Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

If Smash Ultimate is just 4.5, then what is Sonic Mania? Everyone agrees that's a new game, even with the incredible skew towards old content.

@NEStalgia
Bravely Default was my 1st JRPG, and I had no clue what anything was. Final Fantasy X was my 2nd, and the ONLY REASON I knew what a Phoenix feather was, or an antidote, or berserk, or any of that stuff, was because I'd seen it before.

Playing a JRPG really is a learning experience which makes all others easy to understand. But that first has a very high learning curve.

Btw, can we stop with calling new games ports? It's getting out of hand. Unless the game is identical, or identical with added content, it's not a port.

@JaxonH Ok, BD was kind of a bad place to start I feel for ya'! That's a game that's even worse than Xeno at being obtuse, explaining nothing, and just assuming you already know because you bought it because you're an FFIV diehard that laments that no game since 1993 has ever been good.

It really is quite the learning curve in a way even WRPGs are not (and that's a learning curve of its own!)

Ports are ports. I'm not part of the anti-port crowd at all, but I won't pretend they're something they aren't either. And Smash Ultimate, unless theres some huge sweeping story mode, and there could be, but Smash Ultimate is clearly what it says on the tin. It's not disparaging to say it's an ultimate edition, that's what it is. It's Smash 4 with tuned mechanics and a massive extra DLC pack of prior content added in in one box. That's pretty cool for the price. I'm not sure why people are so insistent on pretending that it's magically Smash 5 when its main focus is on DLC-style former content rather than new content. An ultimate bundle is a cool thing, and like MK8 a new game isn't really needed at this time, the last one still hasn't run its course yet. It's not like shooters that need a yearly refresh. We're on Street Fighter V after 30 years. An expanded bundle is just fine. (Albeit Smash 4 was really bare bones on its single player content in a way that even the already bare bones Tekken 7 didn't manage to be and no other fighter in this age is.)

I think you have it backward. So many people use "port" as a derogatory, there's this odd knee-jerk reaction to "defend" things from being called ports. An edition, bundle, port isn't a bad thing, and identifying such a game isn't a disparagement of it.

@EvilLucario 50/50 old and new content, and the old content is heavily modified, though it's a little too much "I've already played this" for aspects of it, there's equal amounts of new content to match the old. Smash Ultimate is literally the content of smash 4 + brawl + mele as an HD bundle, plus some amount of new content we've been cautioned to will be limited. Even Final Destination is still Smash 4. Again, that's not at all a bad thing, and it's strange people get defensive about it. An ultimate edition is a good idea. Why do we have to pretend it's "smash 5" to be a good purchase?

I wonder which Nintendo franchise will get a Switch installment first?

Animal Crossing? Sin & Punishment? Kid Icarus? Punch-Out? Pilotwings?

I'd love to have all of them. But if not all, then I'd love them in that order.

@NEStalgia
Regardless of being derogatory or not, it's still not a port. Saying "well it isnt supposed to be derogatory" doesnt make it any more true. I'm not saying it's not a port because I think its derogatory, I'm saying it's not a port because, it genuinely isn't a port.

Either its selling the same game again or it's not. And it's not the same game. It really is that simple.

It's not "being defensive", it's simply a statement of "what you are saying factually is not true".

If you say the sky is red and I reply to tell you it's blue, it has nothing to do with "being defensive" while you say "but a red sky isnt derogatory". It's simply correcting a statement that goes against fact.

Ports are, by definition, taking one game and transplanting it onto another system. Nothing has changed- it's still the same game, its just running on different hardware. That is undeniably not the case with Smash 5. They did not simply translate the code of Smash Wii U to run on Switch. The game is actually different. Different characters, different movesets and mechanics of those characters.

Same thing with Splatoon 2. I cant fathom this new age line of thought that somehow says a game must have 100% new assets, 100% new modes, 100% new everything or it's not new.

By that misguided logic Majoras Mask was a port of Ocarina of Time, Monster Hunter 4 was a port of Monster Hunter 3 and Generations was another port of 3, etc etc. Its ridiculous. Even IF they took the base game and modified it into something different, it's still been modified into something different. You could say "it's too similar" or any number of other criticisms, but labeling it as a port is just factually wrong.

Now, if they announce that stupid board game and Smash Run are in and nothing else for single player, then you might have a leg to stand on. Because that would indicate a hybrid of sorts rather than a new game. But we dont know anything about single player yet.

Which means right now, you could do a TBD if you wanted, but not outright classification as the same game as Wii U.

@Magician
Animal Crossing: yes please! Switch sales will sky rocket, and we have not seen a main Animal Crossing in years. and Nintendo knows it will do well.
Sin & Punishment: did the game on wii did well enough for a switch game? i've never tried it myself (i should somepoint, heard great things about it and the franchise itself.)
Kid Icarus: i would love to see a switch game of KI. although, the question is would sakurai be involve in it? or will Nintendo give it to someone else?
Punch Out: could never get into Punch Out. but, i'd be happy for the fans that wants it on switch.
Pilotwings: haven't tried either. would be pretty cool for switch and optional for Labo. it fit so well for a game like this to have the option to use labo.

@JaxonH i also specifically did not say the word port, i said ultimate edition. I'm not labeling it. That's exactly what it even says right on the daggone box!

Honestly, i can't fathom an age where recycled content does count as new. Usf2 is not a new game, is a new edition of all old game. Monopoly game of thrones edition is not a new game is a new edition of an old game. Smash ultimate is not A new game it's a new edition of... Honestly a current game.

