News: Star Fox Designer Says No to Wii Version Page 3

Star Fox Designer Says No to Wii Version

04.04.2009

Star Fox Designer Says No to Wii Version on Nintendo gaming news, videos and discussion

Q-Games founder Dylan Cuthbert recently spoke Star Fox, and it's pretty certain the studio won't be involved in another game for a while yet.

Cuthbert (originally of Argonaut Software) has worked on 3 of the titles that fans consider the better games of the series: Star Fox (Wing), Star Fox 64 (Lylat Wars) and the latest adventure for Fox McCloud and friends, Star Fox Command for DS.

A Wii version should be on the way, but from the sounds of things - not from Cuthbert and his team. In an interview with G4, he reveals that personally the Wii is "a bit more of a toy" for him, and that Wii remote would be "a bit too hard to use", despite Nintendo already demonstrating it in action through Wario Ware.

He also takes a slight dig at Miyamoto with the Nintendo designer seemingly ignoring requests from fans and doing it his own way.

G4: Would you like to do another Star Fox game?

Dylan Cuthbert: (Laughter) After Command? Uhh, not yet. Maybe in another 10 years. I've made three.

G4: Well there hasn't been one for the Wii yet...

Cuthbert: The problem with that is that it'd be a big project, like 100 people on the staff. It's just not something we really want to do. I'm sure someone will make it. Maybe they'll go back to Namco.

G4: I hope not, personally. (laughs) I'd rather you did it.

Cuthbert: Well, maybe in the future, you never know. Star Fox is an interesting brand. It has a very hardcore audience. People like those furries a little too much. (laughs)

G4: Oh! People are going to love that quote. (laughs) I have to ask you, why do you think it was always difficult for developers when Fox got out of the Arwing. Fox is a pilot, but they'd always get him out of…like the tank, the tank was cool, but it still felt like an Arwing - Why do you think people wanted to take him out of being a pilot and have him run around on foot?

Cuthbert: I think that's all Miyamoto. Whenever I speak to Miyamoto about Star Fox, he says it's not meant to be just a flying, sci-fi shooting game. It's meant to be anything we want to think up. But the core fans don't want that, but Miyamoto doesn't really care about that. He wants to make what he wants to make, so he just goes ahead and gets it done.

Comment on this article

Comments

« Previous 1 23next »

Modplan Man 05.04.2009#51

dartmonkey said:
So because a game sells well that means it wasn\'t criticised by people who bought it?

Not entirely, it means it does its job well enough that people will want to buy it, and if it sells immensely, then it\'s safe to say it does its job very well (it\'d have to for it to be demanded by that many people).

Different groups of people have different levels of demand for different things. Saying that a product that sells well must mean it\'s good for what people demand of it isn\'t the same as saying the product is perfect for everyone, even for people looking for something within the same general area or \"product category\".

Wii Fit as an example does its job of giving people an easy, conveniant way to exercise that\'s entertaining, but that doesn\'t mean there aren\'t people who demand more out of their exercise regime (and would therefore demand a game more taxing), or people who would prefer a game to be all entertainment.

It\'s sales mean that it does its particular job so well that it\'s been able to attract such a large audience.

Which is where the digression of metacritic/neogaf opinions/etc comes in. Sometimes reviewers opinions are made irrelevent by the facts of what job something does and applying metrics that they\'d normally use that actually don\'t apply for this game/film/tv show/hammer/lawn mower/meat cleaver/whatever.

This quote probably explains it better than I can.

