I don’t remember that at all either. The only people who thought it was a port, were against it and [wrongly] mocking it for being one. Maybe there was one extreme fanatic on the site saying such things (there’s always at least one), but if something like that is going to be asserted as a general truth I’m going to need to see some evidence because I don’t remember that at all.
I mean, ideally we should be doing what Microsoft is doing now and making sure everything from now on is forwards compatible. Past generations (at least for consoles, handhelds have always been very good about backwards compatibility) had forced pretty significant hardware architecture changes so backwards compatibility wasn't guaranteed at all until the PS1 to PS2. PS3 had to include some PS2 hardware inside in order to be backwards compatible in the first place. The Wii was basically a supercharged GameCube, and the Wii U was basically a supercharged Wii so it still had GameCube roots in its architecture, but that architecture was outdated and led to some more difficult development with it. So out with the old and in with the new with the Switch, being much easier to develop and should hopefully lay the groundwork for future consoles and native backwards compatibility.
What Microsoft is doing with its backwards compatibility is basically taking the PC route of letting games tap into the better hardware to output better looking games using the same code, which is really good and something both Nintendo and Sony should adopt. If a Switch 2 comes out and has native backwards compatibility with the original Switch and allows games to tap into the better horsepower, that means games like BotW will always run at a locked 30fps and 900p, Odyssey will always run at 900p, Smash Ultimate won't drop to 30fps with 8 Ice Climbers on Fountain of Dreams with explosive items on (ok maybe not lol, but you get what I'm saying here), etc.
Since the Xbox One and PS4 are basically PCs now, there's no excuse not to have native backwards compatibility for the Xbox... Two (???) and PS5. Nintendo's next system should also be backwards compatible, but since Nintendo has gotta Nintendo at points to make much different hardware, that's not a certainty sadly.
That said, ports of all kinds are welcome. We can argue about bad ports, but ports as a concept is nothing but a good thing. It's just how some go about it that can make it bad or questionable, like Ark: Survival Evolved on Switch or even DKC: TP being priced higher than its original price on Wii U.
Metroid, Xenoblade, EarthBound shill
I run a YouTube/Twitch channel for fun. Check me out if you want to!
Please let me know before you send me a FC request, thanks.
Errr...yeah, lets stop assuming people who like ports and the like don't want new/original games. I'm just as hyped to play the Resident Evil games on Switch as I am to play Daemon x Machina, Animal Crossing and Luigis Mansion 3.
@ReaderRagfihs@JaxonH You all really don't remember all of the "SSB4 should be ported to the Switch" before Ultimate was teased in March? Again, I want to clarify that this was BEFORE March. Of course, there were many members on here who insisted it was still a port, but that was a different discussion.
Do I need to go any further? All I had to do was go back in my posts to the beginning, and these are all from the last three pages of my posts, I'm sure the further forward I go, I'd find more examples. A SSB4 port was not only demanded but was lauded as the only logical step because SSB4 was seen as good enough with just a few character additions.
Well, before it was teased, people didn’t know what to expect. A port of Smash U was a logical conclusion to come to, and it wouldn’t have been the end of the world had that been the case. Out of all those posts can you direct me to any where people said they wanted Smash U ported MORE than a new entry? Or is this just people saying they’d be down for a port?
I’m just not understanding what you’re trying to argue here... that a handful of people said they’d be down for a port of Smash before we knew about Ultimate??? I mean... I’m pretty sure even I said that much. Just like right now, when people say they be down for a port of Pikmin 3. Doesn’t mean people don’t want Pikmin 4, it just means that if they’re not going to bring a new game they’d be down for a port of the last one. I... don’t understand what the issue is
@JaxonH Did you read the posts I linked to? Even the first post I linked to is an example of just that, someone (again, not meaning to single out anyone here) saying that they don't even want a new Smash on Switch, but instead a port.
My above post always specified BEFORE March teased Ultimate. There were many times on this forum I felt that I was alone in wanting a new Super Smash Bros. instead of a SSB4 port. The links I posted above are just a small portion of this. Sure some of them are saying that it would better for Nintendo/new games and not necessarily that it is their own opinion, but "port instead of new game" was a big thing before Ultimate was revealed to be a new game.
