/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.1193171]

I'd like to get all your input since you're the board most likely to enjoy this sort of niche. It's in the pre-pre alpha stages.

I'm working on a Star Fox rail-shooter modelled after 64. There's only a small number of us working together atm, including a 3D guy, two drawfags, somebody from OCremix who said they'd get back to us and a coder who'd be willing to do some work in exchange for a small paypal fee, as long as we provide the material. The aim of the project is a homage to what we all wanted out of a good Star Fox game that none of the recent ones delivered, and a sort of portfolio to showcase everybody on the project, for resumes and etc...

The rough plans thus far are to make the sort of Star Fox game we've collectively wanted but never got after the N64. Low poly modelling is planned to simplify the design. Cell shading was suggested, as well as a clever application of 2D painted backgrounds and obstacles that would mimic 3D without being taxing on the average PC. We are planning multiple routes in the storyline that are separated by difficulty, with additional secret levels unlocked by completing hard objectives. We probably won't be able to implement the landmaster or blue marine(and certainly not ground ops), but there is a limit to how much we can try to bite off. All-range mode may have to be cut, but the coder says if he can't do it well he doesn't want it done at all.
(pic related, but not our work)

[Anonymous No.1193187]

>>1193171
(ex: recurring SF threads on /v/ usually come to this sort of agreement)

Plot wise, we wanted to bring back the classic formula of the SF team going up against Andross, this time a couple years after the events of 64. One problem a lot of us had was that back in those days 'critter' characters were used more readily without the negative connotations that come along with the "furry" community(see: Krystal). We decided to bring back the characters Miyu and Fay from SF2 and try a blank slate approach instead of shoehorning Krystal in, the reason being to give a wider range of dialogue than regurgitating the classic team to the point of being stale. Everyone's very clear on the fact there won't be any romance subplots, we want to provide a campy and at times cheesy sort of space shooter that reminds the player of a fun but hilariously bad cartoon.

[Anonymous No.1193209]

>>1193187
I like the idea, but there's a good chance Nintendo's gonna shit all over you if you try using their IP like that. I mean, they're having a shitfit over seconds worth of music from their games being in videos.

[Anonymous No.1193217]

Sounds cool. How far along in development are you? Is there a website?

[Anonymous No.1193224]

>>1193187
Basically, pilot avatars would be animated in the same sort of talking window as 64 did, with flags(code) in the game that would be tripped to set off dialogue, with some rare lines reserved for specific conditions. The struggle with gameplay is that we need to adjust the enemy AI to allow for difficulty within reason, instead of a cheap bullet-hell that causes damage no matter what. Fast reflexes and accurate flying and shooting are supposed to be rewarded, while mistakes are punished harshly. The speed is constant, although airbrake can briefly slow down the arwing to avoid hazards and boost is unlimited, for expert players to attempt time record clears, although exponentially more dangerous.(still discussing this)

We're retexturing and redesigning some classic enemies found in the SNES games and 64 series, with the intent on having some good variety and a hell of a lot of nostalgia. Star Wolf is tricky, as we want to include them much more often than rare duels, and have them insanely dangerous in their own right.

[Anonymous No.1193228]

>>1193209
You think so? There's no profit at all here, we're not hosting it for ad-revenue or selling anything. It's supposed to be a free download eventually. There won't be a youtube channel or anything. We might have to chat with a legal expert just to cover our asses.
>>1193217
It's still planning and concept, a couple of us all together, but we want to stay low for now because A) we don't want people's hopes getting up before we've moved along a bit and B) we don't want to be crushed for using a nintendo IP early on.

[Anonymous No.1193251]

>>1193171
You can do lower poly than that image and have the end result look far better than that image.

[Anonymous No.1193252]

>>1193251
The 3D guy was talking about that, it's just a question of getting it all right apparently.

[Anonymous No.1193259]

>>1193251
Isn't it more important to have high res textures than poly count?

[Anonymous No.1193260]

Sound pretty good.

I always thought that a prequel where you play as the James/Peppy/Pigma team would be great. Maybe you could include one flashback mission set in the past?

[Anonymous No.1193262]

So what's the deal, are you looking for any kind of feedback?

[Anonymous No.1193263]

>>1193260
Well we've been talking about including a secret super-hard mode where you fly the original team with just one life and no continues, just to make it the 'ace of aces' difficulty.

[Anonymous No.1193268]

>>1193262
Yeah, we'd like to hear what you'd all like to see, what you're hoping for, that sort of thing.

[Anonymous No.1193301]

>>1193268
Game branches depending on either player's ability to complete objectives or occasionally by player choice. Based on this, up to two or three different end missions.

Arwing customization: improved booster/brake, bomb capacity, perhaps missiles or countermeasures.

Puzzle-Like boss fights. I don't recall many of the bosses in Assault and Command being more than 'shoot glowing bit until it's over'. Design them with gradual degradation in mind, it was so satisfying when you could see bosses shedding parts and become more vulnerable in 64 like pic related.

