No plans for F-Zero is killing me

[Quillion]

I am sorry, @ LancerStaff , but you have driven me to dedicate this song to you:

 

[Rie Sonomura]

Thank you based @ Quillion .

Anyway, I learned the adapter technically takes in signals via digital, not analog. But if I'm not mistaken the pressure sensitivity on the shoulder buttons should still be a thing.

 

[Quillion]

Thank you based @ Quillion .

Anyway, I learned the adapter technically takes in signals via digital, not analog. But if I'm not mistaken the pressure sensitivity on the shoulder buttons should still be a thing.

We'll honestly never know until they release GCN games for the Virtual Console.

Even then, I wouldn't put it past Nintendo to release Pro Controllers that actually have analog pressure triggers.

 

[Rie Sonomura]

We'll honestly never know until they release GCN games for the Virtual Console.

Even then, I wouldn't put it past Nintendo to release Pro Controllers that actually have analog pressure triggers.

It technically wouldn't be Virtual Console per se, as VC implies pure emulation and the Wii U has Wii mode which has been shown to run GC games via ISO. It just can't read the disks themselves. So I'd say GC Downloadable digital games, in the vein of Wii downloadable games, would be more accurate.

But yeah, let's just wait and see.

 

[Quillion]

So it just came to my attention that Shin'en Multimedia, a German studio seemingly dedicated to pushing Nintendo consoles to their limits, has put in their own spin on the niche futuristic racing genre.

They did it by combining it with, of all things, Ikaruga:

What did you say about being unable to advance the series, Miyamoto?

 

[LancerStaff]

So it just came to my attention that Shin'en Multimedia, a German studio seemingly dedicated to pushing Nintendo consoles to their limits, has put in their own spin on the niche futuristic racing genre.

They did it by combining it with, of all things, Ikaruga:

What did you say about being unable to advance the series, Miyamoto?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the series has been using that gimmick since the beginning back in the Wii era.

I don't really think it's a big innovation either... You could scrap all the switching stuff for F-Zero's cast-from-hp system and it really wouldn't feel significantly different. I'm not impressed with the game since it's just F-Zero HD without .

 

[Spak]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the series has been using that gimmick since the beginning back in the Wii era.

I don't really think it's a big innovation either... You could scrap all the switching stuff for F-Zero's cast-from-hp system and it really wouldn't feel significantly different. I'm not impressed with the game since it's just F-Zero HD without .

That's true, but it proves that if the creative department at Nintendo actually decided to try thinking about making a new mechanic, they could advance the series. This game didn't even need to trade out the health system, but I guess their creative department decided to anyways since the previous game didn't have it either.

 

[LancerStaff]

That's true, but it proves that if the creative department at Nintendo actually decided to try thinking about making a new mechanic, they could advance the series. This game didn't even need to trade out the health system, but I guess their creative department decided to anyways since the previous game didn't have it either.

Not even GX was a huge step forward... It was just the F-Zero HD of it's time. I don't think they haven't tried.

The problem with the series is that there's little room for innovation in the whole genre besides new ways to go fast.

 

[Spak]

Not even GX was a huge step forward... It was just the F-Zero HD of it's time. I don't think they haven't tried.

The problem with the series is that there's little room for innovation in the whole genre besides new ways to go fast.

GX had updated graphics, machine building/customization, Pilot profiles, and a couple more extra features. It was a significant enhancement on the previous game.

Also, you could argue that any new fighting game is just finding new ways to hit something or a new shooter is just finding new ways to kill things, so I don't see your point by saying that a new F-Zero would just be finding new ways to go fast.

If you want ideas on how to add new innovations to the game, just look back over and re-read this thread; there have been plenty of ideas.

 

[Shog]

I want that F - Zero definitely stays a hard game btw. The moment you figured out that the sliding build in F Zero X + Grip E was the best build was amazing!

 

[Rie Sonomura]

I've only played GX (and I haven't even played that in a while cause Xenoblade is eating up my time) but I like the difficulty of the series' gameplay. It's very rewarding.

Of course I feel some of the Story Mode missions on Very Hard to unlock some AX racers were perhaps overkill. (The one where you have to escape from the exploding building...ugh) Maybe I'm just not good enough, or there's a trick to clearing that particular one on Very Hard.

 

[LancerStaff]

GX had updated graphics, machine building/customization, Pilot profiles, and a couple more extra features. It was a significant enhancement on the previous game.

Also, you could argue that any new fighting game is just finding new ways to hit something or a new shooter is just finding new ways to kill things, so I don't see your point by saying that a new F-Zero would just be finding new ways to go fast.

If you want ideas on how to add new innovations to the game, just look back over and re-read this thread; there have been plenty of ideas.