While the terms and breakdown differ from site to site, these are the general strokes that hardcore gamers and the gaming press look at to determine the quality of any given title. To Microsoft, and Sony, and other developers, that value canvas is everything. Graphics and sound, concept, and time define the box within which classic game companies must develop their content.
The Larger Picture
For Nintendo\'s titles, however, that\'s only part of the picture. While they also incorporate Graphics, Concept, and Playtime into their development, the importance of these values is purposely reduced. According to their strategy, Nintendo has added two new values which were never present in games before. The purpose of these values is to attract new customers who wouldn\'t be playing games otherwise.
The first broad value is Accessability. While this value may have had glimpses in some reviews of the past, calling out games that were \"easy to learn but hard to master\", Nintendo has taken the term to a whole new level. Its products strip away the years of gameplay experience required by most titles and instead provide an interface that everyone from little Timmy to Grandma can jump into. This is done by more than just the Wii Remote, but is also reinforced by simplified game design, positive encouragement, and familiar content such as real life sports or activities that any player would already understand.
The second new value is Peripheral Benefit, or the idea that the player will actually enrich their life via playing the game. Thought possibly more perceived than factual, players of Nintendo\'s games desire more than entertainment. They want to engage in media that better their health, their skills, their talents, and their lives.
To consumers who would certainly not call themselves gamers, Nintendo\'s mid-scoring games are, in fact, the only games that attract them.
These two values are at the heart of Nintendo\'s breakaway software success. But because these are disruptive values that are not within the traditional games industry, they do not show up on Metacritic when they are first released. The gaming press does not have accessability or peripheral benefit on their radar. Thus, when we look at the Metacritic scores of Nintendo\'s products of this type, they are inaccurate to assess the perceived quality of the title. When Metacritic looks at Big Brain Academy, it scores low, because it is low on the traditional values of the games industry. But when non-gamers look at the same title, they see a product of great quality.
Note that not all of Nintendo\'s successful titles appeal to accessibility and peripheral benefit. Super Mario Galaxy makes no attempt at enriching the player\'s life beyond entertainment, nor does Donkey Kong Barrel Blast, which scored a dismal 46 on Metacritic. However, these titles still benefit from the incredible momentum and brand recognition that comes from their other titles.
\"I should point out this isn\'t a game.\"
The quote above, taken from IGN\'s an review of Personal Trainer: Cooking, is exemplary of the changes that are occuring behind the most popular review sites and magazines. Reviewers whose evaluations end up on Metacritic look at games from the traditional view and by traditional values. They aren\'t yet trained to understand or even recognize the two new values that Nintendo\'s titles introduce. Asking a game journalist to review Personal Trainer: Cooking or Wii Fit is like asking a movie critic to review a Tae-Bo exercise video. Imagine the review: \"There\'s no plot or character development.\" \"The camera work and cinematography is shoddy.\" \"The setting and the stage is inadequate.\" They will be completely missing the point.
However, this will not be the case forever. As Nintendo and other companies continue to cash in on games that score high with peripheral benefit and accessibility, Metacritic will calibrate itself to accomodate these new values and, in time, adopt the values that Nintendo has created. When games with these new values were originally released, Metacritic reviewers had no frame of reference, and so, not knowing what to do, they assumed that it must be average. No matter how good the game is, since the gaming press was incapable of understanding the new values, they gave it an average review in the 60\'s range.

Subsequently, in a situation where something like metacritic score and sales of a game diverge so greatlly, sales will always win out as the better indicator of who\'s right and who\'s wrong. Even better if you can actually get some genuine, thorough research and figures that will indicate why something is seemingly valued so much to sell.

E: Didn\'t mean to quote the whole thing.

( Edited 05.04.2009 14:53 by Modplan Man )

Edit this post:

[quote][b]dartmonkey said:[/b] So because a game sells well that means it wasn't criticised by people who bought it?[/quote]

Not entirely, it means it does its job well enough that people will want to buy it, and if it sells immensely, then it's safe to say it does its job very well (it'd have to for it to be demanded by that many people).

Different groups of people have different levels of demand for different things. Saying that a product that sells well must mean it's good for what people demand of it isn't the same as saying the product is perfect for everyone, even for people looking for something within the same general area or "product category".

Wii Fit as an example does its job of giving people an easy, conveniant way to exercise that's entertaining, but that doesn't mean there aren't people who demand more out of their exercise regime (and would therefore demand a game more taxing), or people who would prefer a game to be all entertainment.

