Login

Nintendo talks Smash Bros. Ultimate being a new game, and engaging more with the eSports scene

Nintendo certainly seems like they're warming up to the eSports scene, and that trend continued with Nintendo's focus on Smash Bros. Ultimate during E3. In an interview with Forbes, Reggie Fils-Aime discussed Smash Bros. Ultimate as a completely new game, as well as how it leads into Nintendo's embracing of eSports and the competitive Smash scene.

First, we did go into a lot of detail on Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, and we did that to make sure consumers across the globe really understood that this is a brand-new Smash Bros. game, with every character from past Smash Bros. games included with updates to the gameplay mechanics. It was very important to drive home that message. That said, the unique thing about Smash Bros. is that it's a great couch co-op game for consumers who aren't all that familiar with the game. They can very much pick up and start smashing right away.

But to the second part of your question, the competitive scene: We have been doing more and more with the competitive Smash scene. We've supported EVO, we've supported a number of the other tournaments. And the Nintendo philosophy is this: We want to first obviously provide a game that really is well-suited for the competitive activity. Certainly Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, we believe, will deliver on that regard. But the other thing that we worked with the EVOs of the world is to have some consistency in the format of the tournaments to make sure that the best players do have an opportunity to compete. And those activities will continue. We believe that letting the communities grow around Smash Bros. as a competitive experience is good for Nintendo and it's good for the pro players of Smash Bros.

Comments

Top Rated Comment

They kind of have to with the sheer volume of stupid "ITS A PORTTT!!!!" comments still flying around.

They're probably trying to avoid the game being labelled as such and having a bad case of misinformation and confusion on their hands.

hawk
Fri Jun 15 18 08:19pm
Rating: 1

They're really pushing the "new game" thing.

What'll really make it a new game to me is the game modes they include. I'd really like something fun and new for single player, if they can manage it.

They kind of have to with the sheer volume of stupid "ITS A PORTTT!!!!" comments still flying around.

They're probably trying to avoid the game being labelled as such and having a bad case of misinformation and confusion on their hands.

Based on what I’ve seen and heard, Smash Ultimate does strike me as an enhanced port of Smash 4, no matter what they say. Of course they’re going to push it as a new game.

That said, what does it matter? It doesn’t make sense to completely rebuild the game. If we get a ton of content it’s pretty irrelevant. They shouldn’t have to do a PR spin on it.

link2dpast
Sun Jun 17 18 06:10pm
(Updated 1 time)

I know it doesn't matter but do you even know what a port is? Smash 4 looks noticeably different from the last Smash from a visual standpoint. Textures are more detailed, lighting is much better, characters have been completely remodelled and all the Menus and presentation have been redesigned. Even returning stages from Smash Brawl to Smash 64, have been completely remodelled from scratch. I'm pretty sure when we get our hands on it, characters won't feel the same way they do on Smash for Wii U. So how is it a port? We were never going to see the same leap we got from Brawl to Wii U. The Switch is more powerful than the Wii U but it's not PS4 level of power.

Meh, semantics. It’s just like Hyrule Warriors Definitive Edition. They improved the textures, lighting, and added content but fundamentally it’s the same game. To me it’s a port. I’m not the only one saying it either. But it shouldn’t matter as long as we enjoy it and it’s looking great.

link2dpast
Mon Jun 18 18 09:36am
(Updated 1 time)

Well, the Truth lies in the semantics so don't brush it aside. Hyrule Warriors Definitive Edition has the exact same presentation as the Wii U version. Levels haven't been redesigned. They just look sharper and the colour palette is brighter. Same music, same progression pattern, Its the exact same game with more content. Smash 4 looks and sounds completely different from Smash Wii U. Fighting has been improved, new fighting mechanics have been added, characters have been redesigned. Your Hyrule Warriors comparison is a terrible example. You're free to ignore everything PLUS Nintendo outright coming out and saying it is a brand new game. It doesn't really matter. It's only a disservice to all the work the development team put into making this game by branding it as a port.

