TUMBLING DOWN
>TUMBLING DOWN
TUMBLING DOWN
>TUMBLING DOWN
TUMBLING DOWN
>TUMBLING DOWN
TUMBLING DOWN
>TUMBLING DOWN
TUMBLING DOWN
>TUMBLING DOWN
TUMBLING DOWN
>TUMBLING DOWN
TUMBLING DOWN
>TUMBLING DOWN
TUMBLING DOWN
>TUMBLING DOWN
TUMBLING DOWN
>TUMBLING DOWN
TUMBLING DOWN
>TUMBLING DOWN
>>334927961
The original is the same though
>JUST GIVE US A NEW STARFOX JUST LIKE THE ORIGINAL NINTENDO, A GOOD ONE
>After years of begging Nintendo does it
>"What the fuck it's just like the original this isn't what I wanted"
>>334927961
>SF64
>Difficult
I dont see the problem. 64 was only an hour long.
>A Platinum game is short
STOP THE FUCKING PRESSES
We've known that for more than a month now. 3 hours for one path, 10 hours for all paths.
>>334928290
>>After years of begging Nintendo does it
That's the real issue here, I think. If this had have been released 15 fucking years ago when people actually wanted it no one would be complaining.
>>334927961
>game length meme
If the game is a solid 3 hours of fun it's fine.
Its not surprising that Star fox zero/10 flopped
2-3 hours is kind of long for starfox
>>334928904
>60$ for 3 hours is fine
>I enjoy wasting my money
>>334927961
Reminder that Starfox 64 is only an hour long, and it's considered to be a great game.
>>334928904
it's 60 dollars dude
i mean that ratchet and clank remake was shorter than the original but at least they cut the price a bit
it better be the most amazing 3 hours of gameplay ever
It's ok when Nintendo or Platinum do it.
>>334929548
As much as this frogposter is shit I have to agree with him
3 hours at max is not something I'm going to pay 60 fucking USD for
No, I'm not a fag who correlates rate of money to hours played directly (I.e. Shitposters who say one dollar of fun per hour is justified) because that's subjective and goes into stupid semantic arguments. 60 bucks is just hardly worth 3 hours in general.
>>334927961
Just add in 20 hours of cutscenes, that's what modern gamers like nowadays right?
>>334929548
>One of various routes avaible
>You can easily play the game atleast 6 more times until you have seen everything
>60 hours maymay despite offers online for the game allready at 35
Frogposters are dumb, OP opened multiple thread
Giantbomb is shit and always was
>>334929890
If you only play one path, you're an idiot though. The other ones are entirely different levels that you aren't playing.
2-3 hours for a StarFox game is alright. It's meant to be played over and over to do the different courses and find all the secrets/complete the challenges.
That said, it's not worth $60. Maybe one day when it goes on sale.
>>334928904
>ITS NOT OK WHEN SONY DOES IT
>>334930092
>Nintendo games
>sale
Those things aren't seen together very often.
>>334930092
Got it for $41 because of amazon prime.
>>334930092
>Nintendo games
>sale
?
>>334929548
Dude I'm not a starfox fan and I'm not going to waste my $60 buying this game because I know starfox is literally a one or two day game, and its always been. It's not a secret. Complaining about it is like a reviewer for dark souls 3 saying its shit because when you die to many times you lose your souls or some shit.
But SF64 was the same.
>>334930209
>>334930225
Exactly. Probably won't be getting this for several years.
>>334930379
SF64 was 1 hour per path. 2-3 per path sounds like a substantial upgrade.
I was expecting SF64 HD in all honesty.
That said, I want to play this game because I enjoy replayable games, but 60 dollars MSRP is too high. I value it at around 20.
How much time do I have to return something to FUCKING GAMESTOP?
I just wanna beat the paths and return it
>>334930627
If it's been opened, you cannot return it for full refund. It is like this everywhere, even Walmart.
>>334927961
>MGR is about 3 hours
>AH, TRULY ONE OF THE GREATEST GAMES EVER :))))
>STANDING HERE. I MEME. XD
>Literally any game is short these days.
>WELP, YA KNOW THATS JUST HOW THE INDUSTRY IS THESE DAYS. BESIDES IM BUSY AND APPRECIATE SHORT GAMES NOW.
>Nintendo releases a 3 hour game (Which is only one path, not including 100%)
>NINTENDO, YOU FUCKING RETARDS. 3 HOURS IS SHIT. SHIIIIIT. ITS NOT OKAY WHEN YOU DO IT.
>>334930765
Darn. Getting 45 off trade in is decent anyways
>>334930835
Because you can buy MGR:R for around 10 dollars or less.
>>334927961
>>334927961
>no matter how many branching paths are included
If that implies each path lasts 2-3 hours, then I might have to buy this
>>334930835
who are you quoting
>>334930835
>MGR
>3 hours
nigga what, it's closer to 6 hours
/v/ has always shit on short games, like the order, gone home, firewatch etc.
