• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

StarTopic Nintendo Direct Speculation |ST8| Press Your (Nintendo Direct) Luck!

Reader mode
Concernt said:
You know.

Octo Expansion was a DLC longer than the base game content with limited canonicity and lots of new mechanics.

So "story is incompatible" isn't a hurdle for DLC, "as big as or bigger than the base game" isn't a hurdle, "new mechanics" aren't a hurdle. What is a hurdle?

Funding and a willing producer. Basically, company will.

If they want to sell something as DLC they can. They can sell puzzle game DLC for a life sim game, and they have! Well, Welcome Amiibo was a free update, but still.

So I don't think it's all that absurd to think Black and White 2 could be provided as DLC for potential Black and White remakes, since it would reuse a lot of assets and I'm sure they wouldn't be too confident in the sales numbers of a physical run of ILCA-style White 2.
Click to expand...
Octo Expansion was very canon. Side Order is basically a sequel to it.
 
Concernt said:
You know.

Octo Expansion was a DLC longer than the base game content with limited canonicity and lots of new mechanics.

So "story is incompatible" isn't a hurdle for DLC, "as big as or bigger than the base game" isn't a hurdle, "new mechanics" aren't a hurdle. What is a hurdle?

Funding and a willing producer. Basically, company will.

If they want to sell something as DLC they can. They can sell puzzle game DLC for a life sim game, and they have! Well, Welcome Amiibo was a free update, but still.

So I don't think it's all that absurd to think Black and White 2 could be provided as DLC for potential Black and White remakes, since it would reuse a lot of assets and I'm sure they wouldn't be too confident in the sales numbers of a physical run of ILCA-style White 2.
Click to expand...
Octo Expansion is canon. The final battle location is reused as the final Shifty Station during Chaos vs Order Splatfest, which ties directly into the events of 3 and Side Order's campaign.
 
Pokemaniac said:
Octo Expansion was very canon. Side Order is basically a sequel to it.
Click to expand...
Yes and no. Octo Expansion's protagonist escaping becomes the playable octoling, except it does, except it doesn't. This playable Octoling receives gear from Deepsea Metro, except they don't, except they do. According to Grizz, this same playable Octoling is the playable Octoling in 3, who is Argent 8, but is, but isn't.

Splatoon's continuity and how it interacts and deals with the separation of the singleplayer characters and the multiplayer playable character contradict itself, and that's... Fine? Splatoon 3 says one thing in the base game, that this is the same Octoling, and says another in Side Order, that the playable Octoling and 8 are different people, and that's... OK.

Octo Expansion is canon to Side Order, for the most part, but that means that the base games contradict the DLCs. And that's fine.
 
Semi Lazy Gamer said:
Octo Expansion is canon. The final battle location is reused as the final Shifty Station during Chaos vs Order Splatfest, which ties directly into the events of 3 and Side Order's campaign.
Click to expand...
The canonicty of Splatfests?

So, how do you think Callie feels about Michaelangelo the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle? 😅

For the rest, see above. Splatoon's continuity is whatever they want it to be.
 
I've never understood the approach that IS takes with avatar characters in Fire Emblem.

Either they're customizable but already have a personality and dialogue that the player can't define (Awakening, Fates) or they get dialogue choices but the player can't customize their appearance (Three Houses).

It's mind boggling.

If you're going to do player avatars, go all in.
 
Concernt said:
Yes and no. Octo Expansion's protagonist escaping becomes the playable octoling, except it does, except it doesn't. This playable Octoling receives gear from Deepsea Metro, except they don't, except they do. According to Grizz, this same playable Octoling is the playable Octoling in 3, who is Argent 8, but is, but isn't.

Splatoon's continuity and how it interacts and deals with the separation of the singleplayer characters and the multiplayer playable character contradict itself, and that's... Fine? Splatoon 3 says one thing in the base game, that this is the same Octoling, and says another in Side Order, that the playable Octoling and 8 are different people, and that's... OK.

Octo Expansion is canon to Side Order, for the most part, but that means that the base games contradict the DLCs. And that's fine.
Click to expand...
There's no contradiction. The Splatoon 1 player character is original Agent 3, now captain. The Splatoon 2 player characters are an Inkling Agent 4 and Octolong Agent 8. Splatoon 3 introduces a new Agent 3 of ambiguous species. They're not meant to be the same person, they've just already worked at Grizzco before if you imported a Splatoon 2 save.

Splatoon generally takes a radically inclusive approach to canon. The multiplayer modes are all canon. The Splatfests are literally based on faxes the idols receive from pre-apocalypse Nintendo. Even the hologram concerts and some of the amiibo releases are canon events.
 
