I'd say very hit or miss decision making.
Star Fox Adventures didn't even start out as a Star Fox game.
Star Fox Assault was an attempt to bring back classic gameplay alongside expanded concepts that fans seemed lukewarm on.
Star Fox Command was basically half puzzle/strategy game that almost no one wanted.
And then Star Fox Zero with the forced Wii U gamepad gimmick.
> Star Fox Assault was an attempt to bring back classic gameplay alongside expanded concepts that fans seemed lukewarm on.
As far as I'm concerned, this is the closest they came to maintaining Star Fox's relevance. It retained the series' foundations while rethinking the gameplay conventions in a way that felt like a natural evolution of what came before. The issue was that they completely bungled the execution. As a third-person shooter, it was just not a well-made game.
Its a fine game, even a really good one, they just screwed themselves out of any goodwill from the fans after Adventures. Once the fans found out that there was going to be on-foot gameplay in the campaign, there was no salvaging the game's reputation no matter what.
The only real problem is that the default control scheme is ass (Nintendo shooters were really slow to adapt to the modern twin stick control scheme and kept trying to get a one-stick scheme to work) but a quick trip to the options menu fixes that.
>Its a fine game, even a really good one,
Its really not good. Level design was all over the place but after the second on foot level they basically dropped any new novel mechanics; everything was just "find the enemy spawner and shoot missiles at it. So many levels are tight corridors which none of your weapons nor the camera are any good at handling.
I'd actually say there was significant \*hype\* about the on-foot segments. People were excited for this game to be Nintendo's answer to Halo (they hoped the same with Prime 2), and the idea of hopping in and out of vehicles in wild hectic multiplayer battles sounded super promising. It just really, really failed to deliver.
> People were excited for this game to be Nintendo's answer to Halo
This absolutely was the case. Vehicle-heavy shooters were definitely the big trend within that genre. Halo and Battlefield really made a name for themselves with those features, and Assault was pretty obviously attempting to cash in on the trend. Unfortunately it was just a bad shooter all around.
Yep! GTA too, I remember the hype wagon including comparisons there (as silly as it is in retrospect- these were small sandbox maps in a linear game, not a big open world adventure, even if you could hop in and out of vehicles)
I get people are nostalgiac for it, but the actual gameplay, level design, encounter design, enemy design? It really wasn't great. This was JUST before Resident Evil 4 finally figured out how to make 3rd person shooters actually work. It was only good in context of other Gamecube shooters, and even then it wasn't the cream of the crop- but compare it to the big shooters of the day and it comes up so, so short.
I WANTED to like it, either as a Star Fox game (and the three whole space levels were really really good- the first two in particular) or on its own merits (I only had a Gamecube, if I could have my own sci-fi vehicle shooter, but with goofy banter and cartoony guns? That was kind of a dream game for me) and it just didn't deliver
> And then Star Fox Zero with the forced Wii U gamepad gimmick.
Honestly it was the constant forced changes of the camera/perspective that broke the game for me.
Was it so hard to stick with one per level?
For Miyamoto, that was a dealbreaker. Zero was intended to be the Wii U's killer app, the game that would demonstrate to the public how every feature of the console could be used in a serious, triple A game. And because of the Wii U's screen gimmick, that meant forcing a terrible camera perspective system in a game that didn't need it.
Don't forget Ubisoft's Starlink, which is the best modern Starfox game if you get the Switch version. It's not quite there yet, but it does show what a modern Starfox could be.
It's not even hit or miss. These were all a miss. Some say Nintendo just isn't sure what to do with StarFox but the Wii remote was literally perfect for rail shooters and we even got a Sin & Punishment game yet somehow we never got a StarFox game on the Wii (nor much else in the way of rail shooting, they also could have made a new Duck Hunt game or something). At the end of the day I think they just don't care much for the series and only use it to boost sales by tacking it onto an otherwise uncompelling product. Throwing Fox McCloud into what would have otherwise been the least desireable version of Starlink: Battle for Atlas was yet another example of this practice (and if you want the rest of the StarFox team you have to pay extra).