It's sales mean that it does its particular job so well that it's been able to attract such a large audience.

Which is where the digression of metacritic/neogaf opinions/etc comes in. Sometimes reviewers opinions are made irrelevent by the facts of what job something does and applying metrics that they'd normally use that actually don't apply for this game/film/tv show/hammer/lawn mower/meat cleaver/whatever.

This quote probably explains it better than I can.

[quote]
While the terms and breakdown differ from site to site, these are the general strokes that hardcore gamers and the gaming press look at to determine the quality of any given title.  To Microsoft, and Sony, and other developers, that value canvas is everything.  Graphics and sound, concept, and time define the box within which classic game companies must develop their content.

The Larger Picture

For Nintendo's titles, however, that's only part of the picture.  While they also incorporate Graphics, Concept, and Playtime into their development, the importance of these values is purposely reduced.  According to their strategy, Nintendo has added two new values which were never present in games before.  The purpose of these values is to attract new customers who wouldn't be playing games otherwise.

The first broad value is Accessability.  While this value may have had glimpses in some reviews of the past, calling out games that were "easy to learn but hard to master", Nintendo has taken the term to a whole new level.  Its products strip away the years of gameplay experience required by most titles and instead provide an interface that everyone from little Timmy to Grandma can jump into.  This is done by more than just the Wii Remote, but is also reinforced by simplified game design, positive encouragement, and familiar content such as real life sports or activities that any player would already understand.

The second new value is Peripheral Benefit, or the idea that the player will actually enrich their life via playing the game.  Thought possibly more perceived than factual, players of Nintendo's games desire more than entertainment.  They want to engage in media that better their health, their skills, their talents, and their lives.

To consumers who would certainly not call themselves gamers, Nintendo's mid-scoring games are, in fact, the only games that attract them.

These two values are at the heart of Nintendo's breakaway software success.  But because these are disruptive values that are not within the traditional games industry, they do not show up on Metacritic when they are first released.  The gaming press does not have accessability or peripheral benefit on their radar.  Thus, when we look at the Metacritic scores of Nintendo's products of this type, they are inaccurate to assess the perceived quality of the title.  When Metacritic looks at Big Brain Academy, it scores low, because it is low on the traditional values of the games industry.  But when non-gamers look at the same title, they see a product of great quality.

Note that not all of Nintendo's successful titles appeal to accessibility and peripheral benefit.  Super Mario Galaxy makes no attempt at enriching the player's life beyond entertainment, nor does Donkey Kong Barrel Blast, which scored a dismal 46 on Metacritic.  However, these titles still benefit from the incredible momentum and brand recognition that comes from their other titles.

"I should point out this isn't a game."

The quote above, taken from IGN's an review of Personal Trainer: Cooking, is exemplary of the changes that are occuring behind the most popular review sites and magazines.  Reviewers whose evaluations end up on Metacritic look at games from the traditional view and by traditional values.  They aren't yet trained to understand or even recognize the two new values that Nintendo's titles introduce.  Asking a game journalist to review Personal Trainer: Cooking or Wii Fit is like asking a movie critic to review a Tae-Bo exercise video.  Imagine the review: "There's no plot or character development."  "The camera work and cinematography is shoddy."  "The setting and the stage is inadequate."  They will be completely missing the point.

However, this will not be the case forever.  As Nintendo and other companies continue to cash in on games that score high with peripheral benefit and accessibility, Metacritic will calibrate itself to accomodate these new values and, in time, adopt the values that Nintendo has created.  When games with these new values were originally released, Metacritic reviewers had no frame of reference, and so, not knowing what to do, they assumed that it must be average.  No matter how good the game is, since the gaming press was incapable of understanding the new values, they gave it an average review in the 60's range.
[/quote]

Subsequently, in a situation where something like metacritic score and sales of a game diverge so greatlly, sales will always win out as the better indicator of who's right and who's wrong. Even better if you can actually get some genuine, thorough research and figures that will indicate why something is seemingly valued so much to sell.

