Starfox relies on gimmicks, not gameplay

37 views
Skip to first unread message

Z z z 3623

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
to sell it, the rumble pack.


Wayne

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

Aol relies on gimmicks... *cough*youhavemail*cough*.

<snicker>

Wayne

Herman McClain

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

Z z z 3623 wrote:
>
> Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
> begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
> over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
> to sell it, the rumble pack.

Goddamn AOLERS!

Craig Bender

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

>Aol relies on gimmicks... *cough*youhavemail*cough*.

<snicker>

>Wayne
Haha! :)
Good point! :)

Nicholas Yarymowich

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

Z z z 3623 (zzz...@aol.com) writes:
> Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
> begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
> over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
> to sell it, the rumble pack.
>

How the hell would you know? It's not even out yet.
--
"This is sickening..... You sound like chapters from a self-help booklet"
-Kefka
"He walks like a DUCK"
-Lucca

Woodchuck Takeuchi

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

In article <19970320075...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,

Z z z 3623 <zzz...@aol.com> wrote:
>Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
>begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
>over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
>to sell it, the rumble pack.
>

Maybe N tried to hype with this "FX" gibberish, but nevertheless, the
game is a lot of fun to play. And having polygons still beats
sprites for a space simulator. I have high hopes for the 64 bit version.

--
E. Kenji Takeuchi ______/---------_______
____------- / -----_
__-- /enji /akeuchi------
-____________---/---------/-----________ wood...@brown.edu

Justin LaBroad

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

Nicholas Yarymowich wrote:
>
> Z z z 3623 (zzz...@aol.com) writes:
> > Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
> > begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
> > over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
> > to sell it, the rumble pack.
> >
>
> How the hell would you know? It's not even out yet.

Exactly. Besides Star Fox was a good game. And what the fuck is the
rumble pack? I hope you mean the force pak and no that is not the reason
that I would buy the game for.

c64

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

In article <19970320075...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,

zzz...@aol.com (Z z z 3623) wrote:

> Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
> begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
> over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
> to sell it, the rumble pack.

The original was a great game: not because of the FX chip, but because
of great play mechanics, a high replay value, and overall good design.
Any nimrod can tell you that polygons are better for a flight sim than
sprites.

BTW, how would you know how good Starfox64 is? Have you played it? I
think not.

c64

Gary Kenneth Kroll

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

Z z z 3623 (zzz...@aol.com) wrote:
: Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
: begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
: over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
: to sell it, the rumble pack.
:
He's right. Starfox 64 doesn't have anything going for it. I mean who cares
if they have a four player battle mode, great looking enemies, huge bosses,
two different vehicles, and great graphices overall. I've also heard that
the control is nicely done. But who cares about these gimmicks?

Gary Kroll

Flap on, Flap off...

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

On 20 Mar 1997, Z z z 3623 wrote:
> Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
> begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
> over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
> to sell it, the rumble pack.

Starfox was one of the best 16-bit shooters ever!!!! Blasphemer!!!!
Starfox had

A) The first taste of polygon graphics on a home system

B) GREAT shoot'em up action

C) Some of the BEST videogame music ever heard

D) 3 different routes each with their own unique challenges

I LOVE STARFOX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

==============================================================================
THE FLAPPER!!!!!!!
==============================================================================
Join the petition to bring more Ranma 1/2 Laserdiscs to the U.S.!
http://iczer1.usacomputers.net/~ranma/ranma-ld-petition.html ^_^
==============================================================================


Kane

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

Yeah, whatever. The jolt pack does not come with the game so that
is not a selling point. The FX chip was not a gimmick. The magazine
hype over the FX chip is out of Nintendo's hand so that is not a
gimmick either.

So what are you trying to say? Why don't you get some facts
straight before you post garbage onto the newsgroup.

Mark A Jensen

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

In article <5grv64$3qq$1...@bigboote.WPI.EDU>, ga...@WPI.EDU (Gary Kenneth
Kroll) wrote:

> Z z z 3623 (zzz...@aol.com) wrote:
> : Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
> : begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
> : over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
> : to sell it, the rumble pack.

> :
> He's right. Starfox 64 doesn't have anything going for it. I mean who cares
> if they have a four player battle mode, great looking enemies, huge bosses,
> two different vehicles, and great graphices overall. I've also heard that
> the control is nicely done. But who cares about these gimmicks?
>
> Gary Kroll

You forgot about the real-time "FMV", and the real voices from your alien
friends (not the SNES gibberish). I know gameplay takes precedence over
graphics, but if there ever is a game that makes you say WOW, it's StarFox
64. Not that I'm questioning the gameplay, the SNES version had some of
the best gameplay out of any SNES game. StarFox 64 should add to the
growing list of quality AAA titles out on the N64, and the N64 hasn't even
been out for a year yet!!

