it would have been easier to use the existing Arwing framework and tack that on to the foot missions. I just think that there's no point in adding on foot missions when the time could be better spent elsewhere.

Besides, to me, the essentials of Star Fox is about going pew pew pew in my Arwing, flying around, dodging obstacles, and dogfighting. I don't need to get out of my plane. I don't want to get out of my plane.

It's not like I'm going to get off my dragon in Panzer Dragoon, am I?
 

Nostremitus

Member
Mar 24, 2012
8,868
2
0
Seoul, ROK
Right, that is part of the problem. Also agreed that it could be a lot of fun if done correctly. However...

There is only so much time you can spend on the game development, so it would have been easier to use the existing Arwing framework and tack that on to the foot missions. I just think that there's no point in adding on foot missions when the time could be better spent elsewhere.

Besides, to me, the essentials of Star Fox is about going pew pew pew in my Arwing, flying around, dodging obstacles, and dogfighting. I don't need to get out of my plane. I don't want to get out of my plane.

It's not like I'm going to get off my dragon in Panzer Dragoon, am I?

Quoting my edit.

At this point, Starfox is also known for it's on foot sections. Removing those, it's just another generic on-rails shooter. Why not remove the story and the landmaster and just have waves of enemies appearing? If they didn't waste time on those other aspects, imagine how complex the waves of enemies and the movement algorithms could be.

Starfox needs to move forward and beyond the limitations of the old consoles it used to be on. When I imagine the perfect Starfox, it's a combination Mass Effect 2 cover shooter when on foot and Rogue Leader while flying... I imagine the multiplayer from the Gamecube with better on-foot controls and various online modes, If done well, Starfox could be Nintendo's online multiplayer juggernaught. Make each character hace different classes to choose from. Make your Arwing upgradeable. Have Great Fox "flying fortress" type battles where you're controlling the turrets. Make it "more."

Fox has been in more games on foot than he has been in just the Arwing... A lot of new fans only know him from Smash and would buy the game wanting to run around with a blaster and personal shield.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,319
19,330
1,910
Best Coast
At this point, Starfox is also known for it's on foot sections.
Yeah, it's known for how bad they are and how many wish those sections didn't exist.

At this point, Starfox is also known for it's on foot sections. Removing those, it's just another generic on-rails shooter.
Not necessarily. Star Fox is at its core, an on-rails shooter. Extraneous elements that don't add anything good to the game should not be included (however I still agree that if "done well", it could be a positive. I just don't have much faith that it can be.)

Why not remove the story and the landmaster and just have waves of enemies appearing? If they didn't waste time on those other aspects, imagine how complex the waves of enemies and the movement algorithms could be.
Well, the game's got to have at least a story. This isn't a completely zero-sum game where everything taken out is only going to be a benefit to the Arwing gameplay. I just think it applies more to the idea of not needing on-foot missions in a game that's supposed to be about flying a kickass ship in an on-rails shooting setting.

Starfox needs to move forward and beyond the limitations of the old consoles it used to be on. When I imagine the perfect Starfox, it's a combination Mass Effect 2 cover shooter when on foot and Rogue Leader while flying... I imagine the multiplayer from the Gamecube with better on-foot controls and various online modes, If done well, Starfox could be Nintendo's online multiplayer juggernaught. Make each character hace different classes to choose from. Make your Arwing upgradeable. Have Great Fox "fly fortress" type battles where you're controlling the turrets. Make it "more."

Perhaps. I understand why you want Star Fox to have a grander vision, and I too am saddened at how Star Fox as a brand is languishing at the moment. But I don't know if stuffing in all those kinds of aspects is really going to achieve what you envision. It kinda sounds like you just want to play Mass Effect of Rogue Squadron with Star Fox characters.