@KryptoniteKrunch Errr...yeah, lets stop assuming people who like ports and the like don't want new/original games
This should be stickied at the top of the forum.
I find it downright illogical to be against great games coming to Switch. Or any system for that matter. People are actually arguing Switch would be better off without Diablo 3? Without Skyrim? Without DOOM? Without DKC Tropical Freeze? Without New Super Mario Bros U? The Switch would be better off??? How in any conceivable way is that better?
People can want to see those games on the system and want to see new games at the same time... This isn’t a choice between ports and new games. That’s a delusion that doesn’t exist. It’s a choice between new games and nothing else... just crickets chirping... and the same new games plus some excellent already released games that have never received a handheld version (or in some cases, never received a console version) and in all cases, never received a hybrid version, and in many cases, never received a Nintendo version.
Ports are the greatest thing to happen to gaming since the analog stick. They address the issue of a game releasing on one platform or group of platforms and then forever being trapped on that platform and lost to history. Like Tales of Vesperia. Trapped on the 360, for years and years and years I could not play this game. Now, THANKS TO PORTING, I can play it. Thanks to porting, I can play an entire armada of excellent video games releases across all spectrums of gaming and all manner of platforms. Civilization VI from the PC. Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate from Japanese 3DS. Diablo 3 Eternal from PS4/X1. DKC Tropical Freeze and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe from Wii U, which btw, didn’t seem to hinder the devs from releasing a brand new game, ARMS, the following month.
At the end of the day what matters is what consumers want. And people of all creeds and platforms have spoken in solidarity with their wallets that they want all the best games ported to their currently preferred platforms. And people need to respect that. Respect what consumers want. Nobody said they wanted ports instead of new games. But we are already getting as many new games as developers are willing to make. And since porting games requires so much less money and resources, might as well bulk up the library and double, maybe even triple it’s size with ports of excellent games millions of people desperately want on this hybrid device.
Psalms 22:16 (1,000 yrs before Christ)
They pierced My hands and feet
Isaiah 53:5 (700 yrs before Christ)
He was pierced for our transgressions
@Harmonie
Well... ok. In that case I would have to seriously question that person’s judgment.
Although in some cases I think it’s completely appropriate if someone wanted a port instead of a new entry. You know what you’re getting with a port. They are always cherry picked to be the very best of the very best. A new game is a dice roll. It sounds nice with the “New” label slapped on it, until it releases and scores 7 out of 10 and people say eh, disappointing, I’ll pass. Not that Smash would fall into that category, but Metroid Prime does. That’s a series where if I had to choose, I’d choose the classic trilogy ported over, remastered in HD with dual analog and motion support, over a new game, enticing as the possibilities may be. And the reason for that is I have no idea if a new game is going to live up to the hype of the past. But I know for a fact the trilogy is among my top three games of all time. See where I’m going with this?
Again, not that I’m saying Smash falls into that category. Although I think a port of Smash U would have been 90% as good as a new game, since it’s 90% the same anyways. I’m certainly glad they made a new one.
Idk. At the end of the day I agree with you. If you want to call out a few people who six months ago said they’d rather see Smash ported... ok. I agree with you on that. But I don’t see that as a general rule. As a general rule I see people who want new games and ports. Why make a fuss over an extremely small subset of people who maybe think otherwise?
Psalms 22:16 (1,000 yrs before Christ)
They pierced My hands and feet
Isaiah 53:5 (700 yrs before Christ)
He was pierced for our transgressions
@JaxonH My point is not at all to call out a select few people, it's to show how pervasive that view was back then. I saw it all of the time, but I felt I needed to give only a few examples.
I don't think anyone wants exclusively ports, but there certainly were a lot of people who would have taken a Smash 4 port over a new Smash.
Very interesting view on Metroid Prime, by the way. I think the revealing of Metroid Prime 4 was a HUGE deal for Metroid fans who felt let down by The Other M and the off-base spinoff Federation Forces. To see Nintendo committed to making a new Metroid Prime has to have been super important, like... How I feel when a gaming series is down and they revive it. Porting Super Mario Sunshine to the Switch wouldn't have brought my hopes back up for the Super Mario 3D series, but making Super Mario Odyssey certainly did.