Mark

Gann0n

unread,
Mar 20, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/20/97
to

Bill Saez wrote:
>
> I'm also looking forward to the sound effects of the game.

a note: according to N64HQ(http://n64hq.com) SF64 will have over 600
voice samples(!!!) eeps.. kinda makes sence, since konami's soccer game
is supposed to have close to 500 VS's, and its on a 64mb cart(SF64 is
96mb)
>
> Another thing, the "rumble pack" isn't even shipping with the game (in the US)
> so I don't put much stock into the gimmick theory. Is anyone lese around here
> looking forward to this game?

again, check N64HQ, they say that the US SF64 *will* have a rumble pack
in package... as for waiting for it... i'll rent it first

note: im not saying that N64HQ is right, but they (IMHO) have a better
track record then most other sites

Gann0n

========================================================================
Scoundrel for hire
0.Virginity Cured 0.Kings ransomed
0.Castles plundered 0.Ugly trolls defended
0.No RiffRaff too small 0.No fee too big
========================================================================
Stick em' up punks its the fun lovin criminal
========================================================================
>
> Bill
>

Danny Kusters

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

In article <19970320075...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,

zzz...@aol.com (Z z z 3623) wrote:
>Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
>begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
>over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
>to sell it, the rumble pack.
>
Had your head up your ass all the time? Starfox has a selling point
a whole lot better: Miyamoto..

Grtx, Dan


Bill Saez

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

>In article <19970320075...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
> zzz...@aol.com (Z z z 3623) wrote:
>>Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
>>begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
>>over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
>>to sell it, the rumble pack.
>>

StarFox may not be the most celebrated SNES title, but it did have its
following and it certainly wasn't a horrible game. At the time of its release
there was nothing else like it on a home console. As someone who enjoys
playing space flight sims on a PC I look forward to Star Fox on my N64, it's
like a quick fix when I want to hurry up and play a sim.

I'm also looking forward to the sound effects of the game. Anyone out there
play the original Star Fox on a surround system? It sounds great, you can
actually place where another ship is coming from by the sound location.

Another thing, the "rumble pack" isn't even shipping with the game (in the US)
so I don't put much stock into the gimmick theory. Is anyone lese around here
looking forward to this game?

Bill

(Mail to saez.1 @ osu.edu --> feeble attempt at avoiding spam)

Senders of unsolicited commercial e-mail will be
subject to a $100 proofreading fee; mailing constitutes acceptance of
these terms.

Z z z 3623

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

In article <5gsra6$k...@hera.fw.cuci.nl>, dan...@cuci.nl (Danny Kusters)
writes:

>Had your head up your ass all the time? Starfox has a selling point
>a whole lot better: Miyamoto..
>
>Grtx, Dan
>
>

It looks like your head is stuck up your ass, not mine. If you stuck it
out sometime, you find out that Starfox was developed by Argonaut, not
Miyamoto.

Sad But True
- Metallica

Yehiel Livnat

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

In article <5gst4i$phh$1...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
sae...@remove.osu.edu (Bill Saez) wrote:

actually it will be packed in the US version with starfox for under 70
dollars.

iNtRo

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

I had intended to buy StarFox 64 regardless of any "Rumble Pack" But I
must say the cool little device sure makes me want it alot more... It
adds even more to an already awesome game...

On Thu, 20 Mar 1997 17:17:03 -0500, Justin LaBroad
<arch...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>Nicholas Yarymowich wrote:


>>
>> Z z z 3623 (zzz...@aol.com) writes:
>> > Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
>> > begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
>> > over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
>> > to sell it, the rumble pack.
>> >
>>

TWK - ANTHROX!

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

Z z z 3623 wrote:
>
> Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
> begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
> over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
> to sell it, the rumble pack.


it wasn't so great but sold more than many other SNES games. Even a 2
minute preview on a video tape changed my mind about the game and I
didn't even care much for the SNES version.