Just an enhancement. There's no pull, no reason to buy it besides the fact it's F-Zero X 2. Which is likely why it failed, to be honest. Why buy the new one when the gameplay of the last one is just as good?

Shooters just had two very fresh and inventive games from Nintendo: Kid Icarus and Splatoon. Kid Icarus basically turns the mechanics of a typical shooter on it's head, so instead you bring one weapon with infinite ammo but many different ways of using it, powers which work more like buffs from an RPG then your typical perks, and a deep and complex crafting system. Splatoon turns the goal on it's head, so shooting the ground instead of the opponents is what's important.

Fighting games less so, although it's a fairly niche genre to begin with. It's more about fixing the problems of the last game then anything else. Nintendo isn't really into that sort of thing... Especially for series that don't sell. Smash's big innovation this time is customization.

I've looked over the thread... It's all plagiarized from other games. Nothing worth making a sequel for.

 

[Spak]

Just an enhancement. There's no pull, no reason to buy it besides the fact it's F-Zero X 2. Which is likely why it failed, to be honest. Why buy the new one when the gameplay of the last one is just as good?

An enhancement IS a reason to buy it... A majority of sequels are an enhancement on the older games. By your logic, the gameplay of Gran Turismo 1 is the same as Gran Turismo 5, so why buy GT5?

Shooters just had two very fresh and inventive games from Nintendo: Kid Icarus and Splatoon. Kid Icarus basically turns the mechanics of a typical shooter on it's head, so instead you bring one weapon with infinite ammo but many different ways of using it, powers which work more like buffs from an RPG then your typical perks, and a deep and complex crafting system. Splatoon turns the goal on it's head, so shooting the ground instead of the opponents is what's important.

Fighting games less so, although it's a fairly niche genre to begin with. It's more about fixing the problems of the last game then anything else. Nintendo isn't really into that sort of thing... Especially for series that don't sell. Smash's big innovation this time is customization.

And racing games can be inventive as well; if you've ever heard of Excitbots, then you know that it's a racing game that's based upon your style points rather than position. If you finish first, you get a hefty bonus that makes your score hard to beat, but someone else could still come later and have a high enough score at the end to make it into first place. Racing games can still be innovative, but people generally don't like it whenever a company completely changes up how the game works (which is why F-Zero doesn't NEED to be super innovative, it just needs to be an enhancement upon the previous games).

Also, Nintendo doesn't really care about if they are being "innovative" at this point. Just look at the modern 2D Mario games and try to prove me wrong.

I've looked over the thread... It's all plagiarized from other games. Nothing worth making a sequel for.

I'll just list a few things that were mentioned:

1. Make the track builder from X Expansion a standard feature. It's only available via emulation of X, but put it into the game and it will stay alive for years!
   
2. Slower difficulty modes, since a lot of people have problems getting into how fast F-Zero is. They could also be floatier so that shortcuts can still be taken without the level design being compromised.
   
3. Online play. Goes without saying.
4. Track sections where there are no track and you're just flying using your G-Diffuser, Star Fox style.
5. Drafting/Slipstreaming in order to encourage deeper racer-racer interaction.
6. A few one-way tracks. Maybe with Sonic-style branching paths to set themselves apart from Mario Kart's recent one-way efforts.
7. More track hazards + interactivity beyond just walls, speed boosters and shield boosters.
8. New art style

Or they could completely redo the gameplay and change it to something like this which was already mentioned in the thread:

I wouldn't mind a new F-Zero game where you got to walk around an open world as C. Falcon in story mode to reach different areas for different missions.

Of course, keep the core racing game play. Maybe bring back custom vehicles and hide parts and other collectibles around the open world to give the player an incentive to explore.

Basically, there's a whole bunch of stuff that they could do. They just don't want to do it.

 

[LancerStaff]

An enhancement IS a reason to buy it... A majority of sequels are an enhancement on the older games. By your logic, the gameplay of Gran Turismo 1 is the same as Gran Turismo 5, so why buy GT5?


And racing games can be inventive as well; if you've ever heard of Excitbots, then you know that it's a racing game that's based upon your style points rather than position. If you finish first, you get a hefty bonus that makes your score hard to beat, but someone else could still come later and have a high enough score at the end to make it into first place. Racing games can still be innovative, but people generally don't like it whenever a company completely changes up how the game works (which is why F-Zero doesn't NEED to be super innovative, it just needs to be an enhancement upon the previous games).

Also, Nintendo doesn't really care about if they are being "innovative" at this point. Just look at the modern 2D Mario games and try to prove me wrong.


