SF64 vs. SF Assault?

October 14, 2014

Giladen, on 13 Oct 2014 - 1:12 PM, said:

This section is filled with fanfiction. Krystal never shows any telepathy in Adventures (and no, using a staff doesn't make you telepathic), and she never uses telepathy when it would be handy (see Andross getting the drop on Krystal). Krystal having telepathy was an asspull to let her have an excuse to be a member of Star Fox.

Krystal got a distress signal from Sauria which is the ONLY reason why she arrived (Which she gets distress signals through her telepathy) The only "fanfiction" I said was GUESSES on why she was wearing what she was.

Giladen, on 13 Oct 2014 - 1:12 PM, said:

Assault is more linear than 64.

I don't recall being able to go backwards/travel a base/travel a space station/go through ruins/explore an icy wasteland/explore an alien base/explore the capitol city in starfox 64... Oh wait YOU CAN'T! Assault is much more open and free than starfox 64 (So is adventures) mainly because you can go on the land. You don't like ground combat? That's not the point, its there, and you are free to do what you want on the land.

Giladen, on 13 Oct 2014 - 1:12 PM, said:

Fox droning on about Krystal=Top dialogue

I never said that assault had perfect writing. But it is better than starfox 64 as in assault actually feels more complete when it comes to writing. The potential of assault is mighty. An assault 2 would (Hopefully) have the land combat perfected (Especially if they take pointers from other 3rd person shooters) and hopefully they'll go more in depth with characters/writing (And I wouldn't mind a hub world in Corneria. Go to the general for the next mission/explore around and stuff.

Giladen, on 13 Oct 2014 - 1:12 PM, said:

Even more fanfiction.

CONFIRMED BACK STORY!!!!! Starwolf was hired to take down starfox at all cost, they failed and 10 years later assault happened. Well in 10 years, people are going to change, ESPECIALLY in the job they are doing.

Giladen, on 13 Oct 2014 - 1:12 PM, said:

Next you'll be defending Other M's plot.

What is there to defend? The only thing that I WOULD have defended was Samus's freezing up at Ridley. BUT she already fought ridley a number of times before that part, meaning that it doesn't make sense.

Giladen, on 13 Oct 2014 - 1:12 PM, said:

Also, Fox needed to be reminded to blow up the robot bug queen.

that sentence is nothing but fan-fiction!

The queen was using dead and "Dead" people's voices which confused fox a bit. When he realized it was all fake and snapped out of it, he went on the assault (Pun completely intended by the way) so then when there was an opening, Falco decided to remind him IN CASE he forgot (Although that was probably more about them making Falco to be useful or reminding the audience in case they forgot what they were suppose to do) Fox would have done that regardless if Falco said so or not.

October 14, 2014

I meant in how scifi originals are usually pretty cheesy and/or silly (and can be enjoyed by some in a sort of "dumb fun" sense), and by trying to be Star Wars its trying to be a great big dramatic space opera, thus winding up as a cheesy but fun dramatic epic.

Yeah, I figured you meant that but it was fun to pretend you mean Scifi Original as in those shitty TV movies on the SyFy channel C:

But in all honesty-

pretty cheesy and/or silly (and can be enjoyed by some in a sort of "dumb fun" sense), and by trying to be Star Wars its trying to be a great big dramatic space opera, thus winding up as a cheesy but fun dramatic epic

You literally described Starfox 64 there. Maybe add a massive dose of Independence Day to the mix for good measure. But that is literally what SF64 is. A Big dumb cheesy campy space opera epic that copies Star Wars.

You see kiddo, Assault's problem isn't that its corny or cheesy, its that its -poorly put together-. It could've been the most original uniquely written video game of its time and still been shit.

October 14, 2014

I almost didn't even reply to this one after you called star wolfs LEGIT backstory fan-fiction. (A backstory that nintendo themself, mad

Show me a source that describes Star Wolf's backstory beyond what's said in the games up to Assault and that guide for SF64. That was around when Assault was at the latest.

Krystal got a distress signal from Sauria which is the ONLY reason why she arrived (Which she gets distress signals through her telepathy) The only "fanfiction" I said was GUESSES on why she was wearing what she was.

Except Pepper managed to find about what was happening on Sauria. And Krystal still didn't use telepathy when it would have came in handy against Andross.

I don't recall being able to go backwards/travel a base/travel a space station/go through ruins/explore an icy wasteland/explore an alien base/explore the capitol city in starfox 64... Oh wait YOU CAN'T! Assault is much more open and free than starfox 64 (So is adventures) mainly because you can go on the land. You don't like ground combat? That's not the point, its there, and you are free to do what you want on the land.

And that's how you can change your route in Assault. Oh wait! You can't.

I never said that assault had perfect writing. But it is better than starfox 64 as in assault actually feels more complete when it comes to writing. The potential of assault is mighty. An assault 2 would (Hopefully) have the land combat perfected (Especially if they take pointers from other 3rd person shooters) and hopefully they'll go more in depth with characters/writing (And I wouldn't mind a hub world in Corneria. Go to the general for the next mission/explore around and stuff.

Assault isn't any better than a 3D Sonic game.

CONFIRMED BACK STORY!!!!! Starwolf was hired to take down starfox at all cost, they failed and 10 years later assault happened. Well in 10 years, people are going to change, ESPECIALLY in the job they are doing.

Most of what you posted there was fanfiction. Especially the part with Leon being found in a bar.

What is there to defend? The only thing that I WOULD have defended was Samus's freezing up at Ridley. BUT she already fought ridley a number of times before that part, meaning that it doesn't make sense.

Other M isn't much worse than Assault.

The queen was using dead and "Dead" people's voices which confused fox a bit. When he realized it was all fake and snapped out of it, he went on the assault (Pun completely intended by the way) so then when there was an opening, Falco decided to remind him IN CASE he forgot (Although that was probably more about them making Falco to be useful or reminding the audience in case they forgot what they were suppose to do) Fox would have done that regardless if Falco said so or not.

Fox needed a flashback to remember to launch a bomb at the robot bug queen when she was sitting there. That doesn't make him look impressive.

October 15, 2014

Alright, so, I was gonna make this big huge compare/contrast post about why SF64 is fuckin' good and why Assault is fuckin' bad, but then I realized I -already made this sort of post- a few months ago so I'm just gonna copypaste it here.

Mind you, it largely just deals with the SF64 side of things and uses the shortcomings of not only Assault but Adventures and Command too as a contrast point, but the idea is still the same. I'll do a detailed post on Assault another time.

The ~hip~ thing to say about Starfox is that it was better when it was in the Arwing. This is not false; Starfox's ventures into other things not Arwing pew-pew related were mediocre at best (Adventures) to totally asinine at worst (Assault).
However, like Dras and a few other of you nuggets have posted whom I don't know, the reason those games blew ass was because of poor design, not specifically taking Fox out of the cockpit, and that is correct. HOWEVER...

Starfox 64 -should- be the blueprint for the series success. And what is that blueprint? It isn't KEEP FOX IN THE ARWING 5EVER - its the game's design as a whole. CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:

-Starfox 64 was diverse. The game had 15 different levels, and 10 of those levels had either: 1) Branching pathways in the level itself that allowed you to face different enemy arrangements 2) Divergent endings that took you to entirely different levels or 3) Both. There was a -lot- of cross continuity with the levels as well with Bill/Katt making cameos, and every level had a unique art direction (yes, even all the space ones).

-Starfox 64 was tightly designed. Everything had a place, a purpose, a function. There was no bloat or excess in the form of tacked on piss poor story or forced character drama (CoughCommandCough), no "side" missions that disrupt the pace of the game and distract rather than enhance (CoughSFlagsCoughCheatTokensCough). There were medals, yes, and you got medals by simply playing the game as normal; specifically doing so -well-. It rewarded replay, not guide farming. The story and dialogue was barebones, but what we got was full of character. Starwolf has collectively less than 50 lines of dialogue but they're a hella lot more memorable and loved because what we DID get was well placed and utilized.

-Starfox 64 was inviting. With 15 levels, medals, expert mode, and all the level diversity, Starfox 64 ENCOURAGED you to play the game more. Only 7 levels could be completed during any given run (and two always had to be Corneria and Venom though there was variety even there), and most levels could intersect to two other levels. The game wasn't a slog, though, you're looking at an hour on average assuming you don't get killed a lot. Trying to replay the game to discover new content or improve your old scores wasn't a chore, it didn't drag and it didn't make you question the control you have over your life. You're in, you're out, you're done, you're happy, you do it again tomorrow gladly.

-Starfox 64 was well paced. Like I just said, the game takes little over an hour once you know what you're doing. The controls are tight, responsive, and levels go by at a brisk pace, but not rushed. You never wonder WHEN DOES THIS CRAP END (except maybe Katina), and even the hiccups the game does have aren't too upsetting because everything is so -tightly- put together. Arwings are fast and smooth, lasers hit with a good omph, dogfights are exciting, and so on. There's a sense of speed and thrill that's just right.

And lastly...

-Starfox 64 was a goddamn space shooter game. Here's the deal: Starfox IS supposed to be a SPACE SHOOTER. That's its THING. Now yes, you can have diversity and try new things (SF64 had a tank and a submarine!), but what is important is that the new doesn't overshadow the -core of the game-. Assault's foot missions, poorly programmed controls aside, were loathed because they overshadowed the Arwing missions. Out of Assault's (meager) 10 levels, only four were Arwing levels: Fortuna, Meteo, Orbital Gate, and Aparoid Core. Now yes, Sargasso, Sauria and the Aparoid Surface did all have Arwing -options-, but in all 3 cases the level objectives were on foot and meant to be approached as such; and in the case of Sauria and Sargasso they were -distractions- from the mission that disrupted the flow of the levels.

And that was then; nowadays the "over the shoulder cover based 3PS" is a very generic game design that a lot have imitated, just like the GTA sandbox clones and 2D platformers of yesteryear. Putting Starfox in that bland generic mold is ungraceful. Sure, you -could- make it work, but ultimately the better choice is to focus on making a good design for what Starfox's niche is: spectacular space shooting. Yes, they are mercenaries, but they're mercenary PILOTS dammit. A few foot missions as flavor wouldn't hurt, maybe even use the Greatfox interior as an interactive level hub for the fans, but ultimately the focus SHOULD be on the STAR aspect of Starfox. Concerns of cookie-cutter cut and paste games can hardly be validated when we really haven't even broken in the MOLD since 1997.

tl;dr SF64 is a blueprint because of a lot of smart game design choices that put together an excellent shmup experience not because it IS shmup game.

October 15, 2014

Ummm.....

I like both games equally. Does that count for something?

October 15, 2014

I don't know how to quote the same thing multiple times. I've never used a quote mechanic such as this website before DX

Firstly Giladen, then tell me. What IS the truth of it then? You're quick to say "no no no!!!!!!! That's all fan-fiction." Alright, then please, educate me on what it REALLY is. Because I have a hard time finding much.

"Show me a source that describes Star Wolf's backstory beyond what's said in the games up to Assault and that guide for SF64. That was around when Assault was at the latest."

There's not much. It's basically Andross hired wolf to take out starfox so wolf hired Pigma, Andrew, and found Leon at a bar at Venom. That's it. If that's wrong, then tell me what's right.

For source, let's try this one

http://starfox.wikia.com/wiki/Leon_Powalski

"Early life: Wolf teamed up with Pigma Dengar and Andross' nephew, Andrew Oikonny, and found the mysterious Leon Powalski in a rough bar on Venom. Funded and equipped by Andross, the Star Wolf team was formed as a group of elite evil pilots to defend the key routes to Venom."

