Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread

@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.

@Ralizah yeah, smash is the only fg without a story mode now, well unless you count ki which says it had story mode but it's really just arcade mode with an ending cutscene. .... Like sf2 had 30 years ago.... Even tekken 7 has story mode with waaay too lengthy cutscenes, and that's a game with no tutorial training. The board game was offensive.

The starting roster (and likely stage select) is probably one of the biggest reasons why people want a story mode in Smash Ultimate. If you're going to lock away around 60 fighters and 70 stages at the start, the unlock process needs to be fun.

"Focus on multiplayer" only works if there's very few unlocks that affect gameplay.

@ReaderRagfish
I'm just amazed at the new possibilities for getting angry people seem to come up with every day lol

Lego Harry Potter Collection could be coming to switch.
https://nintendoeverything.com/lego-harry-potter-collection-l...

Any idea what happened to Gunbird 2? Why was it removed? When will it be back?!

Just completed Bloodstained: Curse of the Moon (did two runs, a Normal/Casual then a Normal/Veteran)!

Don't have too much experience with Castlevania proper, but I enjoyed this. Game had a cool atmosphere, and even though it got tough, at no point did it feel unfair. I really enjoyed the bosses especially.

I've decided to do a little breakdown of the whole Spyro thing and the 3 instances of "Evidence" that it's coming.

1: YouTubers say so: C'mon. Do I need to explain this one?

2: The official Spyro site: Okay this one is also simple. That website is a direct copy and paste plus reskin of the Crash one, complete with, for a time, crates at the bottom of the page. Those pre-order links for PC and Switch, when people examined the source code, were referenced to Crash Bandicoot. End of this story.

3: The Nintendo UK Store: This is the most popular point but...people need to understand what that site actually is.

It is a website that is run on behalf of Nintendo UK, by a subsidiary of a large retail group (All payments, shipments etc. are via that group) that only sells Nintendo published titles.

You might be saying, oh it has Yokai Watch, Monster Hunter, Dark Souls, Skyrim etc. up there. Yeah, who published that in Europe again? Nintendo.

Heck, even Crash wasn't on there.

So why do people suddenly believe that a listing for a game with the wrong name and price, when it clearly isn't being distributed by Nintendo, on a website run by a branch of a larger company hired BY Nintendo that only sells Nintendo things, is evidence that it's coming?

Seriously? Did we not think that through for a moment?

@Knuckles-Fajita What I imagine your room looks like:

@Knuckles-Fajita

I see what you're saying, but even ignoring those two site postings, it's just to hard to not imagine Spyro NOT coming to Switch(and PC). Especially after how well Crash on Switch did even in the UK. At this point, does it it look like the Switch and PC versions will launch alongside the other versions? No, but worse case scenario we get it around September next year.

So those site postings could've been hastily made, but at least there's something behind it. At least it's not like those monthly Direct "leaks" we get or other random rumors.

@Octane Nah it's more like one line from obvious point A to obvious point B, then conclusion XD

@KryptoniteKrunch I'll word it like this. It could come next year. But these three reasons are not the evidence that it is.

That's nonsense. Evidence doesnt have to be conclusive proof in and of itself. All it has to do is support an increase in the statistical likelihood something is true.

One of those things by themselves? Sure, that could be random chance and nothing more. But TWO different sites listing it? I dont give a crap who runs the store- the odds of TWO sites listing it drastically improves the odds of it being true.

I'm a numbers guy. And given the evidence (and yes it is most definitely evidence) I'd say the odds are more likely than not.

But please, continue hamfisting excuses denying even the most obvious so you're never disappointed.

Is it possible it was just a double mistake by two entirely separate sites that just so happened to both let slip the exact same game that's not actually coming? Suuuure... its possible. It's also possible unicorns fart rainbows on the moon, but I find it highly unlikely.

@JaxonH So are you saying unicorns existed all along? Damn, where have I been?