I'll just list a few things that were mentioned:

1. Make the track builder from X Expansion a standard feature. It's only available via emulation of X, but put it into the game and it will stay alive for years!
   
2. Slower difficulty modes, since a lot of people have problems getting into how fast F-Zero is. They could also be floatier so that shortcuts can still be taken without the level design being compromised.
   
3. Online play. Goes without saying.
4. Track sections where there are no track and you're just flying using your G-Diffuser, Star Fox style.
5. Drafting/Slipstreaming in order to encourage deeper racer-racer interaction.
6. A few one-way tracks. Maybe with Sonic-style branching paths to set themselves apart from Mario Kart's recent one-way efforts.
7. More track hazards + interactivity beyond just walls, speed boosters and shield boosters.
8. New art style

Or they could completely redo the gameplay and change it to something like this which was already mentioned in the thread:


Basically, there's a whole bunch of stuff that they could do. They just don't want to do it.

I've never played Gran Turismo... So I can't really say.

Played the heck out of Excitebots, although it's more of a stunt-based game then a racer. I don't think you can call it a racer when place is largely irrelevant... Within the futuristic racer genre, and especially in the established F-Zero series, there's not a lot that can be done.

NSMBDS was more of a retro revival then anything else. Actually, Miamoto was hesitant to starting the NSMB series because it wasn't enough of an improvement... Although since it had been practically three gens since the last 2D Mario and didn't bomb like other series I'd say it was justified. NSMBW had 4-player co-op, easy. NSMB2 had coin rush, actually a pretty big thing in Japan since you'll get 30 hits in an average day out. NSMBU had boost mode on the gamepad and challenge mode. Again, NSMB sells and devs actually want to make it.

That's all been done. Most of it is in Fast Racing already...

Metroid Prime Federation Force says hi.

 

[Spak]

I've never played Gran Turismo... So I can't really say.

Played the heck out of Excitebots, although it's more of a stunt-based game then a racer. I don't think you can call it a racer when place is largely irrelevant... Within the futuristic racer genre, and especially in the established F-Zero series, there's not a lot that can be done.

NSMBDS was more of a retro revival then anything else. Actually, Miamoto was hesitant to starting the NSMB series because it wasn't enough of an improvement... Although since it had been practically three gens since the last 2D Mario and didn't bomb like other series I'd say it was justified. NSMBW had 4-player co-op, easy. NSMB2 had coin rush, actually a pretty big thing in Japan since you'll get 30 hits in an average day out. NSMBU had boost mode on the gamepad and challenge mode. Again, NSMB sells and devs actually want to make it.

That's all been done. Most of it is in Fast Racing already...

Metroid Prime Federation Force says hi.

If you want ideas about how to make F-Zero (and the futuristic racing genre) better, look at the 8 points that I listed in the post above yours. All of the things you listed are slight enhancements on the older game. NSMBW's Co-Op was enough of a reason to make a sequel in your book. In that case, F-Zero having 30-machine multiplayer would be a good enough enhancement to release a good game. Having that plus any number of the points listed would make a very good sequel, then. I'm sure that Nintendo could find lots of studios that would take up the chance to make a new F-Zero in a second and if they advertize it decently (unlike what they did for GX), it will most likely sell.

F-Zero doesn't need a huge new mechanic, the gameplay is fine as it is. It could have track customization (which could be shared online), online play, 30-machine multiplayer, and possibly slipstreaming (so that the AI rubber banding doesn't have as huge of an effect as it did in previous games), a new art style, updated graphics, possible new track hazards, one-way tracks, and trackless flying sections. I saw the possibility of items being brought up earlier, but that isn't such a good idea because that decreases the skill to randomness (my problem with competitive MK).

Tell Metroid Prime Federation that I said hi back.

 

[Quillion]

I've looked over the thread... It's all plagiarized from other games. Nothing worth making a sequel for.

So? Nintendo wasn't above stealing things from F-Zero to put in Mario Kart. Most of the things I suggested as innovations even come from Mario Kart.

 

[LancerStaff]

If you want ideas about how to make F-Zero (and the futuristic racing genre) better, look at the 8 points that I listed in the post above yours. All of the things you listed are slight enhancements on the older game. NSMBW's Co-Op was enough of a reason to make a sequel in your book. In that case, F-Zero having 30-machine multiplayer would be a good enough enhancement to release a good game. Having that plus any number of the points listed would make a very good sequel, then. I'm sure that Nintendo could find lots of studios that would take up the chance to make a new F-Zero in a second and if they advertize it decently (unlike what they did for GX), it will most likely sell.

