Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Smash Ultimate is not a port... and not a brand new game?

Would you say Smash Ultimate is...

A port 18 14.75%
 
A brand new game 74 60.66%
 
A compilation 23 18.85%
 
Something else 7 5.74%
 
Total:122
irstupid said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:
Going forward I'm going to use the term "enhanced remaster collection." That more closely describes what this is in my eyes than enhanced port does. It's laughably long but eh!

Why not just call it Super Smash Bros Ultimate.

Whether its a port, new game, remaster, collection, ect its the ULTIMATE edition.

Again singling me out for some reason, but whatevs! Naturally that wouldn't answer the thread's question.

Around the Network
Lonely_Dolphin said:
Going forward I'm going to use the term "enhanced remaster compilation." That more closely describes what this is in my eyes than enhanced port does. It's laughably long but eh!

EDIT: Compilation instead of collection.

SSB Ultimate is to all the previous SSB games that what Alive 2007 is to all the previous Daft Punk albums. "enhanced remaster compilation" is a very accurate description of what this game wants to be.



CaptainExplosion said:
TruckOSaurus said:

The biggest difference is on Bridge of Eldin, the background scenery is so much better on Switch.

They've had quite the time to improve it since then. :)

Well they could have improved it for Wii U but didn't.



Signature goes here!

pikashoe said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:
Going forward I'm going to use the term "enhanced remaster compilation." That more closely describes what this is in my eyes than enhanced port does. It's laughably long but eh!

EDIT: Compilation instead of collection.

You might as well put sequel somewhere in there as well hahaha:)

Nope, enhanced and sequel are mutually exclusive.

If distinct Call of Duty games made with the Infinity Ward engine are new games than so is Smash Ultimate IMO. New characters, stages, and items in addition to significant mechanical changes. Likely yet-to-be-announced new game modes.

It's a new game. Don't make this more complicated than it needs to be.



Around the Network
MrWayne said:
Lonely_Dolphin said:
Going forward I'm going to use the term "enhanced remaster compilation." That more closely describes what this is in my eyes than enhanced port does. It's laughably long but eh!

EDIT: Compilation instead of collection.

SSB Ultimate is to all the previous SSB games that what Alive 2007 is to all the previous Daft Punk albums. "enhanced remaster compilation" is a very accurate description of what this game wants to be.

Oh wow, surprised someone actually agrees!

 

TruckOSaurus said:
CaptainExplosion said:

They've had quite the time to improve it since then. :)

Well they could have improved it for Wii U but didn't.

They were too busy actually making new content trololololol.

Wyrdness said:
Hiku said:
...

-----

The point of the Marth discussion never was about Marth.
It was about how you claimed that "it doesn't matter that it incentivized Yun to play more aggressively because he was already an aggressive character."
When I pointed out that the same thing applies to characters who already were aggressive in Smash in regards to  your comment: "everyone in Ultimate universally has to come out and attack regardless of the match up", you magically ignored the point completely, and only talked about Marth. "Pick any aggressive character" I said.
But no.
Marth, Marth,Marth, Marth, Marth, Marth.

And that pretty much sums up your tactics here.
Since I provided a link to a top FGC player calling it 4.5, you'll have to provide a link of a top FGC player saying the same about SFV. 

Otherwise, you may as well have heard it from randoms. And that's a false equivalent.
And even if that did occur, those comments would obviously not have been made for the same reasons, as I pointed out.
SFV had a brand new engine, all new character models, mainly new animations (some were recycled), all new stages, all new music, etc.

Either way, as fun as it sounds to continue with the endless ambiguation and avoiding the point at all cost, when someone repeatedly answers a simple, specific, question with "I already told you" (I even made a template for you to make it easier), that's a pretty good indication of what's going on.

As such I'll probably pass.

But it was interesting to hear that you already ruled out the possibility of Marth's meta possibly changing in the way it normally can when going to a traditional new Smash.

Last edited by Hiku - on 13 June 2018

Wyrdness said:
outlawauron said:
I think a lot of people are hung up on the word "port" because it's seen as a dig or a negative. If it wasn't new to Switch and released on the Wii U instead, it would simply be called an expansion or enhanced version. As the people who have played it have said it's Smash 4.5, I don't see the need to go to such great lengths to pretend the game is more than it is.

People who played Halo 3 called it 2.5 at first, people who played SFV called it 4.5 at first as well so that's not a concrete argument fact is the game is very different to S4 so can't be a port otherwise you may as well call games like Tekken 7 or Soul Calibur 6 ports.

I was a pretty big Halo 3 player at launch and was even posting on this forum at that time and I never read that criticism. ¯_(ツ)_/¯



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Lonely_Dolphin said:
MrWayne said:

SSB Ultimate is to all the previous SSB games that what Alive 2007 is to all the previous Daft Punk albums. "enhanced remaster compilation" is a very accurate description of what this game wants to be.

Oh wow, surprised someone actually agrees!

21 people voted for compilation, so we're (not) alone. :D

Last edited by MrWayne - on 13 June 2018

Hiku said:
Wyrdness said:

-----

The point of the Marth discussion never was about Marth.
It was about how you claimed that "it doesn't matter that it incentivized Yun to play more aggressively because he was already an aggressive character."
When I pointed out that the same thing applies to characters who already were aggressive in Smash in regards to  your comment: "everyone in Ultimate universally has to come out and attack regardless of the match up", you magically ignored the point completely, and only talked about Marth. "Pick any aggressive character" I said.
But no.
Marth, Marth,Marth, Marth, Marth, Marth.

And that pretty much sums up your tactics here.

As fun as it sounds to continue with the endless ambiguation and avoiding the point at all cost, when someone repeatedly answers a simple, specific, question with "I already told you" (I even made a template for you to make it easier), that's a pretty good indication of what's going on.

As such, I'll have to pass.

But it was interesting to hear that you already ruled out the possibility of Marth's meta possibly changing in the way it normally can when going to a traditional new Smash.

I'm talked about Marth because you keep bringing the character up that's how a debate works you brought the character up and I responded you still don't get the point on Yun, in SFIV he was already being played in an aggressive manner which undermines your point in how a few options encouraged aggressive play that was the point you then brought up Marth for what ever reason all that's clear is that you bring up random things which ironically you keep tripping over in your arguments.

The irony doesn't stop there as in this post you moan about me going on about Marth then turn around and start talking about the character yourself what's comical is that I didn't even mention anything about meta in the next game it's like you hallucinated an argument in your head and responded to it on the forum.