>>334928290
Star Fox was released 23 years ago, and Star Fox 64 was released 19 years ago.
When people say that they want a good Star Fox in line with the originals, they mean a new game that takes the majority of it's cues from older titles.
Not a game that looks and feels like it's two decades old.
But of course you know this, and you're just being pedantic because fuck you.
>>334931273
(You)
>>334930627
Take it back to Walmart, they'll give you store credit without a receipt
>>334927961
So the real question is is a playthrough about as long as a SF64 one and is each route as fulfilling as SF64's?
>>334929890
I'll give you some perspective on things.
I bought CoD: MW when it first released for $60. I played that game(SP & MP) for between 20-25 hours.
Original Star Fox on SNES, I've easily pumped more than 40 hours into over the last 20 years. Yes, its been over time but at this point, I will never go back and play CoD again, yet I'm already tempted to boot up SF just by typing this.
Now I'm not saying this new one will live up to the hype, but it has the potential for replayability. Every single CoD game is made irrelevant by the next one that comes out 12 months later and you'll never pick it up again. Hell you may even stop after the initial 10 hour SP campaign. I never bother with CoD MP anymore.
>>334931005
yes, now you can. It retailed for 60 at release.
>>334931551
>Well, it's better than Cawadooty!
Some mighty fine standards you have there.
>>334931095
MGR is 3 hours if you skip all the cutscenes, have maxed out everything, and are playing on Hard or below.
>>334931643
His point is that Star Fox Zero won't ever go on sale because Nintendo games never do.
It'll be $60 for years, maybe dropping to $40 a few times, and if you're unlucky it'll get boosted to $70+ because of scalpers.
>>334931718
>seems I failed to notice how a new modern game thats "30 hours long", fails to live up to some old busted 20 year old game thats only 1 hour long.
fucking neo /v/
>>334931856
Every company can do this as well, but they know it won't sell anymore at a certain price point so they drop it to keep the free dosh rolling in. Nintendo's products sell well enough even late in cycles that they don't have to do this unless they choose to. Its actually smart business.
>>334929758
So we should price games depending on how long it takes some speedrunner to clear everything?
>>334932182
of course. Why would people take their time and enjoy games anymore?
>>334930379
Gee, a 19 year old game being 1 hour long TOTALLY excuses this sixty dollar full-retail AAA release from Nintendo from being 3!
I'm sorry, in the almost TWO FUCKING DECADES since 64's release they still haven't changed the core gameplay in any meaningful way?
>>334930209
>>334930225
Nintendo Selects (;
>>334932290
>they still haven't changed the core gameplay in any meaningful way?
We all know how well that worked the last time they tried.
Don't break what isn't broken in an attempt to fix it.
>>334927961
The game is full of content and just because the story is 3 hours long doesn't mean the game is too
Sorry not everything can be a small interactive movie sonypony
>>334932290
they tried anon, theres a reason no one remembers those games.
>>334932135
>Its actually smart business
Considering that even if titles are no longer printed they don't reduce eShop prices, no. It's not smart business. It's anti-consumer as fuck.
I'm not getting into this with because I'm 100% certain you'll just keep spouting rhetoric about how "smart" Nintendo is for forcing you to pay full price for launch titles that are no longer printed, or pay through the ass for scalper prices if you actually want physical.
If you think it's acceptable despite no other company doing it (not MicroSoft, not Sony, not even Valve) then by all means, keep supporting it. Don't start spewing your bullshit here though, because I don't care.
>>334927961
It's Star Fox
are you stupid?
>>334927961
I don't know what people were expecting from Star Fox. You can't do much with that IP. It has no potential. It's as good as it's ever going to be, and no matter how much people might want more from it, it's just not gonna happen.
Nintendo clearly lost their passion for video games. they are so uncrative they don't even know what to do anymore. aside from the thousands of generic marios, their concept of a good is rehashing n64 shit
nintendo is over.
>>334932582
I dont support it anon. I have a hacked new 3ds and a modded wii. I don't own a WiiU and I never will. You not liking it doesn't make it bad business. They're continuing to post profits because their die hards will pay the fee to play their games. Its just like apple products, idiots will pay it and thats why its smart business. It'd be bad business to charge 30 for something idiots would clearly pay 100 for. Blame the idiots, not the company.
>>334932576
Assault's ground and tank missions were mediocre but the actual flying was great. In typical Nintendo fashion, instead of fixing what didn't work, they cut it out and focused on what does, to awful effect.
Imagine a world where Star Fox Zero had great flying missions, a competent third person shooter, and tank battles with boosts and dashes and shit like a mech? Oh wait, that would take too much effort, let's just make our 60 dollar game THREE FUCKING HOURS LONG of good stuff?
>>334932290
They did change the core gameplay in the three games between 64 and Zero. I'm sure you saw how well that went down.
And what changes to the core gameplay do you personally demand? What is it about the "fly around shooting things" genre that you want to be innovative and different in a way you like?