"Except Pepper managed to find about what was happening on Sauria. And Krystal still didn't use telepathy when it would have came in handy against Andross."

A planet splitting in pieces is probably gonna catch the eye of a government that high tech. And I'm sure that the sadness from the dinosaurs would be felt from far away, and that's gonna attract Krystal. The game even said that she got a distress signal. So weather its through telepathy or from that ship she had doesn't matter much. (Which I honestly forgot about the ship) (

"And that's how you can change your route in Assault. Oh wait! You can't."

You can beat the ground sections anyway you want. That's not linear. Being forced through a water fall after going through some rocks is hardly "non-linear" I would hardly call a fork in the road being "non linear" You are still stuck on a route, it just gives you one more road to go (Assuming you do its cryptic requirement)

"Assault isn't any better than a 3D Sonic game."

That's the second time you brought up Sonic. Don't know if its on purpose to try and anger me, buuuuut I am a Sonic fan. And with you basically saying "Assault isn't any better than SA2" Ain't gonna get you far with me because SA2 is one of my favorite games. And if you say games like Shadow then I will disagree because I can play assault over and over while I can't play shadow over and over.

"Most of what you posted there was fanfiction. Especially the part with Leon being found in a bar."

What's your obsession with fan-fiction? But okay, how did Wolf REALLY meet Leon? Please, tell me as clearly what I read was wrong.

"Other M isn't much worse than Assault."

o.o

"Fox needed a flashback to remember to launch a bomb at the robot bug queen when she was sitting there. That doesn't make him look impressive."

I literally just rewatched the scene where he shot the bomb in the queen. (And even the scenes before that... In which I remembered that epic feel I had when I play the game's story) There is no flashbacks, and there is no hesitation OR forgetting. I don't know what you're talking about at all (Although it looks like you're confusing a fan-fiction with the actual story... I have a feeling you might actually read fan-fiction since your favorite line with me is "fan-fiction")

Alright, so, I was gonna make this big huge compare/contrast post about why SF64 is fuckin' good and why Assault is fuckin' bad, but then I realized I -already made this sort of post- a few months ago so I'm just gonna copypaste it here.

Mind you, it largely just deals with the SF64 side of things and uses the shortcomings of not only Assault but Adventures and Command too as a contrast point, but the idea is still the same. I'll do a detailed post on Assault another time.

I personally didn't like the 7 levels per playthrough. I think I woulda preferred all the levels in one long story. Granted I have levels unlocked and can do those challenges, but I like story in my games.

Ummm.....

I like both games equally. Does that count for something?

To me it does. Both games are pretty different. Even I have a hard time determining which one I like better. Both games had things I wasn't a fan of so neither one was perfect to me. But I think which one I play will determine on my mood.

October 15, 2014

Oh not this topic again.

SF64 is a game you can pick up and have a few laughs with friends making fun of various things.

Assault is a game that gives the player way more control over the character than ever before. Arwing, Landmaster, on-foot altogether in one mission however you want to approach it.

SF64 had better Star Wolf battles. Also, Assault only had one battle against Star Wolf. That's three - one Star Wolf battle (if you count the one on Bolse)

Assault had relatively tougher boss fights than SF64.

SF64 had the Blue Marine, which was missing from Assault.

Assault had a much better VS mode. However the option to play against CPU opponents would have done wonders for the game.

SF64 story does not flow as well as Assault's because of the branching levels.

Assault replay value is lower than SF64 because there is no creativity in how you will approach the story mode missions to get to different levels, as they did not have extra levels.

SF64 has Bill and Katt in the game as NPC's

Assault does not have Bill or Katt. Katina felt like a slap in the face as such...in the case of Bill not being in Assault.

SF64 does not have as much unlockable VS mode content as Assault.

In SF64 the Great Fox can have one of it's wings destroyed, in Assault the entire ship blows up except for the escape pod. Fandom anger ensues from Assault. (Though I would attribute that to the Great Fox design in Command but whatever.)

It could be said that SF64 has a tougher Expert mode than Assault's Gold Difficulty level when it comes to surviving the level. However, this does not translate well into making boss fights tougher, which Assault succeeds in by simply giving bosses more health.

Both games struggle to provide a wide variety of mission types. Assault holds the very slight edge because of the "enemy air unit strength meter" found on a few levels. It provides something we haven't seen before.

SF64 landmaster felt easier to maneuver. But if you are going for "realism" perhaps the Assault landmaster is the one you preffer? I give that a TIE.

SF64 advantage in memorable character lines. Assault character lines felt like they weren't as well thought out.

In game music is a tie as it is based on user preference.

I say it's really your preference as to which one is better. I always thought that Assault was headed in the right direction, but that it was poorly executed. Lack of mission types made it annoying after a while to just blow up the targets on every level XD Assault would have been an amazing game if it was delayed to allow for the planned Co-op they had originally announced when the game was first announced to be in the works. Also I found it upsetting that VS mode featured so many on foot weapons you wouldn't find in the Story mode. It just felt like wasted potential really. And that's not including the number of VS mode levels that were CLEARLY intended at one point in time to be used as Story mode missions. Im looking at both of you Titania and Zoness.

Agree or disagree? I won't even bother with character development because the whole series has been a disaster in that regard.

October 15, 2014

Okay I really don't care if you like 64 or Assault more but Pharoah, your post is so full of wrong I need to stop you for two seconds.

There's not much. It's basically Andross hired wolf to take out starfox so wolf hired Pigma, Andrew, and found Leon at a bar at Venom. That's it. If that's wrong, then tell me what's right.
For source, let's try this one

http://starfox.wikia...i/Leon_Powalski

This is a fan-run Wiki. This passage conveniently does not mention what official source it came from, unlike many of the other quotes on the page. Pure fanfiction until someone can find an official text that verifies the claim made by this, again, fan-run and edited Wiki.

You can beat the ground sections anyway you want. That's not linear. Being forced through a water fall after going through some rocks is hardly "non-linear" I would hardly call a fork in the road being "non linear" You are still stuck on a route, it just gives you one more road to go (Assuming you do its cryptic requirement)

The point isn't that the structure of the levels themselves is non-linear, it's that the story branch is. Assault runs the same stages and same story every time, 64 does not. Yes, "multiple routes to take the story" counts as non-linear. This is objective fact.

What's your obsession with fan-fiction? But okay, how did Wolf REALLY meet Leon? Please, tell me as clearly what I read was wrong.

There is none, because the games never established 90% of the cast's backstory. There you go.

I literally just rewatched the scene where he shot the bomb in the queen. (And even the scenes before that... In which I remembered that epic feel I had when I play the game's story) There is no flashbacks, and there is no hesitation OR forgetting. I don't know what you're talking about at all (Although it looks like you're confusing a fan-fiction with the actual story... I have a feeling you might actually read fan-fiction since your favorite line with me is "fan-fiction")

W--what? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you've been playing some bootleg game titled "Star Fox Assault" instead of the real thing instead of like...whatever it is you're probably doing here.

Fox is sitting there looking like an idiot in front of the Aparoid Queen who is disabled and vulnerable (though pitifully trying to mess with him), before it flashes back to Wolf's "when the time comes..." quote and only then does he launch the bomb. Again, this is a thing that objectively happens. It's really weird that you're trying to argue that. Like I don't really know what to say here other then "welp, there it is. That's the scene" because what he described is literally, no-room-for-interpretation, the scene.

This is the scene if anyone doubts that for some reason.

October 15, 2014

1. SF64 had the Blue Marine, which was missing from Assault.

2. Assault had a much better VS mode. However the option to play against CPU opponents would have done wonders for the game.

3. Assault does not have Bill or Katt. Katina felt like a slap in the face as such...in the case of Bill not being in Assault.

4. SF64 advantage in memorable character lines. Assault character lines felt like they weren't as well thought out.

5. I say it's really your preference as to which one is better. I always thought that Assault was headed in the right direction, but that it was poorly executed.

Agree or disagree? I won't even bother with character development because the whole series has been a disaster in that regard.

1. I don't recall liking the blue marine. Although starfox assault take on that woulda been interesting

2. Yeah DX I had one friend that use to play it allot with his cousin and his cousin kinda ruined the game for him by beating him over and over as a child. Although I did have another friend I played it with and was quite fun.

3. Which I wouldn't count as a bad thing. Until those characters get more fleshed out, I won't really care for them. Bill story is literally "Fox's buddy from flight school" And Katt just sort of came out of no where.

4. 64 had more memoriable lines because they were so bad and awkward/cut XD "There's a base there?????" Yes, you're the general... How can you not know? But okay, any orders to check it out? Destroy it? No? Okay..." One of my main gripes with 64 writing is everything feels incomplete, like they cut off the last 1/3rd of the conversations. (Lets not forget "You win!!!... IF YOU CAN BEAT MY FINAL FORM!!!!!! HAHA!! I TRICKED YOU FOX!" They are soooooo immature in this game DX

5. That's actually why I want an assault 2, potential. Starfox assault was booming with potential. If they take pointers from other 3rd person shooters (Sat mass effect) then ground combat will be very fun. And I personally LOVE the assault designs. The great fox is sleek and cool, the landmaster looks cool, the arwings look better than ever. And the character armors are amazing. Now imagine if they fix that ground combat, imagine if they fix story and make it more in depth? (I wouldn't mind a hub world in the great fox to go say hi to falco in his room or go to Cornaria to go around the city and see the different races. And then go sleep at night in Krystals room because... Well Fox's bed probably isn't as comfortable XD

This game just had SOOOOOOOO much potential and if the assault issues gets fixed in a sequel, I can see being an AMAZING game to more than just starfox fans.

1. This is a fan-run Wiki. This passage conveniently does not mention what official source it came from, unlike many of the other quotes on the page. Pure fanfiction until someone can find an official text that verifies the claim made by this, again, fan-run and edited Wiki.

2. The point isn't that the structure of the levels themselves is non-linear, it's that the story branch is. Assault runs the same stages and same story every time, 64 does not. Yes, "multiple routes to take the story" counts as non-linear. This is objective fact.

3. There is none, because the games never established 90% of the cast's backstory. There you go.

4. W--what? I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you've been playing some bootleg game titled "Star Fox Assault" instead of the real thing instead of like...whatever it is you're probably doing here.

Fox is sitting there looking like an idiot in front of the Aparoid Queen who is disabled and vulnerable (though pitifully trying to mess with him), before it flashes back to Wolf's "when the time comes..." quote and only then does he launch the bomb. Again, this is a thing that objectively happens. It's really weird that you're trying to argue that. Like I don't really know what to say here other then "welp, there it is. That's the scene" because what he described is literally, no-room-for-interpretation, the scene.

This is the scene if anyone doubts that for some reason.

>

Like. It's cool that you like Assault dude. But stop being weirdly contrary about things that are like...not even a thing.

October 15, 2014

Robert Monroe rises from the depths at last like the terrible beast of destruction he is.

Alright, first things first. Before I get into my huge essay on everything Assault did badly (as well as the handful of things it did actually rather well), I'm gonna address some points I've been seeing tossed around here.

LET'S GOOOO

3. Which I wouldn't count as a bad thing. Until those characters get more fleshed out, I won't really care for them. Bill story is literally "Fox's buddy from flight school" And Katt just sort of came out of no where.

Ok, stop right there. You are correct in that Bill was shallower than a kiddie pool iin SF64. But you know the big elephant in the room you're ignoring?

Everyone else in Assault was also as shallow as a kiddie pool.

Perhaps not to the degree as Bill was (given he was a supporting character compared to Starfox's main lead), but look at what Assault did to LEON. I think he -lost- what little characterization he -had- from SF64. And Pepper? Pretty much unchanged since the goddamn SNES game. Fox was completely devoid of any personality he obtained in Adventures, being a very bland piece of generic heroic cardboard. He didn't even have the stupid corny one-liners from SF64. Again, LOSS of depth. Andrew was exactly the same as SF64, which is to say a one-note joke about UNCLE ANDROOOOSS.