Again, I agree that it could potentially be amazing if it all came together well. I just don't really think there's a high probability of that happening. There's a reason most people think that the series peaked at Star Fox 64. Since then, they've gone farther and farther away from what most people are expecting out of a "Star Fox game", and they haven't met with much success.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,319
19,330
1,910
Best Coast
Fox has been in more games on foot than he has been in just the Arwing... A lot of new fans only know him from Smash and would buy the game wanting to run around with a blaster and personal shield.
I would say part of the reason for the downturn in the Star Fox IP has been that the Arwing focus has been downplayed.

As far as being in more games on foot than in an Arwing, that applies to Star Fox Adventures, Star Fox Assault, and Smash. Adventures and Smash aren't even Star Fox games. Adventures used to be Dinosaur Planet before Nintendo decided to slap the Star Fox IP over it. I don't think most Smash players expect to play as Fox himself just as much as they'd expect to play Captain Falcon as a human playable character, in an F-Zero game.
 

Nostremitus

Member
Mar 24, 2012
8,868
2
0
Seoul, ROK
There's a reason most people think that the series peaked at Star Fox 64. Since then, they've gone farther and farther away from what most people are expecting out of a "Star Fox game", and they haven't met with much success.

I think the reason is because it hasn't evolved. They had Namco working on it and people got excited thinking of what the Ace Combat guys would do with Starfox... Instead they got what the Ace Combat guys would do if they tried to copy Starfox64 with on-foot sections that still controlled like Starfox64... and it was terrible.

3D marios don't play like the 2D ones, and that's fine. Let Starfox evolve too. An on-rails no frills shooter is ok for an eShop "disposable" title. But if they're going to throw an actual budget behind it to make a full retail title, make it a full retail title with all that is entailed.

Maybe it just comes down to the game engine... One of the biggest things to happen this past gen was the ability to have a game in which you were on foot one moment, driving around the next, and flying in a an aircraft minutes later... The newer engines allow for this to work flawlessly.
This is something Starfox had two gens ago before it was quite so possible to do well.

Why would you remove that? It is a part of Starox, and a necessary one if you ask me... otherwise it just becomes the same old boring game you played almost 20 years ago. (It wasn't boring back when it came out on N64 because it was an exciting advancement, now though? Well, there's a reason the rerelease on 3DS isn't highly acclaimed.)

Nostalgia's good and all, but don't let it hold a franchise back. Starfox has been shackled by it for too long.

I would say part of the reason for the downturn in the Star Fox IP has been that the Arwing focus has been downplayed.

As far as being in more games on foot than in an Arwing, that applies to Star Fox Adventures, Star Fox Assault, and Smash. Adventures and Smash aren't even Star Fox games. Adventures used to be Dinosaur Planet before Nintendo decided to slap the Star Fox IP over it. I don't think most Smash players expect to play as Fox himself just as much as they'd expect to play Captain Falcon as a human playable character, in an F-Zero game.

I think the average gamer doesn't know what F-Zero is anymore, so may may think that... the same goes for Starfox, I'm afraid...

If they make a new Starfox, it won't be strictly for the long-time fans who either don't have enough numbers to make the more recent games sale, or have turned their backs on the old formula... If they're smart they'll also target the modern gamer...
 

Neiteio

Member
Nov 10, 2007
54,436
6
0
As a once-in-a-while mission type meant to keep Arwing levels from getting stale, on-foot sections could work great. :)

In spirit they would be similar to the Arwing missions, alternating between on-rails (in the style of Sin & Punishment) and all-range, the latter playing like Nintendo's take on Robotron -- waves of enemies coming from all directions, and you take them on with TPS action reminiscent of Vanquish, and melee combat reminiscent of Bayonetta. It all then culminates in an intense one-on-one rival duel like the kind seen in Metal Gear Rising. Imagine the Mistral battle from MGRR, but instead of Raiden and Mistral, it's Fox and Wolf going head-to-head with their combat staffs.

