Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
That's so absurd to the point of almost being ridiculous.
Of course Samus returns lead to Metroid Dread coming. The game had been shelved for literally fifteen+ years before the team that would eventually release it got their hands on it, and they did so by impressing Nintendo with their work on the Samus returns remake then convincing Nintendo that they were a team capable of designing an entirely new entry.
If Samus returns never happened, there is quite literally no version of reality where anything other than Nintendo being happy to continue sitting on the 2D branch of Metroid doing nothing with it, other than some other company making a similar remake pitch and things continuing as they had donw
This is an incredibly hyperbolic response to doubting the legitimacy of a leaker. Is there a rule that people posting in these threads have to believe them?
I wouldn't say it's completely baseless, as I've over the past few days watched several people across multiple threads make snide remarks about "anyone who still believes" certain members after all this, while taking victory laps over how right they've always been and how wrong we always were.
I agree. I understand the insider skepticism. The whole Zelda remasters issue with Grubb for instance definitely put a sour taste in people's mouths. But other insiders like Nate and Emily have had a consistent track record. I'm not blindly loyal to anything Nate says. It's just a question of confidence based on his track record, like I'm 50% we'll see F-Zero in the next two months. As opposed to 0% if some other random person says it. I don't just believe someone for the hell of it, even if I like what they're saying. I'm puzzled by the comments saying he's had more misses than hits, that hasn't been my impression. But I could be swayed otherwise.
A dream concept of mine is to bring together all (or most) of Nintendo's dormant vehicle franchises into a new experience centered around exploring many possible forms of mechanical locomotion. One where all choices are available to players: from racing insanely fast hovercraft, to driving water and snow vehicles, to piloting ships in air and space and more. This could also include walkers and trains and tanks and submarines and jetpacks and rotor-craft and anything else conceivable.
Come to think of it: LABO Vehicle Kit could have been a nice prototype for just such a concept! So if you didn't buy it you have only yourself to blame for the death of all those other franchises.
I really do hope something new for F-Zero is true. We should be far enough away from Miyamoto's viewpoint on why a new one (or at least a remaster/remake of the previous) game(s) haven't been done.
Plus, MK8D + BCP is just raking in a bunch of bonus money. This gen is perfect for a new entry to just exist. Doesn't even need to be this huge type of game either.
I don't even get why there has to be "sides" in the first place, in regards to insiders. Either you find them to be credible, or you don't. There's no need to sway people to one side or the other, nor is there any reason to start fights with someone who disagrees. Just draw your own conclusions from the information at hand.
A dream concept of mine is to bring together all (or most) of Nintendo's dormant vehicle franchises into a new experience centered around exploring many possible forms of mechanical locomotion. One where all choices are available to players: from racing insanely fast hovercraft, to driving water and snow vehicles, to piloting ships in air and space and more. This could also include walkers and trains and tanks and submarines and jetpacks and rotor-craft and anything else conceivable.
I don't generally follow too closely or get invested in insider drama, though I do seem to pick it up a decent amount through osmosis. It's interesting, though, to see the range of reactions. Sometimes interactions seem eerily cultish (though I assume much of that is in good fun), sometimes seems it would be obnoxious for the insiders to deal with, and sometimes seems overly hostile toward them.
Now that's going too far. Jolly ol' Saint Nick was a real historical person. He even punched a guy at the Council of Nicea! Okay, so that particular story is very likely apocryphal, and it amped up in intensity as time marched on, but it's a humorous thought.
I certainly wouldn't go so far as to suggest people can't voice disbelief in insiders and leaks or whatever, or that people who would do so necessarily need refrain from responding in general, but it is helpful to be cognizant of what's being responded to and the atmosphere being entered into, as well as generally how this is being voiced. And clearly nobody's going to be perfect with such things, but it's good to consider.
Beyond that, I think Brofield just now posted a generally good look into what's going on here:
See, this one I'm inclined to believe exists, especially given Retro Studios' LinkedIn records and such. It also seems one that Nintendo reasonably could be expected to hold onto for a time in order to follow a preplanned marketing plan with Prime 4. I still would prefer that it get a separate title, following the close of the Prime story, but that's been an obvious losing battle since it was announced.
In any case, I would love for something to come of F-Zero. A new title seems possibly the best option, though existing games are a known quality. A brilliant resurgence would be incredible.
Also, y'all know the reason Wind Waker and Twilight Princess haven't panned out yet is because the remakesters are done and ready but the additional content to entice repeat purchasers is not, right?
