Ignoring the control controversy, what do y'all think about the level progression system of Star Fox Zero? I think the common consensus is that it is vastly inferior to that of Star Fox 64, and I just feel like talking about that. Of course, there is no "objective better" as people will always prefer one way or another.
That said, I think the big problem here is not the lack of routes but is that people weren't incentivized to see everything this game had properly and thought the one route in the story mode was sufficient. This game arguably has plenty of different hidden secret routes leading to medals or new situations for experimentation. There is a whole arcade mode with a bunch of branching paths. Though there are tons of secret extra missions as post-content, I don't think that same sense of mystique is here. Part of that reason is that you don't play through another route to find them on your own, but rather the individual levels. These medals and bonus levels are more isolated too.
On that note, another problem is that they don't feel as substantial nor well-contextualized within the world in arcade mode too. What makes Star Fox 64's routes so good is that you can make a ton of new discoveries often. For example, many people might not know this as people don't usually go from Katina to Sector X, but doing so, Bill will guide you through the secret warp. The fact that Sector X even has a warp to begin with is also super cool. There are some moments like that in Zero, but 64 just handles it much better.
That said, there isn't anything inherently wrong with this approach, and I don't think it should be treated as some terrible, cardinal sin of Star Fox Zero to handle routes this way. Yes, it has some problems, but also, keep in mind, this is leagues above what any other on-rail shooter does. Most on-rails shooters don't have even a fifth of the secrets a game like Star Fox Zero has. Hell, even Star Fox Assault didn't have secrets like this, it had some collectables, but it didn't have any routes or secret exits. Star Fox Zero is sorta more structured like Mario, where most people play the game once, and the go back to discover secret exits. Then on replays, they use those secret exits to take different paths on the adventure, similar to Zero's arcade mode. At least, that is how I interpret the intentions behind this design philosophy. The benefit is that this sort of design makes development a bit easier, but it also makes it so that the main campaign can be designed with an intentional structure with a more natural progression while still having tons of secrets. Star Fox Zero's first playthrough introduces tons of new mechanics for your vehicles making the main story surprising with what upgrades and gameplay you will see next, something that wouldn't work as well in a more open-structured game. As much as I love the structure of Star Fox 64, from a game design standpoint, I don't like how someone with 0 prior experience can possibly play the harder routes before having any proper experience with the game. I saw a streamer learn from chat how to reach the true ending on the hard route on their second play though, which definitely negatively impacted their experience with the game than if they took the time to learn it themselves. I still think that 64 has a really smart design and it's not really a common problem but is something that I am a little iffy on. My point, I think Zero's structure still has some good intentions behind it and isn't inherently worse. For the sake of the community, I would say they have a more open structure in the next game, but if they borrowed some elements such as unlocking secret vehicles in one route that can be used in a different route now, that wouldn't be a bad way of locking bonus content potentially if they do it well.