Dr. Orange Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Wait, people take GameTheory seriously? I've always thought it was a satire of all the ridiculous fan theories out there.Every prepubescent jump hacker and LP watcher with an obsession with call of Dooty would cite this man if hgiven a project researching Vida games. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoprimedonna Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Wait, people take GameTheory seriously? I've always thought it was a satire of all the ridiculous fan theories out there.Basicly the same question I ask. Some stuff really doesn't make sense. It would be OK to talk about Andrew, because even in Assault, he is shown with prothesis. But THE WHOLE TEAM??? This is ridiculous, especially to the fact that from SFX1 to 64, they inspired themselves on puppets, and not real-life animals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfinitySquared Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) Because it's basically a bunch of 2edgy fanfiction being proselytized as the truth by grimdorks. Theories that actually make sense (Lylat is a binary star system/what are the Krazoa/etc) aren't interesting enough for 12 year olds looking for shock value so we get STAR FOX CUT HIS LEGS OFF FOR GRAVITY repeated ad infinitum instead.It's not so much that they're ruining any lore or whatever..I mean, it IS really, really dumb, but for some reason is considered as fact by a bunch of edgelords trying to make their goofy Nintendo games as Secretly Terrifying and Not For Kids After All! as possible. It's an overall really annoying trend that doesn't just effect Star Fox -- people try to sensationalize harmless or goofy properties by grasping any straw they can find that has a shot at making the series in question Secretly Dark and Mature in order to, I dunno, justify its existence somehow. It's really goofy and not as deep as it thinks it is. Edge for edge's sake isn't all that interesting.OK, THIS makes sense. Thank you! Edited June 2, 2015 by InfinitySquared 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psy_commando Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 That reminds me, I actually wrote to the "Did you know gaming" people about the metal legs : http://www.starfox-online.net/forums/topic/11097-i-emailed-the-did-you-know-gaming-people/It didn't go anywhere XD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FromAnotherWorld Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 It would be OK to talk about Andrew, because even in Assault, he is shown with prothesis. But THE WHOLE TEAM??? This is ridiculous, especially to the fact that from SFX1 to 64, they inspired themselves on puppets, and not real-life animals.If Andrew is the only one with prosthesis that might only mean he lost his limbs due to an injury in battle or by accident. After all you shoot him down often enough in 64 and (as far as I remember) you never see his whole body in 64 thus you can't tell if he already had this kind of prosthesis during 64. Well, or he could have gotten injured at any other time before Assault.This, however, would likely mean that stem-cell-research and/or developmental biology isn't advanced enough in the Lylat-System to regrow lost body-parts – but Wolf's missing eye already tells us this.How this should be reconcilable with the floating-head Andross is questionable as it is likely more difficult to produce a viable gigantic floating head thing that never existed before than regrowing something that naturally grows during embryonic-development involving genetic pathways that can be researched.But when did StarFox science ever make sense?Luckily they still have magic to offer a possibility to justify some of their nonsense. … though, I think I'm getting off topic here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph. Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 It's just a theory guys... A theory concerning a video game about talking animals in space so of course this shouldn't be taken seriously.If anything we should be thanking the guy who made this video since he's making Star Fox gain more publicity!!After all, Star Fox Wii U is just around the corner (at least that's what we're hoping for during this E3) so let the guy be wrong, he's reminding people of a almost died series. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I had a dream the other night that the reason Andrew has robolimbs is because he was born with some birth deformity that Andross built him SUPER ROBOT LIMBS for and I'm kind of disappointed that I only dreamed that but it will be my maintained headcanon until overridden by actual canon(bizarre star fox dreams intensify as E3 draw near) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoprimedonna Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 If Andrew is the only one with prosthesis that might only mean he lost his limbs due to an injury in battle or by accident. After all you shoot him down often enough in 64 and (as far as I remember) you never see his whole body in 64 thus you can't tell if he already had this kind of prosthesis during 64. Well, or he could have gotten injured at any other time before Assault.This, however, would likely mean that stem-cell-research and/or developmental biology isn't advanced enough in the Lylat-System to regrow lost body-parts – but Wolf's missing eye already tells us this.How this should be reconcilable with the floating-head Andross is questionable as it is likely more difficult to produce a viable gigantic floating head thing that never existed before than regrowing something that naturally grows during embryonic-development involving genetic pathways that can be researched.But when did StarFox science ever make sense?Luckily they still have magic to offer a possibility to justify some of their nonsense. … though, I think I'm getting off topic here....but you did forget about the events in the Titania Incident, didn't you? If they could reconstruct Andross, what else could we say about this? The only thing that I have in mind that makes most sense is that most Lylat citizens are against these studies (especially after a war leaded by a biotechnologist that traited his own homecountry because of his own greed). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Monroe Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 I'm pretty sure Andrew's "robot legs" in Assault were just Assault having a bitch ugly art direction :V 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 That's what I assumed too honestly, I'd been disregarding the idea entirely until that weird nerd dreamalso don't overthink it geoprimedonna me having a dumb star fox dream for no reason isn't exactly a foolproof theory 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoprimedonna Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 also don't overthink it geoprimedonna me having a dumb star fox dream for no reason isn't exactly a foolproof theory ...??? What do you mean, Drasi? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 ...ohhh my god I thought you'd quoted my post on Andrew's fake limbs for some reasontime to go back to bed! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The VGM Lover Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 I had no idea that a lot of this site is actually against Game Theory, but I say, gameplay-wise, how does Fox, Falco, Peppy, or Slippy (ESPECIALLY SLIPPY) move so stinking fast in Star Fox 64? Don't tell me it's technical limitations of the N64 OR the developers, because they could have just given them jetbacks like they did in Star Fox Assault. If anything, IN THAT SENSE, it has to be either robotic legs, or stinking STEROIDS. Of the two, which would you pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Monroe Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 shitty game design! \o/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xortberg Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 it has to be either robotic legs, or stinking STEROIDS. Of the two, which would you pick? No, it doesn't HAVE to be either of those choices. I'm not gonna write up a big wall of text, because I honestly barely care about this subject, but discounting the two possibilities you did (technical limitations/developer choice) for no other reason than... whatever the hell reason you're trying to push there is dumb.Just like the whole robolegs thing is dumb.It's a campy game about space manimals shooting things in spaceships. They move fast because they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xidphel Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 (edited) Don't tell me it's technical limitations of the N64 OR the developersTechnical limitations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2YgZX9Thm0 Edited July 10, 2015 by Xidphel 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The VGM Lover Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Ok. Let me ask you a different question: If you were to look at any reason Star Fox would have robotic legs at all, would you rather for mobility, or G-force? Game Theory proved using evidence from Star Fox 64 that IF they were to have robotic legs, MOBILITY would be the reason. To me, when it comes to multiplayer in Star Fox 64, robotics legs sounds a whole lot better than STEROIDS, or even super-human powers for that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xortberg Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Again, this business of you pushing only a few reasons a thing could be possible and explicitly forbidding the use of a few obvious ones just because you said so is dumb.They move fast because they're furries in a video game and reality doesn't quite apply to them. Not everything has to have some reason or explanation. Shit just is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leon Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 They move fast so that there's a reasonable balance between their performance and the Arwing/Landmaster. That's literally the reason why. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The VGM Lover Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 I understand that, but anyways I just hate that the power of one's system has to factor into how good you can make a game play. Not that I consider myself a hyper-realistic gamer, but if you wanna create an immersive on-foot experience, you shouldn't have to exagerate certain aspects of it just to balance things out. If anything, the developers could have just given the on-foot players jetpacks, and just add a flashing effect to simulate the jetpack working. I think, gameplay-wise, that would have worked way better than just speeding up a character's foot-speed just so he can keep up with a landmaster, from which back in the game, you still couldn't anyways... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Monroe Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 I guess Mario has robot legs or takes steroids too :V 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drasiana Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 You're acting like the on-foot segments of 64 were some big integral part of the game that needs to be justified by the series lore when it was actually just a goofy Super Secret unlockable multiplayer gimmick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psy_commando Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 According to SF64, Slippy, Fox, Falco and Peppy are also giants when they're outside their ships. They can't get into most of these "buildings" on the corneria map, and they're almost as large as the arwing itself ! The arwing is actually huge too, I guess they must be flying corvettes then, or they gave steroids to their arwings! That's the only logical explanation.Also, Andross is a giant floating head in SF64.. How much metal legs and steroids does it takes to explain that ? But seriously, when you're making a 3D game, scale is very hard to nail down. Because you're working with floating point numbers with low precision. You have a limited space to make a level out of, because you have a limited range of spatial coordinates. So you must make scale compromises. If your game is a flying game, and you're not supposed to walk around levels, it makes no sense to scale things differently just to get a realistic scale, but in the process lose space to fly in.. Not to mention, there is a limit to how small you can render things. If you make your player character too small, near Z clipping, or even just the FoV applied to the projection matrix will result in it just not rendering on-screen because its too close to the camera. And if polygons are too close to one another, they'll continually "flicker" (Z-Fighting).SFAss didn't have the same issue as SF64 because all levels that allowed on-foot were limited to a box-like arena, and the whole game was actually made to scale with on-foot in mind.SF64's multiplayer maps were just re-using assets from the single player arwing maps without a single change. This resulted in the characters appearing bigger, and appearing to cover more distance when moving. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The VGM Lover Posted July 10, 2015 Share Posted July 10, 2015 Ok. You got me there. That's still too bad, though. I don't like having to compromise just to get the desired end result, which is one reason I hate Metroid's Space Pirates, but admire how seriously they work to get their desired end result.Also, Andross is a giant floating head in SF64.. How much metal legs and steroids does it takes to explain that?None. I'm pretty sure Andross really likes bioweapons, to the point where he made himself into one. His description on his final form in Smash 3DS basically told me this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unoservix Posted July 11, 2015 Share Posted July 11, 2015 I don't like having to compromise just to get the desired end resultthen you are not going to enjoy, y'know, life 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now