Now, some characters did actually benefit a little bit from Assault. Wolf was actually somewhat interesting. Panther made a good impression for a first go character, though he was pretty shallow all things said. Falco, Slippy and Peppy actually had some good characterization as welll, although Falco was kind of Flanderized into a chump.

What I'm getting at, here, is you can't say Bill's exclusion from Assault is a "good" thing because he was "shallow" in SF64, when almost every supporting character in Assault is JUST as shallow, newcomers and returning characters alike. That's hypocritical. Ultimately, if anything, Assault MISSED OUT on a GREAT chance for a character moment with Bill, because he could have not only appeared in the Katina level as a supporting character/survivor and provided some much needed pathos to give a shit about what was happening, he could have been on the Orbital Gate level too. There are generic Cornerian pilots that get shot down and scream ARGHH COMMAAANDERRR and shit and having Bill there could have really enhanced that atmosphere. So no, the absence of a character is not a good thing when the presence of said character could only have ENHANCED the situation.

Moving on.

4. 64 had more memoriable lines because they were so bad and awkward/cut XD "There's a base there?????" Yes, you're the general... How can you not know? But okay, any orders to check it out? Destroy it? No? Okay..." One of my main gripes with 64 writing is everything feels incomplete, like they cut off the last 1/3rd of the conversations. (Lets not forget "You win!!!... IF YOU CAN BEAT MY FINAL FORM!!!!!! HAHA!! I TRICKED YOU FOX!" They are soooooo immature in this game DX

You are -extremely- cherry picking select lines from SF64. Yes, Pepper's "briefings" in SF64 were probably one of the weaker parts in the game and do feel like they forgot to finish writing them. However, that's ONLY the briefings. SF64 has -hundreds- of lines of dialogue and most of it DOES feel complete. "You win if you can beat my final form" I am guessing refers to the Rock Crusher boss, and yeah, that was immature and corny, but why is this considered necessarily a BAD thing? Camp is not BAD, and SF64 relishes in its camp. This is to say nothing of Assault's writing, which gave us such gems as...

"No, wait, Pigma, stop! Dang!"

"REMNANTS OF ANDROSS'S BUTCHERS"

"THINK YOU'RE TOUGH EH? SECRET WEAPON TIME!"

"Stinking ape!"

"Leave these losers to the pros!"

"Is this guy some kind of demon?!"

If anything, at best, Assault is JUST as corny as SF64 (honestly I love some of these lines, hehe), and at worst its much worse (the STOP PIGMA line is just... sooo bad). By and large though, Assault is just too fuckin' chatty, flapping a whole lot of words without really saying a whole lot of anything. There's very little inter-team banter in the missions save for a few notable instances, and most of the dialogue is drawn out, trite cliched exposition. Blah blah blah core memory blah blah blah Pigma blah blah blah. SF64 in comparison, while not a perfect halmark of video game writing, made more effective and efficient use of its dialogue. Honestly, I think part of this has to do with Assault's bosses: most of them are freakish monster things that can't even talk back to you. A lot of character is lost with that.

5. That's actually why I want an assault 2, potential. Starfox assault was booming with potential. If they take pointers from other 3rd person shooters (Sat mass effect) then ground combat will be very fun. And I personally LOVE the assault designs. The great fox is sleek and cool, the landmaster looks cool, the arwings look better than ever. And the character armors are amazing. Now imagine if they fix that ground combat, imagine if they fix story and make it more in depth? (I wouldn't mind a hub world in the great fox to go say hi to falco in his room or go to Cornaria to go around the city and see the different races. And then go sleep at night in Krystals room because... Well Fox's bed probably isn't as comfortable XD

Booming with potential, yes. But did it live up to that potential? No. It did not. Assault is at best, a worse-done shallow rehash of what Namco THOUGHT people liked about SF64 without any of the thought or depth SF64 actually had as a game. Booming potential doesn't amount to a damn thing if you just shit all over it, and that's what Assault did.

The following things are more personal biases than any objective fact, but I feel compelled to address them as well:

1: Mass Effect is not a good example of a good third person shooter. While I -love- Mass Effect, the gameplay has always been mediocre at best, being run of the mill cover based shooting with some RPG style "spellcasting" thrown in and justified as tech/biotic powers. If Starfox imitated that, it'd be selling itself short of what it could do.

2: The Assault designs were decent at best and horrible at worst. Whoever drew them up has no idea how color theory or character composition works. Pigma wearing PINK? Fox looked like a Christmas tree. Falco's design was just outright tacky. Krystal was BLUE ON BLUE WITH MORE BLUE. Leon was tacky. Pepper looked undignified. Peppy and Panther were alright. The Arwing was fatter than it was long with chunky diffusors and blade thin wings which gave it an awkward and ungraceful sillhoutette. The Landmaster was less of a tank and more of a car with a big fucking gun on it. The Greatfox looked alright.

3: Urggggghhhh hub worlds, tacked on RPG elements, "deep and mature" themes? These are all what Starfox DOESN'T need. They are distraction from important gameplay elements, and Starfox needs to focus on making a good CORE game first, before worrying about fluffy bells and whistles and trying to be some overblown world-building scifi epic.

Moving on.

1. I know, but everything else seemed right so I mainly assumed that was right too. I search furiously for where it came from, but I also searched furiously to where Bill came from (With no luck) so since things are hard to find, and since everything else seemed to be right, I must have assumed that part was right too when I first read it years ago (Assuming that is where I read it in the first place)

Rule of thumb: look for citations. That wiki gives no citation for where Leon came from, so it may as well be fanfiction.

2. I'll never understand why that style is so popular. I personally would have prefered one long story because when I beat the story once, I kinda felt ripped off. So I beat it twice to unlock the rest of the levels, and still didn't feel like I got my money's worth because it was sooooo short. I just don't understand how people can call assault short, yet turn a blind eye to 64's shortness. Or how they call assault linear despite its open worlds and countless ways to beat an on foot level, yet say that 64's cryptic fork in the roads count as linear. Just seems VERY hypocritical if you see what I mean.

Then you're missing the point of the game's design. A game is not meant to provide just a strict linear narrative. it isn't a book, or a movie. It's something that is meant to be played, and enjoyed while playing. SF64's design is genius for reasons I have previously quoted in this thread; by offering 15 levels and only permitting 7 of them to be played at any time (as well as the fact Corneria and Venom must always be level 1 and 7 respectively) you encourage replay value for people to wanna see the rest of the game. SF64 is not meant to be a big huge satisfying steak of a game that you consume over a period of several hours; its meant to be a refreshing quick snack that you can go back to over and over again as the craving hits and see new things. This is GOOD GAME DESIGN.

Conversely, Assault forces you on the same linear path every time you play it. There are no secrets to be found by replaying the game, and every level is always going to be the same thing, save for the RNG factor on the all-range mode levels. People complain about Assault being short because its a one-trick pony that's only good for the virgin run. After that, its the same old shit again. Some levels -do- have some unique or interesting things to look at, but they are not INTEGRATED well into the gameplay. Sauria is an enormous level, but unless you're playing Gold Mode, you'll never have any reason to look at any of it. Furthermore, even if you DO look at all of it, it doesn't DO anything. It's just banal, empty eye candy. In SF64, everything had a function, a form, and a purpose. Nothing was just wasted space to look cool, it was tightly designed and packaged. Assault, by contrast, is sloppy and disorganized. Assault does NOT have good game design.

And this isn't even getting into other sloppy mechanics such as how Arwings and Landmasters are just haphazardly placed around the game maps without any real gameplay or narrative integration. In fact, of the three levels where you use the Arwing and go on foot, the Arwing is -optional- in two of them. Sauria you only need the Arwing to reduce the arbitrary invasion meter; Sargasso you only need the Arwing to fight Starwolf and before then it is also an arbitrary meter distraction, and on the Aparoid Planet you only need it to destroy some hatchers on the underbelly of the weird base thing you're standing on. Sure, Assault at open-range levels you could go around and explore however you want, but this amounts to NOTHING if it is not UTILIZED correctly! More variety is NOT an instant "good" card if the variety is sloppily placed, poorly managed, and irresponsibly thrown around. Had Assault's levels had some ryhme or reason to them and more well designed functionality, then it would've easily surpassed SF64 and the linearity of only following a single storyline could have been forgiven. But as it stands, its just an ugly, sloppy mess.

Also, to note? SF64 came out in -1997- when 3D games were still a gimmicky marvel to behold. Assault came out in -2005-, by comparison. That is 8 years for it to improve and expand on the groundwork SF64 left behind, not weakly immitate it. If Assault came out on the N64 in the 90s we might have been more merciful, but when your -sequel- has LESS total levels than your predecessor and LESS replay value, that is NOT good game design. EVER.

I don't understand why people hate the writing in this game (I guess I can understand that, but I don't get why people say its bad) I mean these are all soldiers who has been doing this for about 10 or so years. They are going to mature, they are going to be more grown up. They are going to change. I think fox and his team are best in this game than the others. Maybe because I like the more serious tone over the (What I find) very silly and immature starfox 64 characters. (Also note that I grew up with adventures, so how they act here is what I grew up with them being. You probably grew up with 64, and probably prefer them acting like they do in that game)

It is hated because it is hokey and bad. Starfox was never meant to be a DEEP EMOTIONAL star tale of love and death in space. It was meant to be a cornball action series in spaaaace with cartoon animals shooting lasers at things. This isn't to say it can't be deep in some ways (Nintendo is surprisingly good at subtle depth, see games like Majora's Mask or Wind Waker), but the focus should never be on that depth. Assault did not convey a sense of development or depth, to me. Actually, if anything, -Adventures- kiiiind of almost sort of did instead. But when I played Assault, I didn't see hardcore mercs who've been matured by a decade of war and hard work, I saw boring stale generic grimdorkery. All the "high stakes" come really out of nowhere about halfway through the game; up until Sauria there IS no melodrama to be had. Then afterwards its all OH NOOOO CORNERIA IS DEAAAD OHH NOOO GENERAL PEPPER OH NOOOO PEPPY DON'T DIIIIE and it just feels -awkward and forced-. It doesn't match the tone of the rest of the game, it doesn't match the tone of the series, and it isn't ANYTHING ANYONE ever wanted. Maybe we could afford to see the characters develop and mature, but Assault didn't -do- that, it just threw cheap scares and shock value at you in hopes of making you think it was mature by taking a shit on your childhood.

And on THAT note, Assault missed out on a lot of potential to HAVE depth where it was pretty much handing itself out on a plate. I already mentioned Bill's absence being a huge missed chance, but there's also the mishandling of Pigma. This is the guy who betrayed Fox's father and was once Peppy's best friend, and how does everyone react to him? With fucking DULL INDIFFERENCE. "Pigma, no, stop, dang." And what about Andrew? He's leading a rebellion to avenge Andross, but he's wirtten off as a joke in the first level. Command eventually tried to fix that with Dash, but Assault dropped the ball. And hell, even the shock jabs Assault throws at you aren't gracefully utilized. General Pepper is a boss fight? Don't even mention him again until after the end credits! At least Peppy got a fuckin' cutscene to show he survived his melodramatic heroic sacrifice. People hate Assault's writing because it is ungraceful, poorly executed, and overall just -sloppy- and even mean spirited. It has nothing to do with the corniness of it, hell we love SF64 and its corny as all get out. But SF64 never tried to be anything more than it needed to be. Assault goes in way over its head, flails its arms wildly every step of the way, and does nothing meaningful the whole time.

