Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

@link3710 "Revised movesets, changes to edgeguarding, speeded up gameplay, harsher gravity, adjustments to damage and much more made it so that 4 and Brawl play completely differently,"

That commentary right there kind of is my point. The SFII versus SFII HF kind of thing. To core FG fans that's a fundamentally different thing. To everyone else it's the same thing. I'm guessing you're a core FG fan....the use of the phrase "edgeguarding" doesn't even exist to the mass market buying Smash So to you it may well be different (though I'm guessing even for you it won't be ), but it's the graphics, visual, level design, etc difference that will make it different to the masses.

Again (and contrary to @IceClimbers) I'm not among those complaining about if the game is a port or not. My point is if it is, as it seems likely to be, it makes for an odd choice for E3. I've expected the Smash port for a long time, that's fine. But highlighting it as "the big game" at E3 if it really is just a doctored port just seems ill conceived. Notice Splatoon 2 was not "the big game" for last E3 even though it was a port (we won't go into the "is Splatoon 2 a port" thing....I was into the hardcore Splatoon scene in the same way that I'm assuming you are with Smash...that was a raging debate there. At first I defended it as not a port, and as more time went on, I finally had to concede...yeah it was a port. It was Splatoon 1 Deluxe, marketing-enhanced Edition.) Mario Odyssey was the big game. This time they could pick Fire Emblem, Yoshi, the rumored Starfox racer. A "new" smash that's just a deluxe port of old smash doesn't make for a stunning E3 outside the core smash echo chamber that collects on Nintendo fan sites. Cool addition to the Switch for sure! E3 highlight, not really. E3 should be about showcasing new things we know little about, or haven't seen a lot. Ports are a side mention for the list of games in the stream. We haven't seen much FE, or Yoshi, or the new racer if it exists, or many other things they may or may not bring. We know Smash 4 already. Watching them promote the thing they already promoted in 2014 isn't really interesting as an E3 show.

@Ryu_Niiyama I think it's an extension of people being frustrated with WiiU.....they're not wrong. Nintendo released the machine, people bought the machine, people bought games for it, then despite having it fail and be discontinued and loosely supported people threw their trust at Switch anyway.....and in year 2 are being rewarded with a year light on new releases, few to no major games, and all the WiiU games brought forward, but the insulting part is all of them lightly enhanced and presented as all new as though WiiU never existed. If they just said "hey we're porting last gen games since we discontinued the hardware" I dont' think anyone cares. But instead they pretend the old version never existed, and that's a legit slap in the face to WiiU + Switch early adopters. A few of them, people don't mind. A lot of them, people don't mind if it's mixed with new content. But to be fair to the complainers 2018 does feel like a year where they're ignoring Switch as its own platform and just using it as a sales tool for their nearly wasted WiiU investments. I bought an XBox for crying out loud.....that's kind of an indication Nintendo dropped the ball this year

I don't mind the ports happening, but the tone deaf presentation of them frustrates as an echo of WiiU era Nintendo on more than one level. And I think people believed Nintendo E3 would kind of reboot the momentum with something fresh, and they tell us instead it will focus on what is likely to be a deluxe WIiU port from 4 years ago. Nintendo. Nintendo never changes.....

I'm technically grateful. I've found so much PS/XB stuff on cheap digital sales I've hoarded I'll NEVER clear my backlog. I don't need to be enticed by MORE $60 games! I already have Ys on the way for Switch. I'm hopeless.

Besides, don't I remember a certain someone saying you don't believe in ports and people just just buy the darned console it was meant for?

@JaxonH Well where are you getting this information saying that it IS a completely new game?

I'm not interested in starting any arguments but all we have seen are some Inklings, the burning Smash logo and some silhouettes. We don't know anything more than that and we won't know anything else until E3. All we have is speculation until then.

@IceClimbers
Hahahahaha true.

@Ryu_Niiyama
I guess it's because people are at this point grasping at straw to complain about Nintendo. Think about it, there aren't many things you can complain about the Switch. It is decently powerful compared to the competition, has third party support and full first party support being both handheld and home console, it is not based on a gimmick and it has two of the greatest games of all time in its first year. People should love the Switch but they can't and must therefore complain about the most minute things.

@NEStalgia A Smash port would still be much bigger than any of those new games, that's just how big Smash is.