I would say it would be too much to suggest that someone not voice concerns -- it could be the initial poster doesn't know something, that a great many people don't know, perhaps that the responder is mistaken and this becomes a learning experience in that way, perhaps even that there's some other element to what's going on -- but it is probably helpful to give some context or explanation to help everybody understand where you're coming from.
Beyond that, I suspect this other element of Bellydrum's post is important to why he's approached things this way (regardless of whether you agree with the outcome):
Spoiled because I really don't want this to be the main focal point of my post:
I wasn't going to touch this subject, but it progressed beyond that with textbook examples of exactly what Bellydrum is talking about.
Here's the thing. I think Bellydrum went a bit far with the implication that the concerns shouldn't be vocalized (Now, I'm also not certain that's the takeaway he meant from that, especially since it specifically referred to this sort of continuation, but that's beside the point); however this is the exact shut-down-the-discussion-and-win response he was talking about.
Literally none of this is truly engaging with what he said, and I very much doubt any of it touches even the very deepest roots of why he said it. It's the same old casting aspersions on the other party and taking personal grievance, using things that were never part of or foundational to the conversation as a means to shut everything down.
It's an implicit attack on the character of the person you're responding to, as a means to give oneself the high ground, bring the other person down, and absolutely pwn them by virtue of being untouchable, because the other person is framed as nefarious and everything they say going forward is now unreasonable and an attack on oneself.
This is exactly why he would see the initial response as he did, exactly as he explained his comment.
I know responding to this has likely put me in some sort of crosshairs already because
I'm some dude, so I have no place to respond negatively here (as indicated in the quote above).
Responding at all likely throws me under the implicit accusations of the above posts.
I already know that suggesting something doesn't have any connection to what's been said will get me slammed for "demanding facts and logic." Been there, done that.
My own character has already been determined exactly like this in the past, so that's ammunition against anything I say right there.
I've already made this post too long.
-- all of which illustrates my point -- ... but this being literally exactly what Bellydrum was talking about made it seem like something to reflect on.
I'm not trying to be confrontational, but this is what the exchange looks like, both from this incident and from previous happenings on the site.
Again, this isn't an attack on you. Maybe you don't realize this is what's happening, maybe you think I have something wrong here you can explain to me, maybe, just maybe something will come of engaging with this.
In any case, there could be room somewhere for some discussion on meme and language usage, providing information for people, exploring different understandings, so forth, particularly because it can help in overall communication and understanding and because of this:
It really, truly is. How words can flip to an opposite meaning over time, how they generally shift from one meaning to another, become completely divorced from their origins (which very well might not make even an iota of sense anymore), connections to different parts of culture or linguistic workings long gone -- the list goes on.
Language as a whole is fascinating, really. I love that stuff.
I would generally agree with this sentiment. Now, I see fans of F-Zero easily buying it immediately, and the expanding gaming audience adding more fuel, which could turn it into such a moment, but I'm not so sure it would be positioned as such or that it should necessarily be expected to be.
I've been refraining from going too far into remake vs new title discourse here, but a new one could be used as an opportunity to figure some new things out, tinker with the overall vibe, etc cetera.
There're been a few posts that have made me want to lean into that a bit, so maybe I'll get back to it briefly.
I think it's sad that you see my post and can only think, "You are attacking his character! You are not properly engaging in the field of ideas! You are trying to give yourself the moral high ground!"
Why did I say what I said? Because I wanted to point out to him exactly what you noticed, that he essentially was saying concerns over such content should not be vocalized. I was hoping that by pointing out this response, he would understand that there's no reason to question transgender people simply for pointing out that a meme is right wing. Consider who you are talking to and why they might say what they say. I did, and I believe it was said out of ignorance, not malice. But that's no reason to stay silent.
You seem very eager after our last conversation for some kind of a debate. But surely you can agree that not all things are up for debate? In this instance, there's someone who's not queer who feels another's character has been attacked after it has been pointed out they have defended the usage of a right wing meme against a trans woman. On the other side, you have transgender people who feel uncomfortable at the fact that it was defended. This is not "trying to pwn the other person", this is telling the other person that I'm not comfortable with what they're doing. Perhaps having it pointed out that a user is defending a right wing meme is uncomfortable for that person, but I think it's less comfortable for queer people to see it defended. I don't think the comfort of queer users on this site is up for debate, even if there are bound to be some who don't see what Bellydrum did as a big deal.
If you really want to continue having your "debate" until you're satisfied, why not DM me, rather than veer the thread further off topic? Perhaps I've missed the point you've buried inside your essay.