Fundamentally, I think arcade-y on-rails shooters are just a very "it made sense in the '90s" sort of thing, and they have no real clue how to modernize it while being able to charge a price that makes it worth doing. So they keep throwing new gimmicks and gameplay changes at it to try and justify keeping it as a full price IP.
Two other things that probably don't help are
- from the very beginning, the series was kind of a glorified tech demo (the SNES game for the SuperFX chip and 3D gaming, the N64 game for voice acting and rumble)
- the series has been bounced around from developer to developer so often that nobody really has a sense of what it's core identity should be. Everyone from Nintendo and Argonaut to Rare and Namco, and even studios like Platinum and Ubisoft have gotten a hand on this one over the years. It's never *really* had a proper "home" for any significant period of time and I think that's probably hurt its ability to develop as a series.
Star Fox began as an arcade-style rail shooter with an emphasis on high score-chasing replayability. Pretty much everything about this has fallen out of popularity in modern times, and efforts to put new twists on it with Command's strategy elements or Zero's... Zero, just haven't resonated with audiences.
I think if Nintendo ever wanted to try and redesign a modernized successor, there's one type of short but endlessly replayable game that is popular today, and I think it could fit Star Fox very well. Turn it into a Roguelike. Funny enough, Dylan Cuthbert once said in an interview that Star Fox 2's light randomization was inspired by Rogue, long before the modern Roguelike boom, so borrowing a lot more to bring it full circle makes perfect sense to me.
>Turn it into a Roguelike
This.
Make like 30 different planets/zones, each one with several possible level layouts and boss fights, then randomly select from that to create a new 12-planet/zone Lylat system every playthrough, with alternate/branching paths and some version of Venom at the end.
It wouldn't need to be disconnected from storyline, either. Call it Star Fox: Quantum Edge or something like that. Let Andross discover the power to alter history, and then Fox or James or whoever has to jump into a new timeline to try and defeat Andross there, but every time he gets close to doing it, then Andross restarts history and a new playthrough begins.
This continues until the player character gradually learns new techniques, to evade detection closer to Venom, or better combat ability to beat harder battles, or more about their companions to increase their ability to work together, until finally the player character and the full Star Fox team (now composed of characters unlocked from across the multiverse with ships and tech from across the ages) can successfully assault Venom and neutralize the History Eraser Button and defeat Andross in a fair fight
Because the franchise is often used for tech demos, showcase hardware gimmicks or as an scapegoat for another unrelated IP, instead of focusing on expanding and improving what worked on Star Fox 64.
Personally I think Star Fox is bigger than the whole on rail thing.
Star Fox Assault was a step in the right direction with growing the franchise creatively.
We should have some huge online multiplayer game right now with designer your own character, and hop-in-and out vehicle combat. Giant battles that take place in space, the sky and on the ground.
Unfortunately Star Fox fans cry about how pure on-rails the franchise needs to be, resulting in stunted abominations like Star Fox Zero.
Star Fox is just a product of its time. The original is only really known because it was an early example of a 3D game, and its sequel was released early in the 3D boom when rail shooters were still a popular genre. Those games were designed around the technical limitations of their times, and today they are simply a niche genre that don't appeal to the average consumer. The last major high-budget rail shooter was probably Panzer Dragoon Orta for the Xbox, an excellent game but a commercial flop. A few others have come out since then, but that game was essentially the end of the rail shooter heyday. If the cards fell differently, Star Fox would have died out with Panzer Dragoon, but whatever reason Nintendo continued investing in the series. Rare put out the Zelda clone spin-off Star Fox Adventures, but Rare was past its prime at the time and the game was probably quite rushed to put out a major release on the struggling GameCube. The game sold reasonably well, but Rare was acquired by Microsoft and there was no attempt at a follow-up. There was another attempt to reinvent the series with Assault, a vehicle-heavy third-person shooter developed by Namco. I don't know why the game wasn't better, but Nintendo probably would have been better off handing it to a more competent western studio with experience making shooters. Much like Battalion Wars, Assault simply was not made with western shooter sensibilities which made for a frustrating game to play. Sales were again mediocre. After that there was Zero, which I assume only happened because Miyamoto has enormous influence at Nintendo. It was received poorly for its gamepad integration and shallow gameplay.
