​

Is Smash 2018 a port, or a new game?

Yesterday we had a whole slew of new games revealed on Nintendo's latest Direct, but the title that stood out as the presentation ended, was Super Smash Bros.

One thing Nintendo conveniently forgot to mention or hint at in any way; is the game a port of the WiiU Smash, following the trend of a lot of the current AAA Switch library? Or is it an entirely new Smash, just for Switch? Or maybe it's a mix of the 2, a DX version?

We've already had a ton of theories in the Super Smash Brothers announce thread - but here, we would like you to cast a vote!

 

[tomhanks69]

Its a new game. And Hal Laboratories is back on the job

 

[Kioku]

Again, all of that can come out of an expansion. I know people have been used to talk about shit dlc for a long time, but before, in ancient times, that's what dlc were. They were expansions to add all you're talking about.

No... No it can't. You can't change the core of a game with an expansion. Then it's just not the same game. Pokken is a piss poor example, as it's the same game at the base.

Tacking on a few new characters with some slight balance changes doesn't add the ".5" moniker. That's just stupid.

 

[deinonychus71]

No... No it can't. You can't change the core of a game with an expansion. Then it's just not the same game. Pokken is a piss poor example, as it's the same game at the base.

Reread my initial message, I defend that there is no point changing the core of the game, because it isn't broken.

Reworking a game from scratch given the already pretty good Wii U version, and given that the switch is barely superior to the Wii U technically makes no sense. Yes you can add stuff, you can fix balancing issues, but they're not going to build a new engine this time around.

And Pokemon, Mario Kart DX etc are good examples actually... it's all they've been doing because it makes sense. For Smash they're most likely rebranding it, but they won't redo the engine, they won't redo the core game. That would be a lose for them AND for the players.

 

[Kioku]

Reread my initial message, I defend that there is no point changing the core of the game, because it isn't broken.

Reworking a game from scratch given the already pretty good Wii U version, and given that the switch is barely superior to the Wii U technically makes no sense. Yes you can add stuff, you can fix balancing issues, but they're not going to build a new engine this time around.

And Pokemon, Mario Kart DX etc are good examples actually... it's all they've been doing because it makes sense. For Smash they're most likely rebranding it, but they won't redo the engine, they won't redo the core game. That would be a lose for them AND for the players.

Now you're ENTIRELY missing MY point. Jesus christ the reading comprehension around here...

 

[deinonychus71]

Now you're ENTIRELY missing MY point. Jesus christ the reading comprehension around here...

I'm sorry but this is just funny. You keep assuming everyone has already settled down that it will be a new game.
This is not binary. There is no "it's either a port or a new game". It's gonna be between the two.

If you want comprehension, I invite you to reread this:

I think we need to go through the logic

1. The Physics engine is fleshed out and solid, and dramatically changing it would only be detrimental
2. The character models and textures are complete, and the Switch has no use for higher resolution assets.
3. Smash is a game where the general idea is always consistent, no matter the platform.
4. Nintendo already has the source code and original files for SmashWiiU on hand.

Throwing that all away, including the full and debugged game engine? That's a complete waste of time. Nintendo would then have to spend several years rewriting it from scratch, then even longer squashing bugs and rebalancing characters. And then the Switch becomes the next console that becomes hackable thanks to a bug in Smash Bros.

Alternatively, Nintendo can import that code into their Switch devkits, replace all Wii U OS API hooks for Switch OS hooks (not that there are that many), change just enough code that it transitions from docked to portable mode properly, then use the rest of their free time to add more stages and characters, and bring back Subspace Emissary.

So yeah, I get your point, except that's not what we're talking about. An extension can do everything you're talking about, because if it's a 4.5 port it's not changing the core, it doesn't NEED to, nor should people WANT them to. It's time wasted reinventing the wheel that could be spent on content.

 

[Xzi]

Reread my initial message, I defend that there is no point changing the core of the game, because it isn't broken.

Smash 64 wasn't broken either, but they've changed a fair amount from iteration to iteration anyway. There's no point in leaving everything the same if you're going to make a sequel.

 

[deinonychus71]

Smash 64 wasn't broken either, but they've changed a fair amount from iteration to iteration anyway.

Yes, but there was a technical gap between the N64 and Gamecube. There is none between the Wii U and Switch.

 

[Xzi]

Yes, but there was a technical gap between the N64 and Gamecube. There is none between the Wii U and Switch.

The technical gap never forced a mechanics change, they did that in each game to keep the series fresh. Wii to WiiU wasn't a big technical leap either, but Brawl is pretty different from Sm4sh.

 

[deinonychus71]

The technical gap never forced a mechanics change, they did that in each game to keep the series fresh. Wii to WiiU wasn't a big technical leap either.

One could say they brought HD, which required re-texturing work.
And I'm not saying it should never evolve, I just don't see the point of not taking advantage of a recent, fully functional and very liked iteration of the game and build on it.
Fans have been asking mostly for adventure mode. This doesn't require to start from scratch. Adding more characters, more stage, is always going to be a Yes from the players.