And then it's back to the Arwing, and the next 10 missions are all in your ship. The ship itself could mix it up by implementing the transformable mech form that was in the unreleased Star Fox II for the Super NES. Whenever the Arwing needs to infiltrate an installation, shut down ground fortifications, etc, it can transform into its bipedal mech form -- like a Gundam changing from a starfighter to a mobile suit. It would then have an all-new set of moves, fulfilling a new purpose.

Likewise with the Landmaster -- my idea to make it amphibious would add a great deal of variety to the Landmaster missions, since it could assume a "Blue Marine Mode" and roll straight into the water, slicing surf like a high-speed gunboat or diving underwater as a submersible. Giving the Landmaster a pair of anti-gravity treads that would allow it to scale sheer surfaces and drive upside-down on ceilings would also be fun -- imagine a level where you're driving up the side of skyscraper as it's bombarded by enemy forces.

It wouldn't be redundant next to the mech, either, since it would feature entirely different handling and have the ability to scale walls and ceilings and travel across and under water. The Landmaster is the versatile ground option where the mission is on ground from the start. The mech is meant more for situations encountered by the Arwing, like infiltrating a space station under siege, or destroying anti-air turrets.

And going back to the Arwing -- it's easy to picture Kamiya giving it the TW101 treatment with a high degree of customization, including upgrades, new subsystems and armaments to equip. I also like the idea of extendable appendages that can deploy like arms underneath the Arwing, for close combat (swatting aside enemies within reach) or for grappling foes or manipulating objects. Imagine a QTE boss finisher, where a dreadnought tries to rush down Fox's Arwing, and Fox pins the nose of it between the arms of his Arwing, slowing it down. SO. COOL. :)
 

Nostremitus

Member
Mar 24, 2012
8,868
2
0
Seoul, ROK
If they keep the mission structure, it should be separated by hub areas. I want to walk around in the Great Fox between battles and talk to people, buy parts for my Arwing, choose my loadout for the next mission. I want armor upgrades, a "Training Room" that functions as the online multiplayer lobby. If they are going to bring starfox back, they need to do so with gusto.
 

Neiteio

Member
Nov 10, 2007
54,436
6
0
If they keep the mission structure, it should be separated by hub areas. I want to walk around in the Great Fox between battles and talk to people, buy parts for my Arwing, choose my loadout for the next mission. I want armor upgrades, a "Training Room" that functions as the online multiplayer lobby. If they are going to bring starfox back, they need to do so with gusto.
That would be a good way to strengthen player attachment to the individual characters. :)
 
Jul 7, 2004
16,628
2
1,505
A completely store-free experience that's basically Star Fox for SNES but with better graphics and new stages.

I'll even settle for an HD remake of SNES Star Fox. Good enough for me.
 

Sami+

Member
May 2, 2013
10,661
1
0
Tallahassee
As a once-in-a-while mission type meant to keep Arwing levels from getting stale, on-foot sections could work great. :)

In spirit they would be similar to the Arwing missions, alternating between on-rails (in the style of Sin & Punishment) and all-range, the latter playing like Nintendo's take on Robotron -- waves of enemies coming from all directions, and you take them on with TPS action reminiscent of Vanquish, and melee combat reminiscent of Bayonetta. It all then culminates in an intense one-on-one rival dual like the kind seen in Metal Gear Rising. Imagine the Mistral battle from MGRR, but instead of Raiden and Mistral, it's Fox and Wolf going head-to-head with their combat staffs.

And then it's back to the Arwing, and the next 10 missions are all in your ship. The ship itself could mix it up by implementing the transformable mech form that was in the unreleased Star Fox II for the Super NES. Whenever the Arwing needs to infiltrate an installation, shut down ground fortifications, etc, it can transform into its bipedal mech form -- like a Gundam changing from a starfighter to a mobile suit. It would then have an all-new set of moves, fulfilling a new purpose.