Snes Sector-Y Space Ocean teeming with life, complete with chill music.

Mostly I just want rail shooting. It'd be cool to see some all range mode in the vein of Freespace/Freelancer though.

[Anonymous No.1193318]

>>1193301
Our issue with all-range mode is it's a whole other set of coding and a lot more range of motion we have to work out properly. Checked off as a maybe.

We're not going to use the 'glowing weakpoints' thing anymore, but degradation might be hard to implement.

[Anonymous No.1193345]

>a clever application of 2D painted backgrounds and obstacles that would mimic 3D without being taxing on the average PC
What do you mean exactly?
The backgrounds make enough sense, but are you talking like pseudo-3D? Like using sprite scaling or whatever for projectiles coming at you?

Personally, I think what suits a 3D game with a lot of projectile dodging best is chunky clearly defined 3D with no or minimal transparency and no or minimal fancy effects. It should be stuff that you can just glance at, and easily tell where it is in 3D space and identify what part of the projectile can cause you damage. pic related is a pretty good example of what I mean. There's no question where the projectiles are or where exactly you will take damage.
Please for the love of all that is holy do not do some dumb glowy effect that obscures the projectiles. Sin and Punishment: Star Successor did that shit and it really hurt the experience.

>Cell shading was suggested
I'm not at all clear on what sort of art direction you're trying to have, but if you ARE considering using sprite scaling and the like, I think just regular old flat shading would fit with that much better.

>We are planning multiple routes in the storyline that are separated by difficulty, with additional secret levels unlocked by completing hard objectives
You mean like the SNES game? No branching paths? I honestly didn't care for how SF64 did branching paths much, so that's cool with me

[Anonymous No.1193356]

you should include an option for either spoken dialogue or the gibberish they spoke in the snes version

[Anonymous No.1193362]

>>1193345
The 2D effect was supposed to be for enviromental objects, like nebula clouds and debris floating in the levels, while important parts like shafts or walls would be defined 3D, to avoid problems with depth. The lasers are another issue, as we want to avoid something like bloom or too many on-screen from making navigation impossible. For cell shading, I was told it would be something like wind waker, as opposed to traditional flat shaders, but we're still divided on that. As for paths, yes the SNES mode is also what we're looking at as inspiration(not the SF2 one).

[Anonymous No.1193363]

>>1193356
Another divide. We were thinking about voices to avoid being forced to read text during a mission, but the gibberish is a classic part of it too.

[Anonymous No.1193364]

>>1193363
You could always have the three options "spoken dialogue/spoken dialogue with text/gibberish with text"

[Anonymous No.1193368]

>>1193364
If there's enough interest we'll look into it, but choosing the voices would be a hurdle.

[Anonymous No.1193375]

>>1193318
Not that guy, and I definitely don't think the bosses should be puzzle-like, but I do like the idea of bosses having 'degradation' in the sense that there could be parts of bosses you could choose to focus on and destroy for points or whatever.
Star Fox has you destroying parts of bosses all the time, but as far I know it's never been optional.

Best example of this sort of thing I can think of:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmbtRW0noRw&t=19m36s
(if the time thingy doesn't work, skip to around 19:40)

[Anonymous No.1193386]

>>1193375
Oh yes, parts will be destroyed in sequence but im not sure how well we can animate damage as it goes, beyond explosions and fragmentation.

[Anonymous No.1193403]

Do you post news of this project anywhere other than /v/? I'd like to keep up with it.

[Anonymous No.1193414]

>>1193403
Well it's still a bit early, and we're trying to be a little secretive. There's a hell of a lot of notes and concept sketches already. /v/ regulary has Star Fox threads bemoaning how to save the series, sometime's I'll post there looking for ideas, but for now we don't have a concrete page to avoid getting slapped with a C&D by nintendo. A lot of projects died that way.

[Anonymous No.1193983]

>rail shooter
Star Fox is a 3D shmup, not a rail shooter. As least get your genre right before you even take this too far.

This is what a rail shooter looks like.

[Anonymous No.1193991]

>>1193983
Not OP here. Star Fox takes the player on rails and presents enemies as they travel that they have to aim and shoot at. It and SF64 are listed as Rail Shooters on Wikipedia and Gamefaqs, and as demonstrated by the OP and the lack of objections by anyone but yourself, it is considered a Rail Shooter by the general populace.

tl;dr: Go fuck yourself.

[Anonymous No.1193997]

>>1193983
That would be a Descent-like.

[Anonymous No.1193998]

>>1193991
No, YOU go fuck yourself, I'm tried of this term being misused by idiots like you. RAIL. SHOOTER. On-rails shooter, as in, ON RAILS. What part about Star Fox is on rails? You can move your ship any way you want and dodge projectiles that way. If Star Fox is a rail shooter then every 2D scrolling shooter in existence is even more of a rail shooter because there are even less dimensions of freedom in them. It's fucking stupid is what it is, get your damn genres right already. Rail shooters and games like Star Fox and Panzer Dragoon are fundamentally distinct genres.

