/vr/ - Retro Games

>>9912286
You're pretty fucking dumb desu. You think Nintendo still wouldn't have chimed in "Hey, we have a series about animal people, why not just make it about them?" if the main character had been a tiger instead of a wolf? You know that Rare was going to cut her out of Adventures completely with the rest of the original plot, and Miyamoto and Imamura cajoled them into keeping her in? Miyamoto has purportedly always considered Star Fox one of their more mature franchises, up to the point of wanting to include mild sex appeal characters in it, so as long as DP wasn't cartoony and goofy like B&K, Adventures was probably always going to happen.
>improved the quality of the game's story, improving its popularity
People don't like Adventures because it has 10 minutes of Arwing gameplay, and the rest of the time you're mashing buttons to endlessly repeat the same combos to kill dinosaurs with a stick. Nobody really gives a damn about the story in Star Fox. Command's plot is disliked because the whole thing leaves a bad taste, the team disbanding and the soap opera bullshit and all the shitting on Fox. Zero's plot is disliked because it's a rehash of 64. And if Adventures was significantly more popular and sold twice as much, you think they wouldn't have doubled down even harder on the on-foot stuff in the hypothetical sequel, because people responded well to it?
>If any of Krystal's games were critically acclaimed or sold really well I'd change the trajectory of the series
I'll tell you a little secret; nobody bought 64 3D or Zero because nobody wants more on-rails shooters. They are fucking archaic and obsolete. Even the original developers were going to make Star Fox free-roaming until Miyamoto decided on the linear obstacle course approach because it improved performance. The Star Fox 2 devs ditched on-rails as soon as they could. What was the last high-profile release, the Panzer Dragoon remake three years ago? That made up its production costs, they bragged.