N64 rules !! :)
--
______________________________________________________________________
twk/atx http://www.anthrox.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TEL/FAX: (718)854-5877 N64 - PSX - SS - IMPORT - EXPORT
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bill Saez

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to
>> zzz...@aol.com (Z z z 3623) wrote:
>>>Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
>>>begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
>>>over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
>>>to sell it, the rumble pack.
>>>
>
>StarFox may not be the most celebrated SNES title, but it did have its
>following and it certainly wasn't a horrible game. At the time of its release
>there was nothing else like it on a home console. As someone who enjoys
>playing space flight sims on a PC I look forward to Star Fox on my N64, it's
>like a quick fix when I want to hurry up and play a sim.
>
>I'm also looking forward to the sound effects of the game. Anyone out there
>play the original Star Fox on a surround system? It sounds great, you can
>actually place where another ship is coming from by the sound location.
>
>Another thing, the "rumble pack" isn't even shipping with the game (in the US)
>so I don't put much stock into the gimmick theory. Is anyone lese around here
>looking forward to this game?

OK, I want to be the first to correct myself (and many others who responded to
this thread). I just went to N64hq and found out that the US version of
StarFox 64 will be shipping with the Rumble Pak- that is the official name
for what was previously known as the Force Pak. I still stand by what I said,
though: I think that the game will sell by its merit alone, not that of the
Rumble Pak...

Kane

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

From what I understand, Starfox 64 is being done entirely by NOJ
and I am sure Miyamoto is involved. Can anyone confirm this?

If this is true then you head is back in your ass.

zzz...@aol.com (Z z z 3623) wrote:

Herman McClain

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

Z z z 3623 wrote:
>
> In article <5gsra6$k...@hera.fw.cuci.nl>, dan...@cuci.nl (Danny Kusters)
> writes:
>
> >Had your head up your ass all the time? Starfox has a selling point
> >a whole lot better: Miyamoto..
> >
> >Grtx, Dan
> >
> >
>
> It looks like your head is stuck up your ass, not mine. If you stuck it
> out sometime, you find out that Starfox was developed by Argonaut, not
> Miyamoto.
>
> Sad But True
> - Metallica

Starfox on SNES was made in collaboration of Argonaut
and Shigeru Miyamoto, asshole!

Craig Majaski

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

Actually, StarFox 64 is being done by Miyamato...there's countless magazine
articles, websites, etc. that have already stated this fact. There's been
interviews with him concerning StarFox 64.
--
Later,

Craig Majaski

"I'll let you taste my sweet banana. It's super jumbo, and very delicious.
If that is not a reason to live, Gongos does not know what is."
----Gongos----Dragon Force----Saturn

Visit some awesome sites by following the links below!!!

Associate Publisher: Online Gaming Review
http://console.ogr.com

Writer: WorldVillage
http://www.worldvillage.com

e-mail: crma...@vax1.bemidji.msus.edu

Above message does not necessarily reflect the views of OGR or
WorldVillage.

Z z z 3623 <zzz...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19970321054...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...

Craig Majaski

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

Actually, according to Nintendo's site, they just updated an article on
StarFox 64 and it is scheduled to come out with the "Rumble
Pack"...previously known as the jolt pack. There's some new information
about the voices (over 600 different blurbs), new screenshots, and some
more info on Nintendo's site!

--
Later,

Craig Majaski

"I'll let you taste my sweet banana. It's super jumbo, and very delicious.
If that is not a reason to live, Gongos does not know what is."
----Gongos----Dragon Force----Saturn

Visit some awesome sites by following the links below!!!

Associate Publisher: Online Gaming Review
http://console.ogr.com

Writer: WorldVillage
http://www.worldvillage.com

e-mail: crma...@vax1.bemidji.msus.edu

Above message does not necessarily reflect the views of OGR or
WorldVillage.

Kane <ka...@nostromo.com> wrote in article
<5gt3uq$1...@camel0.mindspring.com>...


> Yeah, whatever. The jolt pack does not come with the game so that
> is not a selling point. The FX chip was not a gimmick. The magazine
> hype over the FX chip is out of Nintendo's hand so that is not a
> gimmick either.
>
> So what are you trying to say? Why don't you get some facts
> straight before you post garbage onto the newsgroup.
>
>

> zzz...@aol.com (Z z z 3623) wrote:
>

Josh Boudreau

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

Kane wrote:
>
> Yeah, whatever. The jolt pack does not come with the game so that
> is not a selling point. The FX chip was not a gimmick. The magazine
> hype over the FX chip is out of Nintendo's hand so that is not a
> gimmick either.
>
> So what are you trying to say? Why don't you get some facts
> straight before you post garbage onto the newsgroup.
>
> zzz...@aol.com (Z z z 3623) wrote:
>
> >Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to
> >begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
> >over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
> >to sell it, the rumble pack.
I hate to say it but he's right it does come with a rumble pack(jolt
pack).