The debate comes down to, do you want a new engine, with potentially smaller roster/stage, or do you want the same engine with a gameplay slightly tweaked, so that all the current roster + stages are still compatible, and so that they can focus on new modes, adventure mode back, etc?
Personally I think the answer is obvious. It could be wrong of course, but I don't think they would have wasted so much time adding so much dlc characters to Wii U while working on a switch version that wasn't going to support them without major rework (because new engine)

 

[Deleted User]

One could say they brought HD, which required re-texturing work.
And I'm not saying it should never evolve, I just don't see the point of not taking advantage of a recent, fully functional and very liked iteration of the game and build on it.
Fans have been asking mostly for adventure mode. This doesn't require to start from scratch. Adding more characters, more stage, is always going to be a Yes from the players.

The debate comes down to, do you want a new engine, with potentially smaller roster/stage, or do you want the same engine with a gameplay slightly tweaked, so that all the current roster + stages are still compatible, and so that they can focus on new modes, adventure mode back, etc?
Personally I think the answer is obvious. It could be wrong of course, but I don't think they would have wasted so much time adding so much dlc characters to Wii U while working on a switch version that wasn't going to support them without major rework (because new engine)

Once again, Smash 4 was made in 2.5 years, all of its characters as well as stages, engine, etc. There is almost nothing in that game that was borrowed besides maybe character ideas. It isn't too far off of an idea to think that Sakurai has been developing Smash 5 since they finished off Bayonetta in Feb. 2016, and by august that would give them 2.5 years. There are plenty of people where if they aren't told they are getting something completely new they won't get it, and considering HAL is working on it instead of Bamco, it is a sure possibility that everything is/was reworked.

 

[deinonychus71]

Once again, Smash 4 was made in 2.5 years, all of its characters as well as stages, engine, etc. There is almost nothing in that game that was borrowed besides maybe character ideas. It isn't too far off of an idea to think that Sakurai has been developing Smash 5 since they finished off Bayonetta in Feb. 2016, and by august that would give them 2.5 years. There are plenty of people where if they aren't told they are getting something completely new they won't get it, and considering HAL is working on it instead of Bamco, it is a sure possibility that everything is/was reworked.

Everything you're saying is true, especially the part where you say people need to know something is completely new otherwise they don't get it.

What they also don't get is that in this case, it would be their loss (imho).
Many games today work with a model where the core game gets improved for years instead of making sequels. There's never been a sequel to Rocket League, and the game is still being played a lot and new content comes out whenever the game is ported somewhere.

 

[Deleted User]

Everything you're saying is true, especially the part where you say people need to know something is completely new otherwise they don't get it.

What they also don't get is that in this case, it would be their loss (imho).
Many games today work with a model where the core game gets improved for years instead of making sequels. There's never been a sequel to Rocket League, and the game is still being played a lot and new content comes out whenever the game is ported somewhere.

However dropping $60 on a "slightly improved" game is nowhere near dropping $60 on a sequel, unless you are explicitly told that you would be getting a "slightly improved" version.

 

[deinonychus71]

However dropping $60 on a "slightly improved" game is nowhere near dropping $60 on a sequel, unless you are explicitly told that you would be getting a "slightly improved" version.

Let's just assume we live in a utopic world for a moment...

If they would indeed just focus on content and they add 2/3 years to work on content we could imagine:
- 10+ brand new characters
- 10+ reworked characters (that's your BoTW Link)
- 30+ new stages
- Adventure mode
- Target
- New UI

That's the kind of content you could expect of 2/3y of work if they weren't bothering with the engine.
Added to the existing roster and stage? this game would be absolutely MASSIVE.

 

[Deleted User]

Let's just assume we live in a utopic world for a moment...

If they would indeed just focus on content and they add 2/3 years to work on content we could imagine:
- 10+ brand new characters
- 10+ reworked characters (that's your BoTW Link)
- 30+ new stages
- Adventure mode
- Target
- New UI

That's the kind of content you could expect of 2/3y of work if they weren't bothering with the engine.
Added to the existing roster and stage? this game would be absolutely MASSIVE.

Brawl had 39 characters, SSB4 had 58. If you exclude DLC, Melee returnees, and clones, that leaves you with 17 new characters (15 if you count Mii fighter as one but you really shouldn't). They also reworked a lot of mechanics, added a load more stages as well as better options for custom stages, brand new UI (and AI) and different game modes. All of this was done in 2.5 years for two separate systems.
This time includes all creation and scrapping of ideas such as ice climbers and any others we never saw.
I would rather get the same treatment again, maybe not including like 5 characters and 10 stages if we got a new engine to play around with.

The biggest thing for me in Smash is the competitive meta. If they keep the engine the same, we end up with the same characters being the best, and some new characters not even fitting into the same engine.