I don't even get why there has to be "sides" in the first place, in regards to insiders. Either you find them to be credible, or you don't. There's no need to sway people to one side or the other, nor is there any reason to start fights with someone who disagrees. Just draw your own conclusions from the information at hand.
I can definitely vibe with this. There's a serious intensity of emotion surrounding insiders that I suspect carries over from the era of concern about overly publicizing teases to their detriment. With the war having been lost and forum rumor repackaging becoming a goddamned internet cottage industry, trying to protect insiders is sort of a lost cause.
However, the culture of trying to protect insiders remains, and we now see people responding fiercely to any naysaying of rumors. My entry to this community basically came from insider hype, but even I have low expectations most of the time. We were told about Metroid Prime, Zelda ports, and 2022-2023 hardware, but none of it amounted to anything. Were they lying? Were they even mistaken? No, I don't imagine so. Plans change. That being said, we have no idea what's true and what's not, which only compounds the strong pathos of defense or attack.
In short, I think we'd all benefit from reduced intensity about these rumors. Insisting without evidence that someone is a lying grifter is lame, as is lionizing someone who is objectively not a consistent source of things that actually happen. Rumors are inherently not a reliable source of information. Things will change, be wrong, or in sone cases even be fabricated. Some people enjoy knowing things that sometimes happen, others find it infuriating. Neither party has any need to fight the other.
Yes!! A Full Motor Rumble!! Where vehicles from various franchises compete in rounds of death races against each other, and at the end of each round you get to salvage parts from the vehicles you wrecked and incorporate them into your next franken-vehicle design. The way you damage other vehicles (and the areas you damage) affect the parts you'll be able to salvage (like in Monster Hunter) which adds a strategic element to the carnage.
Genuinely, I think the cult of personality around leakers is weird, and the defensive tone struck by some when someone even so much as doubts the credibility or finds motivations of a leaker distasteful is even more bizarre.
We already have plenty of history regarding people who were 1000% making shit up like samushunter or Zippo for the sake of clout. It shouldn't be controversial for someone to note how a leaker even with a proven track record is questionable, or to question when a leaker is conducting business that appears to be self-serving.
Missed some conversation here but I think people are once again getting a little caught up on sales numbers.
Samus Returns didn't sell especially strongly, but it did prove to Nintendo that MercurySteam were the right people for Metroid, which lead to Metroid Dread. Just check out Sakamoto's comments.
A hypothetical F ZERO GX remaster from a new studio might not be a test of F ZERO alone; it could easily be a way for Nintendo to test a potential development partner. Alternatively, any GX remaster might be handled by Grezzo or Tantalus, who've ported GameCube software to other Nintendo systems in recent years; in which case it's just a continuation of an existing partnership.
Viewing it solely through the prism of "it must sell to prove itself" is a little limiting. Whoever handles this stuff with Nintendo might not revive F ZERO and turn it into a smash hit franchise, but that's probably just one part of the puzzle.
Genuinely, I think the cult of personality around leakers is weird, and the defensive tone struck by some when someone even so much as doubts the credibility or finds motivations of a leaker distasteful is even more bizarre.
We already have plenty of history regarding people who were 1000% making shit up like samushunter or Zippo for the sake of clout. It shouldn't be controversial for someone to note how a leaker even with a proven track record is questionable, or to question when a leaker is conducting business that appears to be self-serving.
I'm sure half the memes we use come from 4chan. If you're that concerned, just report the post. Otherwise you just sound uppity, like you'd rather "win the argument" by feeling superior than actually continuing a conversation that you started. You actually do this a lot.
Also, side note, can "insider haters" please stop ruining every single conversation on this website? We get it. You're incredibly smart. I bet you even don't believe in Santa! But engaging with rumors on a forum is just fun to do, and you all are the ultimate fun killers.
Hey Belly. We've received a handful of reports on this post. Members of the moderation team (myself included, of course) have deliberated over how best to approach a potential course of action in response, and whether that should take the form of issuing feedback, approaching you about the matter on the staff server, or something else entirely. We thought mere feedback by itself might potentially ring hollow (especially taking character limit into consideration), and also that approaching you privately would constitute a form of preferential treatment (whether minor or major, is debatable). As such, for the time being, we've settled on what we believe to be the most reasonable option: that being, simply a response in the thread itself. Apologies to all for the fact that this ended up being several paragraphs long, but there are a few factors at play here that warrant public acknowledgement.