Roy Batty

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

The rumble pack really seems gimmicky IMHO. And the fact
that Nintendo is putting it as a packin with Starfox64 means that
they are using it as a selling point to a certain degree.

As far as gameplay goes, Starfox was ok and the same would
probably be true with Starfox64. So it needs a gimmick to boost
its sales.


rbatty

"Judge not lest ye be judged yourself"


c64

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

In article <19970321054...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,

zzz...@aol.com (Z z z 3623) wrote:

> In article <5gsra6$k...@hera.fw.cuci.nl>, dan...@cuci.nl (Danny Kusters)
> writes:
>
> >Had your head up your ass all the time? Starfox has a selling point
> >a whole lot better: Miyamoto..
> >
> >Grtx, Dan
> >
> >
>
> It looks like your head is stuck up your ass, not mine. If you stuck it
> out sometime, you find out that Starfox was developed by Argonaut, not
> Miyamoto.
>
> Sad But True
> - Metallica

And if you read the credits at the end, you would find that Miyamoto's
name is in them. Explain this...if Miyamoto didn't help develop the game,
why is his name there?

c64

Vi On

unread,
Mar 21, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/21/97
to

imho, The original Starfox wasn't a really that great. It was
fun for a while, but that was it. Starfox was hyped alot, and had
alot of advertisment everywhere. Maybe I just don't like this type
of flying game but I'm sure there are many people who like Starfox.
I won't be buying Starfox64 but I'm sure gonna rent it when it comes out.
btw, if you didn't know, the force pak is now called Rumble pak.

-vi

Justin LaBroad (arch...@worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: Nicholas Yarymowich wrote:
: >
: > Z z z 3623 (zzz...@aol.com) writes:

: > > Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great to


: > > begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags generated
: > > over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on another gimmick
: > > to sell it, the rumble pack.

: > >
: >
: > How the hell would you know? It's not even out yet.

Hanson

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

rba...@mindpring.com (Roy Batty) wrote:

>The rumble pack really seems gimmicky IMHO. And the fact
>that Nintendo is putting it as a packin with Starfox64 means that
>they are using it as a selling point to a certain degree.

It's a gimmick, but it seems like a fun one. But I don't think people are going
to rush out to buy Starfox 64 just because of the Rumble Pak -- they want to see
the return of Fox McCloud or experience another Miyamoto game. It's a nice
marketing thing, and a small sign that Nintendo appreciates it's consumers, but
it's not the only hook nor is it a big one.

>As far as gameplay goes, Starfox was ok and the same would
>probably be true with Starfox64. So it needs a gimmick to boost
>its sales.

I got into Starfox late in the game and was disappointed by the bland visuals
but mostly by the sludgy control. The Arwing had pokey response and I felt
little sense of speed. What sells Starfox to me is the promise of beautiful
textures, tons of speech, and excellent control. Multi-player dogfighting is
another plus. The Rumble Pak is quite simply the least of the features. Even
if it weren't being packed-in, I'm sure the game would sell out anyway. To call
it a gimmick to boost sales is inaccurate.

Hanson
"Why, when I find out who you are, I'm gonna shove a sausage
down your throat and stick starving dogs in your butt!"
- Moe the Bartender

Z z z 3623

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

You Starfox "fans" are even dumber than I thought.

If any of you followed the development of Starfox you would know that
Argonaut(makers of Star Glider) developed the game, Miyamoto's
contribution was adding in the animals. Argonaut also developed the FX
chip which Nintendo doesn't mention too often.

Hey, ka...@nostromo.com (Kane), and other various idiots, good luck finding
a "jolt pack".

Many of you, like ka...@nostromo.com (Kane), also said that Nintendo didn't
use the FX chip to sell the game, I guess you all forgot the Starfox
commercial which said:
"Now you're playing with power, FX power"

The whole selling point of Starfox was centered around the FX chip, not
gameplay.

If Starfox was such a great game why wasn't Starfox 2 release? You all
know the reason why. Nintendo shelved it because the FX was old news,
they knew there was nothing else going for it that would've sold the game.
If there was any gameplay to Starfox, Nintendo would've been confident
enough to release Starfox 2 based on the gameplay but instead it was
canned because the FX graphics were old.

