You could make the best F-Zero/Star Fox/Wave Race game ever, made in its predecessor's image. It would never be enough.
Gamers don't have the kind of relationship with replay value that 90's Nintendo/AV made games in mind with.
A lot needs to happen culturally to inspire people towards familiarizing themselves with,
and even crave an experience rooted in, that context. (arcade design)
"I want cheaper, shorter games, with worse graphics, more sustainable development and I'm not kidding."
You can't do any of that when the majority of people come from that era of Nintendo fans,
who were happy to see Star Fox turn into a Ubisoft Toys-To-Life AssCreed Tower game,
or think the only way to save the series is "do what XYZ 3rd Party entry did but betterer and biggerer this time!".
You gotta re-introduce missing context in design philosophy and appeal to the average Switch owner.

Arcade design is represented and cherished in modern times, but it happens devoid of literacy and experience in where that comes from.
You will see people coming up with all kinds of things, like nuzlocke runs, finding all kinds of ways to arbitrarily turn games into more skill-based experiences.
All of that has its roots in arcade design and never really lost relevancy, but the moment you look at Rail Shooters, Nintendo had all the levity.
Nintendo makes a really damn good railshooter that kicks the living shit out of either Panzer Dragoons, in terms of scoring,
but the large majority of Nintendo fans, who started playing SF64 weren't and still aren't interested in its core design. It's why I call it astroturf.
Zero never had a chance, neither does Star Fox as a whole. Shmups are back, the deadest of genres, and yet it's healthier than a Nintendo franchise.

Star Fox suffers from the same issue that Character Action games suffer from.

CAG's, even dating back to DMC1, bank on the idea of shoving high production value, world building, characters and such,
into a narrow interpretation of Beat Em Ups, which eventually snowballed to the point of Platinum Games
trying their hardest to appeal to casuals who only care about these superficial elements.

CAG's are dead. They're going the way of Rail Shooters.
It's partially because CAG's tried really hard to have their cake and eat it, too,
making for a vague representation of arcade design, but casuals don't care about any of that,
so you swim upstream and make them as fancy and expensive as possible, because at the very least the Action RPG elements make them accessible to casuals.

Dark Souls pretty much took that appeal completely by being a better RPG, and being affordable enough to make (not even dialogue animations)

Star Fox is in that exact dilemma.

Yes, I do think players who care about Star Fox the story/characters/world/presentation are just as useless for the survival of the genre as the examples above.
Star Fox will never survive trying to represent the casuals who don't actually play it for the score chasing game that it is,
because the production value and such cannot undo a complete and utter lack of interest in arcade design that fundamentally exists in its conception.

15 years of internet history and me talking to people who actively made videos about star fox,
And the moment they start talking about "what is the appeal of star fox?"

Star Fox kinda just shot itself in the foot by being such a casual console friendly experience.
It allows people to take so many aspects of what they like about it, especially because it can be played at that casual level endlessly
without ever engaging with the scoring system Nintendo's deverlopers clearly hoped people would engage with.

So you end up wanting more of those characters, the world, the music, the story.
Every element that was tacked on to the arcade rail shooter score chasing game
to make it a marketable product was as accessible as the gameplay on a skindeep level
You can just play Star Fox 64 as a childrens game with little engagement of its deeper elements.
That nostalgia gets people attached to all of its art assets and more superficial elements.

bot thread

>>736274772
>everyone who disagrees with me is a bot

>>736274441
in the 3DS version beating a path unlocks a planet and unlocking every planet is fun.
then you can play any level whenever you want. they kinda fucked up not doing that in the 64 version.
and yes playing your favorite level to get better results is fun you fag.

>>736274441
Unlocking the proper paths so you can unlock the real ending was fun. Also, better scores resulted in unlocking the secondary and tertiary vehicle types in multiplayer battle.

>>736274481
>Gamers don't have the kind of relationship with replay value that 90's Nintendo/AV made games in mind with
The fact Vampire Survivors and Megabonk have seen wild success shows an audience exists for arcade-y replayable games

>>736276706
so it is another case of "you had to be there friendslop" i see

Snoys like to pretend N64/GameCube shit is sacred to undermine the dominance of the Switch's success.