E: Didn't mean to quote the whole thing.

Save Changes Cancel Full Edit

knighty 05.04.2009#52

. Asking a game journalist to review Personal Trainer: Cooking or Wii Fit is like asking a movie critic to review a Tae-Bo exercise video. Imagine the review: \"There\'s no plot or character development.\" \"The camera work and cinematography is shoddy.\" \"The setting and the stage is inadequate.\" They will be completely missing the point.

And herein lies the point that games like that shouldn\'t be reviewed on gaming websites/magazines full stop. Because they are NOT games.

( Edited 05.04.2009 15:40 by knighty )

Robertd1138 05.04.2009#53

RATGUOF said:And statistically how much of these fans exist? Because they sound like a very few. And if I look back at TP\'s Reception I find mostly good reviews & it sold well too.

The fans who complain aren\'t the same ones who review the games. Also, the fans who complained still bought the game.

I think this is also an example of the silent majority. The extremist are always the ones who talk. The guys who think the game is so amazing that they crapped their pants shout it from the roof tops. The guys who think that the game sucked filled up the message boards with rants. The other 95% of people played the game, enjoyed it, and silently sold it on eBay 6 months later.

(sorry, when I posted this I didn\'t realize these comments ere 3 pages long).

( Edited 05.04.2009 16:56 by Robertd1138 )

shiptoncraig 05.04.2009#54

This guy did the best 3 in the series, it\'s a shame that he doesn\'t want to do more. While I thought Command was a good portable Star Fox, the brand is crying for something as good as the original/Lylat Wars.

Namco ruined the series with Assault by changing Star Wolf, making Andrew become the squeaky voiced ponce \'Oikonny\', creating Panther, including the spin-off character Krystal and making horrendous on foot gameplay. Give us Arwings, Landmasters and Blue Marines. Most importantly, give us a good game.

( Edited 05.04.2009 17:33 by shiptoncraig )

360 Gamertag: shiptoncraig
PSN: shiptoncraig
Steam: Guess what?

knighty 05.04.2009#55

Assault was a fuck lot better than Command. I agree, the on foot shit sucked ass, but there were quite a few excellent levels such as the first one. The voice acting was really awful too, Lylat Wars was great in that regard.

Also, Krystal = furry fan service, and furries make up a considerable proportion of Starfox's fanbase.

JoshSL 05.04.2009#56

I hate Krystal =3

I liked Assault because I thought it had an awesome story... Command's story wasn't awesome but it's like it purposefully tried to end everything.

Twitter | C3 Writer/Moderator | Backloggery

RATGUOF 05.04.2009#57

Robertd1138 said:
The fans who complain aren't the same ones who review the games. Also, the fans who complained still bought the game.
I think this is also an example of the silent majority. The extremist are always the ones who talk. The guys who think the game is so amazing that they crapped their pants shout it from the roof tops. The guys who think that the game sucked filled up the message boards with rants. The other 95% of people played the game, enjoyed it, and silently sold it on eBay 6 months later.
(sorry, when I posted this I didn't realize these comments ere 3 pages long).

If you think a game sucks before you even buy it then you have issues. It's not really the reviews. Rather its the fact it sold so well. It just so happens to have good reviews.

(BTW you miss out on the entire point Me & Modplan Man were making if you just skipped the discussion.)

I sold my soul to Sony for a PS3...

shiptoncraig 05.04.2009#58

Nah, Command >>> Assault. At least it tried something 'new' and succeeded, rather than try something 'new' and fail.

360 Gamertag: shiptoncraig
PSN: shiptoncraig
Steam: Guess what?

knighty 05.04.2009#59

I've never understood the animosity towards Krystal. Why do you guys hate her?

JoshSL 05.04.2009#60

knighty said:
I've never understood the animosity towards Krystal. Why do you guys hate her?

Because Rare are the fans, and Krystal is the Rule63 recolour D:

Twitter | C3 Writer/Moderator | Backloggery

Alc 05.04.2009#61

More evidence that Miyamoto is kinda a dick. =C

EAD needs to make the next Star Fox.

