Topic: Switchmas Eve Rumors and Speculations Thread

[BranDonk Kong]

Ports aren't necessarily good for people who already own those games, but they're good for the vast majority of gamers who do not own a Wii U.

[Adrock]

Ports are the reality of every system's early life. There are still some decent exclusives and original titles. It's good for Nintendo to get the ports out sooner rather than later. Consumers get some of the best of Wii U's lineup on a more promising platform. Nintendo is essentially telling people not to even bother trying to find Wii U on the cheap. Skip it and get the better versions on Switch. That's a really smart move even if a fraction of Wii U owners will refuse to buy the ports outright.

The key is to not treat them as brand new games. They should be $50 or less and feature some marketing label that admits they're ports without drawing attention to the fact that they were Wii U games. "Remastered" isn't bad per se, just a little cliche. Maybe something like "Switch Essentials," "Enhanced for Nintendo Switch," or "Better on Switch."

Nintendo's entire back catalog up to Wii should be on Virtual Console within a year, if not sooner. It's entire Wii U output should be ported within two years between new titles. Splatoon, Mario Kart 8, Super Smash Bros. for Wii U Switch, and Super Mario Maker should be the priority as launch or launch window ports. The rest should pad the release schedule for those first two years.

[BlackNMild2k1]

How about Switch'd Up.

Mario Kart 8 Switch'd Up

[MagicCow64]

The port strategy is a bit of a gamble. Theoretically it's good to give the games some extra polish/content while putting them in front of a new audience. But during the launch window how many Switches are going to sell to people fresh or returned to a Nintendo platform? You have to assume that the ~13 million WiiU owners are the hardest of Nintendo's core, and the most likely early adopters, and to them (I would include myself here), even souped-up ports of the likes of Mario Kart and Smash Bros. might not do much for them given how much time was likely put into the alpha forms.

If the Switch takes off like a rocket then this is basically moot, but if it tracks between WiiU and Gamecube, it'll be something of an oatmeal first few years for the Switch.

[ThePerm]

If Nintendo has proven anything, it's that Nintendo fans will rebuy games.

[ShyGuy]

Re-releases  seem to be pretty popular with this gen. I think the key will be if re-releases are the majority of the big games, or if there is a healthy sprinkling of new games and third party games high profile games.

[Kairon]

There may be a significant representation of ports on that list, but they're mostly ports of franchises that can have a real strong evergreen effect across a system's entire lifespan: Mario Kart, Smash, Pokemon, Splatoon.

I've always like the idea of getting these types of games out early in a system's lifespan because they're just the sorts of titles that are instantly essential, so every new Switch owner ever will probably give these titles serious consideration as to whether to buy or rebuy them.

Additionally, I'm hoping that not having to worry so hard about delivering a "Mario Kart" franchise on the system means that Nintendo's dev teams can move onto new and different and compelling things sooner rather than later.

Plus these are simply just strong names to have at the ready when going out to market the switch.

Now while I'd be less than enthused seeing a lineup of ports on a new console, that list also shows a new Mario, a new Zelda, and a new Pikmin. That's exciting to me no matter which way I slice it. Plus I'm hoping that the third party offerings, slim though they are guaranteed to be on a Nintendo system, are compelling. I've never played Skyrim, I'm definitely game for a Mario Rabbids RPG, I'm decided on Just Dance 2017, sounds like I'm going to get a Basketball game... and is that a Telltale game I see?

I'm starting to worry that if Year one is this awesome, year two can't be anything but disappointment. Maybe Switch year 2 will actually get some original IP from Nintendo First Party?

[Spak-Spang]

Everyone is saying the same thing, but basically...if the port is good and adds some value to the product then it will be good for both new players and Nintendo fans.  I also agree if you are going to do the port thing do it the first year, only where it will be hard to have enough games for your system out the first year anyway.  Price them at around $40.00 and include all DLC content if available, and if possible add one or two new features.  So for starters.