WHEW.

I realize in my massive counter-point rant, I pretty much already addressed all the issues about Assault I was going to talk about. Funny how that works. Well, there is the matter of controls, but I'm too damn tired of typing now to rant about how the Arwing controls like a weightless fat piece of shit marshmellow and is the very antithesis of fun in a space shooter video game.

Consider this rant completed.

October 15, 2014

Damn Rob, that is one ginormous wall of text.

But yeah, 64 and Assault both had cheesy writing. The difference is that we didn't mind 64 doing it because it wasn't trying to be dark and serious, while Assault on the other hand was. In fact, I actually find myself taking Assault's tone less seriously because of that.

October 15, 2014

EDIT:

Accidental, a button on my keyboard apparently post things

October 15, 2014

Yes, there has already been said enough about this but, that Arwingpedia-thing actually is full of obvious mistakes. Just look at Fay. The first sentence says 'Fay is an anthropomorphic female poodle' and beneath that picture of her it says 'Species Dog(Collie)' So what? Her whole text is hardly three paragraphs and they can't decide on what dog-breed she is, plus probably a year or a little less ago it additionally stated she was a spaniel too if I remember correctly, so back then she was three different dog-breeds in a very short text. Furthermore when I first read anything on Arwingpedia it said Wolf was born 24BLW (or maybe 23, I'm not sure) , about a year ago it said he was born 19BLW and now it says 27BLW. I think this indicates pretty well they're just taking random guesses.

Also, when it comes to Leon I'm quite sure this thing about his background was not mentioned when I last had a look at Arwingpedia, which I assume was about a year ago. However, I do remember to have read this in an actual fanfic some time ago. Someone apparently took someone else's (or their own) fanfic too seriously.

October 15, 2014

I just want to clear a few things up first.

0. When I donâ€™t quite something and reply, it basically means I can agree to it.

1. I meant to say I grew up with assault, not adventures (Although I did grow up with adventures also)

2. It's not that I didn't WANT bill in assault (I actually never heard of him until recently) I meant more that if a game isn't gonna do much with him, then I don't see a point in adding him. The level where you need to protect the (research facility?) would have been perfect for someone like Bill, but if bill was just gonna drop in and be like "Heya Fox! It's been a while!"

"Sup bill! Lets go destroy these aparoids!"

Bill- I have an enemy on my tail! Help me fox!

Fox (Me)- Sorry! I got a missile to shoot down!... And I actually don't know you very well but you not retrieving isn't gonna make a difference anyway"

then I doubt I would have cared much (Although you're right, missed opportunity)

And then I can see Katt in the asteroid field.

Point is, I'm not doubting their inclusion would have been bad, just mainly saying that unless they have some kind of back story to add, him being there is just simply fan-service.

3. This kinda goes back to what was said before by me and a few others, but which personalities you like more will most likely depend on which game you played first. The way I see it really, back then they were more or less kids, so that is why I let their cheesy lines pass (People like them, but I'm not a fan of it) and with assault, you see a bland cardboard, but I see growth. As the leader of team starfox, he has LOTS of responsibilities and with how the game is, you don't see him outside of missions. This is one reason why I want some form of hub world, see the characters outside of missions, see them when they are relaxing. Even if the game is just ar-wings, I AT LEAST want a great fox hub world to FINALLY explore that ship.

1. Everyone else in Assault was also as shallow as a kiddie pool.

Perhaps not to the degree as Bill was (given he was a supporting character compared to Starfox's main lead), but look at what Assault did to LEON. I think he -lost- what little characterization he -had- from SF64. And Pepper? Pretty much unchanged since the goddamn SNES game. Fox was completely devoid of any personality he obtained in Adventures, being a very bland piece of generic heroic cardboard. He didn't even have the stupid corny one-liners from SF64. Again, LOSS of depth. Andrew was exactly the same as SF64, which is to say a one-note joke about UNCLE ANDROOOOSS.

What I'm getting at, here, is you can't say Bill's exclusion from Assault is a "good" thing because he was "shallow" in SF64, when almost every supporting character in Assault is JUST as shallow, newcomers and returning characters alike. That's hypocritical.

2. You are -extremely- cherry picking select lines from SF64. Yes, Pepper's "briefings" in SF64 were probably one of the weaker parts in the game and do feel like they forgot to finish writing them. However, that's ONLY the briefings. SF64 has -hundreds- of lines of dialogue and most of it DOES feel complete. "You win if you can beat my final form" I am guessing refers to the Rock Crusher boss, and yeah, that was immature and corny, but why is this considered necessarily a BAD thing? Camp is not BAD, and SF64 relishes in its camp. This is to say nothing of Assault's writing, which gave us such gems as...

"No, wait, Pigma, stop! Dang!"

"REMNANTS OF ANDROSS'S BUTCHERS"

"THINK YOU'RE TOUGH EH? SECRET WEAPON TIME!"

"Stinking ape!"

"Leave these losers to the pros!"

"Is this guy some kind of demon?!"

If anything, at best, Assault is JUST as corny as SF64 (honestly I love some of these lines, hehe), and at worst its much worse (the STOP PIGMA line is just... sooo bad). By and large though, Assault is just too fuckin' chatty, flapping a whole lot of words without really saying a whole lot of anything. There's very little inter-team banter in the missions save for a few notable instances, and most of the dialogue is drawn out, trite cliched exposition. Blah blah blah core memory blah blah blah Pigma blah blah blah. SF64 in comparison, while not a perfect halmark of video game writing, made more effective and efficient use of its dialogue. Honestly, I think part of this has to do with Assault's bosses: most of them are freakish monster things that can't even talk back to you. A lot of character is lost with that.

3. Booming with potential, yes. But did it live up to that potential? No. It did not. Assault is at best, a worse-done shallow rehash of what Namco THOUGHT people liked about SF64 without any of the thought or depth SF64 actually had as a game. Booming potential doesn't amount to a damn thing if you just shit all over it, and that's what Assault did.

4. Mass Effect is not a good example of a good third person shooter. While I -love- Mass Effect, the gameplay has always been mediocre at best, being run of the mill cover based shooting with some RPG style "spellcasting" thrown in and justified as tech/biotic powers. If Starfox imitated that, it'd be selling itself short of what it could do.

5: The Assault designs were decent at best and horrible at worst. Whoever drew them up has no idea how color theory or character composition works. Pigma wearing PINK? Fox looked like a Christmas tree. Falco's design was just outright tacky. Krystal was BLUE ON BLUE WITH MORE BLUE. Leon was tacky. Pepper looked undignified. Peppy and Panther were alright. The Arwing was fatter than it was long with chunky diffusors and blade thin wings which gave it an awkward and ungraceful sillhoutette. The Landmaster was less of a tank and more of a car with a big fucking gun on it. The Greatfox looked alright.

6: Urggggghhhh hub worlds, tacked on RPG elements, "deep and mature" themes? These are all what Starfox DOESN'T need. They are distraction from important gameplay elements, and Starfox needs to focus on making a good CORE game first, before worrying about fluffy bells and whistles and trying to be some overblown world-building scifi epic.

7. Then you're missing the point of the game's design. A game is not meant to provide just a strict linear narrative. it isn't a book, or a movie. It's something that is meant to be played, and enjoyed while playing. SF64's design is genius for reasons I have previously quoted in this thread; by offering 15 levels and only permitting 7 of them to be played at any time (as well as the fact Corneria and Venom must always be level 1 and 7 respectively) you encourage replay value for people to wanna see the rest of the game. SF64 is not meant to be a big huge satisfying steak of a game that you consume over a period of several hours; its meant to be a refreshing quick snack that you can go back to over and over again as the craving hits and see new things. This is GOOD GAME DESIGN.

8. Conversely, Assault forces you on the same linear path every time you play it. There are no secrets to be found by replaying the game, and every level is always going to be the same thing, save for the RNG factor on the all-range mode levels. People complain about Assault being short because its a one-trick pony that's only good for the virgin run. After that, its the same old shit again. Some levels -do- have some unique or interesting things to look at, but they are not INTEGRATED well into the gameplay. Sauria is an enormous level, but unless you're playing Gold Mode, you'll never have any reason to look at any of it. Furthermore, even if you DO look at all of it, it doesn't DO anything. It's just banal, empty eye candy. In SF64, everything had a function, a form, and a purpose. Nothing was just wasted space to look cool, it was tightly designed and packaged. Assault, by contrast, is sloppy and disorganized. Assault does NOT have good game design.

9. And this isn't even getting into other sloppy mechanics such as how Arwings and Landmasters are just haphazardly placed around the game maps without any real gameplay or narrative integration. In fact, of the three levels where you use the Arwing and go on foot, the Arwing is -optional- in two of them. Sauria you only need the Arwing to reduce the arbitrary invasion meter; Sargasso you only need the Arwing to fight Starwolf and before then it is also an arbitrary meter distraction, and on the Aparoid Planet you only need it to destroy some hatchers on the underbelly of the weird base thing you're standing on. Sure, Assault at open-range levels you could go around and explore however you want, but this amounts to NOTHING if it is not UTILIZED correctly! More variety is NOT an instant "good" card if the variety is sloppily placed, poorly managed, and irresponsibly thrown around. Had Assault's levels had some ryhme or reason to them and more well designed functionality, then it would've easily surpassed SF64 and the linearity of only following a single storyline could have been forgiven. But as it stands, its just an ugly, sloppy mess.

10. Also, to note? SF64 came out in -1997- when 3D games were still a gimmicky marvel to behold. Assault came out in -2005-, by comparison. That is 8 years for it to improve and expand on the groundwork SF64 left behind, not weakly immitate it. If Assault came out on the N64 in the 90s we might have been more merciful, but when your -sequel- has LESS total levels than your predecessor and LESS replay value, that is NOT good game design. EVER.

11. It is hated because it is hokey and bad. Starfox was never meant to be a DEEP EMOTIONAL star tale of love and death in space. It was meant to be a cornball action series in spaaaace with cartoon animals shooting lasers at things. This isn't to say it can't be deep in some ways (Nintendo is surprisingly good at subtle depth, see games like Majora's Mask or Wind Waker), but the focus should never be on that depth. Assault did not convey a sense of development or depth, to me. Actually, if anything, -Adventures- kiiiind of almost sort of did instead. But when I played Assault, I didn't see hardcore mercs who've been matured by a decade of war and hard work, I saw boring stale generic grimdorkery. All the "high stakes" come really out of nowhere about halfway through the game; up until Sauria there IS no melodrama to be had. Then afterwards its all OH NOOOO CORNERIA IS DEAAAD OHH NOOO GENERAL PEPPER OH NOOOO PEPPY DON'T DIIIIE and it just feels -awkward and forced-. It doesn't match the tone of the rest of the game, it doesn't match the tone of the series, and it isn't ANYTHING ANYONE ever wanted. Maybe we could afford to see the characters develop and mature, but Assault didn't -do- that, it just threw cheap scares and shock value at you in hopes of making you think it was mature by taking a shit on your childhood.

12. And on THAT note, Assault missed out on a lot of potential to HAVE depth where it was pretty much handing itself out on a plate. I already mentioned Bill's absence being a huge missed chance, but there's also the mishandling of Pigma. This is the guy who betrayed Fox's father and was once Peppy's best friend, and how does everyone react to him? With fucking DULL INDIFFERENCE. "Pigma, no, stop, dang." And what about Andrew? He's leading a rebellion to avenge Andross, but he's wirtten off as a joke in the first level. Command eventually tried to fix that with Dash, but Assault dropped the ball. And hell, even the shock jabs Assault throws at you aren't gracefully utilized. General Pepper is a boss fight? Don't even mention him again until after the end credits! At least Peppy got a fuckin' cutscene to show he survived his melodramatic heroic sacrifice. People hate Assault's writing because it is ungraceful, poorly executed, and overall just -sloppy- and even mean spirited. It has nothing to do with the corniness of it, hell we love SF64 and its corny as all get out. But SF64 never tried to be anything more than it needed to be. Assault goes in way over its head, flails its arms wildly every step of the way, and does nothing meaningful the whole time.