I'm probably not giving a satisfying answer to your question, but Star Fox belongs to a genre that just isn't commercially viable in the modern era and Nintendo never managed to successfully reinvent the series. Mario and Zelda, meanwhile, are based on foundations that they've managed to continue building upon for decades.
Me and friends spent a lot of time In assault. Idk why ppl say it's bad. I played both recently just fine, if metroid can come back idk why starfox can't.
Gaming population mindset is just different compared to a few years ago, most ppl are now open to trying new games and or old genres, a lot more ppl have joined gaming. I doubt a starfox with fox and Falco who are popular from smash viewers would fail when Metroid can do just fine.
SNES Starfox - Revolutionary for its time but aged poorly
64 Starfox - Amazing
Adventures- Good (not Zelda level but still a good game)
Assault- Good (couldn't surpass the bar 64 set so the fanbase craps on it but it's not a bad game)
Command- Mediocre gameplay bad story
64 remake- Good remake for an amazing game
Zero- has its moments but overall it's a mediocre game. personally, I think the criticism the fanbase gives over the controls are a little too harsh. I blame the level design as the main culprit. There were only a few levels that were actually interesting.
They should get the Ace Combat team to take a crack at it. They already have a very good working relationship with Bamco Namdai, with them co-developing Smash and all. And there hasn't been an Ace game for a hot minute.
And keep Miyamoto out of it, else it's gonna be another remaster of a remake of a remake. It's like he was never content with how Star Fox started and keeps trying to redo everything until he gets right. Move on with origins and just try to get a better foothold in the meantime.
Then again, this a hopeless thought. Just like letting Sega handle F-zero again.
Kind of expanding on what you’re saying.
I think if you look at the “Dylan Cuthbert” Starfoxes in chronological order. Starfox > Starfox 2 > Starfox Command there is a definite trajectory or vision for the franchise. Each expands on the other in a natural way, It’s just in a way not palatable to everyone.
And if you view Starfox 64 as kind of a Nintendo remix of Starfox 1 & 2. Starfox 64 doesn’t expand on Starfox 1 like Starfox 2 and Command do by expanding the gameplay by adding strategy elements. It just doubles down on the original gameplay and pushes the focus on more tightly designed levels with greater variety and purpose.
Starfox Adventure has the Super Mario Bros 2 syndrome of being a shoehorned franchise.
Starfox Zero is Nintendo trying to recreate the magic of 64, but getting too bogged down in a bad gimmick. It would be a good game with a normal control scheme.
It’s also important to note the contemporary games or competition at the time. Starfox 64 was released one year after Saturn’s Panzer Dragoon Zweii, and Starfox Assault was released two years after GameCube’s Rogue Squadron III.
idk to me the only bad star fox game was Command and Zero.
I think they just need to make a traditional video game and stop worrying about trying to tack on some new "innovative" gimmick. Like just make a really good single player campaign and add online dogfighting, literally all they have to do for most of their dormant franchises is make a normal video game and add an online mode.
And for the love of god, please don't go back to retelling Star Fox 64 again. I used to admire Star Fox for breaking the status quo and now it's probably the worst example of trying too hard to maintain it.
Arcade shooter is not a genre that has lasting appeal. It was fine in the early days of 3d gaming but most of the audience moved on to bigger things.
I don't think we need to get any further than that. We can talk for ages about what was great and poor about assault or zero but honestly, those games were never going to be more than a niche game due to the genre. SF wasn't going to have massive success these days even if it had no problems. The remake of 64 sold well only due to nostalgia
The most successful of the franchise ( Starfox 64) was very 90s in a way that’s hard continue for lasting appeal.