To start with, we'd like to fully acknowledge the fact that hostile (in some cases, outright vitriolic) sentiments against insiders are often posted to the site, with a notable ramp-up in such remarks regularly occurring during periods much like this one, wherein numerous leaks and rumors are floating around. These sentiments include personal attacks against the character and integrity of some of our very own members, which the team finds highly unfortunate. Though we're often challenged with where to draw the line, when it comes to at which point reasonable skepticism crosses over into vitriol, we've always maintained a harsh stance against the latter. This is true of moderators past, and present. While insiders are not a protected class of poster, they're fully entitled to the same level of decency that any other member would be.
With that said, when you see a post you feel crosses that line into vitriol (or even just an unproductive contribution that sours the vibe), we know you're fully familiar with the process, at this point: submit a report. This process is the same one you've encouraged someone to abide by in this very thread, so the team are confused as to why you'd opt to bring forth personal jabs against a member, which generally only serve to worsen any given situation. We'd prefer things don't escalate, and as has already been alluded to, the standards of conduct for staff members of the site are generally quite high (with good reason). Whether the content being discussed is highly problematic, or completely innocuous, is irrelevant to the fact that personal jabs toward Phosphorescent Skeleton and her prior board conduct ("uppity", "You actually do this a lot") aren't okay. A member's history of behavior is for the mod team to evaluate, and we aim to do it by the book. It isn't against the rules to raise concerns about the potential problematic connotations of specific content being posted to the board, and we regularly give similar reports their due consideration. Any concerns presented in good faith are to be taken seriously.
We saw it fit to make this post, because we consider it important not to give off the impression of unified staff approval, regarding the way you chose to handle this situation. Staff members should consist of trusted members of the community, and though we do understand some occasional slip-ups are inevitable, there have been numerous past instances in which we've privately expressed our dismay with similar conduct of yours. A response like the initial one you posted only has the potential to erode the trust in staff that we should instead be seeking to foster. We'd ask that you please be more mindful of this, in the future.
Genuinely, I think the cult of personality around leakers is weird, and the defensive tone struck by some when someone even so much as doubts the credibility or finds motivations of a leaker distasteful is even more bizarre.
We already have plenty of history regarding people who were 1000% making shit up like samushunter or Zippo for the sake of clout. It shouldn't be controversial for someone to note how a leaker even with a proven track record is questionable, or to question when a leaker is conducting business that appears to be self-serving.
This feels a tad extreme to me. Regardless of your views on someone's credibility as an insider, they still deserve the same degree of respect that anyone else on this board deserves. If their actions have yet to be explicitly self-serving and/or intentionally misleading, it seems rather unfair to them to question the intentions in this manner. Especially since inaccurate information is not necessarily intentional, given how frequently plans seem to change on Nintendo's end.
If the insider is being actively hostile, then the story obviously changes quite a bit. But for someone like Nate, I don't really see any reason why anyone should be openly doubting his intentions. You don't have to believe his information, but I have yet to see anything that would suggest he's being deliberately misleading or self-serving.
This feels a tad extreme to me. Regardless of your views on someone's credibility as an insider, they still deserve the same degree of respect that anyone else on this board deserves. If their actions have yet to be explicitly self-serving and/or intentionally misleading, it seems rather unfair to them to question the intentions in this manner. Especially since inaccurate information is not necessarily intentional, given how frequently plans seem to change on Nintendo's end.
If the insider is being actively hostile, then the story obviously changes quite a bit. But for someone like Nate, I don't really see any reason why anyone should be openly doubting his intentions. You don't have to believe his information, but I have yet to see anything that would suggest he's being deliberately misleading or self-serving.
This is pretty much the kind of defensive posting I was talking about. I didn't even mention Nate by name nor did I state any personal beliefs about his info, how he gets it, or the nature of his podcast.
This is pretty much the kind of defensive posting I was talking about. I didn't even mention Nate by name nor did I state any personal beliefs about his info, how he gets it, or the nature of his podcast.
Never said you were, but considering that this thread is about Nate and has been fairly contentious, he fit well enough as an example to drive my main point home.
I don't care who's information, if any, you believe in, or whatever your reason is. That's entirely your prerogative. I just don't see the reason for an insider's intentions to come under fire when they haven't shown any signs of hostility or intentional misleading. They deserve the same degree of respect as anyone else on this board, and questioning their motivations extends beyond that in my opinion. That's all.
Never said you were, but considering that this thread is about Nate and has been fairly contentious, he fit well enough as an example to drive my main point home.