F-Zero doesn't need a huge new mechanic, the gameplay is fine as it is. It could have track customization (which could be shared online), online play, 30-machine multiplayer, and possibly slipstreaming (so that the AI rubber banding doesn't have as huge of an effect as it did in previous games), a new art style, updated graphics, possible new track hazards, one-way tracks, and trackless flying sections. I saw the possibility of items being brought up earlier, but that isn't such a good idea because that decreases the skill to randomness (my problem with competitive MK).

Tell Metroid Prime Federation that I said hi back.

4-player simultaneous co-op is a pretty big addition. Slapping on online multiplayer to a predominantly single-player game is not.

Actually, Nintendo turned down a studio that made some other futuristic racing game series of which the name escapes me. They weren't impressed with the initial proposal, surprise surprise...

F-Zero wouldn't sell even with advertising... It's just another futuristic racing game. Why buy it when you have Fast Racing Neo on the eshop? Unless you're suggesting Nintendo make the new F-Zero an eshop game... Yeah, that'd go over well with the fanbase.

So? Nintendo wasn't above stealing things from F-Zero to put in Mario Kart. Most of the things I suggested as innovations even come from Mario Kart.

Not only is MK a completely different genre, Mario Kart actually has casual appeal. F-Zero is this hardcores only kinda thing where the fanbase would whine over all the techs being removed and adding any kind of easy mode. Unless you redesign the tracks for easier difficulties, people are going to be discouraged awful fast. Like with GX.

 

[Quillion]

F-Zero wouldn't sell even with advertising... It's just another futuristic racing game.

It's just another futuristic racing game

What. You can't be serious. PLEASE don't be serious.

But in case you are, I'd like to kindly remind you that the futuristic racing genre is fairly niche, and while WipeOut on the PlayStation may be no. 1 in sales, F-Zero is arguably no. 1 in widespread recognition thanks to its appearances in Smash and more recently Mario Kart.

Why buy it when you have Fast Racing Neo on the eshop?

Another flat "What." with this. You really think an indie IP can compete with a relatively well-known Nintendo IP?

Not only is MK a completely different genre, Mario Kart actually has casual appeal. F-Zero is this hardcores only kinda thing where the fanbase would whine over all the techs being removed and adding any kind of easy mode. Unless you redesign the tracks for easier difficulties, people are going to be discouraged awful fast. Like with GX.

Wait, are we talking about a casual vs. hardcore thing or about innovating on the series? Make up your mind, please.

 

[LancerStaff]

What. You can't be serious. PLEASE don't be serious.

But in case you are, I'd like to kindly remind you that the futuristic racing genre is fairly niche, and while WipeOut on the PlayStation may be no. 1 in sales, F-Zero is arguably no. 1 in widespread recognition thanks to its appearances in Smash and more recently Mario Kart.



Another flat "What." with this. You really think an indie IP can compete with a relatively well-known Nintendo IP?



Wait, are we talking about a casual vs. hardcore thing or about innovating on the series? Make up your mind, please.

People recognize Captain Falcon and Big Blue, but they don't recognize F-Zero. You act like just because he's in Smash means it'll sell... Shadow Dragon and Heros of Light and Shadow did terribly even though they came out around the time Brawl did.

Why should somebody buy F-Zero over FAST besides Captain Falcon?

After GX's sales, yes.

It isn't important?

 

[finalark]

People recognize Captain Falcon and Big Blue, but they don't recognize F-Zero. You act like just because he's in Smash means it'll sell... Shadow Dragon and Heros of Light and Shadow did terribly even though they came out around the time Brawl did.

To be fair, Shadow Dragon sold poorly because the initially hype from the GBA games had well worn off at that point and Nintendo didn't even touch Shadow Dragon's NES era game play. Great for nostalgic fans who grew up on the original, terrible for 90% of the world who didn't have the almighty nostalgia filter exaggerating the game's quality.

This is probably why the remake of Mystery of the Emblem was much better received.

 

[Quillion]

People recognize Captain Falcon and Big Blue, but they don't recognize F-Zero. You act like just because he's in Smash means it'll sell... Shadow Dragon and Heros of Light and Shadow did terribly even though they came out around the time Brawl did.

Yet Fire Emblem has grown by leaps and bounds since Awakening. And it's all thanks to its appearance in Smash.

Why should somebody buy F-Zero over FAST besides Captain Falcon?

Because, again, FAST is a little-known indie eShop title that even less people will know about.

[Casual vs. Hardcore] isn't important?

It is, but you can't just switch the argument over to that when we're discussing innovation in the series.

I appreciate that you're trying to devil's advocate Nintendo's decisions against the fandom majority (which I personally like to do, myself), LancerStaff, but you're descending into silliness, now.