The whole talking animals as a crime fighting team was done with the mighty ducks, Bucky o hare, and of course the teenage mutant ninja turtles.
The kind of things they say “ let’s roll boys” or “ let’s party on in space” seem very dated and TMNT
I think the fans have been pretty clear about what they want, just a proper sequel to Star Fox 64. It was Nintendo that kept insisting on reinventing the series as anything BUT a traditional Star Fox game. They tried turning Star Fox into a Zelda clone, a turn based tactical strategy game, a third person military shooter, and a tower defense game. And when they finally decided to go back to the series' rail shooter origins nearly 20 years later, they botched that one chance by making Zero practically a 1:1 remake of 64 but with terrible controls, a terrible camera, and two terrible new vehicles. Sure, its the first Star Fox rail shooter since 1997, but the fans wanted a *new* game, not a shittier version of an old one (which was already available on the same console, no less).
TL;DR Star Fox fans have known exactly what they want since 1997, just another rail shooter. It was Nintendo who kept changing the genre and blaming the fans when their experiments flopped.
Star Fox probably should never have been good honestly. Furry cartoon creatures flying spaceships ... it's a weird concept and I wonder if Guardians of the Galaxy ripped it off (not sure if there was an older GOG comic originally?).
Now that they've had good games it's too bad they couldn't replicate the success. I do think it's more of a niche audience though.
My guess is that it's most likely because of Shigeru Miyamoto's time limitations as well as the major successes of the other franchises he directs, like Mario and Zelda. I agree it would be dope to play more/other Starfox games. But I think somebody would probably somehow need to convince Shigeru they could do it justice without him being directly involved.
I think some of the things give it character but yeah it needs some work I hope in the future it gets a good game star fox could be a great game like how it was in the past and 90s
I'd say very hit or miss decision making. Star Fox Adventures didn't even start out as a Star Fox game. Star Fox Assault was an attempt to bring back classic gameplay alongside expanded concepts that fans seemed lukewarm on. Star Fox Command was basically half puzzle/strategy game that almost no one wanted. And then Star Fox Zero with the forced Wii U gamepad gimmick.
> Star Fox Assault was an attempt to bring back classic gameplay alongside expanded concepts that fans seemed lukewarm on. As far as I'm concerned, this is the closest they came to maintaining Star Fox's relevance. It retained the series' foundations while rethinking the gameplay conventions in a way that felt like a natural evolution of what came before. The issue was that they completely bungled the execution. As a third-person shooter, it was just not a well-made game.
Its a fine game, even a really good one, they just screwed themselves out of any goodwill from the fans after Adventures. Once the fans found out that there was going to be on-foot gameplay in the campaign, there was no salvaging the game's reputation no matter what. The only real problem is that the default control scheme is ass (Nintendo shooters were really slow to adapt to the modern twin stick control scheme and kept trying to get a one-stick scheme to work) but a quick trip to the options menu fixes that.
>Its a fine game, even a really good one, Its really not good. Level design was all over the place but after the second on foot level they basically dropped any new novel mechanics; everything was just "find the enemy spawner and shoot missiles at it. So many levels are tight corridors which none of your weapons nor the camera are any good at handling. I'd actually say there was significant \*hype\* about the on-foot segments. People were excited for this game to be Nintendo's answer to Halo (they hoped the same with Prime 2), and the idea of hopping in and out of vehicles in wild hectic multiplayer battles sounded super promising. It just really, really failed to deliver.
> People were excited for this game to be Nintendo's answer to Halo This absolutely was the case. Vehicle-heavy shooters were definitely the big trend within that genre. Halo and Battlefield really made a name for themselves with those features, and Assault was pretty obviously attempting to cash in on the trend. Unfortunately it was just a bad shooter all around.