Sf4 is not sf2. Quake 2 is not quake is not quake 3. Red dead 2 is not red dead 1, gtav online is still gtav. Bb ctb is not chronophantasma. They are new content. Calling a collection a new game doesn't make it new. I also doesn't mean it's bad. Is a better version of the same thing with more stuff, that's cool. But it's not new. In fact the very sales slogan is that it's got all the old stuff.

I agree though, at this point single player campaign is the differentiation. I just happen to not be expecting much on that front. Smash 4 was very behind the genre in that regard. And behind smash 3.

@NEStalgia
Content has been recycled for new games since the dawn of gaming.

Just look at Mega Man 1-6, or Super Street Fighter II and Street Fighter II Turbo and Street Fighter II Hyper Fighting, or Mortal Kombat 1-3, and on and on and on.

@JaxonH the MegaMan games were each new. Sf2, turbo, hyper is...... PRECISELY my point I'm making though. Those weren't new games. They were new editions of the same game. They're precisely the example of smash ultimate I'm making

@NEStalgia
And what's so different about that and Mortal Kombat 1, 2 and 3 which were all NEW games?

The name, nothing more.

And that's MY point. Those games were just is new is any other new game. But because the names still had II in it, assume they are all ports of each other? No. They were not ports of each other because they released as separate titles on the exact same system. Ergo > different games.

They were absolutely new games.

But Smash is WAY WAY WAY WAY WAYYYY more New than those. You tell me what's the difference between this smash and Mortal Kombat 1, 2 and 3? You can't because there is an any

You tell me the difference between this Smash and all the King of Fighters games... you can't, because there isn't any. Every single one of them was a new game released and smash brothers is a new game released

Please stop being so ridiculous

Just because the game doesn't get the next main numbered entry doesn't mean it's not a new game. It simply means they aren't revamping the entire systems that were previously in place. That has absolutely nothing to do with being a new game or not.

Monster Hunter Generations didn't receive a new number in the numbered series, but it was still a new game. Recycled 90% or more of the previous numbered entry, but it was still a new game. Barely added any new character content we hadn't seen in a previous game before, just like Smash Ultimate, but it was still a new game. It didn't revamp the pre-existing systems in place, but it was still a new game. Generations was NOT a port of MH4U, despite all of that being true.

And neither is Smash 5. It's literally as new as a new game can be. It doesn't get any newer. New characters? Check. New stages? Check. New character gameplay mechanics? Check. New and revised final smashes? Check. New stage mechanics like fake smashballs and speed of flying from damage? Check.

What more can a new game do to be new? That's as new as it gets. It's literally a different experience in an iterative series than the last Smash. That's... what defines a new games in iterative series.

Smash Ultimate isn't really just a 'port' of one game, though. It incorporates content from multiple past Smash games. So not a port at all, but also not Smash 5... more like a "Smash Anniversary Edition", or something.

Like JaxonH said, it's kinda similar to MonHun Generations in that respect.

The game is also different mechanically from Smash 4.

@Ralizah .... Which is exactly why i called it "ultimate edition".... And probably why Nintendo essentially did too...

@JaxonH i can't speak for mk... i haven't played any of the old mk games, x is the first I've bought. Kof never claimed to have new sequels though, it was an annual edition..."this year's version of the game"almost like"seasons" of modern online games like for Honor, back in an arcade context. In a way, that's sorry of what I'm saying about smash but kof is a bad example because it's the only non sports series i can think of that did the annual edition thing. Street fighter is the better comparison and, no each edition was still sf2 because it was still sf2, it was just different versions of it. Capcom did that right. Smash never used numbers so they're neither telling us numerically that it is it isn't a new sequel. But as ralizah said and as i said earlier, is a smash 4 port with edition changes like turbo plus an hd remake of brawl and melee all in one. I big solo addition could be truly new, but that part well have to draw straws on.

@NEStalgia
Either its the same game or not.

And it's not. New mechanics, different set of characters and stages = not the same.

And if it's not the same, then it's not a port.

Simple, easy to understand logic.

@JaxonH now you're just getting into very narrow criterion. If you want to call it a space sim because it technically features an arwing, knock yourself out. By that definition it would be true. But not everyone is going to define something as a sequel when the changes are if there same order as other similar games that were not considered sequels in a game that is not even numbered.

@NEStalgia Right. It's a new game that reuses a lot of the content from previous games, in addition to having new content and changed mechanics. Not a port of Smash 4.

@NEStalgia
Not a port. Never said anything about sequel. I said not a port. And that is indeed very specific criteria. Either it is, or it isnt. And it isn't

@Ralizah it's a bundle, collection, remaster, ultimate edition, whatever. Just to be clear the whole conversation did start with the word edition, not port.....

To me, Smash Ultimate is a lot like Mortal Kombat Trilogy or Marvel vs Capcom 2. Both games had every character in the respective franchises at that point. Both games also had a handful of new characters introduced. And both games were new, not ports.

@NEStalgia As a sidenote, I made no secret in hoping the new game would be a Smash 4 port with the DLC, as I didn't think Nintendo would release a new Smash with a gigantic cast of characters, and I was afraid it'd only be a let-down from Smash 4 as a result. This turned out to be ideal, though: a game with all the DLC characters from Smash 4 in addition to characters who cameo'd in older games and even NEW characters!

All I need to see is at least one really good single-player mode to be happy. Smash Run would be fine, although I'd prefer something more fleshed out. Anything is better than what we got in the Wii U version of Smash 4.