Galina Bokser

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

In <5gvof3$7...@camel2.mindspring.com> rba...@mindpring.com (Roy Batty)
writes:
>
>The rumble pack really seems gimmicky IMHO. And the fact
>that Nintendo is putting it as a packin with Starfox64 means that
>they are using it as a selling point to a certain degree.
>
>As far as gameplay goes, Starfox was ok and the same would
>probably be true with Starfox64. So it needs a gimmick to boost
>its sales.
>
>
>rbatty
>
>"Judge not lest ye be judged yourself"
>
its not coming with the rumble pack in the US.

Herman McClain

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

Roy Batty wrote:
>
> The rumble pack really seems gimmicky IMHO. And the fact
> that Nintendo is putting it as a packin with Starfox64 means that
> they are using it as a selling point to a certain degree.
>
> As far as gameplay goes, Starfox was ok and the same would
> probably be true with Starfox64. So it needs a gimmick to boost
> its sales.
>
> rbatty
>
> "Judge not lest ye be judged yourself"

Why are you people so content finding excuses to put down
yet another quality N64 game? There's nothing gimmicky about the
Rumble or Force Pak. This *jolt* concept has been done in the
arcades (i.e. Namco's StarBlade, Sega's Alien 3: The Gun,
Gunblade NY, Daytona USA, Out Run, etc ). No one complained
about those games. Nintendo simply brought this concept home --
WHAT THE FUCK WRONG WITH THAT?!

Herman McClain

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

Vi On wrote:
>
> imho, The original Starfox wasn't really that great. It was

> fun for a while, but that was it. Starfox was hyped alot, and had
> alot of advertisment everywhere.

This line goes very well with Sony ;)

> Maybe I just don't like this type of flying game but
> I'm sure there are many people who like Starfox.

No duh...

> I won't be buying Starfox64 but I'm sure gonna rent
> it when it comes out.

You're so brave ;)

> btw, if you didn't know, the
> force pak is now called Rumble pak.

No shit? ;)

> -vi

Herman McClain

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

Z z z 3623 wrote:
>
> You Starfox "fans" are even dumber than I thought.

Man, you need to check yourself!

> If any of you followed the development of Starfox you would know that
> Argonaut(makers of Star Glider) developed the game, Miyamoto's
> contribution was adding in the animals.

You make it seem Miyamoto and Co. had very little to offer.
Not only were the animals designed by Miyamoto and Co. but
also the soundtrack, voices, ships, enemies, bosses, etc.
As far as I'm concerned, Star Glider was a very different
game before it was Nintendized.

> Argonaut also developed the FX Chip which Nintendo

> doesn't mention too often.

No shit, Sherlock! Though, you're exaggerating that Nintendo
is taking full credit for the FX Chip. This could only be true
to people who don't read the mags. As I recall, Nintendo had
a two-page advertisment flunting the technologies used for
certain Super NES games and the contributions of Silicon Graphics,
RARE Ltd's ACM technology and Argonaut's FX Chip. Even in the
Nintendo Media kits from trade conventions (i.e. CES, E3, etc ) --
are PROUD to mention these contributors! Hell, Nintendo purchased
20% of RARE Ltd.!

> Hey, ka...@nostromo.com (Kane), and other various idiots,
> good luck finding a "jolt pack".

That's been solved already, sherlock ;)

> Many of you, like ka...@nostromo.com (Kane), also said that
> Nintendo didn't use the FX chip to sell the game, I guess
> you all forgot the Starfox commercial which said:
> "Now you're playing with power, FX power"

That's stupid -- ofcourse Nintendo used the FX Chip to sell
the game. And you wanna know something? The FX Chip was a
legitimate product. Without it -- StarFox would've ended
up looking like Mega Drive's Star Cruiser ;)


> The whole selling point of Starfox was centered around
> the FX chip, not gameplay.

The same can be said ALL high-profiled games. Just think --
Final Fantasy 7. Square is using the 3 CDs, CG cut-scenes, and
pre-rendered backdrops to sell their game!

> If Starfox was such a great game why wasn't Starfox 2 released?


> You all know the reason why. Nintendo shelved it because the
> FX was old news, they knew there was nothing else going for it
> that would've sold the game.

Would you believe, I was fortunate to play the 50% Starfox 2
demo at the Winter CES '95 in Vegas ( btw, anyone who wants
a rough VHS copy of Starfox 2 footage, e-mail me ).
I thought it KICKED ASS! As matter of fact, someone tried to
STEAL one of the floor demos at the exhibition! Guess what
happened to him...Anyways, why wasn't it released?
Simple -- NINTENDO DIDN'T FEEL IT WAS GOOD ENOUGH! Ofcourse, I
was pissed. But now, the wait is almost over. Some of the features
of Starfox 64 are from the *shelved* SNES version (i.e. land
attacks and multi-player flying ). The rest is all-new due to
the capabilities of N64!