WHEW.

I realize in my massive counter-point rant, I pretty much already addressed all the issues about Assault I was going to talk about. Funny how that works. Well, there is the matter of controls, but I'm too damn tired of typing now to rant about how the Arwing controls like a weightless fat piece of shit marshmellow and is the very antithesis of fun in a space shooter video game.

1.If Leon had little personality back then, then why do you care about him so much? The reason why I'm not a big fan of Leon directly is because he hasn't done much except be there and be Falco's rival for some reason. (And with the lack of cutscenes, makes character growth not really possible per se)

Panther is hit or miss for people I imagine. I find him kinda fun and a good addition to star wolf (Put some different personalities in there)

Wolf- I like Wolf's assault character. Back then he was basically a gun for hire, now he's a professional. (I actually didn't like star wolf in starfox 64, they showed up twice out of nowhere and other than their cool Wolfen's and cool theme song, they are just a glorified boss.

people are wanting to know more about these characters, but nobody actually wants the cutscenes or situations to do so.

2. (Iâ€™m not cheery picking, those were just examples that came to mind. I donâ€™t like the writing in 64 very much)

Except I didn't see shallow characters. Let's take Pigma for example. Pigma was kicked out from star wolf (And people's accents can change over time) so what is he gonna do now? Pretend to be with star wolf? Not be in assault at all? Also note that Fox got his revenge on Andross and probably moved on (For the most part) after the 8 or 10 years later. What do you think they should have done with pigma? Because I didn't see many options.

I... Don't find those lines corny. I mean what is fox supposed to do and say as Pigma escapes? Start flying and chase him like Pit?

And with Andrew, when you're fighting someone who just wont die no matter what, what are you suppose to say?

"Think you're tough eh? secret weapon time!"... Okay???? He was confident in his ships transformation, what did you want him to say "You win... IF you can beat my second form!!!!!!!"

First you say that assault is too chatty, then you say that bosses don't talk back with you and say allot of character is lost in that... Do you want talking or not? DX And come on, what is there to say to an aparoid taking over that thing? What is there to say to a taken over pigma? What is there to say a queen who OBVIOUSLY has her mind set? The lack of talking is because there's really nothing much to say and probably better off concentrating on the fight rather than chatting with the enemy.

3. Except I still enjoyed the game greatly (Still one of my favorite games), and can't wait for an assault 2 like game. If assault 2 doesn't do better, then I'll probably start agreeing with you on things. It was a first attempt and I think they did very well. The only problem I personally had was the land master controls. Everything else worked flawlessly (For me anyway)

4. Then what do you think would be better for an on ground section? (I mainly used mass effect as an example, but if you have a better one, then say so. I would say matrix path of neo but that may be a bit over the top.

5. This one's gonna be fun.

Fox- You don't think the green jeans (Under armor?) and vest looks cool? All right, I find that look pretty cool.

Falco- XD Tacky. You're right on that. I didn't mind it, but I suppose they coulda done a better job

Krystal- First of all, I'm pretty damn sure that's purpose armor on blue and white fur. And despite breaking your "color theory or character composition works" she STILL looks pretty damn cool (Hot even if you're e

General pepper- He's old... What do you expect him to look/be like?

Arwing- After comparing assault and 64, the 64 model has some MAJOR blind side issues. So although it may look cooler (Depending on person) Assault seems much more practical and better. (I personally prefer the look of the assault stuff. Probably because of my preference of cool sleek designs)

Tank- Same with the arwing, I prefer the assault design. Even if the N64 one is more powerful, design wise I like assaults (But I would use the N64 version if need be. When it comes to ships and stuff, I prefer usefulness first, then looks.)

6. I guess this is where we (And probably the 2 sides of the fan-base) differ. The on rails is fine and all, but times are different now. I think they kinda need to grow on their story. This isn't like back then where stories were a feature, now a days story is kinda everything (Unless there is a multiplayer, then if the story isn't good enough, people ignore it and just go straight to multiplayer. (And like I said above, I at least want a great fox hub world)

Basically, I can see starfox having the RPG like hub worlds and stuff, BUT keep to its core at the same time with the ship flying sections, dog fights, and perhaps better ground controls (Somewhere I have an explanation on how that can be good. Basically being able to go through the story with air only, ground only, or the mixture of both. That should please all sides of the fan base)

7. And I do like starfox 64 for that, it IS fun game. But how many times do you do that before it gets stale? (And I grew up with the narrative story book games and I do like them. It's not like games cut gameplay for story either. And even if they do, if done right it doesn't matter (Take metal gear solid for example. I find that a nice mix of gameplay and story for what it's doing) Granted I'm not looking for cutscene galore (Well maybe ONE game to cover background stories so we actually know these characters for once)

8. And starfox 64 isnâ€™t? Starfox 64 forces you down same paths too (All you get is the CHANCE to complete a level requirement to go a different way and to a different level.

But I can agree with that point too, starfox isnâ€™t a non-linear game series. Adventures and assault are the most non-linear games in the series. You can complete levels quite a bit of ways. Sure the ending is the same, but so is starfox 64 (Unless you decided to do the secondary boss)

9. I wasnâ€™t a big fan of those gimmicks either DX (They donâ€™t make much sense eitherâ€¦ And your teammates donâ€™t do too much to help you even know they are supposed to be in the air and deal with that)

10. They tried something new with assault. (Also with adventures) as a sequel, sure, it can be considered bad as a sequel as it started doing other things thatâ€™s not like the previous games. Now letâ€™s ignore the relationship between the two and look at it as its own game. What do you think of it now? I still think itâ€™s a good game (Perhaps even better when you ignore the previous starfox games)

So what do they do now? Learn their lesson on their mistakes on their experements.

11. It actually made my childhood. I had SOOOOOOOOO much fun with this game. Like you donâ€™t even know. Assault, smash bros melee, and Sonic adventure 2 battle were my favorite childhood games. (And I played quite a bit of games back then. But those 3 sticks out)

Was it never meant to be deep and emotional, or did you never WANT it to be deep and emotional? The two are easy to confuse. And even if they didnâ€™t plan to do this, it happened. Time changed. And Iâ€™m pretty sure assault was an experiment of sorts (As other gamecube games were. Nintendo was experimenting with flood/luigiâ€™s mansion/wind waker and cell shading/other)

12. Now you want story and cutscenes? So do I. I always said that this game could have used more cutscenes and stuff. But the game kinda went a â€œstrictly businessâ€ route with the exception of Sauria. And Andrew wasnâ€™t written off as a joke. Andrew is both weaker than Andross, AND it was the REMAINS of Androssâ€™s army. Also notice how an entire Cornaria fleet is in the battle with you. So Andrew has ALLOT after him right now. And then starfox catches up to him, an ELITE squad who has defeated him easily before (But I guess he wasnâ€™t a joke in starfox 64 even know he was an uncle boy, always calling for andross whenever you hit him)

On to the arwings feeling floatyâ€¦ Well they are in space, and these are clearly upgraded from the previous models, so of course itâ€™s gonna be more floaty, it gives more control and maneuverability. Dealing with a planets gravity can really screw with someone, especially if they are used to space fights.

October 15, 2014

Now for my special post, something that I find rather odd in fanboys of one or the other (Though mostly 64 fans) (I love both, so I'm in this awkward middle ground of the fanbase)

I went through starfox 64 twice for all the levels, and then it became JUST like assault in the form youâ€™re speaking of. This is what I donâ€™t get on turning a blind eye on 64. They call assault short, then ignore/make excuses on why 64â€™s SUPER shortness is okay while at the same time continuing on how assaults shortness was bad (One says you go to challenge mode in 64, well guess what? Assault has that too). They say the writing is dull and cheesy in assault, then turn a blind eye to 64â€™s cheesy lines saying â€œitâ€™s apart of the charmâ€ well so is assaults. BOTH games have problems, and both are very fun (Which one I play depends if I want to play a quick few levels (64) or if I wanna sit down and play a game for a while (Assault)

I don't really know what this war is about. From my perspective, it's not even a war, its just 64 fans hating and they are awfully aggressive about it (Except a few.Robert Monroe Seems to be one of the ones that aren't aggressive about it )

The fanbase was split pretty hard too.

Starfox SNES/64 are the original guys.

Then adventures came and attracted a different kind of fanbase (The adventure style guys and probably the more hard core furries because of Krystal)

Then assault came and attracted people like me who likes stories like assault, the look of everything, and the massive potential.

Then command came and... I'm not even sure what that game attracted to be honest. I didn't pay any attention to it.

Now none of them will ever get along, they all want things that are too different. The only way I think they all can compremise is if nintendo makes a starfox game that makes things optional, like you can go through a story on foot only/on sky only/adventures like/mix of all for one mega story (For people like me)

October 16, 2014

Hey could you not misrepresent what everyone here is saying? We've made a point, several times now, of specifying that the difference between 64 and Assault's cornball writing is that it only seems to be intentional in the former. We have explained that 64's shortness is satisfying because the alternate pathways make for good replay value, and it's just short enough to play in small spurts (while Assault takes a bit more time and has very little replay value). This "war" isn't a war. I know you say you don't consider it a war, but you're approaching it like one, with all this talk of factions and such. Most of us here like aspects of all the games and we've said as much. You're just being weirdly aggressive and contrary, relying on your headcanons to "win" this "war", and are apparently willfully misinterpreting what all of us are saying. Seriously, half of your response to Rob is arguing things devoid of the context in which he presented them.

For example:

Point is, I'm not doubting their inclusion would have been bad, just mainly saying that unless they have some kind of back story to add, him being there is just simply fan-service.

He literally said that Bill's involvement could be used as a way to get us to identify with/care more about the Cornerians during the conflict, which was a way of raising the stakes and tension and utilizing the Cornerians for more than cannon fodder.

First you say that assault is too chatty, then you say that bosses don't talk back with you and say allot of character is lost in that... Do you want talking or not? DX

No, he said that despite all the chat, very little was being said. Dude, seriously, read his post again:

There's very little inter-team banter in the missions save for a few notable instances, and most of the dialogue is drawn out, trite cliched exposition. Blah blah blah core memory blah blah blah Pigma blah blah blah. SF64 in comparison, while not a perfect halmark of video game writing, made more effective and efficient use of its dialogue. Honestly, I think part of this has to do with Assault's bosses: most of them are freakish monster things that can't even talk back to you. A lot of character is lost with that.

Like... do you want me to keep going? I don't even know how to respond to the sarcastic quip about colour theory. Just read his entire post again.

Then there's this:

but I see growth.

Where? What defining point in Fox's arc gave him such a radical personality shift? It wasn't his finally coming to terms with his father's death, since he was still a sarcastic goon eight years after the end of Star Fox 64, and still a sarcastic goon by the end of Adventures, and Assault was really only a couple years later. The games never imply anything happened in those few years that caused his strange behaviour. Fox or Peppy or anyone never says anything that suggests that they've observed this change in Fox over the years, and all those characters are the exact same as they were in 64. And even then, a good writer can maintain consistency in a character after big events in their lives--the Fox of Assault is hardly anything like his previous incarnations.

The "growth" here is purely your headcanon and there is nothing to justify it within the text of the game. Stop using it as an argument.