Super Mario Kart 8:  I thought adding a new cup would be good...but perhaps that is too much work.  Then how about adding a new racer, and perhaps tweaking the battle mode to make it better...or include a new battle mode the rips off Rocket League.  Sweet bonus that could re-sell the game easy. 

Smash Bros:  Add a few more Redone Retro levels could be easily done.  Add all the exclusive content from the 3DS version and Wii U version into one package, then add Ice Climbers.  That is easily a package worth paying for. 

Splatoon:  More weapons, more customization.  New play modes like 4 team battle royals or 1 on 1 battles and add new single player content...and of course a year of free new content like levels and such. 

Super Mario Maker Port:  Add Slopes, and perhaps Character exclusive power ups like Fire Flower allowing Link to Shoot his arrows.  (Think Super Mario Bros Crossover...but official)  Also add more enemies, and add a new feature of boss rooms. 

I think Nintendo could really have something special with the Switch and the Wii U ports if they are careful.

[MagicCow64]

Well that's the thing, yes, evergreen titles are good off the bat, but this presumes a fresh audience for these titles plus enough credulous WiiU owners to double dip. That's where I'm a little skeptical. Personally, I'm not going to spend even $40 on Mario Kart 8.5. I'd probably spend another $15 on four more cups, a la the DLC, but I don't think there's going to be any upgrade option or discount or whatever. Same for Smash Bros. and XBX (though that one's a little different). I can wait for full sequels.

The cumulative effect here is making me question whether I need the console in the first year, especially if Animal Crossing and Pokemon Eclipse are the big holiday games. New Zelda, Mario, and Pikmin will stay good. I'm an early WiiU adopter, so I worry about feedback cycles here.

[ThePerm]

I have no problem with the ports of
Smash and Mario Kart. They are our madden. They really are. All I want is an updated roster every couple of years, and some neat new levels/tracks. Splatoon could easily be one of those games in the future.

However, Switch could benefit from ports of Wii U games. People didn't buy the Wii U , but could easily buy the Switch instead. They can collect a whole library of games they missed. I never got Xenoblade, and would not mind getting an upgraded version.

It would be really nice if you had the wii u version if you could register it and download it for switch though.

[Adrock]

5 ports of Wii U games in the first 6 months is overkill and makes me want to buy the console at launch less than before. I need to see new games and those new games need to be sprinkled in with ports of old stuff.

The cumulative effect here is making me question whether I need the console in the first year

Nintendo is probably okay with this if it means convincing everyone else that Switch is a fresh start for the company and the new platform is viable. Neither of you are saying you don't want Switch. Rather, you may not want it right away which is a completely reasonable and justifiable position. That's an important distinction because the other side decided Wii U was not worth their time or money. And it doesn't mean Nintendo is turning its backs on Wii U owners, particularly early adopters. It means Nintendo understands that a platform can't succeed with 13 million units sold.

Lack of content was one of the main reason Wii U faltered its two years. If Nintendo can use what probably comes out to three actual years of Wii U content to prop up Switch and make it appealing to people who dismissed the platform those games originally released on, it will already do better on Switch than it did on Wii U.

[Soren]

My line of thinking is mostly predicated on the fact that we won't know anything new until January 12, and that the current rumor trend of ports was in part pushed by the games we saw in the Switch trailer. Part of the reason I was ok with the Wii U's extreme software drought this year was because I assumed (and still do) that Nintendo is bringing new experiences and new games to Switch, not also devoting time and resources to games I have already played and moved on from.

Because who am I kidding? I'll buy a Switch at launch, and I'll probably buy a lot of these "remastered ports". But I'm not going to play 150 hours of a "remastered" Splatoon like I did with the original on Wii U. Ditto with Mario Maker and Smash Bros. If these games don't bring any new, substantial elements that switch up(sorry) the gameplay a bit then it just isn't worth a lot of my time. I get the "it's new to me" element it will bring to people who weren't Wii U owners. That's just not the case for me.

