Retro|Spective 008: Starfox

[QualityChimp]

Me, trying to work out what's happening on the first SNES Starfox game:

->Open Spoiler<-

[Asura]

And let's be clear: Starfox's underperformance as a Nintendo IP is solely down to Miyamoto-san's insistence on facking about with the formula time and again. With hindsight, I personally would've preferred that Nintendo let the franchise die á la F-Zero.

I'm sure I read an article years ago that suggested, on a personal/creative level, Miyamoto doesn't like it because he doesn't really get it.

If I'm to theorise, I suspect it's because of how Starfox came to be.

Game Design as a field has many different approaches, but two of the most prolific are a "top down" approach and a "bottom up" approach.

Top down is when you might make a game about something high-concept, like, for example, "the fear of darkness". So you create features which service this idea. Alan Wake grew out of this; everything in the game feeds back to that concept. This makes sense because it allows you to craft a tight emotional experience.

Bottom up is usually when you have a game which is technically driven. So, you might have come up with something cool and try to make a game out of it. Red Faction is a good example of that; they developer had this idea of a first-person shooter where explosions would blow holes in walls. This works because it allows you to create interesting, innovative things.

Most designers tend to favour one approach or the other; rarely you get someone who can do both.

Miyamoto's a creative; having read things he's said/written for years, I've always believed he approaches game design from a "high concept" standpoint, which is a top-down approach. He believes in the importance of some technical things, like the concept of "the toy", the idea that games should be very technically proficient - but I don't think he's the sort of person who thrives in a technical approach.

You can see this in how for Starfox Zero, he was talking about how the game was about "transformation" as a high concept; that's like trying to take a cookie-cutter of a shape he's created and to stamp that into an already completed cookie.

[wakka]

Cool post, I haven't heard of those ways of defining creative approaches before but they're definitely an interesting way of thinking about how certain games are designed the way they are.

I have heard that Miyamoto doesn't like/doesn't 'get' Starfox previously, and I think your idea of why this might be makes a lot of sense.

Starfox on the SNES is pretty much the definition of a bottom up approach, based on what I've read about its development. I think the problem with a bottom up approach is that it doesn't really lend itself particularly well to longevity, since a novel technological idea only has a brief shelf life before it's commonplace and then passé.

I'm not a big fan of Starfox personally. The 64 game is well made, but the rest of the series has always felt like a series of average to poor games. And I think it's because I don't think there is much of a foundation there. Not in the way that there is with Mario or Zelda, which have an identity that goes well beyond 'Isn't this a cool gimmick?'.

[Neon Ignition]

Thing is, if Nintendo is approaching Starfox with the intent to make one and Miyamoto doesn't get it or want it in its pre-existing form he should step away from it and let others take it over. It's like the good old meddling middle management issues scenario.

Expanding on Starfox has never really been an issue, it's always been that rather than evolve it there are so many bad attempts at gimmicking it or reinventing it into something it's not.

That being said, I'm going to say, Adventures is not great and there's not enough Starfox DNA in it but I generally didn't mind the game. It was always reasonably fun enough and I'm going to say it... there are Zelda's I've enjoyed less. The idea of an adventure based Starfox with Arwing intersections etc is one of the approaches that make the most sense on paper but forcing Dinosaur Planet into that attempt wasn't the ideal move.

[Nu-Eclipse]

Thing is, if Nintendo is approaching Starfox with the intent to make one and Miyamoto doesn't get it or want it in its pre-existing form he should step away from it and let others take it over. It's like the good old meddling middle management issues scenario.

QFT.

It's the same cop-out that Miyamoto-san uses to justify not making another F-Zero, and other long-lost Nintendo franchises, despite considerable demand and it is tiresome.

[wakka]

I'm not sure if expanding successfully on Starfox is at all straightforward. Isn't that what Assault and Command tried to do already?

For me it's one of those simple concepts that reached its zenith almost immediately (64), with every subsequent expansion and complication only serving to dilute and worsen it. Similar to Super Monkey Ball or Crazy Taxi.

EDIT: And I'm going to caveat this by saying I'm far from an expert on the franchise. So I might have it disastrously wrong but it's my impression, at least.

[Neon Ignition]

I think Assaults issue was that it wasn't building on 64 in the natural sense. The franchise was knocked out to Namco in the same way F-Zero was in an effort to produce the arcade game as well that never ended up coming about. Presumably Assault is the way it is because it shares DNA with the arcade project so whilst it's a decent little game it doesn't go far enough almost by design

[danstan21]

Assault is a flawed game in many respects - short linear campaign that's just a little too long to be a good score attack game, not quite as tight Arwing level design, and clunky on-foot missions which make up 60% of the game.