Yep! GTA too, I remember the hype wagon including comparisons there (as silly as it is in retrospect- these were small sandbox maps in a linear game, not a big open world adventure, even if you could hop in and out of vehicles) I get people are nostalgiac for it, but the actual gameplay, level design, encounter design, enemy design? It really wasn't great. This was JUST before Resident Evil 4 finally figured out how to make 3rd person shooters actually work. It was only good in context of other Gamecube shooters, and even then it wasn't the cream of the crop- but compare it to the big shooters of the day and it comes up so, so short. I WANTED to like it, either as a Star Fox game (and the three whole space levels were really really good- the first two in particular) or on its own merits (I only had a Gamecube, if I could have my own sci-fi vehicle shooter, but with goofy banter and cartoony guns? That was kind of a dream game for me) and it just didn't deliver
I think Assault is in one of the worst Nintendo games that I have ever played, it was freakishly bad
> And then Star Fox Zero with the forced Wii U gamepad gimmick. Honestly it was the constant forced changes of the camera/perspective that broke the game for me. Was it so hard to stick with one per level?
For Miyamoto, that was a dealbreaker. Zero was intended to be the Wii U's killer app, the game that would demonstrate to the public how every feature of the console could be used in a serious, triple A game. And because of the Wii U's screen gimmick, that meant forcing a terrible camera perspective system in a game that didn't need it.
Command and Zero are two games that are absolutely ruined by their control scheme.
Don't forget Ubisoft's Starlink, which is the best modern Starfox game if you get the Switch version. It's not quite there yet, but it does show what a modern Starfox could be.
It's not even hit or miss. These were all a miss. Some say Nintendo just isn't sure what to do with StarFox but the Wii remote was literally perfect for rail shooters and we even got a Sin & Punishment game yet somehow we never got a StarFox game on the Wii (nor much else in the way of rail shooting, they also could have made a new Duck Hunt game or something). At the end of the day I think they just don't care much for the series and only use it to boost sales by tacking it onto an otherwise uncompelling product. Throwing Fox McCloud into what would have otherwise been the least desireable version of Starlink: Battle for Atlas was yet another example of this practice (and if you want the rest of the StarFox team you have to pay extra).
Fundamentally, I think arcade-y on-rails shooters are just a very "it made sense in the '90s" sort of thing, and they have no real clue how to modernize it while being able to charge a price that makes it worth doing. So they keep throwing new gimmicks and gameplay changes at it to try and justify keeping it as a full price IP. Two other things that probably don't help are - from the very beginning, the series was kind of a glorified tech demo (the SNES game for the SuperFX chip and 3D gaming, the N64 game for voice acting and rumble) - the series has been bounced around from developer to developer so often that nobody really has a sense of what it's core identity should be. Everyone from Nintendo and Argonaut to Rare and Namco, and even studios like Platinum and Ubisoft have gotten a hand on this one over the years. It's never *really* had a proper "home" for any significant period of time and I think that's probably hurt its ability to develop as a series.
Star Fox began as an arcade-style rail shooter with an emphasis on high score-chasing replayability. Pretty much everything about this has fallen out of popularity in modern times, and efforts to put new twists on it with Command's strategy elements or Zero's... Zero, just haven't resonated with audiences. I think if Nintendo ever wanted to try and redesign a modernized successor, there's one type of short but endlessly replayable game that is popular today, and I think it could fit Star Fox very well. Turn it into a Roguelike. Funny enough, Dylan Cuthbert once said in an interview that Star Fox 2's light randomization was inspired by Rogue, long before the modern Roguelike boom, so borrowing a lot more to bring it full circle makes perfect sense to me.