Fighting has been improved, new fighting mechanics have been added, characters have been redesigned.

Like Super Street Fighter 2. They took the previous versions and built on it. New characters, new stages, new sounds, revised mechanics. But it was a port.

Yes a lot more work was obviously put into adding new assets and upgrading Smash Ultimate but it's clearly Smash 4 with a fresh coat of paint. A lot of paint, but that's what it is. Impressions from the show floor even confirmed as much. Of course Nintendo is going to say it's an entirely new game - they don't want people devaluing it. They're going to do the PR spin.

Was there value to Super Street Fighter 2 when it was clearly built on the previous versions? Yes of course. People will want to get their hands on Smash Ultimate either way. Smash 4 was a great game and it doesn't make sense to start over from scratch.

Sorry, I'm still going to call it what it is. I'm also going to pick up the game on day one and enjoy the heck out of it. I don't care that it's a port, but I'm not going to see it as something else in order to tow the line.

Curious what you’d call Mario Galaxy 2? Pretty much reused assets, engine, mechanics, audio, etc to make a “new” game.

Btw I’m of the camp that Smash Ultimate is just a super duper deluxe version of Smash Wii U

Yeah, that's a good question. I probably think of Smash Bros a little differently than something like Mario Galaxy because Smash is a fighting game. A sequel can only feel so different. However, I feel like I can tell the difference between fighting game sequels. Mortal Kombat 3 felt very different than Mortal Kombat 2. I can tell that it's a different game in the same series. Mortal Kombat Trilogy was definitely Mortal Kombat 3 with new content. Smash Ultimate is kind of like MKT. It takes the fighting engine from the last game and packs in all the stages and characters from the previous games to make a "complete" package. A lot of the other MK sequels didn't feel that way... didn't feel like "ports".

I'm going to reiterate again, I don't think this will make Smash Ultimate any less of a game. Mortal Kombat Trilogy wasn't a good game but it didn't have issues because it was a retread. It was built upon an already mediocre game, where as Smash 4 is pretty excellent to begin with.

Maybe "port" isn't the right word for it.... but it's not an entirely "new" game. I don't care what Nintendo says. Some people might hold it against them if they said otherwise, so they really have to stick to the narrative.

They took the previous versions and built on it. New characters, new stages, new sounds, revised mechanics. But it was a port.

The problem with this logic is that if building on top of a previous version of a fighting game means its a port then Tekken 2 and Tekken 3 are ports of the first Tekken. Street Fighter Alpha 2 is a port of Alpha. Dead or Alive 3 is also a port of Dead or Alive 2. All these games were built on top of the shoulders of their predecessor. Some characters move sets were barely even touched going from one iteration to another. The main disparity came from better-looking visuals, new presentation, new characters and stages and new gameplay mechanics. Most of the characters in Smash 4 have completely new Final Smash attacks that do not exist in any other iteration of Smash. So many changes have been made; redesigned characters, new move sets, a new original orchestral soundtrack. This is NO Super Street Fighter 2.

Yeah, Smash seems to have a lot more changes than some of those other games but it still strikes me as an Alpha to Alpha 2 kind of situation. Mortal Kombat Trilogy seems like the most fitting comparison. Port is probably the wrong term for it. Whatever the terminology, it feels like an upgraded version of what came before.

link2dpast
Fri Jun 22 18 07:18am
(Updated 1 time)

"Whatever the terminology, it feels like an upgraded version of what came before."

This is literally the definition of a sequel. Ports are not upgrades. They are the same game with added content.

Who cares? Honestly you people are going to buy it anyway.

Yeah, ultimately I don't care. It's something for me to talk about. I'll be getting Smash Ultimate on day one. Other people might be stingy about it, saying that they won't pay full price for a port. Whatever, their loss. But I'm also not going to white knight for the game. In the end the game's content will speak for itself.

Want to join this discussion?

You should like, totally log in or sign up!