Marc Baime

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

In article <19970320075...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, From
zzz...@aol.com (Z z z 3623), the following was written:

> Don't expect too much from Starfox 64, the original was not that great
> to begin with. Starfox's only selling point was the hype the mags
> generated over the FX chip. It looks like Starfox 64 is relying on
> another gimmick to sell it, the rumble pack.

Uh...yeah..right. And I'm supposed to believe this nonsense from a guy
with a name like zzz...@aol.com. I expect Starfox to be great as was
the original.

Regards...Marc Baime

!^NavFont02F01D00008IH3DHHD166DC

--
Marc Baime mba...@gte.net
03/22/97 09:28
---------

Woodchuck Takeuchi

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

In article <5gvof3$7...@camel2.mindspring.com>,

Roy Batty <rba...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>The rumble pack really seems gimmicky IMHO. And the fact

You mean it's just another R.O.B./PowerPad?

>that Nintendo is putting it as a packin with Starfox64 means that
>they are using it as a selling point to a certain degree.
>
>As far as gameplay goes, Starfox was ok and the same would
>probably be true with Starfox64. So it needs a gimmick to boost
>its sales.
>
>
>rbatty
>
>"Judge not lest ye be judged yourself"
>


--
E. Kenji Takeuchi ______/---------_______
____------- / -----_
__-- /enji /akeuchi------
-____________---/---------/-----________ wood...@brown.edu

Roy Batty

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

The game would definitely sell out in the US because there is a
shortage of games and practically any game would sell out at
this point. When I said boost sales, I was talking about Japan.
Everyone knows that NIntendo needs alot of help there.

rbatty

"Judge not lest ye be judged yourself"

Roy Batty

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

I am not putting down Starfox64. All I am saying is that the
Rumble pack is gimmicky. I would've gotten the game
without.

Herman McClain <sa...@juno.com> wrote:

>Roy Batty wrote:
>>
>> The rumble pack really seems gimmicky IMHO. And the fact

>> that Nintendo is putting it as a packin with Starfox64 means that
>> they are using it as a selling point to a certain degree.
>>
>> As far as gameplay goes, Starfox was ok and the same would
>> probably be true with Starfox64. So it needs a gimmick to boost
>> its sales.
>>

>> rbatty
>>
>> "Judge not lest ye be judged yourself"

>Why are you people so content finding excuses to put down

Z z z 3623

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

In article <5gvveg$n...@sjx-ixn4.ix.netcom.com>,
ima...@ix.netcom.com(Galina Bokser ) writes:

>its not coming with the rumble pack in the US.

According to Nintendo, its currently part of the package.


Kane

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

zzz...@aol.com (Z z z 3623) wrote:

>If any of you followed the development of Starfox you would know that
>Argonaut(makers of Star Glider) developed the game, Miyamoto's

>contribution was adding in the animals. Argonaut also developed the FX
>chip which Nintendo doesn't mention too often.

Well I am not sure about Starfox, but I believe Starfox64 is done
entirely by NOJ. So Miyamoto can be used as a selling point
now!

>Hey, ka...@nostromo.com (Kane), and other various idiots, good luck finding
>a "jolt pack".

Ok, I was wrong about the "jolt" pack. Damn Nintendo for making such
abrupt changes and making me into an idiot. :)

>Many of you, like ka...@nostromo.com (Kane), also said that Nintendo didn't
>use the FX chip to sell the game, I guess you all forgot the Starfox
>commercial which said:
>"Now you're playing with power, FX power"

>The whole selling point of Starfox was centered around the FX chip, not
>gameplay.

I really don't remember the commercials. All I know is that I bought
Starfox because I really liked the game when I first tried it out. I
did not buy it because of the FX chip hype. It could've had the
"Dumbass chip" for all I cared and I still woud've bought the game.

>If Starfox was such a great game why wasn't Starfox 2 release? You all


>know the reason why. Nintendo shelved it because the FX was old news,
>they knew there was nothing else going for it that would've sold the game.

> If there was any gameplay to Starfox, Nintendo would've been confident
>enough to release Starfox 2 based on the gameplay but instead it was
>canned because the FX graphics were old.

I was dying to get Starfox2 and was disappointed when it was shelved.
I think it might have sold well if it was released. It's too bad
we'll never know.