>>334928904
Getting pretty hard to justify paying for 3hours when i could get s game like witcher 3 that has 50ish for the same money
Is that 2-3 hours for 100%? Because if it's supposed to be anything like Star Fox 64 it should be roughly 30 minutes each playthrough, multiplied by a shitton of playthroughs for the multiple paths, high scores and other stuff (getting everything in SF64 3D including score attack gold medals took me over 50 hours). If SF0 didn't deliver on that then it didn't even do what it was supposed to, but I'll have to see it for myself before judging.
>>334932843
you left out SF Adventures. I think that had the biggest fallout.
>but there's much replay value for alternate paths
There are no alternate paths. You just choose a random level and some of them have a "secret warp" and then you get a shitty little mission that is just a boring boss fight, or they recycle some level but shoehorn in the arwing instead of another vehicle.
>>334927961
All this does is prove the point people have been trying to make for years. If a game doesnt change, its screwed. What was ok then may not be ok now.
>>334932182
That's such a shit comparison
A speedrunner can abuse glitches to beat the game ridiculously fast. A game designed to be short is short no matter what.
Unless the gameplay is revolutionary 3 hours is way too short. People here were shitting on the Order, Halo 5, Gone Home, Firewatch, etc. for being too short but now that Star Fox has been criticized suddenly we have to open up a dialogue about how it's justified to sell a 3 hour game for 60 dollars
>>334932826
>Lost their passion for video games
>Uncreative
>Just finished releasing one of the most original and innovative IPs in gaming in well over a decade just last year
It's Miyamoto, not Nintendo.
>>334933075
>game in a series almost made around replayability gets defended for having a short playthrough time while others that are short and have no reason to replay don't
>>334932972
>an on-rails shooter should be the same length as a JRPG
Some genres don't work well when you're forced to spend 50 hours trying to beat them.
>>334933075
3 hours is too long for the kind of game starfox is
>>334933313
Well dont charge fucking 60dollars for it then
>JRPG
>>334933527
Their charging 45 for it. Guard is 15
>>334933527
Are you so poor that a one-time $60 purchase is that bad? Also, remember when games were only 45 minutes long and cost $80?
>>334933141
How do you even reply to such horrible bait? It's comical.
>>334933641
No, it's 50 for the digital version without Guard
The order got absolutely shat on for being 5 hours long, but now that Nintendo made a game shorter than that, it's completely okay. Nintendicksuckers are the absolute worst.
>>334930627
Did you seriously ask if a store will accept your game back at full price? This isn't Steam you dingus. Please tell me you're from Texas AND a Trump supporter.
>>334927961
Dark souls 3 is under 2 hours long
I paid $50 USD for this game in 1990.
You can beat it in 15 minutes.
And I don't regret it in the least. It was a fantastic purchase.
Why the different standard now? Is it just the degeneration of the gaming industry that we can only appreciate movie games or padded filler open-world RPGs?
Why can't a game that provides an arcade experience be acceptable? Why must everything be homogenized?
>>334927961
DELETE THIS!
>>334933730
I do remember and that was fine back then but its not fine anymore imo, if people enjoy it for that price good on them but i cant personally justify it
>>334933892
I brought back Other M to Gamestop the day after it released and just said it was terrible. Full refund, no questions asked.
the problem are the god awful controls
>>334933908
It's what happens to an industry that becomes full of people who are too vain or frugal. They need their games to be a meaningless grind or visual spectacle to feel like they've gotten their money's worth.
>>334933982
You're welcome to your opinion, which is all it is.
>I liked it back then but I hate it now
Hilarious. Did you accept it because your parents were the ones paying for them and now that you have to pay for them you hate it? How cheap do you want video games to be these days? Maybe the game companies should just do everything for free, the money-grubbing Jews.
IT'S NOT FAIR
I BOUGHT A WII U AT LAUNCH AND HAVE 5 GAMES FOR IT
WHERE ARE THE GOOD GAMES?
>all this nintendofag butthurt and damage control
>all these excuses and attempts at rationalizations instead of just accepting it's a mediocre game
>game length suddenly doesn't matter even though Nintendofags shitposted like crazy over The Order being 6 hours when Star Fox is half that
Oh Nintendo fans, when will they ever learn.
>tfw you didn't fall for the Wii U meme
>>334927961
No shit? It's a StarFox game you tard, not a epik 140 hour JRPG
>>334934197
>Gone Home is 20 dollars, could be beaten in like an hour
>HAHAHAHA THIS GAME IS SHIT AND NOT WORTH THE PRICE
>Star Fox Zero is 3 hours and 60 dollars
>This game is not worth the price
>UH NO PEOPLE ARE JUST VAIN AND FRUGAL AND YOU JUST WANT GAMES TO BE A MEANINGLESS GRIND
amazing
>devloped by platinum
I am worried bros
Are the branches more like 64 with lots of back and forth or are they the modern branches where one road splits in two which then end up in the same final level anyway?
Well yeah, it's a Starfox game. What did you expect? Except for that Gamecube one that was supposed to be Dinosaur Planet they're all pretty fucking short.