Pokemaniac said:
There's no contradiction. The Splatoon 1 player character is original Agent 3, now captain. The Splatoon 2 player characters are an Inkling Agent 4 and Octolong Agent 8. Splatoon 3 introduces a new Agent 3 of ambiguous species. They're not meant to be the same person, they've just already worked at Grizzco before if you imported a Splatoon 2 save.

Splatoon generally takes a radically inclusive approach to canon. The multiplayer modes are all canon. The Splatfests are literally based on faxes the idols receive from pre-apocalypse Nintendo. Even the hologram concerts and some of the amiibo releases are canon events.
Click to expand...
So it's radically accepting of canon until it's not, and it's the same player character from 2 being played in 3 until it isn't? Come on now. 😅

Splatoon's canon is absolutely all over the place with variations even from region to region, even within the same language in the same game.
 
Concernt said:
So it's radically accepting of canon until it's not, and it's the same player character from 2 being played in 3 until it isn't? Come on now. 😅

Splatoon's canon is absolutely all over the place with variations even from region to region, even within the same language in the same game.
Click to expand...
What makes you think they’re the same character? They don’t even share the same name—it’s Agent 4 in Splatoon 2 (who is specifically an Inkling) and (new) Agent 3 in Splatoon 3 (who can be either an Inkling or Octoling). Agent 4 is also referenced in Side Order, so even within the same game both Agent 4 and (new) Agent 3 are both featured as separate characters. There is no circumstance in which the two are treated as if they’re the same character at all.
 
Bullwine85 said:
Gen 2 Female Oifey keeps the mustache. No ifs, ands, or buts.
Click to expand...
I'm willing to compromise and say it's an accessory that most characters have to buy but is free and automatically equipped as an example for Oifey.

Sin & Punishment said:
Either they're customizable but already have a personality and dialogue that the player can't define (Awakening, Fates) or they get dialogue choices but the player can't customize their appearance (Three Houses).
Click to expand...
I always thought the difference was due to cutscene use. The faces of Robin and Corrin are never shown in cutscenes, as Robin is always hooded and Corrin's features are either in first-person or shown from the shoulder down. Byleth, Shez, and Alear, don't have that luxury, so they instead make them...something else. I could be completely wrong though!

Interestingly enough, there was a Reddit post a week or two ago claiming that most of the Avatars aren't really Avatars. I think there's validity to that, and us treating them like that actually hurts their own character. For example, would Byleth be more accepted if they were treated as simply the main character and not an Avatar? Would Ike still be as loved if in a remake we could choose between Male Ike and Female Ike? These are silly questions I don't have the answer to...nor do I care to answer TBH.
(Although as a side-note, if we take the definition of Avatar as "an incarnation in human form," only Robin, Byleth, and Shez meet the criteria, to varying degrees depending on the story and original intent of their creators, for lack of a better word.)

ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I don’t see anything mechanically or game design wise or art wise that can be carried over in an FE4 Remake and the characters are so shallow that they would all require massive expansion. There isn’t a skeleton here, there’s like three bones.
Click to expand...
I've played roughly five minutes of FE 4 before having to "nope" out due to the age of the game, but I've read a lot of the Oosawa manga and have seen enough gameplay to know that your first sentence is very wrong to the minds of most people who have even a shred experience with FE 4. There's a LOT game design-wise that could carry over! FE 4 is one of the most unique FE games and experiences out there. Huge maps that deploy your entire army, having to buy/sell weapons to trade them, each unit having their own amount of gold, all of these things that are unique to FE 4. One of those is a big change, but the lot of them together? That's a MASSIVE carryover that makes the game still stand out 30 years later. The marriage mechanic alone is a big enough bone. If you liked the child mechanics in Awakening and Fates, or even the Engage mechanic in Engage, those all came from Genealogy.*

Art is a different beast, although I still think you're wrong. Genealogy's artwork was strong enough and detailed enough for characters to come wholesale from the game 30 years ago, to Fire Emblem's first TCG looking pretty much the same, to coming to Cipher looking the same, to coming to Heroes looking the same (and with the same artist from Cipher at times), to looking the same in Engage. Even characters who are not yet in Heroes but were in Cipher like Edain have kept their looks from 30 years ago. (Well, closer to 20 years when her card came out, but the point still stands!)
The only game I can think of where the art design hasn't carried over into a remake was Echoes. Alm in Gaiden, Awakening, and then Echoes are three VERY different art directions! (And the Alm from Awakening is MASSIVELY underappreciated!)