The only port on the list that interested me was the Xenoblade port, in part because I know the game will get a noticeable bump in graphics and performance on the new hardware.. But I probably won't be able to carry over my save file so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Evan_B]

Nintendo is probably okay with this if it means convincing everyone else that Switch is a fresh start for the company and the new platform is viable. Neither of you are saying you don't want Switch. Rather, you may not want it right away which is a completely reasonable and justifiable position. That's an important distinction because the other side decided Wii U was not worth their time or money. And it doesn't mean Nintendo is turning its backs on Wii U owners, particularly early adopters. It means Nintendo understands that a platform can't succeed with 13 million units sold.

Lack of content was one of the main reason Wii U faltered its two years. If Nintendo can use what probably comes out to three actual years of Wii U content to prop up Switch and make it appealing to people who dismissed the platform those games originally released on, it will already do better on Switch than it did on Wii U.

Ah, yes. I completely understand this train of thought, and I support it fully.

[Adrock]

Nice straw man, Evan.

[nickmitch]

I think Splatoon will be billed as a sequel.  All they have to do is add a few more online stages, remix some older ones, add a few new weapons, throw in the Octolings that were already planned (and workable based on that hacker?), and do another single player mode (which was a last-minute add in the first game, right?) and that would be good enough for a "2".  They were adding stuff to that game for a while after release, so I wouldn't be surprised if the team just kept working  and could everything they didn't add to the first enough for a sequel.

[Evan_B]

Nice straw man, Evan.

Thanks! I finally figured out how to do it just right.

However, none of those points address the people that have wasted(?) the Wii U's life waiting for games and now want something new. And while not all 13 million Wii U owners feel that way, there's likely a sizable portion that does, but will begrudgingly buy these Switch ports because of the lack of backwards compatibility, or those that also feel that way, but will buy the ports willingly because of the "newness" of commercialism. I'm just seeing the Wii U and Switch situation much more transparently. Why buy one at launch when the system will arguably sell for the exact same price down the line with a much better and likely "Select-ified" library two or three years down the line? Why buy it at launch when I already own the games they're releasing for it (the answer is, they'll shut down the online services for the Wii U versions as further incentive to make you "Switch")? That's the situation I wasn't smart enough to see with Wii U and now I'm an embittered skeptic that hates video games.

[Kairon]

Personally, I'm not enthused for ports, but that rumored year 1 with Mario, Zelda, and Pikmin from 1st Party is pretty solid to me as a Nintendo fan. And hope springs eternal for 3rd party gems.

I WILL say though, that I consider Mario Kart as not really changing much over the last series of games. And HECK, half of the stages in Mario Kart 8 were OLD stages. I'm not sure that Mario Kart 8 really delivered that much in mindblowingly new content anyways.

Also, I've been eagerly waiting for more Single Player content before jumping into Splatoon (My brother is the squidkid in the house). A robust single player mode, to me personally, is more than enough justification to buy a Splatoon Sequel/Port/Portquel/Sequort.

That said I'd probably sit out a Xenoblade port entirely, and put off buying a Mario Maker port for a lengthy amount of time. (Gotta find time to play NEW games you know!)

[Soren]

So just to throw some more speculation into the air:

http://kotaku.com/two-nintendo-fan-games-removed-from-game-awards-nominee-1789223036

So why would Dorito Pope and the Game Awards bend over backwards to appease Nintendo (one of the sponsors this year) and damage their credibility as an awards show??

Call me crazy but maybe something Switch related gets teased at the Game Awards.

[Ian Sane]

I think if the Switch has too many ports it may create the narrative that the Switch is just a repackaged Wii U.  I get the desire to fill up the launch lineup and how most people didn't play these games but the systems needs enough unique content to provide value for Wii U owners and newcomers alike.  Ports of titles like Mario Kart and SSB would be really odd as the expectation is for a new entry of those series per generation.  So if the Switch gets a port does it get a new Mario Kart and SSB as well at some point or do the ports "count" as that generation's entry?