>>334934293
I want console war shitposters to leave
>>334934218
No i accepted it because that was pretty much all we got, thats not the case anymore, id be happy to shell out 30 for the game but 60 is a bit too much imo
>>334934401
it's okay when nintendo does it
it's okay when nintendo does it
IT'S OKAY WHEN NINTENDO DOES IT
>>334934468
And that's fine.
But not for $60
If this had been a late gamecube title, nobody would have minded if it were a 2-3 hour game with a few branching paths.
These days though, you REALLY have to justify the inflated 2016 $60 price tag.
I want a minimum of 8 hours, even with the branching paths.
>>334927961
>A platinum game is incredibly short
WOW
COLOR ME FUCKIN SHOCKED
Wasn't TF only like 5 hours long as well?
they picked the wrong dev.
it should've been Treasure
>>334927961
>3 hours of game its ok cuz nintendo
fucking /v/ grow a pair
>>334934549
I don't even like Starfox, I'm just pointing out that anyone claiming they expected anything different is either retarded or a shitposter.
>>334927961
What's the average runtime for a Platinum game?
Because I don't remember Bayonetta 2 or MGR being that long unless you tried to get everything.
>>334934636
Treasure doesn't make games anymore.
>>334934401
What a great analogy, truly accurate and not retarded at all
>>334928290
Yeah too bad the new Star Fox is more like a fucking phone game that cost $60
>>334934401
>game that has no gameplay
vs.
>game that does have gameplay, is 3 hours for one route, and is actually cheaper without the packaged second game
m8
>>334927961
You know Kom Susser Todd only plays when something bad of actual note happens right?
>star fox game made in the style of the best one is short like the best one was
>>334934636
Treasure is kill friendo
>>334934667
Bayo 2 was really long for the genre. Both Bayos were, now that I think of it.
>>334934401
>Gone Home is a game where you walk around opening things
>Star Fox is an actual game
Wew lad
Everyone is forgetting that it's $60 for two games, Zero and Guard. Not saying that Guard is gonna be any good or any longer, but if each are 2-3 hours then it's 4-6 hours total for the price.
>>334933908
Good post, well deserved (you). Sick of the fucking idiot children shitposters.
>>334934732
Okay then
>Halo 5 has a 5 hour campaign, 60 dollars
>HAHAH THIS GAME IS SHIT AND NOT WORTH THE PRICE
It doesn't matter, /v/ has almost always, universally, shit on 60 dollar games that are short
Game has multiple paths. You can't see everyhing in the first pass. Also, the game is meant to be played repeatedly to improve your scores and shit. I can't fault anyone for not liking the price, but I'll handle my buyer's remorse when it comes for me and you'll be the first to hear it.
>>334934645
>>334934583
What would you want in Star Fox Zero to inflate the playtime to however long you think an on-rails shooter should be in order to be acceptable in the modern day?
>>334934401
You could at least try comparing games from the same genre. Might as well say that Final Fantasy VII is shit because it's not like Mario Party.
>>334934636
>tfw Nintendo fell for the "Platinum should develop everything" meme
>>334933908
That was $50 in 1990 money.
In 2016 money, it's $91.
>>334931262
the length of the game does not need to improve with the tech though. it doesn't 'look and feel two decades old' because of the length, it feels like an arcade experience because of the length, which is the point. an arcade experience with huge replayability.
everyone who thinks star fox being 3 hours long from start mission to end mission is bad is either underage or a shithead.
Someone fill me in, why is everyone suddenly turning on Platinum now? I understand Miyamoto, but Platinum?
I haven't played their games, but from what I've heard most people liked Revengance, W101 and whatnot. Is it because those games are also short like Star Fox is?
>>334931496
>The Order has zero replay value
>Halo 5 has zero replay value
>Star Fox Zero has multiple routes and secret goals
Do you notice the difference idiot?
>>334934904
To be fair halo has multiplayer too
>>334934920
make it 30$ then.
Or put more courses
>>334934774
>for the genre
Don't get smart with me, boyo, non-completionist Bayo 2 is still short.
>>334934824
I don't mind the length. I've payed close to $100 for shooters that are ~30 minutes long. My issue is that the actual shooting and design doesn't seem that hot.
>>334931496
Even Sonyggers made fun of The Order, anon. Nintendrones actually defend shitty titles like this though.
>>334934952
their games are marmite: you either love or hate them. the 'love' group started getting too loud and penetrating the mainstream too much and now the 'hate' group are recruiting to bring balance to the force.
Most places are giving it 7/10.
Figures Dan Ryckert at giant bomb would be the one guy vying for attention with a low review.
I'm sure the game is medicore garbage, regardless.
>>334933878
not a fair comparison. does the order have a level system built around branching paths and have any replay value? no? didn't think so.
>>334930278
You're an idiot.
SF64 had loads of replay value. This game clearly doesn't and every review is saying so. $60 for a game you can beat before lunch with no end-game content worth playing is almost objectively not worth the price Nintendo slapped onto it, and this is coming from a guy who really likes Star Fox. You're an idiot with no concept of economics if you say otherwise.