>"Sad But True" - Metallica

Why are you listening to band that sold out!?!?


Z z z 3623

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

In article <3333D4...@juno.com>, Herman McClain <sa...@juno.com>
writes:

>Why are you people so content finding excuses to put down
>yet another quality N64 game? There's nothing gimmicky about the
>Rumble or Force Pak. This *jolt* concept has been done in the
>arcades (i.e. Namco's StarBlade, Sega's Alien 3: The Gun,
>Gunblade NY, Daytona USA, Out Run, etc ). No one complained
>about those games. Nintendo simply brought this concept home --
>WHAT THE FUCK WRONG WITH THAT?!

It is wrong when a company uses a gimmick to generate interest and to sell
a game instead of relying on the gameplay. The first Starfox was centered
around the FX chip. The cancellation of Starfox 2 proves my point. The
FX chip was old news so it was cancelled because they knew it wouldn't
have sold based on the poor gameplay. They used the time to devise
something new to sell Starfox64 and it is called the rumble pack.


Z z z 3623

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

In article <5h11mn$a...@camel4.mindspring.com>, ka...@nostromo.com (Kane)
writes:

>Well I am not sure about Starfox, but I believe Starfox64 is done
>entirely by NOJ. So Miyamoto can be used as a selling point
>now!
>

Yeah, I can see the commercials now, "Starfox 64 only for N64 by Miyamoto"
Get real, gamplayers in the US don't care about developers to the extent
that Japan does. In fact, you're one of the idiots that didn't even know
Starfox was developed by Argonaut.

>
>Ok, I was wrong about the "jolt" pack. Damn Nintendo for making such
>abrupt changes and making me into an idiot. :)
>

You've been wrong about everything so far, yet you continue to embarass
yourself.

>I really don't remember the commercials. All I know is that I bought
>Starfox because I really liked the game when I first tried it out. I
>did not buy it because of the FX chip hype. It could've had the
>"Dumbass chip" for all I cared and I still woud've bought the game.
>

It's pretty obvious you don't remember the commercials because your head
was stuck up your ass.

>
>I was dying to get Starfox2 and was disappointed when it was shelved.
>I think it might have sold well if it was released. It's too bad
>we'll never know.
>

So you're saying that Nintendo spent their time developing Starfox 2 and
then cancelled it even though it would've sold. Are you really that
stupid? Nintendo knows more than any of us how well Starfox sells. They
knew the FX hype was over and the poor gameplay wouldn't have sold Starfox
2.

Hey Kane, are you hunting Aliens aboard the Nostromo?

Gabe White

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

Z z z 3623 (zzz...@aol.com) wrote:
: You Starfox "fans" are even dumber than I thought.

Whatever. Argue all you like, buddy. Scream until your face turns blue.

You can't change the (cold, hard) fact that for me, and many others, Star
Fox was a great game. Maybe you didn't like it. So? I did.

Gabe

--
"If I told you where to look, but failed to tell you what to find... If I
led you down a road, that had a twisted center line... Or if I fed your dark
sensibility... Put the blame on me."
-The Waiting (put the blame on me)

Herman McClain

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

Z z z 3623 wrote:
>
> In article <3333D4...@juno.com>, Herman McClain <sa...@juno.com>
> writes:
>
> >Why are you people so content finding excuses to put down
> >yet another quality N64 game? There's nothing gimmicky about the
> >Rumble or Force Pak. This *jolt* concept has been done in the
> >arcades (i.e. Namco's StarBlade, Sega's Alien 3: The Gun,
> >Gunblade NY, Daytona USA, Out Run, etc ). No one complained
> >about those games. Nintendo simply brought this concept home --
> >WHAT THE FUCK WRONG WITH THAT?!
>
> It is wrong when a company uses a gimmick to generate
> interest and to sell a game instead of relying on the
> gameplay.

Man we can get into to the world of gimmicks if you want --
Polygon fighters, FMV, etc. Lemme know ;)

> The first Starfox was centered around the FX chip. The
> cancellation of Starfox 2 proves my point.

No, it does not prove your point! Starfox 2 was cancelled
cause Nintendo Co. Ltd didn't feel it was such a leap over the
original -- though I thought it was. Yoshi's Island almost
suffered the same. Here's a quote from Ken Lobb ( Nintendo's
Development and Evaluation manager ) in the Sept '96 "Intelligent
Gamer":

"I'm talking about six to eight games we spent large quantities
of money and time on and we just came to the point where we said,
"This game is not good enough for us, let's cut our loses." And
I'm not talking about little amounts of money either. Again, it's
willingness to say, this is our level of acceptance, and it's very
high. If a game is not there, it's a million dollars down the drain.
So what? It's our face that we're talking about. It's the quality
of the Nintendo label that really matters."