 

[LancerStaff]

To be fair, Shadow Dragon sold poorly because the initially hype from the GBA games had well worn off at that point and Nintendo didn't even touch Shadow Dragon's NES era game play. Great for nostalgic fans who grew up on the original, terrible for 90% of the world who didn't have the almighty nostalgia filter exaggerating the game's quality.

This is probably why the remake of Mystery of the Emblem was much better received.

And yet Mystery did terribly anyway.

Yet Fire Emblem has grown by leaps and bounds since Awakening. And it's all thanks to its appearance in Smash.

Because, again, FAST is a little-known indie eShop title that even less people will know about.

It is, but you can't just switch the argument over to that when we're discussing innovation in the series.

I appreciate that you're trying to devil's advocate Nintendo's decisions against the fandom majority (which I personally like to do, myself), LancerStaff, but you're descending into silliness, now.

If that were true then the FE DS games wouldn't of did so terribly since Marth was actually in the game. The Mystery remake was actually a good game, too... Awakening had Lucina who only has a passing resemblance in that they're slender figures with blue hair and swords and then DLC. Smash didn't do squat since Brawl was years old at that point, and Melee didn't help GX from bombing whatsoever. There's absolutely no reason a new F-Zero would do better then GX did.

So now we're supporting games just because of old, more popular IPs, and justifing the decisions like making Mario Tennis U over Golden Sun 4? Defeats the argument to make F-Zero to begin with...

Uh, yeah, it is important. Remember all that BS surrounding NSMBW and FE for including optional difficultly features? Imagine what it'd be like when they have to make all the tracks easier so casuals can play. Would even half of GX's fans be interested if it was easier? Why even make the game at that point when the old fans aren't happy?

 

[Quillion]

If that were true then the FE DS games wouldn't of did so terribly since Marth was actually in the game. The Mystery remake was actually a good game, too... Awakening had Lucina who only has a passing resemblance in that they're slender figures with blue hair and swords and then DLC. Smash didn't do squat since Brawl was years old at that point, and Melee didn't help GX from bombing whatsoever. There's absolutely no reason a new F-Zero would do better then GX did.

AGAIN, bad word of mouth defeated the purpose of that. The remakes only made marginal improvements over the heavily outdated originals (from what I hear), and those games were marketed about as well as F-Zero usually is (which is, not at all).

So now we're supporting games just because of old, more popular IPs, and justifing the decisions like making Mario Tennis U over Golden Sun 4? Defeats the argument to make F-Zero to begin with...

New example then: WipeOut is the best-selling series of this genre. It's still very niche due to the hardcoreness, but it's still best-selling. Yet even though it made a comeback in the PS3 era after declining sales, it didn't stop SCE Liverpool from going under. Now, its former staff is making an indie spiritual successor. So even worse can happen to better-selling series.

At least Nintendo has kept the love of F-Zero alive. Especially even moreso now that it has appeared in Nintendo Land, Smash U, and Mario Kart all at once. Now you won't find any discussion on F-Zero anywhere without mentioning that it needs a new game.

Uh, yeah, it is important. Remember all that BS surrounding NSMBW and FE for including optional difficultly features? Imagine what it'd be like when they have to make all the tracks easier so casuals can play. Would even half of GX's fans be interested if it was easier? Why even make the game at that point when the old fans aren't happy?

Well, that was mainly elitism from a vocal minority (emphasis on both VOCAL and MINORITY), and that didn't stop NSMBW from selling over 20 million and FE: Awakening from being the best-selling game in the whole series. If anything, it helped.

And the only complaints that came about were pre-release. There were absolutely none afterwards.

 

[LancerStaff]

AGAIN, bad word of mouth defeated the purpose of that. The remakes only made marginal improvements over the heavily outdated originals (from what I hear), and those games were marketed about as well as F-Zero usually is (which is, not at all).

New example then: WipeOut is the best-selling series of this genre. It's still very niche due to the hardcoreness, but it's still best-selling. Yet even though it made a comeback in the PS3 era after declining sales, it didn't stop SCE Liverpool from going under. Now, its former staff is making an indie spiritual successor. So even worse can happen to better-selling series.

At least Nintendo has kept the love of F-Zero alive. Especially even moreso now that it has appeared in Nintendo Land, Smash U, and Mario Kart all at once. Now you won't find any discussion on F-Zero anywhere without mentioning that it needs a new game.

Well, that was mainly elitism from a vocal minority (emphasis on both VOCAL and MINORITY), and that didn't stop NSMBW from selling over 20 million and FE: Awakening from being the best-selling game in the whole series. If anything, it helped.

And the only complaints that came about were pre-release. There were absolutely none afterwards.