Likewise with the Landmaster -- my idea to make it amphibious would add a great deal of variety to the Landmaster missions, since it could assume a "Blue Marine Mode" and roll straight into the water, slicing surf like a high-speed gunboat or diving underwater as a submersible. Giving the Landmaster a pair of anti-gravity treads that would allow it to scale sheer surfaces and drive upside-down on ceilings would also be fun -- imagine a level where you're driving up the side of skyscraper as it's bombarded by enemy forces.

It wouldn't be redundant next to the mech, either, since it would feature entirely different handling and have the ability to scale walls and ceilings and travel across and under water. The Landmaster is the versatile ground option where the mission is on ground from the start. The mech is meant more for situations encountered by the Arwing, like infiltrating a space station under siege, or destroying anti-air turrets.

And going back to the Arwing -- it's easy to picture Kamiya giving it the TW101 treatment with a high degree of customization, including upgrades, new subsystems and armaments to equip. I also like the idea of extendable appendages that can deploy like arms underneath the Arwing, for close combat (swatting aside enemies within reach) or for grappling foes or manipulating objects. Imagine a QTE boss finisher, where a dreadnought tries to rush down Fox's Arwing, and Fox pins the nose of it between the arms of his Arwing, slowing it down. SO. COOL. :)

This would be lovely. :)

I hope there are as few non-Arwing missions as possible, honestly. Either that or make the Landmaster much, much faster. I couldn't help but find those missions boring in comparison to the Arwing ones in 64.

A motorcycle would be pretty cool, IMO. Really fast and could make for some amazingly exciting setpieces.
 
Apr 20, 2013
5,400
0
0
Alabama
Combination of all 4 styles of gameplay in each mission, 4+ player online and local co-op with 3DS Connectivity. Touch screen can be used for map placement, requests, Great Fox strikes and etc.

16 player Multiplayer. The return of manual somersaults and u-turns.
 
Apr 20, 2013
5,400
0
0
Alabama
Perhaps. I understand why you want Star Fox to have a grander vision, and I too am saddened at how Star Fox as a brand is languishing at the moment. But I don't know if stuffing in all those kinds of aspects is really going to achieve what you envision. It kinda sounds like you just want to play Mass Effect of Rogue Squadron with Star Fox characters.

Or maybe he wants them to take what they did with Assault and actually improve on it instead of walking backwards.
 

Neiteio

Member
Nov 10, 2007
54,436
6
0
Assault was nothing but walking backwards.
Depends on how you look at it. The multiplayer was some of the absolute best on the GameCube, which is no small feat with competition like Melee, Double Dash, etc. The vehicle missions were solid, but the campaign as a whole was on the short side (even by the arcadey standards set by SF64 -- at least that game had branching paths to the end to incentivize multiple playthroughs).

And the on-foot sections, while they definitely had their moments, could've been more smartly designed, both mechanically and structurally. But they were totally worth it, if only to ensure there was an on-foot component in the multiplayer mode, which was instrumental to its appeal.

The multiplayer was so great, being able to run around and switch vehicles on the fly. It was like Warhawk before Warhawk (PS3 version) -- all land-and-air skirmishes. I still fondly remember running on foot between Cornernian skyscrapers while my brother tried to dive-bomb me with the Arwing, and then getting the Landmaster and driving up on the overpass to shoot him out of the sky. :)
 

Nostremitus

Member
Mar 24, 2012
8,868
2
0
Seoul, ROK
Or maybe he wants them to take what they did with Assault and actually improve on it instead of walking backwards.

This is exactly what I want.

Assault was nothing but walking backwards.

Assault was taking Starfox64 and trying to make that game's mechanics-unchanged-work in a much more complex environment.

It was a half-step forward in scope but stumbled when they didn't complete that step by making the required evolution in gameplay.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,319
19,330
1,910
Best Coast
Or maybe he wants them to take what they did with Assault and actually improve on it instead of walking backwards.

Of course he does. I agreed that "if done well", it could work. But this argument can be used for anything.