>>736276867
Just completely dismiss the whole point on single player. Additonalky, that era had tons of tacked on multiplayer modes because arcades were still a thing and the consoles needed to compete with them. So in a way, yes you had to be there but you could also just play and master the fun single player aspects of the game.

>>736274441
>fun about playing it over and over again just for the sake of getting a high score
Seems like you don't enjoy playing games and only care about end results.

File: 1772081523947828.png (53 KB, 360x263)

53 KB PNG

>>736274441
>Chess
I dont get the appeal of this game, what's supossed to be fun about playing it over and over again just for the sake of getting win?
>poker
I dont get the appeal of this game, what's supossed to be fun about playing it over and over again just for the sake of getting a royal flush win?
>fortnite
I dont get the appeal of this game, what's supossed to be fun about playing it over and over again just for the sake of getting a royale win?
>any game ever concieved by a human
I dont get the appeal of this game, what's supossed to be fun about playing it over and over again just for the sake playing the game?

>>736276808
I wouldn't really consider roguelites to be the same as arcade games or even just similar on a fundamental level. The most popular roguelites are shit like Isaac, VS, Hades, etc. where the base gameplay is incredibly shallow and the real meat of the experience is RPG interactions and making synergies. So the entire focus is just randomized progression options that you use to get more feedback in the shitty fake gameplay, with the gameplay itself and being skilled at that gameplay being completely irrelevant. Compare to arcade games, you HAVE to get good at the fundamental gameplay, the gameplay IS the game and the core focus.

File: 1692671946094280.png (558 KB, 600x600)

558 KB PNG

>>736276968
After shitting on Nintendo for weeks after Jeff Gerstmann gave Twilight Princess an 8.8

>>736274524
>>736274568
I think what your toughing upon but fail to grasp is that the popularity of Arcade sensibilities as w whole are a casualty of mismatched expectations on account of the historical appeal being split between the limitations of a culture of gaming, the kinds of people drawn towards gaming in its early days and their market capture, and that captured market's size in contrast with the larger population.
In other words a lot of arcade sensibilities were popular because that what was available back then and so the kinds of people who were into them only because their tastes aligned with what existed and who only liked them in the context available shared cultural pressure with actual arcade gameplay enthusiasts (see what happened to the RTS genre and how genre fragmentation left ti a husk).
Arcade sensibilities still exist but its either in the fragmented offshoot of the roguelike with meta progression and/or non-score related primary objectives or in hobbyist circles or low budget titles as >>736276808 pointed out.
From what I have seen High Scores as the primary form of mastery and mastery for its own sake being a core incentive are the outdated parts of design and once a arcade style game moves away from them it becomes much more sucessful.

Why does Star Fox now have three or two dedicated schizos now that he's in the bing bing movie?

>>736274441
DUN. DUN. DUN. DUN. DA NA NAAAAA

>>736279170
to remind people that starfox was never good

>>736279261
All three people who give shit? I literally can't name a more forgotten Nintendo series besides F-Zero

>>736279170
I think it's just one schizo: the guy who posts this exact same thread over and over pretending he can actually understand what he's directly told.

File: 1675749298374919.png (740 KB, 1291x651)

740 KB PNG

>why would you replay it
To unlock and memorize all the dialogs of course

>All these long ass essay replies

No, just no

arcade games are obsolete boomerslop

Endless Space + Star Fox
Is this Awesome?
[Y/N]

>>736279167
>arcade sensibilities exist in roguelikes
Refer back to >>736278628

>>736280268
I would view them to be kin in the same way Moba's are kin to RTS game in that its a cultural descendant that specialized on certain aspects outside of the core and devlopted out in a new genre successful in the modern day.

>>736280478
It's not a cultural descendant. The only shared factor is run-based gameplay, but the difference in fundamental gameplay principles aside from that is so huge that it's not really relevant at that point. No one who plays VS or Hades or Isaac or some other shit is going to come out of it wanting to play an arcade game, and vice versa.

I like what they were thinking with Assault by half turning it into a 3rd person shooter.
But they unfortunately turned it into a really shitty 3rd person shooter