The Mystery "remake" was about on the level of Zero Mission in how it added in features from newer games and redid the mechanics and thus the gameplay. It even invented the avatar feature like Robin and Kumi/Corrin.

Your Wipeout example is proof enough that the genre is much too niche to be profitable... Nintendo isn't going to make another without some big innovation.

Ah, but the difference is that this isn't optional. A new F-Zero wouldn't even be half as hard as X. F-Zero is known for it's difficultly, but difficultly doesn't sell anymore... Same reason we haven't had a proper collectathon Mario in thirteenish years. Once you water down the collectathon aspect to a palettable amount, you end up with Galaxy or 3DL/W. Just isn't the same.

 

[Spak]

The Mystery "remake" was about on the level of Zero Mission in how it added in features from newer games and redid the mechanics and thus the gameplay. It even invented the avatar feature like Robin and Kumi/Corrin.

Your Wipeout example is proof enough that the genre is much too niche to be profitable... Nintendo isn't going to make another without some big innovation.

Ah, but the difference is that this isn't optional. A new F-Zero wouldn't even be half as hard as X. F-Zero is known for it's difficultly, but difficultly doesn't sell anymore... Same reason we haven't had a proper collectathon Mario in thirteenish years. Once you water down the collectathon aspect to a palettable amount, you end up with Galaxy or 3DL/W. Just isn't the same.

"Difficulty doesn't sell anymore" doesn't really match up to what we've been seeing in gaming recently. Dark Souls, VVVVVV, DMC4, any competitive multiplayer game (MOBAs really started to pick up when RTSs fell in popularity, so don't tell me difficult competitive games are becoming harder to find), and many other games are difficult. The main reason hard games don't sell on Nintendo's consoles anymore is because they accepted the kiddie tag that Sega and Playstation put on them many years ago and refuse to make any extremely difficult games anymore.

What was the last really difficult game that Nintendo cranked out? I'd say Pikmin 2, and that was 12 years ago. It's not that it didn't sell, it's just that Nintendo has intentionally changed their target audience to family-based. They are trying to change it back to the old non-kiddie-specific Nintendo (with the various ports of M games and Bayo 2 exclusivity), so I think that they need to revive their "hardcore" racing series because it would boost their reputation as not just another kiddie company.

 

[LancerStaff]

"Difficulty doesn't sell anymore" doesn't really match up to what we've been seeing in gaming recently. Dark Souls, VVVVVV, DMC4, any competitive multiplayer game (MOBAs really started to pick up when RTSs fell in popularity, so don't tell me difficult competitive games are becoming harder to find), and many other games are difficult. The main reason hard games don't sell on Nintendo's consoles anymore is because they accepted the kiddie tag that Sega and Playstation put on them many years ago and refuse to make any extremely difficult games anymore.

What was the last really difficult game that Nintendo cranked out? I'd say Pikmin 2, and that was 12 years ago. It's not that it didn't sell, it's just that Nintendo has intentionally changed their target audience to family-based. They are trying to change it back to the old non-kiddie-specific Nintendo (with the various ports of M games and Bayo 2 exclusivity), so I think that they need to revive their "hardcore" racing series because it would boost their reputation as not just another kiddie company.

Difficultly comes in many flavors. The type that F-Zero is known for doesn't sell diddly and died out with the arcades. I really don't know anything about Dark Souls, but VVVVV I believe is one of those "infinite lives, saves everywhere, doesn't really get hard until you go for 100%" things Nintendo kinda does.

Pikmin 2 ain't even hard unless you're talking about 100% again... DKCR is harder with just mirror mode. Platinuming TTs is probably the single hardest thing you can do in a Nintendo game.

 

[Spak]

Difficultly comes in many flavors. The type that F-Zero is known for doesn't sell diddly and died out with the arcades. I really don't know anything about Dark Souls, but VVVVV I believe is one of those "infinite lives, saves everywhere, doesn't really get hard until you go for 100%" things Nintendo kinda does.

Pikmin 2 ain't even hard unless you're talking about 100% again... DKCR is harder with just mirror mode. Platinuming TTs is probably the single hardest thing you can do in a Nintendo game.

And F-Zero isn't too hard on the easiest difficulty level. The point is that the challenge is there if you actually want it.

 

[LancerStaff]

And F-Zero isn't too hard on the easiest difficulty level. The point is that the challenge is there if you actually want it.

Yes it is. Fall off, ded, retry x5, lose all your progress. People don't like that kind of thing. Take away the lives and there's no risk at all, add in respawning and now the cast-from-HP mechanic means nothing, strip out the difficult tracks and now what's the point of the game existing?