I just don't think there is a good possibility of it being done well. The original Star Fox, and Star Fox 64 are widely agreed upon as being the best in the series. It would be better to take the lessons of why those games were good and apply that to a new Star Fox games. Additionally, it would be wise to see why Assault and Command were bad, and make sure not to do that again.
 

Dorygrant

Member
Aug 26, 2013
518
1
0
Canada
Star Fox 64-esque

Just add more paths to go down (both in the levels and map) but still keep it primarily on-rails.

Do not make it like Command. God that was terrible.
 

Spring-Loaded

Member
Apr 16, 2012
28,425
11
0
I honestly can't believe I'm seeing more lobbying for fucking on-foot Star Fox.

ROGUE LEADER. STAR FOX. MIX. PROFIT.

You can't believe people want some form of on-foot gameplay after Assault's multiplayer, then you say the next game should be like Rogue Leader, a decidedly nonlinear space shooter?

The multiplayer was so great, being able to run around and switch vehicles on the fly. It's was like Warhawk before Warhawk (PS3 version) -- all land-and-air skirmishes. I still fondly remember running on foot between Cornernian skyscrapers while my brother tried to dive-bomb me with the Arwing, and then getting the Landmaster and driving up on the overpass to shoot him out of the sky. :)

I remember a friend and I having a short duel while standing on top of an arwing as it was flying.

The apprehension about on-foot gameplay is understandable, but it would be worth it just for the multiplayer. It really was like War/Starhawk with a deathmatch focus. If on-foot gameplay was on-rails like in Sin & Punishment (essentially like Landmaster levels) and "All-Range Mode" fights allowed you to exit/switch vehicles + run-and-gun, it wouldn't be intrusive, and multiplayer could still make use of that type of gameplay.
 

Neiteio

Member
Nov 10, 2007
54,436
6
0
I remember a friend and I having a short duel while standing on top of an arwing as it was flying.
Hahaha, that sounds AWESOME! XD Reminds me of my brother and I playing Capture the Flag in Warhawk — I'll infiltrate the enemy base and grab the flag, he'll fly in with the Warhawk, I'll hop on his wing, and then he'll gingerly rise into the air and try to hover back to base without me slipping off. XD

Seriously, take the multiplayer mode from Assault, expand the maps, allow up to 32 players to play it in mixed local/online multiplayer (like Warhawk on PS3), and add more game types, and you have the recipe for the best multiplayer in a Nintendo game in a long time. Assault was -that- fun and had that much potential, and following Warhawk's lead will only lead to good places. :)
 

Oersted

Member
Mar 14, 2012
32,328
1
0
To make my wishlist in the OP even dreamier, I went back and amended it to be co-developed by PlatinumGames AND Treasure. :-O

A dream team collaboration! The best-playing and most action-packed action game EVER!

Give Treasure Star Fox. Platinum should get
Eternal Darkness.
 

Japanmanx3

Member
Aug 28, 2013
7,944
1
665
Atlanta
Platinum+Kamiyaaaaa X Miyamotooooooo!!!!!

Give me local and online co-op and battle modes!!!!

Dat Fur!!!!

 

GRIZZMEISTER

Banned
Dec 3, 2013
210
0
0
I just want Star Fox 64 part 2, without any of the bullshit they added in later games. Is it too much to ask for, Nintendo? :(

I want lush landscapes, barren wastes, towers of lava and lava caverns, complex military bases, and all the areas from 64 revisited.

This is what I want too but with on-line support for multiplayer.
 

spanks

Member
Oct 21, 2007
808
0
745
Nintendo's take on Star Citizen + Star Wars Battlefront for the multiplayer.

Or just a straight up Starfox 64 sequel with 4-player co-op

Edit:
I honestly can't believe I'm seeing more lobbying for fucking on-foot Star Fox.

ROGUE LEADER. STAR FOX. MIX. PROFIT.

Man, Factor 5 would've been a perfect fit, on the same level as Amusement Vision and F-Zero.
 