[Anonymous No.1194002]

>>1193997
The only Descent-like I'm aware of is Forsaken. Such a shame the 6DoF sub-genre of FPSs is so neglected.

[Anonymous No.1194003]

>>1193983
This nigga gets it.

Never got why anyone called it a rail shooter.

The game really is just Xevious but with the camera behind the ship instead of above. The game still auto scrolls, and you are in control of 2 axis.

[Anonymous No.1194005]

>>1193171
If you think NIntendo would allow anything like this, you're insane. They are second only to Disney for being massive cunts when it comes to protecting their IPs ruthlessly. You could you know, develop your own.

I'm guessing you're not a modeler. Just because something is low poly doesn't mean it has to look like ass, it's very possible to do a lot with a little via normal mapping and just having good textures and applying them properly. If you don't know what you're doing, go to Polycount or CGTalk and ask. Protip: Stay away from 3, it's a bunch of elitist cunts who will rip you to shreds.

[Anonymous No.1194006]

>>1194005
This, what is up with you fan projects and feeling the need to take the name and canon of a franchise you love so much? That's the easiest way in the world to get all your hard work shut down through a cease and desist. Is cloning everything about Star Fox except the name and the characters and distinct ship designs really so bad?

[Anonymous No.1194009]

>>1193998
>What part about Star Fox is on rails?

Confirmed for never playing Star Fox.

[Anonymous No.1194013]

>>1194009
Confirmed for fucking idiot who equates autoscrolling with being on a rail. Are the scrolling levels of SMB3 and SMW "on-rails levels" now too?

[Anonymous No.1194020]

>>1193998
>being this much of a bitch about genre definitions
Seriously. Stop derailing the thread and...well...go fuck yourself.

[Anonymous No.1194025]

A rail shooter is a type of action-based video game. In a rail shooter the player control is limited to directing where to fire a virtual gun or move their avatar around the screen; the player does not control the path their avatar takes from the start to the end (although they may be able to pause that movement), as if the player is tied to a rail like a roller coaster.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Rail_shooters

A shooter in which the player movement is restricted so they can only follow a linear, predetermined path.
http://www.giantbomb.com/rail-shooter/3015-320/

A variant of either first person or third person shooter, in a rail shooter the computer controls most of your movement and you control the shots. May or may not be a Light Gun Game. Will score very low on the Sliding Scale of Linearity vs. Openness.

Often considered a sibling genre to the Shoot 'em Up, as both genres set you on a fixed path and involve shooting things. The primary difference is that while shoot-em-ups have two-dimensional gameplay, rail shooters have you shooting things in three dimensions. Most often you can't control your movement at all, unlike in shoot-em-ups where you are allowed to freely move within the confines of the screen, although some rail shooters allow you to move along the YZ plane relative to the screen.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RailShooter

A quick google shows that literally everyone but you will call Star Fox a rail shooter. It is at its core an arcadey rail shooter and only a super special autist like yourself "gets" the "truth" that it's not.

Enjoy your world where your minority opinion is what's important and no one will understand you when you deliberately choose to be obtuse and misunderstood. Just because you enjoy "correcting" people with wronghoods doesn't make you correct.

And for the record, SMB3 and SMW are sidescrollers, not shooters.

[Anonymous No.1194029]

>>1194025
>two wikis and another game site that relies on user submission for description
Try harder. Can we really never use logic when describing genres instead of "it's popular so it's right"? Every time we have these sorts of important discussions the first thing you idiots try to pull is some lazy ad populum fallacy. Calling Star Fox a rail shooter doesn't make any sense, that label already perfectly describes a uniquely different type of game. Does Smash Bros. become a "party game" just because enough idiots parrot it long enough? Is the same fate in store for a particular non-Retro Gamecube FPS?

No, of course not. Use your brain. Star Fox plays distinctly different from House of the Dead and has more in common with Raiden.

[Anonymous No.1194087]

>>1193983
>>1193998
No one cares you pedantic asshole. Everyone calls stuff like Panzer Dragoon and Star Fox rail shooters, and no one wants your made up term "3D shmup". Deal with it.

[Anonymous No.1194091]

>>1194087
>No one cares you pedantic asshole. Everyone calls stuff like Panzer Dragoon and Star Fox rail shooters, and no one wants your made up term "3D shmup". Deal with it.
It's hardly made up and I'm hardly the only person who has a problem with calling 3D scrolling shooters "rail shooters". It simply makes sense to lump Star Fox with other shmups over actual rail shooters like Rez or Area 51.