 

[Spak]

Yes it is. Fall off, ded, retry x5, lose all your progress. People don't like that kind of thing. Take away the lives and there's no risk at all, add in respawning and now the cast-from-HP mechanic means nothing, strip out the difficult tracks and now what's the point of the game existing?

Who ever said anything about removing any of that? There could be a "Noob" AI level (also debating calling it "Scrublord") for the people who are VERY bad at the game, but we wouldn't have to change any of the other difficulty levels. Also, having 4-ish "Casual Cups" (or a mode with more floaty physics) would let the little kiddies have fun in the game while leaving us with more difficult tracks.

 

[LancerStaff]

Who ever said anything about removing any of that? There could be a "Noob" AI level (also debating calling it "Scrublord") for the people who are VERY bad at the game, but we wouldn't have to change any of the other difficulty levels. Also, having 4-ish "Casual Cups" (or a mode with more floaty physics) would let the little kiddies have fun in the game while leaving us with more difficult tracks.

The AI honestly isn't a problem. Since they randomly place instead of something consistent you really only need to survive without coming to a complete stop until expert.

Considering GX only had six cups plus story mode, it's not feasible to make two-thirds of the game casual mode, and making you switch between one set of physics for another ends up widening the gap even more since you have to unlearn one set and learn the new set. I don't understand how you could make the physics significantly easier besides being able to save yourself if you fell off, and that still eliminates much of the risk. The game just isn't fun at all unless there's some risk to it.

 

[Spak]

The AI honestly isn't a problem. Since they randomly place instead of something consistent you really only need to survive without coming to a complete stop until expert.

Considering GX only had six cups plus story mode, it's not feasible to make two-thirds of the game casual mode, and making you switch between one set of physics for another ends up widening the gap even more since you have to unlearn one set and learn the new set. I don't understand how you could make the physics significantly easier besides being able to save yourself if you fell off, and that still eliminates much of the risk. The game just isn't fun at all unless there's some risk to it.

They wouldn't need to make completely new designs for the casual cups. I see how the floatier physics could make the game harder to adjust to in higher difficulties, but they could just have slower machinesmachines (everyone's max speed is decreased, including yours), increase the regained health rate over healing pads, and shorten the distance the player has to jump.

The extra two cups could be available on non-casual difficulties as a reward for being on a higher difficulty, plus the X Cup (hopefully). The hardest modes will still be as hard as the predecessors, but the casual modes will help the game sell.

Mainly referring to the lack of analog triggers. Probably the biggest gameplay improvement was how you could control how much you banked quite simply. Making ZL gradually move you and L move you quickly would mean losing a ton of precision. Even if the GC adaptor properly read and translated analog button imputs then we'd still have the problem of basically requiring an add-on for an already obscure game.

F-Zero is terrible for multiplayer. First ten seconds is just a FFA and whoever comes out on top wins if he just plays the rest of the track decently. Only way to diffuse that basically turns online vs. into TTs but live, and those types of modes die quickly.

The GC adapter reads analog inputs properly. Sorry to bring this up again, but I just remembered reading this a while ago and never corrected you on it.

 

[LancerStaff]

They wouldn't need to make completely new designs for the casual cups. I see how the floatier physics could make the game harder to adjust to in higher difficulties, but they could just have slower machinesmachines (everyone's max speed is decreased, including yours), increase the regained health rate over healing pads, and shorten the distance the player has to jump.

The extra two cups could be available on non-casual difficulties as a reward for being on a higher difficulty, plus the X Cup (hopefully). The hardest modes will still be as hard as the predecessors, but the casual modes will help the game sell.

The GC adapter reads analog inputs properly. Sorry to bring this up again, but I just remembered reading this a while ago and never corrected you on it.

Slowing down the machines wouldn't turn out well... Not only would you have to shorten tracks for slower speeds *coughMK8BigBluecough* it really wouldn't help on the actual hard parts like Sand Ocean Slim Line Slits unless it was unbearably slow.

So the first two-thirds is complete casual stuff? Weeeee.

Official one or the third-party one with a Wii U/PC switch?

 

[Spak]

Slowing down the machines wouldn't turn out well... Not only would you have to shorten tracks for slower speeds *coughMK8BigBluecough* it really wouldn't help on the actual hard parts like Sand Ocean Slim Line Slits unless it was unbearably slow.

So the first two-thirds is complete casual stuff? Weeeee.

Official one or the third-party one with a Wii U/PC switch?

And shortened tracks would be completely fine for the casual mode. The speed wouldn't have to be unbearably slow, just a decent amount (which WOULD make all the tracks easier to race on with the slight modifications). I'm not saying the casual modes would be 2/3 of the game, I'm saying that all 6 cups (plus X) should be available in their unaltered form in all non-casual difficulties, but the first 4 cups of the non-casual mode be altered to be easier (same basic design, but changed to have slightly less sharp turns, less platform hops, shorter jumps, less hazards, always have rails, etc.)