They shit out another mediocre game with an inflated price tag and it's idiots like you who are okay with this.
>>334934667
>>334935002
I didn't think so. Wasn't it like 10 hours or some shit? I was pretty shocked that it kept going after I thought it was over. And then you go back to the past and fight with Bayo's mom and then Star Fox level and then disappointing ending fight.
Still really good overall.
>>334934993
Just toss in more areas for the sake of inflating the running time? How many in each playthrough should you have to do, or should we have to do every single one in a straight line so it take 6-8 hours from beginning to end?
>>334934952
Reason 1: Platinum is popular and le /v/ is ebin hipsters may may
Reason 2: Platinum fanboys are cancer
I am one and even I'll admit we're cancer
>implying you can get all medals on all levels in 3 hours
You can 'beat' SF64 in an hour.
>>334935146
Is there any more obvious way to show you don't like a series than by claiming "and this is from someone that likes x"
>There will never be another Star Fox game as good asAssault
At least Metroid has some company in the shit can
>>334935146
>This game clearly doesn't
Source?
>>334933075
>comparing length of story based games to arcade shooters
Those games are shit on because story is their main element, their replayability is ruined as soon as you finish it once. Except halo 5, no odea why that campaign would be shat on except for the lack of co op
>>334935085
>Figures Dan Ryckert at giant bomb would be the one guy vying for attention with a low review.
Dan is forgiving to a fault with Nintendo shit, if he thinks its bad it's probably hot garbage
I'm glad people finally accept the fact that Star Fox was never good.
>>334935394
The chances of this game being better than Assault are pretty good, anon. Most of Assault was hot garbage.
>>334934952
they started making "meh, it's ok I guess" games instead of "yo this is one of the best games of the generation". Pretty sad fall from grace.
Still hoping that Nier is gonna be excellent though.
>>334928290
/thread
>>334934636
>>334934671
>>334934752
Fuck I remember playing Warioworld on the Gamecube and seeing their name on it. What other games did they really nail?
>>334933908
>I paid $25 for this hardcover book, but the story is only 1 page long. I don't regret my purchase at all because I'm a retard without a working brain, and I don't know when I'm getting kiked over by a company.
Wew
How much higher ratings would Recent Wii u games get if they were half the price?
>>334935284
>'beat' sf64 in an hour
It took me 3 routes to get all the medals when I played it a week ago, cool 2 hrs
would play again
The funniest thing is that no one here has actually played it yet. Not the supporters or the detractors. It's like BvS over at /co/. Just endless shitflinging.
>>334935419
This is a man who thinks Super Mario Sunshine is better than SM64 and that Terminator 3 is better than 1.
I can't trust someone that brain damaged.
>>334935592
Fucking Gunstar Heroes.
Radiant Silvergun
Ikaruga.
Gunstar Heroes especially though.
>>334934735
So you would be satisfied with a Super Mario Bros remake that could be beaten in literally 5 minutes?
>>334935743
it literally can be beaten in 5 minutes or around that though.
Well. Maybe this means they'll give F Zero another shot.
>>334935743
Mario 3 and Mario World both have skips to the end of the game if you know where you're going.
Probably not the best analogy.
When will Miyamoto retire? He is driving the company to doom.
>>334935743
>>334935805
Actually here: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiUgsPp1p3MAhWLzoMKHXl1AfEQtwIIIzAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DJQ24UHbhFM8&usg=AFQjCNF44mfZSSWqfH8sgqUaMcKvut7eoA&sig2=hO1LDaotd1ChZkavBh0ZPA
An arcade style on-rails shooter being 2-3 hours long, who would've thought
>>334935691
Thanks, finally have a game for the couch
A real shame they're not around anymore.
>>334934913
The game changed the structure though.
The split paths aren't available from the start, and you don't replay from the beginning each time. Now the map is a glorified level select menu, letting you replay levels again and again, with the splits just leading to some bonus missions and not having optional bosses or anything at the end of them.
>>334936006
I think Treasure made only one bad game. Forget the name of it though. Other than that they churned out gold.
>>334935872
If the Splatoon team can make another good game then hopefully soon. They should be his successor.
>>334935982
SIXTY
DOLLARS
>>334936094
Hey buddy, the cringe thread is 3 doors down.
>>334936094
Somebody actually wrote this.
>>334927961
sounds good to me. I always enjoyed replaying 64 trying to beat my scores and get the hard path. If the game were more than a couple of hours long it would feel tedious as fuck trying to do that. I'm glad Zero works the same way.
>>334936147
That's cheaper than the SNES and Genesis games back in the 90's which were 45 minutes to an hour long and cost 70-90 dollars.
Also, how poor are all of you people if a one-time sixty buck purchase makes you this angry?
>>334935328
Wanna try again?
>>334935404
Read the reviews, faggot. Even fucking GameXplain says none of the extra content is worth playing.