[Anonymous No.1194116]

>>1194091
The accepted term is rail shooter. That's what everyone calls them. Everyone knows what people mean when they say rail shooter. There's really no problems with it. It's perfectly functional.
You are shitting up this thread (and countless other threads I've seen in the past) trying to differentiate two dead genres that few people care about and fewer still care to classify just so just for you.
I could sort of understand if rail shooters and "3D shmups" were still made today, but they really aren't.

And no, games like Star Fox or Space Harrier really do not play much more like Gradius or DoDonPachi than they do Rez or LA Machineguns.
Moving in 2D to dodge 3D obstacles is about as different from moving in 2D to dodge 2D obstacles as it is aiming in 3D to stop 3D obstacles by shooting them.

[Anonymous No.1194127]

>>1194116
>Everyone knows what people mean when they say rail shooter.
Do they now? Your definition describes this as a rail shooter. Either rail shooter encompasses so many game types so as to render the term functionally useless or you keep the strict definition so when people ask for more games like House of the Dead or Rez you can actually recommend them without confusion.

And no, moving to dodge obstacles and projectiles is world's different than being forced to shoot any and all of them down.

[Anonymous No.1194134]

>>1194116
>I could sort of understand if rail shooters and "3D shmups" were still made today, but they really aren't.
Also they're made with about the same frequency as they always have been. The Wii has Sin and Punishment 2 and tons of rail shooters both arcade ports and original console games and the XBone is getting a spiritual successor to Panzer Dragoon. They're not as dead as Descent-like FPSs yet at least.

[Anonymous No.1194158]

>>1194134
But that's basically NOTHING compared with the 90s when SEGA alone made at least a couple dozen dozen rail shooters and "3D shmups".

Also, I'm going to play your game and be a pedantic piece of shit and insist that Sin and Punishment: Star Successor does not count because it is merely a cabal shooter with some shmup levels, not a rail shooter or "3D shmup".
'course, difference is this is corroborated by many sources, including even Wikipedia which you criticized earlier for not being anal enough due to user input.

I'm going to play your game again and point out that shmup is short for "shoot 'em up", which has to be one of the least specific things imaginable aside from action or action-adventure.
Hell, you could call Doom a shmup if you wanted. Gears of War could be considered a shmup. Asteroids is clearly a shmup. Even Duck Hunt is a shmup.
Quit trying to pedal your vague as fuck "3D shmup" bullshit.

[Anonymous No.1194165]

>>1194158
>Sin and Punishment: Star Successor does not count because it is merely a cabal shooter with some shmup levels
Haha, fair enough, that game at least has Cabal shooting as its roots even though it turns into a 3D shmup for the majority of the game.

And you are also right, some genres like shoot 'em up are certainly vague. "Rail shooter", however, is at least quite clear. Sorry but Star Fox doesn't fit the bill.

[Anonymous No.1194168]

OP here, thank you all for your comments, every bit helps.
>>1194005
We're painfully aware that Nintendo would shut us down, but we wanted to make the Star Fox game we were all hoping for instead of Command or Adventures. If need be, the art guys said they'd rig up alternate pilot avatars and assets so we can switch characters if need be. As for the low poly issue, the 3D guy was saying roughly what you are too(please forgive me for no understanding it too well, I just go by what I've been told). We are planning on using textures to make things look better than they're modelled to be. Less geometry or something.
>>1194025
I'll admit we were all unaware of the finer definitions of 'rail shooter.' I suppose we'll have to decide what to call it later on to be accurate, but if it's called Star Fox(or a placeholder to avoid C&D) then people will generally know what's coming.

[Anonymous No.1194182]

>>1194168
If you guys get C&D'd and you end up changing assets, what are the odds of seeing a SF mod pop up out of nowhere?

[Anonymous No.1194183]

>>1194168
For the record, I was sperging out on the Rail Shooter Definition sperg, not you guys. I'm pulling for your project, not getting mad about it.

[Anonymous No.1194185]

>>1194168
Just call it a shoot 'em up. Most people seem to think "rail shooters" are a sub-genre of shoot 'em ups anyway.

[Anonymous No.1194187]

>>1194165
>"Rail shooter", however, is at least quite clear. Sorry but Star Fox doesn't fit the bill.
Man, I'm not saying that you are wrong. I'm saying "no one cares, quit ruining the thread."
That rings a bit hollow now that I've helped ruin it, though.

>>1194005
Is Nintendo really so bad about that? The only thing I know of that they shut down is Super Mario Bros. X and even then I'm a bit hazy on the whole thing, because it seems like it was only shut down temporarily (?).

[Anonymous No.1194190]

>>1194185
Star Fox is a rail shooter, though.

[Anonymous No.1194192]

>>1194190
Well... No, not really.

[Anonymous No.1194193]

>>1194182
99%
>>1194183
Thank you, I don't mind people criticizing points they don't like, and the rest of the guys are pretty good about feedback too. We want to make this a project that'll be enjoyed.
>>1194185
Maybe something more oblique like "Space Shooter." I'll ask the others.