And Iâ€™m pretty sure assault was an experiment of sorts

It was, but not in the way you're thinking. It was allegedly meant to be a part of an arcade series that fell through. Hence the way the game felt unpolished and there were a ton of unused assets in the game data.

Now letâ€™s ignore the relationship between the two and look at it as its own game. What do you think of it now?

Gee, these goalposts sure are shifting in a topic specifically meant to compare and contrast 64 and Assault. (Assault's affiliation with Star Fox has nothing to do with its awkward dialogue and forced pseudo-moral, janky control system, nonexistent physics, bad AI, almost complete lack of intralevel structure, shaky plot, and strange art design)

Like??? Stop preaching about this nonexistent fandom war, some of us just have different video game opinions but are old enough to realize that you're allowed to like something while also realizing it isn't perfect--without inventing reasons to justify why you like something. You don't NEED to justify that. Like with Adventures and even Command, there are parts of the game I liked, but I'm not going to force myself to defend its shortcomings over that.

October 16, 2014

I wanna mention the hostility thing. That's a few things.

It's not meant to be hostility on my end. What happened is emotion does not translate over text. I haven't been adding my normal smileys in my post do they may seem bland and/or "yelling" like (Also the black theme of this website and my avatar isn't the friendlies of faces so all that can make a post seem hostile or mean). That is not intentional, but it happens. And any other hostility that isn't from confusion in that regard, is most likely a response to hostility towards me (Weather its intentional or not, can still lead to misunderstanding DX)

1. Hey could you not misrepresent what everyone here is saying? We've made a point, several times now, of specifying that the difference between 64 and Assault's cornball writing is that it only seems to be intentional in the former. We have explained that 64's shortness is satisfying because the alternate pathways make for good replay value, and it's just short enough to play in small spurts (while Assault takes a bit more time and has very little replay value). This "war" isn't a war, most of us here like aspects of all the games and we've said as much. You're just being weirdly aggressive and contrary, relying on your headcanons to "win" this "war", and are apparently willfully misinterpreting what all of us are saying. Seriously, half of your response to Rob is arguing things devoid of the context in which he presented them.

2. He literally said that Bill's involvement could be used as a way to get us to identify with/care more about the Cornerians during the conflict, which was a way of raising the stakes and tension and utilizing the Cornerians for more than cannon fodder.

3. No, he said that despite all the chat, very little was being said. Dude, seriously, read his post again:

4. Like... do you want me to keep going? I don't even know how to respond to the sarcastic quip about colour theory. Just read his entire post again.

5. Where? What defining point in Fox's arc gave him such a radical personality shift? It wasn't his finally coming to terms with his father's death, since he was still a sarcastic goon eight years after the end of Star Fox 64, and still a sarcastic goon by the end of Adventures, and Assault was really only a couple years later. The games never imply anything happened in those few years that caused his strange behaviour. Fox or Peppy or anyone never says anything that suggests that they've observed this change in Fox over the years, and all those characters are the exact same as they were in 64. And even then, a good writer can maintain consistency in a character after big events in their lives--the Fox of Assault is hardly anything like his previous incarnations.

6. The "growth" here is purely your headcanon and there is nothing to justify it within the text of the game. Stop using it as an argument.

7. It was, but not in the way you're thinking. It was allegedly meant to be a part of an arcade series that fell through. Hence the way the game felt unpolished and there were a ton of unused assets in the game data.

8. Gee, these goalposts sure are shifting in a topic specifically meant to compare and contrast 64 and Assault. (Assault's affiliation with Star Fox has nothing to do with its awkward dialogue and forced pseudo-moral, janky control system, nonexistent physics, bad AI, almost complete lack of intralevel structure, shaky plot, and strange art design)

9. Like??? Stop preaching about this nonexistent fandom war, some of us just have different video game opinions but are old enough to realize that you're allowed to like something while also realizing it isn't perfect.

The "war" isn't this website. It's the ENTIRE fanbase in general.

1. Yes, it was intentional, being intentinoal doesn't mean it was a good decision. I personally don't like it, and you do.

Also, sure, you like the way starfox 64 was short. But that's not my point. If you're gonna complain about a game being short, then also complain about the game that's being praised for being MUCH shorter. Weather it's a good thing or not is a different subject. I personally felt starfox 64 was too short for me liking. It was fun while playing through it, but I got an empty feel.

2. And I AGREED with him. Maybe YOU should stop misrepresenting what I'm saying.

(All I added was that if they are not going to do what he suggested, then I personally don't care if he's in or not)

3. I know what he said.I was literally asking if he wants a more chatty starfox, or a less chatty starfox because he seemed rather torn on that subject. (You seem to be under the impression that everything I reply to is an attack so you're adding extra meaning to my word. I was literally asking what he prefers.)

4. THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!! (He's the one that said that BTW, not me, you quoted someone else)... Glad you are targeting me and ignoring what your buddies are saying. Real mature and nice in a conversation like this. Sooooo you're right, please do re-read what I say. (BTW, you are the new godfather of misrepresenting people. You misrepresented me to the point of taking someone else's words, and claiming that I'm the one that said it.)

5. Time. He didn't get all depressed/angry at Andross in adventures, and considering that he did the same in assault with Pigma, it would be safe to assume that he moved past all that. There is ALLOT of empty space in the starfox series, but is it really so bad to assume that time was the reason for his shift in personality? In the end it was the writers, but even writers include unmentioned other factors, and I'm willing to bet that the factor is as time went on, and fox got good with what he did, he matured from it all. People don't stay young and fun forever (As much as I would love it) People have been saying "Well Peppy is the same throughout the series" WELL that's because he started old, and after a certain age, people generally don't change too much. (And for the unchanged characters like Falco, it's also mind set. Falco didn't grow up like Fox did. SOME personalities are set in stone, Fox's was not (As you can CLEARLY see... What are you even arguing with this one anyway? Clearly fox changed over time. Fox isn't unique in this kind of change either, Take Ezio for example. He started as a kid (Say 64 fox) then as time went on and stuff happened, he became more noble and serious, even a leader in brotherhood (Like fox in assault)

(Unless you literally want the game to tell you that he moved on for the most part.)

6. Sometimes you don't need the text of a game. If a game comes out that explains that change, then clearly I'll go with that one. But in this context, it seems that time/aging/experience is what made fox like he is in assault. But if you don't think so, then please, explain to me what happened. If you don't know, then perhaps you shouldn't be going after THEORIES until the actual fact is out.

7. I didn't know that

8. That wasn't meant to "derail" anything. Allot of fans of any series sometimes looks at a game in a new light when they separate it from what they think are superior titles. It is also what I do to determine a game on its own. Say if a game is crap because its nothing compared to the one before it, I look at it as its own product. Then I either see it in a new light, or still don't like it.

9. I'm not preaching, i'm explaining. And it's not a "non-existent" fandom war, it's what happened (Maybe still is. It's been YEARS since I quit keeping up with it... I like to follow drama

Also, that's what I've BEEN SAYING! I LOVE both games. I can understand why people won't like starfox 64, and I also see why people hate assault. I'm fine with that, however I do want to question certain reasons so I, myself can understand that point of view more clearly.

October 16, 2014

Also, sure, you like the way starfox 64 was short. But that's not my point. If you're gonna complain about a game being short, then also complain about the game that's being praised for being MUCH shorter.

No. This is not how things work. I am not going to complain about 64's usage of length because it used it well. The problem with Assault being short isn't that it's short, it's that there's no replay value and very little variation within the levels you do get to play through. Look past the surface issue here, man.

2. And I AGREED with him. Maybe YOU should stop misrepresenting what I'm saying.

(All I added was that if they are not going to do what he suggested, then I personally don't care if he's in or not)

Sorry you're right, I missed that bit because your post is a formatting nightmare.

3. I know what he said.I was literally asking if he wants a more chatty starfox, or a less chatty starfox because he seemed rather torn on that subject. (You seem to be under the impression that everything I reply to is an attack so you're adding extra meaning to my word. I was literally asking what he prefers.)

You were asking him that based on your apparent misunderstanding of the point he was making, which didn't really have anything to do with how much the characters talk but, again, as with the length, how dialogue was utilized.

4. THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!! (He's the one that said that BTW, not me, you quoted someone else)... Glad you are targeting me and ignoring what your buddies are saying. Real mature and nice in a conversation like this. Sooooo you're right, please do re-read what I say. (BTW, you are the new godfather of misrepresenting people. You misrepresented me to the point of taking someone else's words, and claiming that I'm the one that said it.)

Dude, I was referring to this:

And despite breaking your "color theory or character composition works" she STILL looks pretty damn cool

That is WHAT YOU SAID. Now, maybe it is just because you really are this bad at conveying your tone through text, but to me that looks an awful lot like you dismissing a basic artistic theory Rob brought up for the sake of defending the game.

5. Time. He didn't get all depressed/angry at Andross in adventures, and considering that he did the same in assault with Pigma, it would be safe to assume that he moved past all that. There is ALLOT of empty space in the starfox series, but is it really so bad to assume that time was the reason for his shift in personality? In the end it was the writers, but even writers include unmentioned other factors, and I'm willing to bet that the factor is as time went on, and fox got good with what he did, he matured from it all. People don't stay young and fun forever (As much as I would love it) People have been saying "Well Peppy is the same throughout the series" WELL that's because he started old, and after a certain age, people generally don't change too much. (And for the unchanged characters like Falco, it's also mind set. Falco didn't grow up like Fox did. SOME personalities are set in stone, Fox's was not (As you can CLEARLY see... What are you even arguing with this one anyway? Clearly fox changed over time. Fox isn't unique in this kind of change either, Take Ezio for example. He started as a kid (Say 64 fox) then as time went on and stuff happened, he became more noble and serious, even a leader in brotherhood (Like fox in assault)

Yes, it isn't accurate to assume that's the reason for his shift in personality since it seems to only effect him and no one mentions it ever, which leads me to believe it was not an intentional character choice, because the changes in him have had no reflection on the environment or other characters. I AM a writer, and while leaving room for headcanon is nice, I'd be MORTIFIED if I left out such a damning piece of development that would account for the main character's drastic shift in personality. Yeah, people don't stay "young and fun forever", but Fox is like 30 at the oldest by Assault. He's 26 in Adventures, which is older than I am, and still acting like a goofball. Look at Han Solo. He goes through a good bit of character development in a similar setting to Star Fox, but he's still Han Solo by the end of it, not a hollow reflection wearing the same nametag. What am I arguing with you? I'm arguing that your headcanon about what Fox has been through does not magically count as canon. Sorry. And goddamn Ezio? Not only is Assassin's-fucking-Creed tonally irrelevant to Star Fox in every way but, uh, we actually see Ezio go through character development on-screen.

(Unless you literally want the game to tell you that he moved on for the most part.)

YES! I DO want the games to develop their characters in a way we can actually see them develop! Incidentally, Fox getting James's death IS a poignant, on-screen scene in Fox's development. It's the scene after he escapes the base in 64. In 64, before Adventures, where he was still a goofball.

That wasn't meant to "derail" anything. Allot of fans of any series sometimes looks at a game in a new light when they separate it from what they think are superior titles. It is also what I do to determine a game on its own. Say if a game is crap because its nothing compared to the one before it, I look at it as its own product. Then I either see it in a new light, or still don't like it.

Well, okay. Like I said, Assault's affiliation with Star Fox has nothing to do with its awkward dialogue and forced pseudo-moral, janky control system, nonexistent physics, bad AI, almost complete lack of intralevel structure, shaky plot, and strange art design. I actually think I'd like it less if it didn't have Star Fox characters in it to begin with, however oddly portrayed they may have been.