This means that the game designers don't have to come up with 10 cup concepts, just 6 and 4 variations.

Also, the first-party adapter reads analog inputs. It acts as a direct converter; I can pick up every single input (even analog shoulder presses) with my PC.

 

[LancerStaff]

And shortened tracks would be completely fine for the casual mode. The speed wouldn't have to be unbearably slow, just a decent amount (which WOULD make all the tracks easier to race on with the slight modifications). I'm not saying the casual modes would be 2/3 of the game, I'm saying that all 6 cups (plus X) should be available in their unaltered form in all non-casual difficulties, but the first 4 cups of the non-casual mode be altered to be easier (same basic design, but changed to have slightly less sharp turns, less platform hops, shorter jumps, less hazards, always have rails, etc.)

This means that the game designers don't have to come up with 10 cup concepts, just 6 and 4 variations.

Also, the first-party adapter reads analog inputs. It acts as a direct converter; I can pick up every single input (even analog shoulder presses) with my PC.

Even something like shortening tracks takes plenty of effort. Nothing's easy in video game development.

And the GC adapter is still irrelevant because they're not making you buy it just to play one obscure game.

 

[Spak]

Even something like shortening tracks takes plenty of effort. Nothing's easy in video game development.

And the GC adapter is still irrelevant because they're not making you buy it just to play one obscure game.

Shortening tracks takes some effort, but it's not as hard as making 4 new cups. If they have a decent IDE, they could just copy and paste portions of the the track, adjusting lenght if neededneeded and then retiling the texture post-shrink. Also, you're assumingassuming that a new F-Zero would be obscure, which isn't a good assumption whatsoever. You can't comment on the sales of a game that doesn't exist.

EDIT: Also, I wouldn't call Sm4sh obscure.

 

[Deleted member]

Hey, if they don't feel they'll do it justice then honestly I'd rather them not make a F-Zero game then make a lackluster one. It shows they care enough about the series not to mess it up.

We'll get an F-Zero someday, for now enjoy the games we have. If you want some 'fresh' F-Zero action, there is a cheat for the Gamecube F-Zero to turn it into the arcade version.

 

[Quillion]

Shortening tracks takes some effort, but it's not as hard as making 4 new cups. If they have a decent IDE, they could just copy and paste portions of the the track, adjusting lenght if neededneeded and then retiling the texture post-shrink. Also, you're assumingassuming that a new F-Zero would be obscure, which isn't a good assumption whatsoever. You can't comment on the sales of a game that doesn't exist.

EDIT: Also, I wouldn't call Sm4sh obscure.

Actually, I don't really get why we need to shorten tracks for easier difficulties. It would be tedious for some people, but it shouldn't be that bad.

Hey, if they don't feel they'll do it justice then honestly I'd rather them not make a F-Zero game then make a lackluster one. It shows they care enough about the series not to mess it up.

We'll get an F-Zero someday, for now enjoy the games we have. If you want some 'fresh' F-Zero action, there is a cheat for the Gamecube F-Zero to turn it into the arcade version.

But, again, they're definitely not doing New Super Mario Bros. justice even though that series has had more frequent installments in recent times.

 

[Spak]

Actually, I don't really get why we need to shorten tracks for easier difficulties. It would be tedious for some people, but it shouldn't be that bad.

Adjusting the length of straightaways so that they wouldn't be horribly boring at lower speeds, shortening the inevitable oval so that you aren't just racing in a mostly straight line while racing uneventfully in front of everyone else, and shortening the distance between platforms in a jump might be some reasons to shorten the track for Casual Cups.

 

[Quillion]

Adjusting the length of straightaways so that they wouldn't be horribly boring at lower speeds, shortening the inevitable oval so that you aren't just racing in a mostly straight line while racing uneventfully in front of everyone else, and shortening the distance between platforms in a jump might be some reasons to shorten the track for Casual Cups.

If F-Zero tracks would be really long at Mario Kart speeds, why not reduce it to 2 laps?

But even then, smart use of boosting stops things from getting boring on straightaways.

 

[Spak]

If F-Zero tracks would be really long at Mario Kart speeds, why not reduce it to 2 laps?

Because that wouldn't break up the monotony before getting to another corner on the ovals, that would just make the miserable monotony happen for a shorter period of time. This would make sense for tracks with more going on, but on long straigtaways, it just wouldn't work as well.

But even then, smart use of boosting stops things from getting boring on straightaways.

But it's casual mode. If they knew how to use boost smartly, they likely would be onto the normal mode by then.