Sponge

Banned
Dec 3, 2011
7,195
1
715
I would have liked if Argonaut never left Nintendo. Maybe even have Nintendo expand their studio so Star Fox never would have fell off the radar.
 

qq more

Member
Feb 5, 2010
16,331
0
0
32
qqqqqqqqqqqqqq
A game just like 64.

Keep it simple, I don't care if I can finish the game in 2 hours.

Basically this, I want Star Fox to be just an arcadey rail shooter again. I feel that every game after 64 missed the entire point of what made the franchise great in the first place. I don't really care for on-foot or the game being strictly all-range mode. If I want an on-foot Star Fox game, just make it a spinoff (and add in the cool stuff Fox and co had in Smash Bros like the shield). But for a mainline Star Fox, just give back that arcadey gameplay with score attack just like it was before. Oh and don't make it linear again please... the non-linearity and tons of secrets was what justified the 2 hour story!

Also why do people want Kamiya/Platinum Games on Star Fox so badly? I mean I wouldn't oppose to it, but have they made a rail shooter before? It always feel like everyone wants them to make everything they like.
 

Neiteio

Member
Nov 10, 2007
54,436
6
0
Also why do people want Kamiya/Platinum Games on Star Fox so badly? I mean I wouldn't oppose to it, but have they made a rail shooter before? It always feel like everyone wants them to make everything they like.
Kamiya has said in the past that the Star Fox series is one of his all-time favorites (perhaps his No. 1 favorite!), and he'd love Nintendo to come to his office and stick a gun to his head and make him make a new Star Fox. Kamiya also happens to be one of the greatest action game developers of all time, with no shortage of ideas, as all of his games attest (Okami, Bayonetta, TW101, etc).

These days, Kamiya claims he's no longer interested in making a Star Fox due to everyone asking him about it on Twitter... but that strikes me as petty behavior, and/or an attempt to stop the spam. :)
 

Neff

Member
Feb 6, 2012
13,357
2,613
1,080
UK
Yep, Kamiya worships the first two Star Fox games, and 3D shooters generally. He was born to do it. It would pretty much be the best game we could hope for in his hands.
 

Doorman

Member
Jun 21, 2008
6,654
0
0
Michigan, USA
I've given this thought on a few occasions, trying to mix in some of my own preferences along with a dose of what could be a realistic expectation based on the current gaming landscape. With that in mind, there's two potential options as I imagine it...

Option 1: aka the option to please the super-strict hardcore fans: An eShop downloadable game done almost or exactly in the vein of Star Fox 64. Very arcadey, mostly on-rails, a campaign that you can play through in probably an hour or so but has a few potential routes to take. For the comparatively small level of development investment, this would probably be a single-player campaign, with maaaaybe a 4-player (local!) versus mode along the lines of SF643D. It would be what the "Arwings only!" crowd is looking for in a fairly compact package.

Option 2: The bigger-budget package, with all the benefits and pitfalls that come with it.
I actually think that in terms of concept, Star Fox Assault wasn't a bad direction for the series to go in. There'd be some hell to pay if Nintendo of all people tried to get away with charging for a $60 retail game with an on-rails campaign lasting only three or four hours, the value proposition just wouldn't be there in the modern era. Giving Star Fox a wider swathe of shooting action to work with isn't the problem...it's the fact that the execution of that initial concept lacked the polish it really needed. I personally liked the notion of the team taking on different tasks, some of them doing things in the air while others operated on land...but balancing that with the arbitrary "might gauge" that forced you out of ground objectives in order to jump away from your objective to shoot down random foes killed mission pacing.