I don't care who's information, if any, you believe in, or whatever your reason is. That's entirely your prerogative. I just don't see the reason for an insider's intentions to come under fire when they haven't shown any signs of hostility or intentional misleading. They deserve the same degree of respect as anyone else on this board, and questioning their motivations extends beyond that in my opinion. That's all.
I want to be clear I am not talking about Nate or any other leaker specifically here. But leaks, until proven, are rumors and speculation until there's solid evidence it's true. Healthy skepticism is warranted, and yes, sometimes people just make things up.
Even in a case where a leaker is relatively trusted, you shouldn't take their word as gospel, because there are any number of reasons that their information could be anywhere from slightly off to completely and utterly wrong.
I want to be clear I am not talking about Nate or any other leaker specifically here. But leaks, until proven, are rumors and speculation until there's solid evidence it's true. Healthy skepticism is warranted, and yes, sometimes people just make things up.
Even in a case where a leaker is relatively trusted, you shouldn't take their word as gospel, because there are any number of reasons that their information could be anywhere from slightly off to completely and utterly wrong.
I think we’ve got our wires crossed a bit here. I’m not disagreeing with any of this. Who someone chooses to believe, and for whatever reason why, is nobody’s prerogative besides their own, and people have every right to freely share that opinion. Anyone trying to shame someone over that is undeniably in the wrong.
My main point is that openly questioning the motivations behind an insider, particularly in a negative light, runs me the wrong way a bit. Yeah, they could be making everything up for shits and giggles, but that doesn’t really give anyone the right to immediately assume that and make that assumption public. It's pretty rude and completely unprovoked as long as the insider isn't being openly hostile towards the community.
Kind of a silly example, but imagine if someone posts a fairly popular post on here, only for someone to immediately say that it's a made up opinion, and that they only did it to farm Yeah!'s. Sure, maybe that is the case, but it's completely unsubstantiated and just outright rude. One of those "if you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything" situations.
That's fair enough. I think the GPX master cups weren't too bad for the tracks, but AX racers on story mode hard mode was on another level. Really hoping f-zero GX remaster/remake is true.
I'm gonna hold the remaster to the same standard as Fast RMX on Switch though. 1080p 60fps. And maybe 4k 60fps docked on Drake and 4k 120 fps with DLSS. Jk
I'm generally sympathetic to 'leakers' who have a track record of not bullshitting people because, as anyone who has worked in a large, high profile business will know, stuff changes behind the scenes all the bloody time. There will be plenty of ideas that never make it off the cutting room floor, and projects that get delayed internally either by design or by necessity. Maybe a while back plans were for the Metroid Prime trilogy to get released, until suddenly something happened internally that meant it made sense to hold fire. We don't work at Nintendo so we don't know for sure.
Always best to take insider information with a big grain of salt, not necessarily because they're bullshitting, but because until Nintendo sticks a pin on a date and announces a game to the world, every single project they work on is up in the air. And that counts for pretty much every major game developer, not just Nintendo.
I think we’ve got our wires crossed a bit here. I’m not disagreeing with any of this. Who someone chooses to believe, and for whatever reason why, is nobody’s prerogative besides their own, and people have every right to freely share that opinion. Anyone trying to shame someone over that is undeniably in the wrong.
My main point is that openly questioning the motivations behind an insider, particularly in a negative light, runs me the wrong way a bit. Yeah, they could be making everything up for shits and giggles, but that doesn’t really give anyone the right to immediately assume that and make that assumption public. It's pretty rude and completely unprovoked as long as the insider isn't being openly hostile towards the community.
Kind of a silly example, but imagine if someone posts a fairly popular post on here, only for someone to immediately say that it's a made up opinion, and that they only did it to farm Yeah!'s. Sure, maybe that is the case, but it's completely unsubstantiated and just outright rude. One of those "if you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything" situations.
I will say that while you have a point, it isn't entirely fair, as an individual may have a valid reason for doubting a leaker's intentions and if there's proof that a leaker is propagating nonsense for clout, yes, it should be called out, even if it wrecks a thread's 'fun'.
If you see someone very obviously selling snake oil, it's better to out the salesman than let him conduct business undisturbed.
Insider Nate Drake posted this on the forum resetera
".
F-Zero's time will come in 2023.
As for Metroid Prime 1... Retro completed development of the game in late summer of 2021 (for clarity: development finished then -- it still had to go through QA, any localization, and such). The game has been finished for some time now. Nintendo just opted to wait to announce and bring it to market, for whatever reason."