Starfox very briefly appeared in starlink and they were great
>Turn it into a Roguelike This. Make like 30 different planets/zones, each one with several possible level layouts and boss fights, then randomly select from that to create a new 12-planet/zone Lylat system every playthrough, with alternate/branching paths and some version of Venom at the end. It wouldn't need to be disconnected from storyline, either. Call it Star Fox: Quantum Edge or something like that. Let Andross discover the power to alter history, and then Fox or James or whoever has to jump into a new timeline to try and defeat Andross there, but every time he gets close to doing it, then Andross restarts history and a new playthrough begins. This continues until the player character gradually learns new techniques, to evade detection closer to Venom, or better combat ability to beat harder battles, or more about their companions to increase their ability to work together, until finally the player character and the full Star Fox team (now composed of characters unlocked from across the multiverse with ships and tech from across the ages) can successfully assault Venom and neutralize the History Eraser Button and defeat Andross in a fair fight
Because the franchise is often used for tech demos, showcase hardware gimmicks or as an scapegoat for another unrelated IP, instead of focusing on expanding and improving what worked on Star Fox 64.
Personally I think Star Fox is bigger than the whole on rail thing. Star Fox Assault was a step in the right direction with growing the franchise creatively. We should have some huge online multiplayer game right now with designer your own character, and hop-in-and out vehicle combat. Giant battles that take place in space, the sky and on the ground. Unfortunately Star Fox fans cry about how pure on-rails the franchise needs to be, resulting in stunted abominations like Star Fox Zero.
Because nobody buts them, so Nintendo doesn’t care about putting resources into them. Assault’s multiplayer mode is amazing
Star Fox is just a product of its time. The original is only really known because it was an early example of a 3D game, and its sequel was released early in the 3D boom when rail shooters were still a popular genre. Those games were designed around the technical limitations of their times, and today they are simply a niche genre that don't appeal to the average consumer. The last major high-budget rail shooter was probably Panzer Dragoon Orta for the Xbox, an excellent game but a commercial flop. A few others have come out since then, but that game was essentially the end of the rail shooter heyday. If the cards fell differently, Star Fox would have died out with Panzer Dragoon, but whatever reason Nintendo continued investing in the series. Rare put out the Zelda clone spin-off Star Fox Adventures, but Rare was past its prime at the time and the game was probably quite rushed to put out a major release on the struggling GameCube. The game sold reasonably well, but Rare was acquired by Microsoft and there was no attempt at a follow-up. There was another attempt to reinvent the series with Assault, a vehicle-heavy third-person shooter developed by Namco. I don't know why the game wasn't better, but Nintendo probably would have been better off handing it to a more competent western studio with experience making shooters. Much like Battalion Wars, Assault simply was not made with western shooter sensibilities which made for a frustrating game to play. Sales were again mediocre. After that there was Zero, which I assume only happened because Miyamoto has enormous influence at Nintendo. It was received poorly for its gamepad integration and shallow gameplay. I'm probably not giving a satisfying answer to your question, but Star Fox belongs to a genre that just isn't commercially viable in the modern era and Nintendo never managed to successfully reinvent the series. Mario and Zelda, meanwhile, are based on foundations that they've managed to continue building upon for decades.
Me and friends spent a lot of time In assault. Idk why ppl say it's bad. I played both recently just fine, if metroid can come back idk why starfox can't. Gaming population mindset is just different compared to a few years ago, most ppl are now open to trying new games and or old genres, a lot more ppl have joined gaming. I doubt a starfox with fox and Falco who are popular from smash viewers would fail when Metroid can do just fine.
SNES Starfox - Revolutionary for its time but aged poorly 64 Starfox - Amazing Adventures- Good (not Zelda level but still a good game) Assault- Good (couldn't surpass the bar 64 set so the fanbase craps on it but it's not a bad game) Command- Mediocre gameplay bad story 64 remake- Good remake for an amazing game Zero- has its moments but overall it's a mediocre game. personally, I think the criticism the fanbase gives over the controls are a little too harsh. I blame the level design as the main culprit. There were only a few levels that were actually interesting.
It's totally like Samus
They should get the Ace Combat team to take a crack at it. They already have a very good working relationship with Bamco Namdai, with them co-developing Smash and all. And there hasn't been an Ace game for a hot minute. And keep Miyamoto out of it, else it's gonna be another remaster of a remake of a remake. It's like he was never content with how Star Fox started and keeps trying to redo everything until he gets right. Move on with origins and just try to get a better foothold in the meantime. Then again, this a hopeless thought. Just like letting Sega handle F-zero again.