>Progression of industry standards
What the hell is this person talking about? My standards have only gone down.
>2-3 hours
is that for one playthrough? there are multiple paths too right? that's at least 3x as long as SF64, do people think that's too short? It honestly sounds too long if anything. SF64 at it's length was perfect. If it has the base gameplay of 64 at least 70% of the variety it sounds like it'd be pretty good.
>>334927961
Starfox should be nintendos starwars series, where gameplay is a mix of ground, on foot combat in tps format, with the option to use all kinds of neat vehicles throughout the game, like tanks, military cars, spaceships, etc.
>>334935394
>Assault
>good
The arwing moved at a snail's pace and the 3rd person on foot aiming was just awful. Assault is a good idea with bad execution it is not good by any means.
>>334929548
>playing through a game with different routes only one time
>willingly leaving parts of the game unexplored just so you can whine about the game costing too much for how long it was
also the game is $50, not $60. It's only $60 if you get Guard with it.
>>334936305
>I don't like the extra content = there is no extra content
ok
>>334936034
I can feel the remorse creeping up already, but I'm a sucker so I'll still need hands-on time for it to set in.
>>334928904
I can think of a million other games that cost $60 that are way more fun AND can get you more time for your purchase.
>B-but those don't count because they aren't Nintendo games!
I bet they played it on invincibility mode just to complain.
>>334936305
And if they said you should run off a cliff you'd do it without hesistation?
>these people on the internet said this, I absolutely follow their words without question!
If I did that, I'd hate everything that exists. Try thinking and acting for yourself and actually try the game before you blindly agree with clickbaiters.
I mean does length really matter that much if the game is good? By all means keep your money if the game is bad but I don't understand why a game with 100 bad missions is inherently worth more then a game with 10 great ones.
>>334928904
>It's ok when nintendo does it
>LOL sony the order is 6 hour movie LOLOL
>>334936525
>that are way more fun
Oh so you've already played Star Fox Zero? Tell me about it if you can.
>>334936432
>any content made by Nintendo is good content no matter what
ok
>>334936287
>games back in the 90's which were 45 minutes to an hour long and cost 70-90 dollars.
And? How is related to SFZ?
>>334931496
original Halo was around 10 hours long so it was expected that future games last around the same time.
Cant say anything about the order since its the first game
Starfox 1 and Starfox 64 last about 1-1:30 hours for 1 route, so Starfox 0 to last 2-3 hours for just 1 route is actually longer than its previous counterparts.
>>334936673
>any content made by Nintendo is bad content no matter what
ok
>>334931718
>Some mighty fine standards you have there.
Not him anon, but it is.
>>334935683
Sunshine I can see, different tastes ok
T3 I cant... how?
>>334936525
You already bought and played SFZ to 100% completion?
>hurr if you like Nintendo then you don't like anything else!
When did this retarded meme start? Do /v/irgins actually believe every shitpost they see?
>>334934941
>Starfox
>Replayability
>2-3 hours
>Doesn't need to be improved
You Nintenyearolds are hilarious.
>>334936593
The game is short and not technically impressive either.
It's overpriced.
>>334936557
Holy shit this strawman
If the game was any good people would be happy to talk about it, dude. It's common fucking sense. Most game reviewers have casual taste anyway. The game is mediocre and nobody with a brain in their head thought it would be otherwise. Deal with it.
>inb4 reviews don't matter
>inb4 cherry-picked meme examples of reviewers being dumb
>>334929548
who the fuck only plays through a star fox game once?
>>334936785
I'm pretty convinced Dan is just trolling when he says T3 is better than 1 or 2. There's no way someone can actually think T3 is a good movie.
>>334934952
Only Kamiya platinum games are good. Like actually 9 and 10 good. He's earned that dicksuckery with his entire track record since Capcom days.
The rest are a mixed bag, 90% just borrow from Bayonetta and slap on other aesthetics and call it a day. It's a shame SF0 is nowhere close to Vanquish
>>334928904
i saw your post at first and thought that you were calling star fox zero a meme with the duration of a video game
>>334936656
Nah I don't have to, not gonna spend $60 on a game thats gonna bomb and is getting lukewarm reviews. I should probably pick up another game instead, nice try though :^)
>>334936305
Nice shop
>>334927961
>Nigger who leaked the game had 5 hours of play time for half way
Outright lying in reviews now, nice.
>>334936525
please do, Im jaded as fuck from video games.
Nothin slow tho
>>334927961
seriously how many shmups have playthorughs longer than 2-3h? and really, nobody would like a 10h shmup.
>>334936915
children on /v/ who have no idea what Star Fox even is
>>334936961
>It's a shame SF0 is nowhere close to Vanquish
like this person
>>334934718
It costs $50 though
>buy FIFA 16 for 70$
>Play Barcelona vs Manchester
>win
WOOOOOOOOW
70 DOLLARS FOR 20 MINUTES OF GAMEPLAY
IT'S OKAY WHEN EA DOES IT
>b-but it has MULTIPLE PATHS!