I'm not preaching, i'm explaining. And it's not a "non-existent" fandom war, it's what happened (Maybe still is. It's been YEARS since I quit keeping up with it... I like to follow drama

Evidently. No, dude, the only "fandom war" exists in the minds of the people who desperately want to fight it. We are literally just a bunch of nerds that like space animal video games and at the end of the day none of us give a shit about which ones you like more, we just don't appreciate the attitudes you're taking towards it.

October 16, 2014

No. This is not how things work. I am not going to complain about 64's usage of length because it used it well. The problem with Assault being short isn't that it's short, it's that there's no replay value and very little variation within the levels you do get to play through. Look past the surface issue here, man.

Then assault has no replay value. The could have been 15 hours long and made no difference. (Unless they went with more story) Meaning this isn't an issue with a "short" game, but an issue with gameplay/writing.

Sorry you're right, I missed that bit because your post is a formatting nightmare.

That's because I don't know how to work its quoting system DX (Even know I used it correctly earlier somehow DX... Let's try on this though... (It worked!!! :D ... Kinda -.- the names aren't at the quote boxes)

ou were asking him that based on your apparent misunderstanding of the point he was making, which didn't really have anything to do with how much the characters talk but, again, as with the length, how dialogue was utilized.

I was actually literally asking out of curiosity.

Dude, I was referring to this:

That is WHAT YOU SAID. Now, maybe it is just because you really are this bad at conveying your tone through text, but to me that looks an awful lot like you dismissing a basic artistic theory Rob brought up for the sake of defending the game.

Ohhhhhhhh that, you quoted the wrong thing.

And that's because I don't think the color theory applied in this case (At least for the most part) they designed their characters to how they wanted them to look, and I personally think they all looked cool (Better than they ever have looked I think other than falco) Sure Krystal has allot of similar color shades on, but she still looks pretty damn cool (Hot even if you're into that)

I meant exactly what I said (Although I did not mean any rude tones to it) I just saying that I think they all still look cool even know they go against that color theory. If that's dismissing the color theory (Which is bad?), then fine, I dismissed it.

Although I did agree with a few things. Like Falco was pretty tacky and could have done something different (I still prefer that adventures look), but I don't think it looked bad, just an odd design choice.

Yes, it isn't accurate to assume that's the reason for his shift in personality since it seems to only effect him and no one mentions it ever, which leads me to believe it was not an intentional character choice, because the changes in him have had no reflection on the environment or other characters. I AM a writer, and while leaving room for headcanon is nice, I'd be MORTIFIED if I left out such a damning piece of development that would account for the main character's drastic shift in personality. Yeah, people don't stay "young and fun forever", but Fox is like 30 at the oldest by Assault. He's 26 in Adventures, which is older than I am, and still acting like a goofball. Look at Han Solo. He goes through a good bit of character development in a similar setting to Star Fox, but he's still Han Solo by the end of it, not a hollow reflection wearing the same nametag. What am I arguing with you? I'm arguing that your headcanon about what Fox has been through does not magically count as canon. Sorry. And goddamn Ezio? Not only is Assassin's-fucking-Creed tonally irrelevant to Star Fox in every way but, uh, we actually see Ezio go through character development on-screen.

Me mentioning Ezio was an example of growth (Even sudden growth. Take black flag for example. The game skipped the entire section of Edward changing and when you see him next, suddenly he's completely different) That's basically what assault did and that change wasn't explained.

Want to know why it's a good guess? (Even canon?)

1. Because it happened.

2. I didn't say that it was JUST growing up (Although I think that had part of it) but I'm pretty sure I said that something must have happened for that. What happened was up to the writers and they know, but clearly something DID happen, or else Fox would still be a goof ball. I don't know what happened, and I'm not even gonna begin to try and guess. But point is, it happened, and fox changed. (Sure it could have been that the writers just wanted fox to be different for the sake of the more gritty story... But I want to give the writers more credit than that DX)

The only character that I am fairly certain about the change is starwolf, and that's because generally, as a criminal rises the ranks, they get more professional. Not once have I heard of any story/character of a professional criminal start out, and end while staying the EXACT same personality. (An educated guess you can call it) (Although in reality, it could very well be that the writers wanted wolf to be different than he was in starfox 64)

YES! I DO want the games to develop their characters in a way we can actually see them develop! Incidentally, Fox getting James's death IS a poignant, on-screen scene in Fox's development. It's the scene after he escapes the base in 64. In 64, before Adventures, where he was still a goofball.

So do I (I even suggested in that new topic that they make the new starfox game have an origins like side story as you play as the side characters to get their stories) Although I didn't quite mean that moving on is what made him serious. When I said moving on, I meant that the mention of his father didn't make him enraged or get mad, which is why Fox simply had slight disappointment when Pigma escaped.

Well, okay. Like I said, Assault's affiliation with Star Fox has nothing to do with its awkward dialogue and forced pseudo-moral, janky control system, nonexistent physics, bad AI, almost complete lack of intralevel structure, shaky plot, and strange art design. I actually think I'd like it less if it didn't have Star Fox characters in it to begin with, however oddly portrayed they may have been.

I guess I'm a blind fanboy because I don't really see awkward dialog (Except Fox, Krystal, and Tricky) everything else was fine for me.

Not sure where you get pseudo-moral. Everyone did something for a reason. Wolf helped Fox against the aparoids because if the aparoids win, then who's gonna hire them in the future? The general was clearly liked by starfox so of course they are going to hesitate in shooting him down (Although they realize they really have no choice) The barrier goes back up and Peppy slams the great fox into the barrier, but what are you gonna do? Sit around as aparoids eat your ship and let the barrier stand and everyone loose? Or are you gonna crash the great fox into the barrier to destroy it to give others the opening while you escape in your escape pod for a win-win (And loose from the great fox)? The only "forced" thing I really see is the existence of the aparoids in the first place. Everything else is them dealing with the issues (And pretty realistically I must say)

As for strange art design, I quite liked it. Everything in assault is pretty much my prefered art design (Other than Falco's armor, I prefer his bandit look from adventures)

Evidently. No, dude, the only "fandom war" exists in the minds of the people who desperately want to fight it. We are literally just a bunch of nerds that like space animal video games and at the end of the day none of us give a shit about which ones you like more, we just don't appreciate the attitudes you're taking towards it.

Love how you say "we" don't appreciate MY attitude. Look in the beginning of this topic, this was quite civil, cooperative, and nice until Giladen came in with his tone and telling, not explaining replies to me. Then I replied to what he says, then suddenly you came in with similar tone (Probably response to my tone, which was a response to the other guy) Robert Monroe post were quite nice and informative, which is why I agreed with allot of it and even liked his post, but still had questions and replies to things he said. I don't need someone simply TELLING me what's what, I kinda need explanations and reasons.

October 16, 2014

I don't think you understand any of my points. Or any of the points being made at all.

I mean. I'm glad you appreciate my posts and all, but I really don't think you understand what is being said here at all.

You like Assault. We get that. It's fine. But you seem to be misunderstanding some things here.

You are seeing things that ARE NOT THERE. There is NO DEVELOPMENT OR GROWTH in Assault. Development, growth, implies something happens ON SCREEN that causes a change in how a character thinks, acts, or believes. None of this is -ever- present in Assault. It did not happen "off camera" because there is no LOGICAL PROGRESSION from Fox going from a smarmy little shit to a boring piece of shit. Assault was simply -inconsistant-, and you need to stop telling yourself otherwise just because you like Assault a whole lot.

What could they have done with Pigma? I dunno... fucking ANYTHING with the guy who -KILLED FOX'S DAD-. Seriously, this asshole is right there in front of Fox and he treats it like a casual occurrence. Instead he's just used as a throw away villain for the Aparoids. This is NOT development. This is NOT good storytelling. This is NOT GOOD USE OF YOUR CHARACTERS. Assault wants to be "mature", but it writes like a goddamn teenager who discovered R rated movies are a thing and is secretly trying to imitate it with PG language. It's -BAD WRITING-. Nothing else.

I'm not saying Assault is too chatty. I'm saying Assault spends a whole lot of time talking and not saying anything of worth. SF64's writing was terse and got the job done. Assault is blabbing exposition and droning bullshit. Assault DOES NOT MAKE EFFECIENT OR EFFECTIVE USE of its writing. Yes, I expect games to expand and grow and become bigger and more involving as technology advances. However, if dialogue is not USED correctly, then its just a waste of space and time.

Of course Starfox 64 will get stale if you play the hell out of it repeatedly, ANY game will. No game is endlessly timeless. However, SF64 offers MORE replay value on principle than Assault. Assault is ten levels. Ten levels that will never change unless you up the medal difficulty, and even then the changes are MINUTE, not to mention frustrating. But comparison, SF64 has -15- levels, and many of them cross intersect. Corneria has two branches. Sector Y has two branches. Meteo has THREE branches. Katina has two branches. Aquas has one branch. Zoness has two branches. Solar has one branch. Fichina has two braches. Sector X has THREE branches. Sector Z has two branches. MacBeth has two branches. Titania has one branch. Bolse and Area 6 have one branch. Venom has two -variations-. And then the levels themselves have small variants in themselves, such as Corneria's secret boss, Meteo's secret zone, Sector Y's high and low path, Sector X's left and right paths, etc. Assault is the same straight line over and over again. SF64 is generally never the same experience twice, even if you do the same thing over and over.

THIS is ultimately what I am getting at. When people hate on Assault and love 64, its because ASSAULT IS A STEP BACKWARDS in EVERY POSSIBLE WAY except presentation. Assault is a whole lot of shiny pretty graphics and storytelling and NO SUBSTANCE behind it. yes, SF64 is dated, yes, it can be a bit stale with time, but its design and implementation is fantastically conceived. Assault is badly made. There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

And ultimately, this is what we want in a Starfox game. We don't mind or care if there's a lot of story or dialogue IF IT IS USED WELL. Assault was NOT used well. We don't want games to stay stuck in 1997 and forever copy SF64; that would be retarded. SF64 is dated. it is good, but dated. Games need to evolve. But games are not automatically BETTER just because they're bigger and badder and talkier and flashier. If the parts are poorly put together and utilized, then the game is BAD. That is what happened to Assault, and the assumption that Starfox needs to be bigger and flashier to be good without consideration for how the parts are put together responsibly will only result in more dissapointing failures LIKE Assault.

The end.

October 16, 2014

Meteo has THREE branches.

Meteo only has two branches, The warp to Katina and the normal way to Fichina

October 16, 2014

Meteo only has two branches, The warp to Katina and the normal way to Fichina

WHATEVER BRAAAAH ITS STILL MORE THAN ASSAULT

WHICH HAS ZERO ZIPPITY ZILCH BRANCHES EVER

also addendum: Assault's art design is still shitty even if you like it

space fighter jets should not be wider than they are long thats just tacky

also color theory is a thing Krystal is a blue vixen in a blue suit and its just a fuckin amateur mess

addendum 2.0: the fucking writing and acting in Assault is corny regardless if you THINK it is corny

I mean seriously the shit in the Fortuna level rivals and even outclasses SF64 in some cases

STINKING APE.

October 16, 2014

I always enjoy seeing that gif, first time it's been used on me directly though XD

Robert Monroe, on 15 Oct 2014 - 10:13 PM, said:

I don't think you understand any of my points. Or any of the points being made at all.

I understand them, I just don't always agree with them.

You are seeing things that ARE NOT THERE. There is NO DEVELOPMENT OR GROWTH in Assault. Development, growth, implies something happens ON SCREEN that causes a change in how a character thinks, acts, or believes. None of this is -ever- present in Assault. It did not happen "off camera" because there is no LOGICAL PROGRESSION from Fox going from a smarmy little shit to a boring piece of shit. Assault was simply -inconsistant-, and you need to stop telling yourself otherwise just because you like Assault a whole lot.