How is this problem corrected? The best solution incorporates one of the other features that's often asked for out of Star Fox: Co-op play. Taking the usual four-person Star Fox team, you select your character at the beginning of a play session and the roles of each member of the team vary depending on the requirements of the mission. There would still be fully on-rails levels, but now each pilot takes a slightly different route through, with periods of overlapping for the classic opportunities to help bail your partners out of trouble. Each persons' path could have some conditions to shoot for that would have some impact on their partners (like, say, Falco's player having to take down an attack carrier before it crosses into Slippy's path and unloads a barrage of smaller enemy ships). In all-range levels, there would be a mix of ground and air objectives like with some of the levels in Assault, but the emphasis is taken away from one person having to constantly switch roles, instead allowing the objectives of both the ground and air teams to intermingle.
So let's say, for example, the team is called in to assist with an enemy invasion on the base at Katina. Two players are assigned to hit the surface and infiltrate the iconic pyramid-shaped base and clear out ground troops, while the two air-supports are tasked with protecting the skies. Periodic enemy drop-ships are sent in with reinforcements and it's up to the air-fighters to fight through the convoy and take out the loaders, otherwise they drop more numerous, tougher enemies for the players inside the base to deal with. Or a level where air support is needed to weaken a fort's outer defenses so that a ground-player can infiltrate and destroy some specific objective or rescue hostages or what have you. I think back to the mission on Corneria in Assault, where you had to track down radar-jammers on foot in order for your air companions to properly locate their own objectives. Both air and ground styles have different but concurrent objectives, encouraging proper teamwork and coordination. Plus you get a boost to replay value because playing through the missions as a different character gives you a very different experience without the programmers having to craft four times as many environments.

This style of game would need to foster a strong online community and would be something that Nintendo can really position as a strong net-minded franchise in a time when people seem to think that if it's not Mario Kart, they're not interested in putting anything online. With a multiplayer-centric approach, they could still design it as a single long campaign if they want to, or open things up a bit more and lay out clusters of stages as various self-contained "contracts" for the Star Fox mercenary team to complete. This would also cut out a lot of the needless melodrama and preponderance of unpopular characters that the likes of SF Command took the series in. Individual missions could still provide character insight and give hints toward a larger plot that comes to fruition once the final contracts are unlocked. As a bonus, taking a more episodic approach to the missions gives potential for future DLC contracts if Nintendo felt so inclined to extend the life of the game.

Speaking of episodes and DLC, how about a series of missions where you play as the Star Wolf team? Probably a bit less tactical and a bit more destructive, but certainly fun in its own right.

That's...about all I've got for game setup. Obviously it needs to have a quick, tight control scheme and great graphics and all the stuff you'd expect of any top notch game, but I figure that's a given for any "wishlist" game.
 

Terrell

Member
Apr 1, 2006
12,476
2
1,050
Vancouver, BC, Canada
I don't want that.

I want flying. That's it. I have other games for arena combat. Starfox was my game for on rails space shooters.
Keyword being "was". There's a reason people aren't lining up to make them.

Why do some of you want more on foot stuff? I don't think it works well with the Arwing gameplay.
Agreed, that's why several people attest that something needs to be done to it instead of adding it back in exactly as it was.

It's nice to hope that it could be done well. Of course it'll be a good addition if it's done well. However, is it necessary? Are on-foot missions essential for a Star Fox game?

No, but evolution is. It's part of a dying genre, so changing things up a bit may be what it needs for the series to keep going. I'd go as far as to say that evolution of what "defines" Star Fox is damn near MANDATORY for it to survive, otherwise it will just become another Ice Climber or Mach Rider, forgotten by all but the most staunch fans. Kid Icarus lives and became relevant again because it evolved, and this series needs the same.

GAF baffles me... on the one hand, people argue that Nintendo doesn't venture from their game's standard formulae and how it's costing them marketshare. But mention Star Fox? Those same people will ask you to strip it to its barest of bones, because anything beyond the standard formula is unnecessary or even downright revolting.

It just feels strange to me.

Would Sin and Punishment, Bayonetta, and MGR have had as good gameplay as they have if the devs also had to have developed a deep and compelling flying vehicle aspect to their game as well?
Funny that you mention 2 other series in dissipating genres that don't sell...

It's not like I'm going to get off my dragon in Panzer Dragoon, am I?