@JaxonH That would be a very nice surprise. I still do not expect that to be the case. Though that depends on your definition of port. MK8D, DKCTF, Hyrule Warriors, Splatoon 2 (yes, I went there), are ports. Splatoon 2 was further enhanced post release to the point it's safely "Splatoon 1.5" more than a straight port, but it's not a 2.0. I don't foresee Smash being a genuine Smash 5 no matter what they title it. We'll see that on the next console. I could be wrong. IT would be nice to be wrong, it would be cool if it were seriously a new experience. But I'm not holding my breath. Going by Nintendos' turnaround times, prior releases, etc, I think an all new experience is unlikey. If you're holding your breath hoping for it, just brace for some disappointment. Of course if you can convince yourself a game with the same maps and characters but some deluxe edition shenanigans is a true Smash 5, you'll be fine If you're right and I'm wrong I'll be thrilled!

@Ryu_Niiyama Just to clarify btw, I meant 1st party output above...Nintendo as a publisher. The console is fine with 3rd party releases, but most of that comes from outside their E3 show. Octopath should really be getting a bigger billing than a Smash port, IMO. It's not Nintendo published, of course, and that's the only reason.

@NEStalgia Going by that logic, Smash 4 isn't a true 4th game either. It's an enhanced HD remaster of Brawl.

@NEStalgia Sorry, but Splatoon 2 is in no way, shape, or form a port. It has new stages, new weapons, new characters, new modes, an entirely different single-player campaign, new music, etc. etc.

@Grumblevolcano Bigger than Fire Emblem and a Yoshi game, yeah, I agree. Those aren't strong franchises. It's historically sold well, primarily as a party game, and with the people missing it on WiiU or only playing it on 3DS, it's believable it will sell well again. That's also another reason to believe it's an enhanced port. Though I think the boon that was Wii skews people's perceptions of its popularity. It doesn't have the consistent history Kart does. It's a "safe" game. But it's not a keynote worthy game as a main focus for E3. If it's a new game, yes. If it's a port, no. Sales aside, E3 is a marketing event. Bringing a port as your keynote kind of says "yeah, not much going on...."

All that being said, that's if they're not really bringing much else....no Animal Crossing, no Pokemon...the real heavy hitters we all anticipated for this E3. They could just be messing with us, too. (insert burning Chibi.)

@Kimyonaakuma
We've been over this. Listed 9 key pieces of evidence overwhelmingly supporting it being a new game.

But most of all, if it's not specifically stated to be a port, then it's not a port.

And last I checked, they didn't specifically state it was a port. Neither did they show gameplay, which they would have never held back for a game everyone already played.

And, name one single Switch port from Nintendo where they showcased an already released game as their flagship e3 title.

Exactly. ON TOP of Sakurai working on it for years, ON TOP of saying people will be going in equally blind...

I mean come on.

Why are we suddenly acting as if we know whether or not Smash will be a new game? It could go either way, and we really know nothing at this point. To say it's gonna be a port is just as illogical as saying that it's gonna be a sequel. We have no idea. All we've gotten so far is a teaser to let us know that Smash is coming in some form.

We can make assumptions, but we can't know until we see more.

@IceClimbers No, all different stages, fairly different roster, new overall level DESIGN, totally new single player mode (awful single player mode, but it is what it is...), and being in HD. 4 was very different from Brawl, in some good ways and some bad ways. A clearly different game.

This time a port would be: many repeated stages, same stage design, largely shared roster, same or visuals or same with better lighting/textures.

@Ralizah It's Splatoon 1.5. So many repeat levels, the way they drip fed weapons and clothing as "all new" even though we'd already had them all before, the fact it took 6 months just to get most of what we already had before in the first game. It has indeed evolved a bit in the past few months into something maybe better. Again, I advocated it as a "true sequel" early on, but the longer time went on the more obvious it became to me I was wrong. It has new...and old stages. Some new, mostly old/remixed weapons. It launched with the same 3 modes. It took 6 months to get any new gameplay mode in the game. A true sequel wouldn't have had the very same 4 gameplay modes. Everything else was window dressing. I can argue this one forever and ever. Even more than DualShock being awful. I used to be on your side.....but I learned. Much of the "hardcore" community evolved in that same mindset. Once we got past the new window dressings that wowed us, we realized it really wasn't new at all. Now everything that has changed this month, I can't comment on, I'm on indefinite hiatus from that game. Maybe they finally are making a sequel, one DLC at a time.