[Anonymous No.1194197]

>>1194185
Don't call it anything. Just say it plays like Star Fox or Star Fox 64.
Problem solved.
Case closed.
Issue avoided.
Hitch unhitched.
Complication rectified.

[Anonymous No.1194212]

>>1194197
There is no issue other than some sperglord in a basement getting bitchy when he realized the world doesn't conform to his interpretations of reality.

It's a rail shooter.

[Anonymous No.1194218]

>>1194212
I've explained how illogical that is now, you can stop already. Nobody's going to get hurt if you decide to use your language in a more proactive manner one of these days.

[Anonymous No.1194228]

>>1194218
But your explanation is insufficient to justify destroying the transfer of information from person to person. By deliberately obscuring and confusing the ideas being transferred, you're making discussion more difficult, all in order to please some personal aesthetic desire.

That's retarded and I won't stand for it.

[Anonymous No.1194236]

Sorry OP, you can't have nice things. Much like this thread, some retard will show up and ruin everything. You might not post anything on youtube, but xX_gamertron_bornin2001_Xx will if you ever get anything playable. Nintendo will shut you down even if the parasites are making money instead of you.

I would suggest avoiding the Starfox brand and instead clone the game with an original IP.

[Anonymous No.1194242]

What will the music be like? I don't know about anyone else, but I think the original game, and Maybe Star Fox 2 as well, have the best soundtracks of the series by far.

[Anonymous No.1194253]

>>1194228
>By deliberately obscuring and confusing the ideas being transferred, you're making discussion more difficult
No, no, THAT'S what you're doing when you insist that Star Fox plays on rails.

[Anonymous No.1194256]

>>1194236
The consensus on the team is we're going to go full retard and push it out before they can stop us, with no project page or way for them to find out what we're doing yet, it's likely we can get away with it. We'll advertise after the fact.
>>1194242
We really liked some of the tracks from Star Fox 2, particularly the menu themes and the victory BGM. The OCremix guy said he'd rig up some midis for us so we don't have to re-use existing tracks.

[Anonymous No.1194258]

>>1194236
Oh, and we won't be releasing demos publicly or anything to prevent the scenario you outlined from happening. Small control groups we know will be asked to test it out for playability, but we're not going to let it be easy.

[Anonymous No.1194263]

>>1194253
I'm not the one trying to redefine words and genres, changing their meanings to satisfy some petty desire. If your interpretation were something that actually "competed" with current definitions, then you'd perhaps have a leg to stand on.

But it's an unknown interpretation, and forcing its greater use only muddles everything. And muddling things results in confusion like the Wii vs. Wii U and 3DS vs. 2DS vs. DS situation.

Avoid it.

[Anonymous No.1194269]

>>1194263
>I'm not the one trying to redefine words and genres
But you are. You're trying to tell me that "on-rails" means autoscrolling in a 3D environment or something instead of literally being "on-rails".

[Anonymous No.1194273]

>>1194256
>the victory BGM
All of them? There's like 5 or 6 different ones, depending on what you just beat.

>>1194258
>that image
Do you plan on having different Arwings?
I hope the ones from Star Fox 2 show up if so.

[Anonymous No.1194274]

>>1194269
I've already told you what it means, I've already shown you what it means in popular usage, I've already shown you that your definition does not exist anywhere but in a few posts in a thread on /vr/.

If you have nothing new to say, don't expect anyone to reply to it.

[Anonymous No.1194275]

>>1194263
>If your interpretation were something that actually "competed" with current definitions
Also it does. The murky definition of "rail shooter" that you've provided encompasses all 2D scrolling shooters as well, rendering the term practically useless. I've explained this all before already though, you just seem to want to stay ignorant or wallow in your own lack of insight. I don't think this discussion is going to go anywhere like this.

[Anonymous No.1194284]

>>1194273

[Anonymous No.1194305]

>>1194273
In general we liked the upbeat music that they were.

As for the Arwings, we'll probably stick with the original, but there's still room to decide.

[Anonymous No.1194314]

Hmmm, this seems like it has potential OP. You'll probably need a couple more 3D modelers, and definitely more than one coder to finish it though.

What I would recommend is not explicitly making it based off of Star Fox, Nintendo has been on the edge with copyright enforcement shutting down LP'ers and Full-Screen Mario. If any game site mentions this project, expect threatening letters from lawyers. You won't have to change anything about the gameplay, because that's not possible to copyright.

I assume you aren't planning to sell it in the game in the first place, and in that case I strongly suggest you GPL the project. By having the game FOSS, you can get help from people who are unable to be permanent members of the dev team. This is invaluable for bug-fixes and porting the game, and helps maintain the project's momentum. Tell your coder to set up a Git project after you get a little bit of progress.