> The FX chip was old news so it was cancelled because they
> knew it wouldn't have sold based on the poor gameplay.

The gameplay was fine -- you just lack the skills! The FX Chip
continued to be a phenomena and Nintendo went on to release
Stunt Race FX and Yoshi's Island ( both which were based on the
newer FX2 Chip ).

> They used the time to device something new to sell Starfox64

> and it is called the rumble pack.

Z Z Z -- you're so stupid! WAKE UP! The Rumble Pak was not
made just for Starfox 64 but for many other games currently
being developed (i.e. BlastCorps ).

Web-Slinger

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

This flamebait is so blatent that anyone responding is a twit.
Err, whoops.

--

Web-Slinger

c64

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

In article <3333D4...@juno.com>, sa...@juno.com wrote:

> Roy Batty wrote:
> >
> > The rumble pack really seems gimmicky IMHO. And the fact
> > that Nintendo is putting it as a packin with Starfox64 means that
> > they are using it as a selling point to a certain degree.
> >
> > As far as gameplay goes, Starfox was ok and the same would
> > probably be true with Starfox64. So it needs a gimmick to boost
> > its sales.
> >
> > rbatty
> >
> > "Judge not lest ye be judged yourself"
>

> Why are you people so content finding excuses to put down
> yet another quality N64 game? There's nothing gimmicky about the
> Rumble or Force Pak. This *jolt* concept has been done in the
> arcades (i.e. Namco's StarBlade, Sega's Alien 3: The Gun,
> Gunblade NY, Daytona USA, Out Run, etc ). No one complained
> about those games. Nintendo simply brought this concept home --
> WHAT THE FUCK WRONG WITH THAT?!

Well said.
I guess it should be mentioned that Sony's analog controller will feature
force-feedback, too.

c64

Kane

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

zzz...@aol.com (Z z z 3623) wrote:

>In article <5h11mn$a...@camel4.mindspring.com>, ka...@nostromo.com (Kane)
>writes:

>Yeah, I can see the commercials now, "Starfox 64 only for N64 by Miyamoto"


>Get real, gamplayers in the US don't care about developers to the extent
>that Japan does. In fact, you're one of the idiots that didn't even know
>Starfox was developed by Argonaut.

Yeah you are the real idiot since you thought Starfox64 was developed
by Argonaut. Check NG #28. It says that Starfox64 is developed by
NCL's development team under close supervision by Miyamoto.
And that is selling point for real gamers who care.

>You've been wrong about everything so far, yet you continue to embarass
>yourself.

Yeah at least I admit it. Your "Holier Than Thou" attitude just makes
you look insecure and bitter.

BTW, note the "Holier Than Thou" reference to the Metallica song.
Of course you should know cause you listen to the Black Album which
is a piece of shit.

>It's pretty obvious you don't remember the commercials because your head
>was stuck up your ass.

Are you getting sick of seeing your own butt? THEN GET YOUR HEAD
OUT OF YOUR ASS!

>So you're saying that Nintendo spent their time developing Starfox 2 and
>then cancelled it even though it would've sold. Are you really that
>stupid? Nintendo knows more than any of us how well Starfox sells. They
>knew the FX hype was over and the poor gameplay wouldn't have sold Starfox
>2.

As much as I respect Nintendo, they do not possess some kind of power
that can predict the market. Look what happened to the Virtual Boy.
Maybe they didn't release Starfox 2 because it wasn't a major jump
from the first game. Maybe they committted themselves to shelve it
and revamp it for the N64. And maybe if they released Starfox2, it
might have had respectable sales.

>Hey Kane, are you hunting Aliens aboard the Nostromo?

Oh boy. Kane was the first to die in Alien so he never hunted the
Alien. Note that I said Alien not Aliens. There was just one being
hunted down. Dumbass. Is your head still in there?

>"Sad But True" - Metallica

Wow, it is sad but true that your are listening to a piece of shit
album. The Black Album! HAHAHAHA! This is too much.


Roy Batty

unread,
Mar 22, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/22/97
to

I just read at n64hq.com that Starfox64 will only come with
the Rumble pack. It will not be available separately. If this
does not smell of a gimmick, then I don't know what does.

rbatty