I wouldn't mind a Star Fox Wii that goes in the same direction as Mario Kart Wii.

Just make the single player mode like the one from Star Fox 64, and then add in the same fluid online functionality that MKWii had for 12-person dogfights.

knighty 05.04.2009#62

Well I suppose if you know the history it kinda sucks. Since Krystal was of course a cat and Nintendo decided to turn her into the love interest but I don't see any reason to hate her more than Slippy Smilie

JoshSL 05.04.2009#63

I don't know why, but I like Slippy in the same way I like Charmy Bee, he's pretty awesomely annoying.

Dinosaur Planet should have stayed as not being a StarFox game Smilie

Twitter | C3 Writer/Moderator | Backloggery

Marzeee 05.04.2009#64

Personally, I love Krystal. Smilie

knighty 05.04.2009#65

Me too Smilie Smilie

JoshSL 05.04.2009#66

Perrhaps in slightly different ways.

I love her too! As in I love to hate her.

Twitter | C3 Writer/Moderator | Backloggery

RATGUOF 05.04.2009#67

knighty said:
Well I suppose if you know the history it kinda sucks. Since Krystal was of course a cat and Nintendo decided to turn her into the love interest but I don't see any reason to hate her more than Slippy

@_@
Do you has any pics of this?! She probably doesn't fit in well in StarFox... But damn, that is one hot Female Anthro!

I sold my soul to Sony for a PS3...

knighty 05.04.2009#68

You\'re REALLY never seen any pics? Google brah.

Actually google sucks for things like this. Most of the stuff that comes up is just....terrible <_<

( Edited 05.04.2009 22:38 by knighty )

JoshSL 05.04.2009#69

knighty said:
Most of the stuff that comes up is just....terrible <_<

Bet you love it though. Smilie

Twitter | C3 Writer/Moderator | Backloggery

jb 06.04.2009#70

knighty said:
Me too

Of all the people on C3, i knew straight away it'd be you Smilie Smilie

Krystal's was fine in Adventures, but they made her character weird in Command.

On-foot and stuff's fine, go nuts with changing it up, but when they put bare minimal space exploration/combat then you just know they've stuffed it up.

Cubed3 Admin/Founder & Designer

RATGUOF 06.04.2009#71

knighty said:
You\'re REALLY never seen any pics? Google brah.
Actually google sucks for things like this. Most of the stuff that comes up is just....terrible <_<

I\'ve seen tons of pics of Krystal... Just none of them were Krystal as a cat.

Edit
OK so I did some reading... And found out that Krystal was supposed to be not just a cat, but the main character of Dinosaur Planet AKA SFA. In the past I just assumed Fox replaced some Rare look alike. Also found out Fox\'s original GF, Fara disappeared.

So basically someone at Nintendo decided to screw up two franchises by merging them into SFA. If it weren\'t for that, Krystal (The Cat) would be Rare property... And maybe on the Xbox.

( Edited 06.04.2009 02:24 by RATGUOF )

I sold my soul to Sony for a PS3...

Wolvesgod 07.04.2009#72

Okay... what happened to the conversation about starfox??? I like Star Fox it's and awesome game i really hope they make a Star Fox Command two that will also be nice.

When all is bad don't look for a easy way out. Because you wont know what to do once your out

WP-Final 07.04.2009#73

I really liked StarFox Adventures. It wasn;t anything like the normal StarFox games but that doesn't mean it was crap. The graphics are gorgeous even by today's standards and the gameplay isn't bad.

I haven't played Assault so can't say anything about it but I do hope a new StarFox is being made. Rare did a good job on Adventires but I think the next game should stick to it's roots and be stricly focused on Arwing gameply.

or sign in with...

Star Fox Designer Says No to Wii Version

Star Fox Command (Nintendo DS / Wii U Virtual Console)

Comment on this article

Comments

Subscribe to this topic