[Anonymous No.1194317]

>>1194314
*sell the game

[Anonymous No.1194325]

>>1194314
Thanks for the suggestions, I'll pass them along. There was another SF project a couple of years back "Shadows of Lylat" built on the Freespace engine that didn't get anywhere; we decided to make something simpler and closer to the originals. I'll admit some of the terms I'm not familiar with, but I'm sure the coder is going to know them. He was also asking for additional help for sure. I'll see if I can hunt them down and another 3D guy.

Like was mentioned earlier, we might simply put placeholders in lieu of all Star Fox references, and simply "leak" a mod that replaces them after the fact.

[Anonymous No.1194407]

How much stuff have you guys done before? Not to sound (too) rude here but that you've got all these ideas and not even a single guaranteed coder yet gives of that vibe of someone new looking to create a great project and getting way in over themselves.

[Anonymous No.1194426]

>>1194407
A couple of us were on the original Shadows of Lylat team, and others worked on some flash games and a unity engine before. There's no illusions about pulling off an AAA title, but the truth of the matter is it's easier for us to produce the assets for the game initially rather than the engine. We can make the 3D models, backgrounds, music, avatars and menus, but the hard part is stringing it all together with proper coding, so imagine we all have the pieces of a shed all cut up and painted, but we need somebody who knows how to properly nail it up. We only have one 'maybe' coder, and he said he'd really need help to start making progress once we provide rigged models for him.

[Anonymous No.1195227]

>>1194426
>A couple of us were on the original Shadows of Lylat team
Then I have a request. Please keep the ice trench of unitinu out of the game.

[Anonymous No.1195390]

>>1195227
Oh my god, so you have some idea what a nightmare that was. I promise we won't do that.

[Anonymous No.1195393]

In no way am I trying to bash what you're doing, but seriously; just make an homage; call it galaxy dog or something. Okay not even Galaxy Dog as that was used in F-Zero. Nebula Vulpine. Make talking animal characters and ships that resemble but do not directly lift. Nintendo will blow your operation up the moment they get wind of it otherwise. Don't do that to yourselves. Good luck.

[Anonymous No.1195406]

>>1195393
Thanks for the input, we've had others reccomend it too. I'm going to suggest to the guys that we just use placeholders for all the SF assets and release an "unofficial" mod shortly after we're done.

[Anonymous No.1195547]

>>1193209
>>1194005
>>1194236
>>1194314
>>1195393
You people keep suggesting Nintendo will kill any fangame. Are there any serious examples?
AM2R still exists, even with Nintendo currently selling Metroid II on the 3DS.
Project M is still fine, even with a Smash 4 just around the corner.
Mother 4 doesn't seem to be running into any resistance.
And all of these projects are pretty damn big, and current, and have their own websites. There is no way Nintendo could not know of them.
Then there's Super Mario Bros. X, which is interesting because Nintendo asked for the site to be closed down (for obvious reasons: the domain name was supermariobrothers.org) but did nothing about the game itself.
Hell, Mario Fan Games Galaxy is a site is devoted entirely to the creation of Mario fangames. It's been around for about a decade. Why hasn't it been shut down by now if Nintendo is really bad about this?
There's also that Mother 3 fan translation, which I'm pretty sure the people involved contacted Nintendo about themselves. Even that wasn't shut down.
And since it's relevant to the topic at hand, what about Shadows of Lylat? Did Nintendo ever try to stop that?

A quote from Iwata:
>Of course, we cannot say that we can give tacit approval to any and all the activities which threaten our intellectual properties. But on the other hand, it would not be appropriate if we treated people who did something based on affection for Nintendo, as criminals.

So I'm sorry, but I just don't see it.

[Anonymous No.1195613]

>>1195547
I think the issue is people who earn ad revenue from using the nintendo name or similar, let alone anyone stupid enough to try to sell a product.

[Anonymous No.1195661]

Make it a prequel based on Mission File. There, you have your Star Fox lore backdrop, and Nintendo won't go after you for using chracters that only appeared in this Japanese artbook. And you have all the prequisites you noted and we all want in a SF game.

It would be analogous to the Metroid fan-games like the guy above said but in even safer territory
http://www.glitterberri.com/star-fox/guidebook-intro/

[Anonymous No.1195682]

>coder
>not programmer
it's gonna be so fucking shit i guarantee it
fuckin hipster

[Anonymous No.1195684]

>>1194187
Fuck off you underage nintendo kiddie. I remember taking my built like a tank PC and smashing this kid's head and n64 in and then proceeding to play quake on my pc you fucking noob

[Anonymous No.1195687]

>>1195684

[Anonymous No.1195708]

>>1195682
your from /g/, right? what's the difference? or is it a joke?

[Anonymous No.1195709]

>>1195661
This. Use the Bear, the rat and make up some random animal friend to help them out later. The extras can be mercenaries not affiliated with the air force.

[Anonymous No.1195812]

>>1195708
>your
>not capitalizing and overuse of question marks
>underage detected

[Anonymous No.1196003]

The guy saying it's not a rail shooter is right, but shouldn't be getting angry. You guys shouldn't be freaking out either, semantics are important. Star Fox is a rail shooter shmup, but most rail shooters don't have a unit to control and manipulate and that's the distincition the "pedantic asshole" is trying to make.