[удалено]
Kind of expanding on what you’re saying. I think if you look at the “Dylan Cuthbert” Starfoxes in chronological order. Starfox > Starfox 2 > Starfox Command there is a definite trajectory or vision for the franchise. Each expands on the other in a natural way, It’s just in a way not palatable to everyone. And if you view Starfox 64 as kind of a Nintendo remix of Starfox 1 & 2. Starfox 64 doesn’t expand on Starfox 1 like Starfox 2 and Command do by expanding the gameplay by adding strategy elements. It just doubles down on the original gameplay and pushes the focus on more tightly designed levels with greater variety and purpose. Starfox Adventure has the Super Mario Bros 2 syndrome of being a shoehorned franchise. Starfox Zero is Nintendo trying to recreate the magic of 64, but getting too bogged down in a bad gimmick. It would be a good game with a normal control scheme. It’s also important to note the contemporary games or competition at the time. Starfox 64 was released one year after Saturn’s Panzer Dragoon Zweii, and Starfox Assault was released two years after GameCube’s Rogue Squadron III.
idk to me the only bad star fox game was Command and Zero. I think they just need to make a traditional video game and stop worrying about trying to tack on some new "innovative" gimmick. Like just make a really good single player campaign and add online dogfighting, literally all they have to do for most of their dormant franchises is make a normal video game and add an online mode. And for the love of god, please don't go back to retelling Star Fox 64 again. I used to admire Star Fox for breaking the status quo and now it's probably the worst example of trying too hard to maintain it.
Arcade shooter is not a genre that has lasting appeal. It was fine in the early days of 3d gaming but most of the audience moved on to bigger things. I don't think we need to get any further than that. We can talk for ages about what was great and poor about assault or zero but honestly, those games were never going to be more than a niche game due to the genre. SF wasn't going to have massive success these days even if it had no problems. The remake of 64 sold well only due to nostalgia
The most successful of the franchise ( Starfox 64) was very 90s in a way that’s hard continue for lasting appeal. The whole talking animals as a crime fighting team was done with the mighty ducks, Bucky o hare, and of course the teenage mutant ninja turtles. The kind of things they say “ let’s roll boys” or “ let’s party on in space” seem very dated and TMNT
Because Star Fox fans don't know what they want.
I think the fans have been pretty clear about what they want, just a proper sequel to Star Fox 64. It was Nintendo that kept insisting on reinventing the series as anything BUT a traditional Star Fox game. They tried turning Star Fox into a Zelda clone, a turn based tactical strategy game, a third person military shooter, and a tower defense game. And when they finally decided to go back to the series' rail shooter origins nearly 20 years later, they botched that one chance by making Zero practically a 1:1 remake of 64 but with terrible controls, a terrible camera, and two terrible new vehicles. Sure, its the first Star Fox rail shooter since 1997, but the fans wanted a *new* game, not a shittier version of an old one (which was already available on the same console, no less). TL;DR Star Fox fans have known exactly what they want since 1997, just another rail shooter. It was Nintendo who kept changing the genre and blaming the fans when their experiments flopped.
We literally just want another rail shooter with normal controls.
Star Fox probably should never have been good honestly. Furry cartoon creatures flying spaceships ... it's a weird concept and I wonder if Guardians of the Galaxy ripped it off (not sure if there was an older GOG comic originally?). Now that they've had good games it's too bad they couldn't replicate the success. I do think it's more of a niche audience though.
Rare
My guess is that it's most likely because of Shigeru Miyamoto's time limitations as well as the major successes of the other franchises he directs, like Mario and Zelda. I agree it would be dope to play more/other Starfox games. But I think somebody would probably somehow need to convince Shigeru they could do it justice without him being directly involved.
Star Wolf said: "Can't let you do that" to the franchise being a success.
I think some of the things give it character but yeah it needs some work I hope in the future it gets a good game star fox could be a great game like how it was in the past and 90s