@JaxonH "But most of all, if it's not specifically stated to be a port, then it's not a port."
If I don't specifically say I'm stealing your money, I'm not stealing your money. I'm just advanced borrowing without intending to replace it. I'd rather not let a marketing department tell me what a product is, thankyouverymuch. I'll decide for myself based on what the product actually is. If your definition of "new and improved" is because the box says so, I don't think we'll agree on this one no matter WHAT they show unless it has destructible environments and vehicles.

"And, name one single Switch port from Nintendo where they showcased an already released game as their flagship e3 title."

Well that part we agree on. That's why I say it shouldn't be flagship E3 if it's indeed a port. Where we disagree is you'll believe it's a sequel if they don't tell you it's a port. They didn't even say DKCTF is a port. But it is. I'm betting they call this "Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo Switch"....which will leave this debate ambiguous forever.

@KirbytheVampire exactly.

Just throwing this out there, @NEStalgia is snarky as heck. Also, I hope smash isn't a port. Grumpy out.

@NEStalgia No true sequel, huh?

Sounds more like you're just a long-time player who is tired of what you perceive to be same-ish content. Nothing you pointed to is indicative of it not being a sequel. Many, many, many sequels include some content from previous games. Doesn't mean they're not brand new games.

@NEStalgia
No. Wrong.

Name one port, just one, where they didn't make it abundantly clear from the start.

Exactly.

If it's a port, they're gonna plaster that fact across the board from the yet go. Ergo > if they don't state it's a port from the start... It's because it's not

Furthermore, name one port where gameplay was concealed and saved to showcase as the flagship e3 title.

I rest my case.

And no, Splatoon 2 is not a port. That's called a new video game.

I honestly don't get how people can accept without a shadow of a doubt that titles like Call of Duty, Arkham Origins, FIFA, MH4 or N++ are new games and yet when it comes to Smash and Splatoon the bar is suddenly raised.

It's also kind of dumb to play semantics with the word "sequel" when applied to these gameplay-focused, non-narrative games.

@Grumpy-Cam LOL, snarky & proud!
(Also, to clarify again before the TL;DR crowd runs screaming, I don't care if it's new or a port, I just don't think it's a good E3 flagship if it's port.)

@Ralizah As for Splatoon 2....at this point, yeah, long time player tired of the same content, but back a year ago it was very hypey. The game literally featured the same 4 modes. The exact same 4 modes. In the same rotation pattern. with the same weapons presented over 6 months as though it was the first time they were released. And LESS gear. And LESS maps, half of which were the same maps. The BEST I can give them is they released a port as a sequel with the intent to add the sequel part later. Much later. And even if they've finally done it, it feels too late for the early adopters to have had an experience that was a legit sequel. They added the sequel after we already burned out.

Battlefield gives you a new era, new maps, new weapons (that all feel the same) and a new (terrible) mode to go with mass-murder mode. Not even COD recycles itself until the odd-number sequels.

Also #bringbackcallie </mic>

@NEStalgia False. There was a BUNCH of returning stages from Brawl and other past entries. The roster is Brawl's roster with some additions. There was, what, 4 cuts, 6 if you count Squirtle/Ivysaur? Hell, one of those cuts was ultimately brought back and you had to pay for it!

Ultimately, there's no reason to believe this is a port. Every argument I've seen boils down to "not enough time", which has already been proven false, or "but they ported other Wii U games!", which ultimately means nothing.

The only reason people thought they'd do a port is because they assumed that Nintendo would insist on Sakurai doing it, and that he was working on something else. Turns out he was working on Smash this whole time.

@IceClimbers Which maps returned from Brawl. I didn't play Smash WiiU much, but I remember the maps being quite a bit bigger and more elaborate than anything in Brawl. To be fair on roster it includes MOST of Nintendo's IPs already so it's hard to add a lot....but the maps, visuals, modes were quite different.

Lets consider this though in terms of speculating "port" or "port doctored to look new": would they be releasing this "Smash 5" if WiiU were a runaway success and Switch were not released yet? Or did they cobble it together to get Smash for sale on Switch? Does it exist because it warranted to exist as its own product or because hardware demanded a version of the product to sell? New game, great, port, predictable. Ambiguous "enhanced new game port" that will keep this argument raging for years? Probable.

@NEStalgia Yeah BF4->BF1 because we don't know enough about BF5 other than that it's clear it can't be confused as a port of BF1 Unlike Smash and Splatoon

LOL, yeah War Pigeons. I kind of like it too...but it's technically not very good....

Complaining about a sequel being too samey is just putting a target on your head saying "Prove I'm a hypocrite!" And trust me, we will. We will.