And of course if the Wii U library was such a system seller then the Switch wouldn't exist and we would be talking about upcoming Wii U releases.  So we get a 3D Mario and a bunch of Wii U ports?  Those games didn't sell Wii U's when they were new.  The Gamecube suggests that 3D Mario in a vacuum doesn't move systems.  Nintendo's familiar franchises tend to sell huge on a system like the Wii where a large userbase is sold on the console by something else but don't tend to move systems on their own.  If Mario was a killer app these days then the Gamecube and the Wii U would have sold gangbusters.  The general public is perfectly content to get their gaming on without Mario.

Zelda sounds like a potential system seller (even though it isn't exclusive... maybe) because it's changing up the formula and comes across as ambitious.  Nothing else seems like it would attract much attention beyond the Nintendo fanbase that were a certain sale anyway.  Based on the rumours the Switch's concept seems like it's best selling point.

[MagicCow64]

I take your point, Adrock, and I hope that's how it shakes out.

But I also have the Iansane fear tendrils about how a port-laden Switch launch period could encourage a certain narrative among the gaming press/commentariat that could smother the system in the crib. But I suppose those folks were hard sells anyway, and they're hoping for a fresh blue ocean infusion. Bless their hearts, I hope it works!

But to follow up to an above point, it sounds like they should really try to rebrand the hell out of the WiiU games and not emphasize at all that they're not "fresh". As was mentioned, they could slap the word Switch on everything, but it might be worth it to go so far as to just flat out call things Splatoon 2, MarioKart 9, and so forth, where possible. Might piss a few people off, but most Nintendo hands will know the score.

[Mop it up]

Ports are what sold the PS4 and XBONE for a while, so I don't see why it can't work for Switch, as long as nothing else is screwed up.

Of course, that means I, myself, won't be interested in the Switch for a long time, but as an owner of both Wii U and 3DS, I'm used to disappointments and screwovers.

[nickmitch]

Ports are what sold the PS4 and XBONE for a while, so I don't see why it can't work for Switch, as long as nothing else is screwed up.

Yeah, updates of older games is what helped my buy a PS3, let alone a PS4.  This wouldn't be a new trend, just new for Nintendo.

[Evan_B]

I'll play the hell out of a Ubisoft strategy RPG though. I loved the last one I played.

[Spak-Spang]

I still hope that the ports rumor is just a bad rumor because of speculation.

We already know the Mario Kart footage was new.  It could be similar tracks, but some of the core gameplay could be different.  I would love for a more modern take on the Mario Kart 64 design...instead of the direction the series has been going. 

Also there has to be some "B-Sides tracks" for Mario Kart 8 and "B-sides" Stages not used in Smash Bros they can add.  As well as adding back in Ice Climbers...and perhaps Pokemon Trainer. 

[Luigi Dude]

I really doubt Mario Kart and Smash Bros are going to be ports or even just slightly enhanced.  These are evergreen titles that sell throughout the systems lifespans and both also sold pretty well on the Wii U already.  Both games are more then likely going to be labeled as new installments in their series with a shitload of new content over their Wii U counterparts.

Like I've said before, by the time the Switch is released it'll have been 3 years since the base game for Mario Kart 8 was released and 2 years since the last DLC.  If Smash Bros doesn't come out until closer to fall then it'll have been almost 3 years since it's base game was also released and over 1.5 years since it's last DLC.  This is plenty of time for the main teams add enough content to each to make what could be considered a full blown sequel.

The port rumors probably come from the fact both games are running off the exact engine as their predecessors and reusing a shitload of assets instead of being build from the ground up like Nintendo sequels usually are.  People have to remember someone like Emily Rogers said before E3, Breath of the Wild would contain the option to play as a female Link, something Aonuma joked about they thought at the very beginning of development but then decided "But what would Zelda do then?"  A lot of the time these rumors get based off of old information from sources who are no longer apart of the development team.  Mario Kart and Smash Bros could have easily start development as basic expansion packs, similar to how games like Ocarina of Time and Mario Galaxy 2 originally started as expansion packs from their predecessors as well before being turned into full blown sequels, build heavily off the assest of the previous to save development time, which is more then likely what Nintendo wants to do with both installments for the Switch so they can get them out as quickly as possible.