If a game's not fun playing through the first time, why the hell would someone force themselves to do it again and again, especially when only a few of levels are changing each time?
This is reminding me of Stories, another furry game that was just recently released. Its biggest selling point was "MULTIPLE PATHS", but what that meant was you were playing a handful of levels chosen from a small pool that changed depending on what insignificant option you picked. Regardless of your path, the first and last levels were always fucking the same. Unless your levels are actually fun to play, there's no way I'm going to slog through the same shit multiple times just to get to something I haven't done before.
>There are people seriously complaing about length in a Star Fox game fuck a rail shooter at that which is MEANT to be short so it can be REPLAYED often
This is the shittiest bait I've seen quit posting
>>334936680
Are you deliberately not following the discussion, or are you just stupid?
SFZ is longer and cheaper than games which were shorter and more expensive. Why people keep comparing the two and then whining about Zero's price I have no idea, it's like everyone wants the games to be priced based on how quickly the fastest player alive can get through them or just demand games for free.because you're all a bunch of entitled bitter fucks who hate video games yet continue to demand them yet refuse to pay for them.
>>334936998
>not gonna spend $60 on a game thats gonna bomb and is getting lukewarm reviews
Because how much you can enjoy a game directly depends on how many other people buy it and what random people online say about it?
>>334936305
so you played both Starfox games and you never tried replaying them to get better at them? and in Starfox 64 to increase your bounty?
Extra content? on Starfox? the extra content is just extra levels, what is there to unlock?
>>334936859
Is that how you determine game price though? Based on length and technical specs?
Once again, your logic is that so long as a game is long and has good graphics then it is worth 60 bucks.
I'm sure he's right about the game but
>I never played Harvest Moon back in the day because I avoided anything that looked like a JRPG
Why are faggots like this writing about games as "professionals"? What a dumb sack of shit.
>>334935683
No way can somebody think T3 is better than T1 you have to be baiting here.
>>334936915
Reviewers.
>>334936593
It only matters to retards. The real question is if the game has enough depth and good enough mechanics to make it replayable. For a game that's focused on self-improvement rather than progression, a short length is beneficial. Just look at arcade games. I'm quite willing to pay $40 for 30 minute long games just because I know they are well made and will last me over a hundred hours. Or even several hundreds to thousands of hours if I want to get at a decent level of play.
>>334937019
Unlike 0, Vanquish was good enough to merit a replay, though
Miyamoto should have let platnium have 100% freedom and they would have put krystal in it and add some fresh ideas.
This is not on platnium, this is all miya. Did you really think that platnium had free reign? Lol, miya just told them what to do the whole time.
>>334937187
oh, alright. I didn't realize you had already played through Zero.
>>334928290
This is literally what happened and I am Tumblr-tier triggered about how retarded these fans are.
>>334937070
>Are you deliberately not following the discussion, or are you just stupid?
What discussion? You've answered to a post saying that the game costs $60. How does the cost of SNES games relate to that? Are you actually this fucking retarded?
>SFZ is longer and cheaper than games which were shorter and more expensive.
Just like 99.9% of the current games. What this has to do with anything?
>Why people keep comparing the two
You are the only one comparing the prices
>>334937238
>Miyamoto should have let platnium have 100% freedom and they would have put krystal in it and add some fresh ideas.
>>334927961
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElkwXZhFKAw
Nintendo 1889 - 2016
>>334937252
http://youtu.be/lBEKr7s2sc8
See for yourself. This is the "hard" path, and yet, 64 still blows it out of the water.
Even Venom easy on 64 is better
>>334937287
if it makes you feel any better, I've been asking for another SF64 for years and I'm actually really excited that Zero is basically just SF64-2.
>>334928904
Rune Factory 4 is $40 and you can EASILY get 250 hours out of it.
I expect that scale of quality out of full price games. I'm not going to throw $60 at the equivalent to a mall arcade game.
>>334937238
>Put Krystal in a remake of Star Fox 64
Why? Save for for a sequel when she actually fucking shows up.
>>334936885
There are lots of people talking happily about it. You people simply dismiss it as "NINTENDRONES!! NINTENKEKS!! NINTENDO DOES NO WRONG!! SHILLS!!" etc etc while pointing to video game journalists as the only voice that matters, who /v/ has always disregarded and laughed at except when what they say is what you also think or want to think because it lets you poke the eyes of people/games/companies you hate.
I recall a time when we saw internet game jounalists as laughingstocks who need real jobs, not as the be-all end-all word of truth on gaming.
I mean, it's a rail shooter. I'm not buying it myself because I hate using the gamepad, not to mention gyros. Plus no rail shooter is worth $60, but lets be real you cant expect much more when the pace of the game is dictated for you. Thankfully while there's not branching paths in the planets from what I've read, there's multiple paths on the planets so theres some replay value.
>>334930835
the funny thing is it will sell like hot cakes because v knows fuck all about what people like
>>334937103
No, because of idiot game writers can even pick up on how shitty a game is, I can too.