[Anonymous No.1196507]

>>1195547
It's just right to be cautious, I don't want to see something with as much promise as this get shut down. I can't take another Chrono Ressurection.

>>1193301
I want to back what this guy said about customization, if you gave people decent options to make their arwing feel their own cosmetically you'd get a lot of attention.

I hope you leave the game easily accessible to the modding community

[Anonymous No.1196646]

>>1196507
I had a chat with the group and thus far the plan is to go ahead with the Star Fox name, with a contingency plan of cheap stand-in characters and names if we get heat from Nintendo, after which a mod to replace original content would "mysteriously" appear on the net.

As far as customization goes, I get what you're saying, but one thing we wanted absolutely clear was there would be no altering the mechanics of the game, insofar as lasers, speed, shields, etc...(not counting temp powerups) Everyone's on the same footing and it's your skill that's all you can count on. Cosmetically we would like to have multiple ships you could fly just for show, like the different Arwing models from SF2 or the Wolfen as an unlock. I wish I could let slip a few other details we have planned, but there's so much we want to keep secret until release. I'd like there to be some sort of modkit for people to play with it how they'd like.

[Anonymous No.1197512]

>>1196646
>Cosmetically we would like to have multiple ships you could fly just for show, like the different Arwing models from SF2 or the Wolfen as an unlock, but one thing we wanted absolutely clear was there would be no altering the mechanics of the game, insofar as lasers, speed, shields, etc.
Man, really?

If you plan on having a serious emphasis on score, or you want there to be stuff that's difficult to unlock but would be easier with certain ships, you could just make scores and unlocks for anything but the default Arwing invalid.
Unlockable stuff could be reserved purely for "just for fun" replays.

Just reskins would be pretty damn boring.

And hell, one mechanic you would be forced to change anyway is collision detection.
>>1194273 this ship's wings don't extend out much at all, so it would be taking damage when visually it clearly shouldn't be.
>>1194284 this ship is much wider than the default Arwing . It would run into similar problems.
I don't know what version of the Wolfen you intend to use, but most if not all of them have at least four wings.
It's especially problematic because I assume you will be including wing specific damage like Star Fox and Star Fox 64 and Star Fox Assault all had. I forget whether Adventures or Command had that as well, but all the major games with a significant amount of rail shooting action had it.

[Anonymous No.1198597]

>>1197512
We talked it over, and the big thing is that getting the enemy AI to be challenging and not bullshit hard depends on us basing it off what the player can do, so if one section is hard for an Arwing Mk.1 but a Wolfen Mod.0 can blaze through the damn thing, it's kinda gamebreaking. We'll have to set individual collision detection regardless, but if we do give each ship slightly tweaked stats, we have to juggle it with the rest of the game.

So far, we'll be including the Space Dynamics Arwing Mk.1, Mk.2, Arwing Interceptor(SF2), and the Wolfen Mod.0 and Mod.1, though we're omitting the bomber variant from SF2 since it got subpar reception from everybody. The 3D guy was clamouring for alternate paint schemes as an unlock, so we might implement it ourselves or let modders do it.

[Anonymous No.1198649]

>>1198597
>if one section is hard for an Arwing Mk.1 but a Wolfen Mod.0 can blaze through the damn thing, it's kinda gamebreaking
I understand, that's why I'm saying they should be different, but reserved for "just for fun" replays.
Beating the game with the Wolfen wouldn't count as beating the game. It wouldn't unlock anything or record a score. It would just be for fun.

It really shouldn't be THAT big of a deal anyway. I mean, with the Interceptor Arwing, all you'd have to do to make it basically the way it is in Star Fox 2 is:
>change collision detection which you're doing anyway
>give it less health
>give it a larger boost gauge
>make it charge up charge shots a little bit faster
>make it start with the twin blaster
>Star Fox 2 didn't have wing damage, so perhaps the wings could be more fragile than the standard Arwing
Nothing about that is particularly game breaking. It's mostly trade-offs, not a straight upgrade by any means unless you never get hit.

>Space Dynamics Arwing Mk.1, Mk.2, Wolfen Mod.0, and Mod.1
Alright, but what are these exactly?
The Arwing has a different design in 1, 64, Adventures, Assault, and Command.
The Wolfen has a different design in 2, 64, 64 (Venom II), and Assault.
If I had to guess, I'd assume it's 1, 64, 2, and 64 respectively, but I have no idea.

[Anonymous No.1198663]

>>1198649
Yes that's generally what we want to puzzle out. We might include all the ships available for the campaign as unlocks but only slightly different, not gamebreakingly-so.