Metroid Prime Trilogy HD is an excellent thing to release to lead up to Metroid Prime 4, but by itself? Eh.
@Yorumi
Not sure where your post went, but I had this typed out in response, so...
That’s just basically arguing the merits of PC gaming. Which admittedly is an advantage. But I don’t see anything wrong with perpetual ports in the console space. New architecture means new development to bring a game over, which means new costs incurred which means a new sale must occur. That’s just the way it is.
Eventually the Switch will become old, yes, and I’ll probably want ports on the new system. That’s true. But all I know is, right now, this moment, I don’t have handheld versions of these games. I don’t have versions with motion. I don’t have console versions of some. Switch versions solve all of that. When the day comes Switch fades out, I may want some of them again. But at least I’ll have hybrid versions of all of them on Switch. I can just carry Switch in the same case as the next console, and I won’t need them on the next system.
At the end of the day though, if people want to play these games on Switch, Who is anyone to criticize what people want? If there’s gonna be criticism of what people want, at least do it on the PS and Xbox forums where people routinely buy ports without any tangible benefit at all, aside from a resolution bump and maybe a better frame rate. At least on this system you’re getting something tangible in return. You’re getting portability, console play, tabletop mode, motion controls, the whole thing.
@Harmonie
Oh I definitely think it was the right move announcing Metroid Prime 4. Most definitely. That was a really important announcement, and I am extremely excited for it. But after it releases, and after everyone plays it... looking back in hindsight, I’d probably be happier with the trilogy. Three games combined, some of the best ever made.
I’m not saying I always prefer a port, and you’ll never see me asking for a port instead of a new game. But deep down inside, if they announced MP Trilogy instead of MP4, even though it might not be as exciting of an announcement I think in the end, i’d probably get more enjoyment from it.
Thankfully we don’t have to choose. My whole point is concerning people complaining about ports like they are a bad thing, when they are an extremely valuable asset to any library that countless gamers enjoy and want. Ports should not be ostracized, they should be embraced. Right alongside new games.
Psalms 22:16 (1,000 yrs before Christ)
They pierced My hands and feet
Isaiah 53:5 (700 yrs before Christ)
He was pierced for our transgressions
To summarise my thoughts on what they should do:
1. Smash 4 basically as it was on Wii U ported to Switch
2. Include all Smash 4 characters + DLC and add just a couple of new ones (eg Inklings)
3. Take stages from Wii U and 3DS, maybe even just a selection from the two rather than all of them
4. Include a few stages for games released since Smash on Wii U (Splatoon, BotW, Arms, Snipperclips)
5. Include a couple of new game modes that weren't on Wii U/3DS
6. Have some surprise third party character/stage that makes sense for Switch (Skyrim, Doom, Rayman)
And that's it, no need for a sequel
I feel like I got what I wanted more than the people demanding a "sequel" did. I wanted Smash 4 with all the content and DLC plus some new content and modes. A Smash bros "deluxe". Literally what we got. Others in that thread were asking for a sequel where they started with anew roster. I still believe this would've been the worse option and I stand by it.
So no, you haven't proven anything here. All you've shown is that "port" is more about perception than content, development effort and so on. Also on your example about wind waker, I would always by a HD remaster over an emulated version. Ans the whole conspiracy of changing hardware you wrote about says a lot about the illiteracy of the other side of this debate
@Harmonie A Smash 4 port with the DLC included would have been preferable to a new Smash game with less content. Thankfully, Nintendo's kitchen sink approach to content in Smash Ultimate meant we could get a brand new Smash game without it feeling like a downgrade from the previous one. A game isn't inherently "better" by virtue of being new. It all depends on what it has to offer and what kind of game it is.
Do I need to go any further? All I had to do was go back in my posts to the beginning, and these are all from the last three pages of my posts, I'm sure the further forward I go, I'd find more examples. A SSB4 port was not only demanded but was lauded as the only logical step because SSB4 was seen as good enough with just a few character additions.
I do like how the majority of what you quoted were just posts from me. Can I just say again that what we ended up getting what more or less what I was saying we should get. I was arguing for Smash Bros as a service rather than a "token sequel" where the entire roster was reset. What we got was a game clearly built upon the Wii U Smash Bros, a game where the main hook is that it has all of the characters and stages from previous games. A game that is going to continue on with new DLC over the next year.