That's because the growth happened before the game. I simply like the characters in assault better than they were in 64. And like I said in that other post, how and why they act are a mixture of educated guesses based on how REAL people change, or it may very well be just that the writers wanted them like that for the sake of the games theme (Although I do want to give the writers more credit than that)

What could they have done with Pigma? I dunno... fucking ANYTHING with the guy who -KILLED FOX'S DAD-. Seriously, this asshole is right there in front of Fox and he treats it like a casual occurrence. Instead he's just used as a throw away villain for the Aparoids. This is NOT development. This is NOT good storytelling. This is NOT GOOD USE OF YOUR CHARACTERS. Assault wants to be "mature", but it writes like a goddamn teenager who discovered R rated movies are a thing and is secretly trying to imitate it with PG language. It's -BAD WRITING-. Nothing else.

Think of who Pigma is. He was a scumbag who betrayed James, worked with starwolf for a bit and got kicked out by Wolf. So what was Pigma going to do? Join back with star fox? Hire a bunch of people and become a leader of a side organization? And I get the impression that you don't even know how Pigma could be used in your own mind. (And honestly, betraying James isn't that impressive. A cheap shot on someone who trust you isn't an impressive kill)

I'm not saying Assault is too chatty. I'm saying Assault spends a whole lot of time talking and not saying anything of worth. SF64's writing was terse and got the job done. Assault is blabbing exposition and droning bullshit. Assault DOES NOT MAKE EFFECIENT OR EFFECTIVE USE of its writing. Yes, I expect games to expand and grow and become bigger and more involving as technology advances. However, if dialogue is not USED correctly, then its just a waste of space and time.

You say that they say a bunch of nothing, but I did replay it recently and everything they said made sense. Sure they could have been strictly to the point, but that would have made it even more dull than it was. (And starfox 64 hardly got the job done. It didn't do enough in terms of writing)

Of course Starfox 64 will get stale if you play the hell out of it repeatedly, ANY game will. No game is endlessly timeless. However, SF64 offers MORE replay value on principle than Assault. Assault is ten levels. Ten levels that will never change unless you up the medal difficulty, and even then the changes are MINUTE, not to mention frustrating. But comparison, SF64 has -15- levels, and many of them cross intersect. Corneria has two branches. Sector Y has two branches. Meteo has THREE branches. Katina has two branches. Aquas has one branch. Zoness has two branches. Solar has one branch. Fichina has two braches. Sector X has THREE branches. Sector Z has two branches. MacBeth has two branches. Titania has one branch. Bolse and Area 6 have one branch. Venom has two -variations-. And then the levels themselves have small variants in themselves, such as Corneria's secret boss, Meteo's secret zone, Sector Y's high and low path, Sector X's left and right paths, etc. Assault is the same straight line over and over again. SF64 is generally never the same experience twice, even if you do the same thing over and over.

Scripted Forks in the road vs an open world to beat the enemy in any order you want in the level.

Is the above really hard to understand? One of you said that sure assault was more open, but it was all just eye candy designs. And although true, so is starfox 64. And starfox 64 levels aren't long enough for me to like these forks in the roads any better than they are. To me, it's just another route that require a cryptic challenge to enter. Once you go through the story twice, there's not much point to do so again but instead, replay levels in the challenges. (Same with assault. Sure there was 5 less levels, but it still had it, and I quite liked the levels.)

THIS is ultimately what I am getting at. When people hate on Assault and love 64, its because ASSAULT IS A STEP BACKWARDS in EVERY POSSIBLE WAY except presentation. Assault is a whole lot of shiny pretty graphics and storytelling and NO SUBSTANCE behind it. yes, SF64 is dated, yes, it can be a bit stale with time, but its design and implementation is fantastically conceived. Assault is badly made. There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Apparently there is if I enjoy it more than starfox 64. If the game was truly badly made, then I would hate it like I do command (Which to me, was truly badly made)

And ultimately, this is what we want in a Starfox game. We don't mind or care if there's a lot of story or dialogue IF IT IS USED WELL. Assault was NOT used well. We don't want games to stay stuck in 1997 and forever copy SF64; that would be retarded. SF64 is dated. it is good, but dated. Games need to evolve. But games are not automatically BETTER just because they're bigger and badder and talkier and flashier. If the parts are poorly put together and utilized, then the game is BAD. That is what happened to Assault, and the assumption that Starfox needs to be bigger and flashier to be good without consideration for how the parts are put together responsibly will only result in more disappointing failures LIKE Assault.

Assault's art design is still shitty even if you like it

space fighter jets should not be wider than they are long thats just tacky

They have different modes. The wings get thinner for different purposes and get wider for others. It's like that for a reason.

And look at REAL fighter jets, they are about the same wing span as it is long wise. (Even longer in some cases)

I've never seen a case where a character was made to look like art. I always see character designs based on what the creator looks cool/hot/sexy/ugly. It all just depends on the theme they are going on. (And the armor looks good on her)

I mean seriously the shit in the Fortuna level rivals and even outclasses SF64 in some cases

Then that is just how starfox writing is.

October 16, 2014

Ok I'm just gonna break this down and be done with it.

1: Growth. Sorry, no, growth doesn't happen off camera just because you want it to. You want to like the characters more in Assault? Fine. I actually liked Assault Slippy more than any other Slippy. But don't claim there's growth when there isn't any. All you're doing is making assumptions, and honestly they're not even good ones. Growth in fiction has to be portrayed, or at least hinted at. Assault is set ONE year after Adventures, and in that one year Fox went from being his best written to his worst. Assault Fox isn't -defined- at all, he isn't even a -character-. He's just a mouthpiece for generic heroic dribble. That is not development. That's lazy writing.

2: Think of who Pigma is? He's the guy who KILLED FOX'S FATHER. What's he going to do? How about NOT BE IGNORED AND BECOME A FLOATING CYBERFACE? Seriously, Fox should've been out to kick this pig's ass for showing his face around him (especially after manipulating him to save his sorry ass from the Aparoids), but all he does is say DANG very flatly. I don't see how you don't understand my frustration here. Pigma is the biggest traitor to Fox's family ever and the catalyst of his woes. He should REACT TO HIM. This isn't about Pigma being an impressive character, this is about -wasted pathos potential- that was ignored in favor of a cheap character kill.

3: You're misunderstanding what I mean by "saying a lot of nothing". I'm not saying that Assault's dialogue is hard to understand. I'm saying that Assault is talking out of its own ass too much. Much of Assault's writing isn't memorable because its a bunch of exposition bullshit. its talking to hear itself talk, in other words. SF64 got the job done because almost everything in that game is QUOTABLE. If that isn't a fucking sign of good, to the point writing, I don't know WHAT IS. SF64's writing was never meant to tell a grand story, it didn't NEED to do more. It delivered quirky fun banter while you shot shit, and it succeeded. This isn't about -scope-, its about EFFECIENT APPLICATION.

4: Forks in the road that you can mix and match in any order for dffering play experiences VS sloppy open world combat that had a lot of fucking useless filler meant to distract you. Seriosuly, fucking Katina is "run around in a tank and fight endless droves of the same fucking enemies until you kill all the arbitrary targets". That is NOT effective use of an open world level design. That is PADDING. Starfox 64 didn't have PADDING and that is why it is GOOD. Assault PADS. Assault WASTES YOUR FUCKING TIME with slogs of samey boring enemies to drag its length out. Bad. Game. Design.

5: A game can be badly made and still be enjoyed by people. I don't fucking care if you LIKE Assault, my point isn't to make you DISLIKE it, its to enlighten you on its OBJECTIVE, FLAWED, BAD DESIGN CHOICES. I fucking love a lot of shitty games but that doesn't make them any elss shit. And honestly as far as shitty games go you can do a lot worse than Assault.

6: I don't know what you're saying. I'm complaing about how the Assault Arwing is -disproportionate-. it is UNATTRACTIVE to the eye. Art theory doesn't mean characters have to be TRUE ART, it just means there are simple rules that fucking anyone who ever took a goddamn drawing class should know when it comes to designing things and Assault's character designs just take a GIANT PISS on all of them. This isn't -hard- stuff this is shit like proportions, complimentary colors, and fucking appealing geometry.

7: Yes, this is how Starfox's writing is. So stop saying Assault isn't corny and 64 is too corny, because they're both goddamn corny.

October 16, 2014

Ugh Rob basically handled this but hey why not slam my head into a wall for another hour

Then assault has no replay value. The could have been 15 hours long and made no difference. (Unless they went with more story) Meaning this isn't an issue with a "short" game, but an issue with gameplay/writing.

Yes

And that's because I don't think the color theory applied in this case

That is not how colour theory works. You do not pick and choose at which point colour theory exists just like you don't pick and choose the points in which the theory of gravity exists. It's a fundamental artistic concept like "anatomy" and "using a drawing apparatus to create an image".

Take black flag for example. The game skipped the entire section of Edward changing and when you see him next, suddenly he's completely different) That's basically what assault did and that change wasn't explained.

You are saying this as if Black Flag was an example of a good game

Because it happened.

No it didn't.

I didn't say that it was JUST growing up (Although I think that had part of it) but I'm pretty sure I said that something must have happened for that. What happened was up to the writers and they know, but clearly something DID happen, or else Fox would still be a goof ball. I don't know what happened, and I'm not even gonna begin to try and guess. But point is, it happened, and fox changed. (Sure it could have been that the writers just wanted fox to be different for the sake of the more gritty story... But I want to give the writers more credit than that DX)

You are inventing this. This is not a thing that happened. Buddy, I can chat all day about my long and winding interpretation of Andrew Oikonny, his pathos, his role as a character foil to Fox, the fact that he would probably have a sword and watch space anime. I love me some headcanons. That doesn't mean it's a thing that happened or had any implication of happening in the actual games. Even in terms of being a character foil the groundwork is there but the narrative never actually acknowledges it.

You know how you don't actually "see" your blind spot? We all have blind spots in our eyes, but we don't see them as just a void in our vision. Our brains use the surrounding imagery to fill the gaps. That's what you're doing with Assault's story and Fox's character. Just because you think you see something doesn't mean it isn't your brain just glossing over a blind spot.

And don't worry about giving credit to the writers. There are no credited writers on Star Fox Assault. Their dignity is more than protected.

Not sure where you get pseudo-moral.

"She tried to bypass evolution by stealing souls...but you have to be born with one"

Seriously, high five to anyone who can figure out what the fuck that meant or what it had to do with any overarching theme of the game, and why it was practically stated to the camera as if it were the overarching theme of the game. That line was actually so bad I kind of wonder if something was mistranslated.

Anyway I'm just gonna leave with this because I scrolled down from one and immediately saw the other and it made me laugh.

Robert Monroe post were quite nice and informative

SF64 vs. SF Assault?

Recommended Posts

Pharaoh Shadon

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Drasiana

Robert Monroe

Robert Monroe

Robert Monroe

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Giladen

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Robert Monroe

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Arminius H O Fiddywinks

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pharaoh Shadon

Link to comment

Share on other sites

StarFoxfan-FUR_ever

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Drasiana

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pharaoh Shadon

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Robert Monroe

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Patch93

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pharaoh Shadon

Link to comment

Share on other sites

FromAnotherWorld

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pharaoh Shadon

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pharaoh Shadon

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Drasiana

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pharaoh Shadon

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Drasiana

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pharaoh Shadon

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Robert Monroe

Link to comment

Share on other sites

ArwingFan

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Robert Monroe

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pharaoh Shadon

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Robert Monroe