 

[deinonychus71]

Brawl had 39 characters, SSB4 had 58. If you exclude DLC, Melee returnees, and clones, that leaves you with 17 new characters (15 if you count Mii fighter as one but you really shouldn't). They also reworked a lot of mechanics, added a load more stages as well as better options for custom stages, brand new UI (and AI) and different game modes. All of this was done in 2.5 years for two separate systems.
This time includes all creation and scrapping of ideas such as ice climbers and any others we never saw.
I would rather get the same treatment again, maybe not including like 5 characters and 10 stages if we got a new engine to play around with.

The biggest thing for me in Smash is the competitive meta. If they keep the engine the same, we end up with the same characters being the best, and some new characters not even fitting into the same engine.

I guess you have a point there, although i'm not sure if only tweaking the engine wouldn't be enough.
I guess we'll see... waiting for E3 is gonna be painful this year

 

[Deleted User]

I guess you have a point there, although i'm not sure if only tweaking the engine wouldn't be enough.
I guess we'll see... waiting for E3 is gonna be painful this year

no joke.

 

[Futurdreamz]

If you had watched the video I submitted (which I assume not since it wasn't directed at you) you would see that the whole of Smash 4 was made in 2.5 years (both versions). It isn't farfetched to assume that Sakurai knew about the Switch and had development tools around Feb. 2016 (since that was the last DLC update for Smash 4), and if you add 2.5 years you end up at August 2018, leaving them a few months to perfect it even more before November, which was the release date of Smash 4 and just a guess for this one. Not to mention Nintendo themselves called it an "All new game" so, I mean, the evidence really is irrefutable.

I generally avoid YouTube videos completely. I have SDAM which is a type of memory disorder where I function fine but have side effects like videos being a bunch of white noise unless they stick to clear bullet points and flow of logic - something rare enough that I don't bother checking.

And the reason why Smash 4 was completely rewritten as opposed to just porting Meelee or Brawl was Nintendo had been taking feedback on the earlier games to figure out what game mechanics were wanted, then rewrote them from scratch to match what the customers were asking for. Meelee was glitchy and unbalanced, Brawl was floaty and ponderous, but SmashWiiU was effectively perfect. They don't need to rewrite the engine if the end result is going to be indistinguishable. That also means they can create Smash for Switch at a much faster pace (problably once a development team was freed up from Mario odyssey or something) or have more time to stuff additional modes in.

There isn't any reason they'd do that. There isn't any reason they'd give us a teaser trailer for a "DX" version, either. They'd just reveal it if it was Sm4sh, and they wouldn't open on new characters.

Since people keep abbreviating it as Sm4sh or Smash 4, I should remind you that the official name for SmashWiiU is "Super Smash Bros. Wii U." They are not exactly going to call the Switch version "Super Smash Bros. for Wii U Deluxe Edition for Switch," especially when one of the major complaints of the Wii U era was confusing naming conventions. The "New 2DS" is not particulary helpful to my cae though.

I think it'll make launch by end of 2018, but I'm not expecting earlier than holidays. Remember, same engine, it should be pretty easy to work with and tweak.

It WILL be on the shelves soon enough before Christmas that they can try to avoid shortages. I'd expect October/November at the latest.

No... No it can't. You can't change the core of a game with an expansion. Then it's just not the same game. Pokken is a piss poor example, as it's the same game at the base.

Tacking on a few new characters with some slight balance changes doesn't add the ".5" moniker. That's just stupid.

it's Smash. You do NOT change the base. that would be like puttying realistic physics and to scale cars into Mario Kart. But adding content such as SubSpace Emissary can dramatically improve the enjoyment of the game. Kind of like how Splatoon 2 is getting more story campaigns.

 

[Bladexdsl]

betcha it will be like mariokart 8.5

 

[aofelix]

Again, all of that can come out of an expansion. I know people have been used to talk about shit dlc for a long time, but before, in ancient times, that's what dlc were. They were expansions to add all you're talking about.

Can you name me 10 games which had DLCs which changed the move sets, balance of a game, a new roster and new levels?

 

[deinonychus71]

Can you name me 10 games which had DLCs which changed the move sets, balance of a game, a new roster and new levels?

There are way more than 10 games that adds new characters and levels. You take pretty much all the RTS expansions, all the fighting games with dlc... i really dont think there's a need to list them.

If you insist though, Nintendo has proven recently that they're willing to significantly improve their games while re-releasing them:
- Hyrule Warriors Legends adds character, change/improve some mechanics and add levels.
- Splatoon 2 is getting a whole new mode. We dont know everything about it, but that shows that smash could also get an adventure mode even though it'd be built upon smash 4. Splatoon 2 itself was already an enhanced port of Splatoon 1, rebranded for the occasion so people don't bitch about it (seems to be the smash treatement).
- Mario Kart got tracks, characters, modes (pvp only but still) and some gameplay change (new cc, new turbo level, new items)

Based on that, and since Smash Bros is top tier and they want to ensure its success, and given the perfectionism of Sakurai, I don't think its too much of a stretch to assume a similar thing for Smash. Except they're obviously putting a lot of efforts into it.