What you were arguing for in that thread was... well I'm not quite sure. You said Smash Bros 4 was garbage and that you didn't want to see it ported. You said you wanted something akin to Breath of the Wild or Super Mario Odyssey for Smash Bros. You wanted more than the same game with a larger roster. What we got was basically the same game with a larger roster and now you're praising it as "not a port". Pointing specifically to posts of mine where I said the same game with an expanded roster would be perfect.
Some playlists: Top All Time Songs, Top Last Year
An opinion is only respectable if it can be defended. Respect people, not opinions
I still don’t understand why people feel gaming should be any different from gaming or film.
In all three entertainment industries old content gets repackaged.
It doesn’t mean no new content as creating something entirely new takes much longer than repackaging something old.
New technology adds value whether it be DVD, CD, streaming, or more powerful games systems. There’s no compulsion to upgrade, if people want to stick to their old VHS/Vinyl/SD machine on a CRT they can do. Those who want an updated/better quality/more convenient version can have it.
There are always people who missed out on a record/film/game the first time whether it be due to age, other interests or all he thousands of other reasons people can have. None of these industries go “NO, loser, you want to listen to The Beatles/watch The Godfather/play The Last Of Us, you go and seek an old copy and the hardware to play it on. More effort for you and less money for us. HA!”
There are people out there who like to rewatch old films, listen to the same music, reread the same books, watch the same plays etc. why are games supposed to be a one shot and you’re done issue? People like to buy old games on new formats.
Why do people think games-where the technological progress has been so stark-should be different?
This year, we are looking at Onimusha, more Final Fantasy and Resident Evil you can shake a stick at and Grandia 1 & 2. I shouldn't worry OP, if it keeps going at this rate, there won't be anything left to ask for!
Films went VHS/DVD/Blu-ray/UHD BD/Streaming. You can buy films on your satellite box (you can in the UK anyway) or download them to your PlayStation/XBox. There were detours into Betamax, Laserdisc, UMD, HD-DVD. Films get rereleased into cinemas constantly or remade into Imax.
Music went from Vinyl to Cassette to CD to MP3 and streaming with detours into Minidisc, DAT Tape, DVD Audio, SACD. Albums get rereleased onto the same format because they’re remastered and/or include extra content.
Either way the same is true. Remastering of music and film didn’t stop new content and nobody was forced to buy it. Same is true of remastering video games.
The difference is in nearly 40 years the video industry has gone through at best 3 upgrades. VHS/dvd/blu-ray, and really dvd players are still perfectly fine today, and sold as if blu-ray didn't exist. The music industry is similar except that they haven't changed since the introduction of the CD. Video games invalidate every old game every 5 years requiring a new format.
It seems like the thread has gotten to the "lets draw out this analogy needlessly" section. So lets argue this comparison rather than the original topic I guess.
Talking just about music formats for a second, there were a lot of format changes as @electrolite77 said. However it is worth pointing out that CDs are a mathematically perfect format for reproducing sounds upto 22khz. Unless your a Dog this is fine. There were attempts to produce a new format before, during and after CDs but none took off because CDs were widespread and perfect quality was "good enough" for most people.
It's a similar story with video formats. We're still kinda getting new and higher quality formats for video unlike audio but it has considerably slowed in recent years. For some movies there wouldn't really be much of a gap between BluRay and UHD BluRay. Also consider this, there were HD Laserdiscs available in the early 90s. It was obviously a fairly silly format and even more so now, even so it still outputs a fairly acceptable video by today's standards:
Now consider what games were possible in the early 90s, particularly 3D titles like StarFox. Stating the obvious I would've thought but this is the reason why consoles get refreshed much faster than video or audio formats. Unlike audio and to an extent video the visual quality of games are still heavily reliant on the hardware you're using. It didn't hit its peak 30+ years ago like audio did. Basically like clockwork since before gaming was even a thing computer hardware has doubled in performance every couple of years.
Some playlists: Top All Time Songs, Top Last Year
An opinion is only respectable if it can be defended. Respect people, not opinions
Forums
Topic: The port begging needs to stop!
Posts 121 to 140 of 186
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.