I'll be damned if I don't say I think it's great, though. Not as good as 64 of course, but it still has enough that appeals to me:

1) Cool mission variety - even if there's too little time in the Arwing, it feels like a natural expansion of the SF universe to have semi-exploratory on-foot missions, and the wingman missions with the rapid-fire bazooka were a treat.

2) The cheesy space opera story with betrayals, self-sacrifices and unlikely alliances, not to mention a totally-not-the-Borg new antagonist. The VA might not be as legendary as 64 but it's still pretty excellent as far as games go. Plus that soundtrack!

3) The multiplayer is some of the GC's best, and stands head and shoulders above that of 64. While nowhere near as in-depth as something like Halo, it works as a better party game due to the simpler mechanics, and there's enough variety in maps, characters and weapons to stay fresh. There's fun sandboxy elements too, like how with enough protracted effort you can stand on your teammate's Arwing to haphazardly recreate the wingman scenarios of the single player mode. I had a lot of 4P fun with friends on this as a teenager.

I feel like Assault has aged well in retrospect because of what the franchise has (or rather, hasn't) become since. It feels like a rough draft of the things we imagined the series would develop into - new and longer mission types, a grander story scope, a slightly more serious tone, and fleshed out extra modes. If we'd got any games building on Assault's formula it'd probably have been forgotten by now, but as it stands it's likely to remain "the last decent Starfox".

[Asura]

For me it's one of those simple concepts that reached its zenith almost immediately (64), with every subsequent expansion and complication only serving to dilute and worsen it. Similar to Super Monkey Ball or Crazy Taxi.

EDIT: And I'm going to caveat this by saying I'm far from an expert on the franchise. So I might have it disastrously wrong but it's my impression, at least.

Nah, I think you nailed it. It's like what I've said regarding WipEout; the HD version is kinda as close as you're going to get a to a perfect expression of what the games were meant to be. So sequels are always going to be risky.

[Neon Ignition]

We've already been discussing it so I'll throw in another installment alongside it as a bonus:


Game 04 - Starfox Assault
A canonical sequel to Adventures, a greater on foot focus than 64 but more close to that game than the action rpg styled last release, this sequel was a second title released for Gamecube. Performing well in the game unlocks Xevious whilst in Japan you can also unlock Battle City and Star Luster.




Game 05 - Starfox Command
Mixing two styles of play, this handheld entry crossed turn based strategy with rail shooting. The turn based section involve commanding four ships to protect the Great Fox whilst the battle mode works like all-range mode in 64. It was one of the better reviewed entries but any ideas of its own remain its own.




What direction was the series headed in at this point?

[Asura]

Game 05 - Starfox Command
Mixing two styles of play, this handheld entry crossed turn based strategy with rail shooting. The turn based section involve commanding four ships to protect the Great Fox whilst the battle mode works like all-range mode in 64. It was one of the better reviewed entries but any ideas of its own remain its own.

I strongly remember really hating this game, though I don't remember much about it.

I've always felt it got good reviews because it's one of those DS games which is technically very proficient - alongside stuff like Metroid Prime: Hunters, Mario Kart DS and Tony Hawk's American Sk8land; like it's one of the better looking 3D games on the platform. But unlike some of those others, it's just not very good.

As for the direction question; I think the point is that the series doesn't have one, and that's potentially the problem.

[DeathAdder]

I've got Star Fox Command still sealed - never played for some reason.

Might have to give it a whirl.

[Asura]

Starfox on the SNES is pretty much the definition of a bottom up approach, based on what I've read about its development.

Yes, in fact it's a very good example. Someone hit upon a technological idea, and then thought "how do we make a game around this".

There's a good cooking metaphor; bottom-up is making a risotto because you've found yourself a secret to getting infinite risotto rice. Top-down is making a risotto because you want to make people understand what you feel when you eat a really good risotto.

[Neon Ignition]

Game 06 - Starfox Zero
Another reboot for the franchise and another stab at the fundamental approach that the original game and 64 took, players control the Arwing using the left stick and gyroscopic controls to aim. The Arwing can transform this time, the series continuing a long running tradition of mining the cancelled Starfox 2 for ideas whilst also building on the concept of an abandoned Wii entry. The game was coupled with Starfox Guard, a small tower defense game formed from further gyro experimentation within Nintendo on the franchise. Reviews weren't bad but they were very middling and the games sales performance was weak leading the franchise into its current state of silence.




Better or worse? Which direction did Zero suggest for Star Fox?

[wakka]

I played the demo of this and though that it didn't play well. It centres around the gamepad of course. You have to look at the screen on it frequently, an annoying and for me immersion breaking experience.

I wanted to like it, but it just wasn't much fun.