There hasn't been a Panzer Dragoon game since 2002. You've been "off the dragon" for a decade now. And there's (sadly) a reason for that. Just being a rail shooter isn't enough for the majority of gamers.

I think the reason is because it hasn't evolved. They had Namco working on it and people got excited thinking of what the Ace Combat guys would do with Starfox... Instead they got what the Ace Combat guys would do if they tried to copy Starfox64 with on-foot sections that still controlled like Starfox64... and it was terrible.

3D marios don't play like the 2D ones, and that's fine. Let Starfox evolve too. An on-rails no frills shooter is ok for an eShop "disposable" title. But if they're going to throw an actual budget behind it to make a full retail title, make it a full retail title with all that is entailed.

...

Why would you remove that? It is a part of Starox, and a necessary one if you ask me... otherwise it just becomes the same old boring game you played almost 20 years ago. (It wasn't boring back when it came out on N64 because it was an exciting advancement, now though? Well, there's a reason the rerelease on 3DS isn't highly acclaimed.)

Nostalgia's good and all, but don't let it hold a franchise back. Starfox has been shackled by it for too long.

...

If they make a new Starfox, it won't be strictly for the long-time fans who either don't have enough numbers to make the more recent games sale, or have turned their backs on the old formula... If they're smart they'll also target the modern gamer...

This man gets it.

Of course he does. I agreed that "if done well", it could work. But this argument can be used for anything.

So why does that mean they should stop trying, exactly? Gaming would be pretty damn bleak if that were to be the case.

Basically this, I want Star Fox to be just an arcadey rail shooter again.
You and the handful of other people who care about rail shooters as a genre. But you can't resurrect Star Fox for a literal handful of people.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
46,319
19,330
1,910
Best Coast
No, but evolution is. It's part of a dying genre, so changing things up a bit may be what it needs for the series to keep going. I'd go as far as to say that evolution of what "defines" Star Fox is damn near MANDATORY for it to survive, otherwise it will just become another Ice Climber or Mach Rider, forgotten by all but the most staunch fans. Kid Icarus lives and became relevant again because it evolved, and this series needs the same.

GAF baffles me... on the one hand, people argue that Nintendo doesn't venture from their game's standard formulae and how it's costing them marketshare. But mention Star Fox? Those same people will ask you to strip it to its barest of bones, because anything beyond the standard formula is unnecessary or even downright revolting.

It just feels strange to me.

I'm not one who argues that Nintendo is losing marketshare because of an inability to venture from their usual game archetypes. I'm also not of the opinion that "anything beyond the standard formula is unnecessary or even downright revolting".

The series already tried to change things up twice with Assault and Command, and failed both times. I'm not saying that a new Star Fox has to be exactly like the old games (I'm saying that they should understand what made the old games good, and then innovate and improve on that formula).

I'm just not seeing the necessity to add in an on foot section in and of itself as a means to craft a more appealing gameplay experience.
 

valkillmore

Member
May 17, 2006
12,700
0
1,365
My dream:

A true squeal to SNES Star Fox.

Same triangles and boxy polygons in 1080p 60fps. I actually loved the original's art style. Also bring the feel back from the first game by making the music in the same style as well; the SNES game has the best music in series imo.

HOLY SHIT

This is EXACTLY what I came in here to post. You and I have exactly the same sentiment with regard to Starfox, my friend!
 

MAtgS

Member
Dec 13, 2008
4,274
666
1,120
I've been wanting a game with 3 campaigns. A past campaign with James, present with Fox, & future with Marcus. Each campaign would play mostly the same but with some variations. For example Past is completely linear (like Assault), Present is branching (64) & Future is more open (SF2). Different weapons and/or power-ups could be available in each time period with advances in technology being the in-universe reasoning.

Never been big on multiplayer in SF personally, but I guess it'd be something a lot of people want. I've long wondered if co-on SF is even possible (about a dozen reasons why it doesn't on-rails) but I hope they pull something off.