I'm not buying the game. Id rather not buy it and risk missing a game I might like than spend the money and end up with something I hate. I'm not spending $60 of my money on a 3-hour game when I could buy something like SMM or Dark Souls 3, games that are both fun and can last a long time.
Regardless of whether or not the game is good, I don't know I don't own it.
I feel like most complaints of the games length happens simply because it's a review.
They aren't willing to try and find all the hidden paths and get to the other missions.
They're gonna playthrough it once and then just judge it off that.
>>334935085
>vying for attention with a low review
this is the exact Same logic people used during 8.8 gate TEN YERAS AGO
TEN YEARS /v/, AND YOU HAVEN'T CHANGED ONE BITit's why I love you
>>334933908
>You can beat it in 15 minutes.
No you can't, Millenial Gen Z 2004 born fagglet. Your whore mother wasn't even born in 1990 yet.
>>334937394
>Venom easy is easy
Venom easy is by far the hardest level in SF64
>>334927961
Why are they literally using the argument of "IT'S THE YEAR 2016 PEOPLE, I MEAN COME ON!" when the industry standards have if anything declined? An acceptable game in 2002 would be a GOTY in 2016 given how much shit people eat nowadays.
>>334937462
>I recall a time when we saw internet game jounalists as laughingstocks who need real jobs, not as the be-all end-all word of truth on gaming.
Yeah I recall GG too. It sucked and the only good thing was the SVU episode. Ruined this place even further
>>334937238
Platinum are the reason this is bad. If Nintendo did it all first party, this would be a decent game.
So let me get this straight.
SF0 is 2-3 hours long for one playthrough
Nintendies think that's acceptable because the games they wanted it to be like were also short.
One anon brings up 90s games and says that gamers are too greedy for playtime
Nintendo releases this game for $60
People cite that times have changed and $60 for 2-3 hours of playtime is bullshit.
So, from what I can gather, Nintendo fans are stuck in the 90s and want everything to be like the games from the 90s while everyone wants them to move on?
>>334937462
>I recall a time when we saw internet game jounalists as laughingstocks who need real jobs, not as the be-all end-all word of truth on gaming.
well like you said, it all depends on what they're saying about a certain game. Someone criticizes Dark Souls 3? Get a job, you stupid hippy. Someone shits on a Nintendo game? Game journalists are the voice of God and their reviews are gospel.
Even shillXplain are struggling to defend this game
>The controls are good after 50 hours of play! How else could you move the ship and the reticule?!
>>334937585
This was long before GG child
>>334927961
Is this a problem with rail shooters in general? I realise Kid Icarus Uprising is much longer but it's only like one third rail shooter segments.
Man, Zero would have been great 14 years ago.
>>334937514
>No, because of idiot game writers can even pick up on how shitty a game is, I can too.
yet if an "idiot game writer" says something bad about a game you like, I bet you have a fucking conniption fit over it.
>>334937514
>say game writers are idiots yet agree with them
Seems like you were already of the opinion that Zero was shit and simply needed internet celebrities to say the same thing so you could act superior to everyone else.
>>334937531
I know what you're getting at, but the difference here is that most sites are giving an average of 7/10.
A 2/5 (4/10) just seems absurdly against the norm.
>>334937578
>not Aqua with the frame drops adding artificial difficulty and everything surrounding you at any moment
>>334937531
>2006 /v/
>>334937416
You got what you wanted and you're happy. That's what matters.
If you wanted it and then bitched because it felt too much like 64 then you'd be a colossal faggot.
>>334937119
Yes. A games price should be tailored to the amount of content it has and its technical fidelity. A smaller budget release like Star Fox shouldn't cost the same as a large scale open world game with a hundred of hours of content like Zelda U.
I'm not saying short games aren't good. I almost exclusively play them. But it's not a 60 dollar package.
Portal was one of the most critically praised games of all time and it released as a digital title for like 25 bucks after releasing separately from the Orange Box package. Indie games don't have the audacity to sell themselves as 60 dollar games either, even though I'd much rather play something like Samarost 3 or Raiden IV to whatever garbage Ubisoft is crapping out.
More like
Star Fox Zero Reasons to Buy It
>>334937617
No I just want good games, not everything has to be like everything else.
This looks enjoyable so I'll be buying it.
>2-3 hours
So like Starfox 64?
>>334937698
Yeah, when 8.8, 5.0, and 7/10 were the hot topics?
Yeah ok, don't act like this place is vastly different.
>>334937772
Based on all the footage shown at E3, the game looked like shit. Everyone who wasnt a Nintendo loyalist was saying so, and whatdoyaknow? The game is bombing.
>>334937586
>>334937329
Thanks for the (You's) but I do not trust EAD like i used to, I actually meant that.
Modern nintendo along with NoA is complete shit atm.
>>334937876
How much was 64 on release?
>>334927961
>>334928290
You'd have to be absolutely blind not to know this was coming. It's basically just 64 2.0, and suddenly that's not good enough despite that being all anyone wanted for years.