Edit: this seems to be about a GX remaster that Nate has teased before.
Great news! F-Zero GX better comes with an easier way to unlock AX tracks and a GCN controller included since my limited imagination can’t come up with a new way to implement the analog triggers function and the feeling using those was sexy as fuck. HD textures, remastered soundtrack and maintaining 60fps would be also appreciated thank you very much.
Also, please Nintendo release the N64DD expansion for F-Zero X with the track editor and I’ll bite with your overpriced “premium“ NSO subscription
I will say that while you have a point, it isn't entirely fair, as an individual may have a valid reason for doubting a leaker's intentions and if there's proof that a leaker is propagating nonsense for clout, yes, it should be called out, even if it wrecks a thread's 'fun'.
If you see someone very obviously selling snake oil, it's better to out the salesman than let him conduct business undisturbed.
I think part of the reason people are mad at Nate is precisely because he wasn't upfront about the Switch 2 debacle, instead of clarifying the situation or just saying he doesn't know what is happening, he dropped a couple comments that don't make sense neither with what we know from factory leaks nor with what he had said himself previously, leading to more confusion.
So being "openly shady" is a matter of where you draw the line. It's consensus here that Zippo acted in bad faith and thus no one cares if people discredit him. Now the jury is out if Nate also acted in bad faith in this recent situation, some people think he did so they're dispensing the same treatment to him they would to someone like Zippo.
Personally, I think if you want to leak stuff you have to be upfront always. No one's gonna force you to leak anything, you could participate in discussion like any other member does. If you choose to leak because you like the attention or whatever the reason is, then you also need to take responsibility for when you you've been spreading false info to people for months, otherwise people will rightfully just think of you as a liar.
Seeing as Kirby's Return to Dream Land Deluxe is completely revamping the visual look of that game in favor of something more stylized (applying to even the key art), I wouldn't rule out of possibility of an F-Zero GX rerelease trying the same thing. I think fully embracing the American comic book aesthetic the series has always aimed for could look stunning; though it really depends on the scope of the project, and if they plan on remaking all of those pre-rendered videos.
Seeing as Kirby's Return to Dream Land Deluxe is completely revamping the visual look of that game in favor of something more stylized (applying to even the key art), I wouldn't rule out of possibility of an F-Zero GX rerelease trying the same thing. I think fully embracing the American comic book aesthetic the series has always aimed for could look stunning; though it really depends on the scope of the project, and if they plan on remaking all of those pre-rendered videos.
It'd honestly be quite interesting if that would be the story of all 3 games: Prime, GX and RTDL. Games which got remasters that weren't just a face-lift, but also got a slight artstyle refresh on the same token.
The comic art style would be a lot better for a remake of F-Zero X if you ask me, GX's art style is great as is. That said I think doing something more than a resolution bump is called for, GX has aged well for sure, but it could certainly use a visual overhaul like Xenoblade 1 got, or Prime supposedly has gotten. Especially considering it's gonna be the series first, and likely only installment on Switch. If we aren't getting a new F-Zero I at least want a game which visually looks like what a exclusive F-Zero on Switch would've looked like.
Anyway, I'm not a big racing game guy, but I hope if it exists, F-Zero succeeds to bring some variety to Nintendo's warchest. I might buy it just for that.
Basically just make a ton of scifi-tech shit up that the player has to memorize, like those Star Wars cutaways that show the insides of ships and speeders.
Edit: almost forgot this official Blue Falcon artwork exists:
I think F-Zero works best as a graphical showcase. F-Zero, X, GX, and even maximum Velocity are all technical marvels that push the hardware. Ports are great but I think a new game wouldn't make the impact it deserves unless it's on very powerful hardware. Personally I would love a collection of the existing games (minus GP Legend and Climax) and then save a new game for the Switch 2 assuming it's as powerful as people say. It would need to be impressive by modern console standards or don't do it imo
Nintendo hasn't ever thought like this and they have more than enough proof that they don't need to. even when F-Zero was impressing by then-contemporary standards, it meant fuck all for sales
Nintendo hasn't ever thought like this and they have more than enough proof that they don't need to. even when F-Zero was impressing by then-contemporary standards, it meant fuck all for sales
Disagree completely. That's what F-Zero is all about, it's the Mode 7 launch title.
edit: You're right that Nintendo hasn't focused on graphical power since the Gamecube failed to sell despite being the most powerful console. I would point out we also haven't seen an F-Zero since then likely for this very reason, lol
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