The Arwing Mk.1 is intended to be the original James McCloud flew with his team, and will look like an overhaul of the SNES version. The Mk.2 will be closer to the N64 version. Both variants are visually similar, but the original SF team flies the Mk.1's while you start out with the newer Mk.2's. It's also part of something in the story later on. The Wolfen designs are loosely based on the SF2 designs and 64, with Wolf having the Mod.2 while his team flies the Mod.1, the reason for all the trouble being that in our game Wolf O'Donnel is going to be a scary motherfucker in the skies. Just pulling a simple loop will not save you. Again, this is still on the drawing board, so we love gathering input to tweak everything to how the players are going to enjoy it.

[Anonymous No.1198680]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XAJEDJJ_Bo

[Anonymous No.1200859]

>>1198680
Very cool.

[Anonymous No.1200905]

>>1198680
>not posting the version with all the radio chatter
Good man.

[Anonymous No.1202718]

>>1198680
>that video
>that entire channel

tears
IN
EYES

[Anonymous No.1204138]

>>1198680
Welp, firing up the SNES now.

[Anonymous No.1204468]

>>1198663

Will the SNES Arwing have a solid black cockpit? This is a dealbreaker if its wrong

[Anonymous No.1205073]

>>1193171
not a fan of furry shooters but this sounds worthwhile. you should contact nintendo for copyright issues though.

and may i suggest low-res textures with filters on the ships? untextured old skool polygons will look awfully dated in this day and age, esp if you mix it up with 2D painted backgrounds

[Anonymous No.1205314]

>>1195547
Shadows of Lylat was suspended because the release of Starfox 3D
also,AM2R,ProjectM,SMBX and other stuff are FREE,Nintendo doesnt care about FREE fanmade games
also,Nintendo hasnt C&D'd the guys who are making Mother 4 because Mother is finished as a series and anything would be not canon

i'd recommend you to wait a bit

[Anonymous No.1207032]

>>1205314
>Nintendo doesnt care about FREE fanmade games
Right, that's kind of my point.
This Star Fox fangame would be free, so what's the big deal? Nintendo wouldn't do anything about it.

[Anonymous No.1209184]

>>1194020
But he's right. Why don't you just agree with him and thank him for correcting you. That'll also make the thread not derail. It's also the correct thing to do because he's right and you were wrong.

[Anonymous No.1209257]

>>1209184
He didn't say that he wasn't right.
People understand just fine that the term rail shooter doesn't really work for something like Star Fox.

It's an issue of practicality.
You aren't going to introduce some new term that catches on and replaces "rail shooter" in the discussion of games like Panzer Dragoon or Star Fox this late in the game, partly because everyone already uses the term rail shooter and has done so for about two decades without any real issue, and partly because 'rail shooters' are all but dead at this point so the issue is not a pressing one.

Compare with something like the term "roguelike".
Most people have not been using the term for more than a few years.
Many games with disparate elements claim to be roguelikes, so there is serious issue with use of the term. The meaning is unclear. Is it just procedural generation and permadeath? Does it have to be overhead, turn-based, and tile-based? Does it have to be an RPG? Good luck getting most people to agree on any of that shit.
Most of these games claiming to be roguelikes are new, or being made right now, so the issue is very relevant right now.

None of those things are true of the term "rail shooter" in regards to games like Star Fox.

And of course, most people would much rather discuss a Star Fox fangame in the works than have some shitty argument about semantics.

[Anonymous No.1209478]

>>1209257
>partly because everyone already uses the term rail shooter and has done so for about two decades without any real issue
I don't know where you're getting this shit but it simply isn't true. Nobody called Star Fox a "rail shooter" back in the day. This genre confusion is a recent invention.

[Anonymous No.1209816]

>>1209478
[Citation Needed]

[Anonymous No.1212119]

>>1193171
>somebody from OCremix who said they'd get back to us
Did he ever get back to you? i would drop this person so hard

there's hardly any good music on OCremix

[Anonymous No.1212316]

>>1209257
Except people apparently do agree on what a rail shooter is, unlike a roguelike.

You're like that apathetic faggot in science who defends the use of eponyms because everyone already uses them, despite the fact it's a garbage ego-stroking name that doesn't say shit about the entity being named.

People like you make me pretty mad. If you don't want to argue semantics, then here's how you react when you inevitably get corrected: shut the fuck up about it and use the correct term because even you know you're dead wrong. If you try to argue about how nobody cares, you'll just be proven wrong in front of everybody.

[Anonymous No.1212328]

>>1212316
okay but nobody cares idiot

[Anonymous No.1212336]

>>1197512
Honestly I loved starfox 2, but it didn't have as much content as it could of. I'd love to see elements of starfox 2 used in this. the walker mech and defense arwing.

[Anonymous No.1212385]

>>1212336
If it's going to be purely rail shooting action then the walker mech transformation thing doesn't make sense to include.
I'd like to see it if they include all-range mode for sure though, since it eliminates those dumb moments where you have to fly somewhat far away from the enemy, turn around, fire at it a handful of times before you pass it, and repeat.