As for calling FE 4's characters shallow...in my - again, VERY LIMITED - experience, there's a nugget of truth in there, but you're exaggerating it to another level. The replacement characters are indeed a tad shallower from what I've seen, but that's due to the nature of being a replacement character. They don't have the space or inherent story importance to be as nuanced as some of the other Gen 2 characters, like Ares or Seliph or Lief. But the Gen 1 characters have quite a bit of depth as far as Fire Emblem games with limited supports per playthrough and conversations go. Could Gen 2 be fleshed out a bit more? Absolutely! But that doesn't mean that there's nothing already there.


ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
If you want a dark story like FE4… Just write another dark story?
Click to expand...
OR - and hear me out - we remake our dark story that not a lot of people played, so while they're waiting on our new dark story, they can enjoy this old one that they haven't experienced because it wasn't widely accessible! And then, after the team that finishes remaking this old dark story, they can move onto making a new light story, so we don't just have one type of story!



*Yes, even the Engage mechanic. The director and producer of Engage explicitly site Genealogy as the origin point for that idea.

Nakanishi:
The idea of the Emblems came up when we were discussing the core gameplay of this title. During those discussions, the marriage systems in Fire Emblem: Genealogy of the Holy War, Fire Emblem Awakening, and Fire Emblem Fates were brought up. In Fire Emblem: Genealogy of the Holy War, the marriage system allows the characters to get married and have children who inherit the abilities of the parent characters. Players can come up with their own pairs and develop those child characters. However, you had to play through the game to a certain point first before you could get married and have children, so it took a very long time until players could see the outcome of the pair they chose.



Yokota:
Even if you think later, “Actually, pairing these two together instead might be better”, you pretty much have to go back to the beginning and start over.



Nakanishi:
So, to let players enjoy this "pairing" gameplay more casually, we came up with this idea of "Emblems".
Click to expand...
 
Concernt said:
So it's radically accepting of canon until it's not, and it's the same player character from 2 being played in 3 until it isn't? Come on now. 😅

Splatoon's canon is absolutely all over the place with variations even from region to region, even within the same language in the same game.
Click to expand...
I think you're confusing some of the general acknowledgements that you don't need to go through the tutorial stuff again with suggestions about the player character's identity. At no point does the game suggest new Agent 3 is the same person as Agent 4 or Agent 8, just that, if you import your save, new Agent 3 starts with some experience with battling and salmon run.
 
EvilChameleon said:
I was going to save this question for Sunday, but since the discussion is drifting that way anyway...

Will the theoretical Fire Emblem 4 remake have a choosable avatar character ala Three Houses and Engage?
Click to expand...
They didn't put an Avatar into Echoes... despite that game coming off of Fates and Awakening, so I don't see a reason why they would do that tbh.
 
0
Yes, I do think the FE4 remake will have an avatar, and there are numerous ways to make it work with FE4's generation split.
V_ac said:
Nah.

After the criticisms with Kris and Shadows of Valentia straight up not having one despite arguably Gaiden being the easiest game to implement one in, I'm pretty sure IS considers avatars to be a new game only thing.

(Having said that however, I 100% think IS will update Mark to more closely resemble modern avatars if FE7 gets a remake.)
Click to expand...
Gaiden would be one of the most difficult to implement it in though? The avatar can't be in two places at once, the events of Alm and Celica's routes are happening concurrently with each other with the player switching between them. It's not like Sacred Stones where you just pick one at a route split and play as them for the whole game.

Not to mention there was less incentive to add one for romance purposes since the game has quite a few pre-existing canon pairings.
 
EvilChameleon said:
I was going to save this question for Sunday, but since the discussion is drifting that way anyway...

Will the theoretical Fire Emblem 4 remake have a choosable avatar character ala Three Houses and Engage?
Click to expand...
It could go either way, but I think it will ultimately depend if they think a modern FE game can be commercially viable without a playable avatar character.

One thing to consider when bringing up Echoes, to add to what everyone else has already said about IS not adding an avatar to that game, is that the director was a huge fan of Gaiden and wanted the remake to be as faithful as possible to the original. It's possible that whichever director they assign to the FE 4 Remake has the same mindset for the SNES game but in any case, I don't think Echoes can be used as a set-in-stone precedent by default just because it's the most recent remake IS made.
 
EvilChameleon said:
I was going to save this question for Sunday, but since the discussion is drifting that way anyway...

Will the theoretical Fire Emblem 4 remake have a choosable avatar character ala Three Houses and Engage?
Click to expand...
No. At best it will most likely have a few new characters like Faye and Berkut were in SoV.

The only way to have an avatar/tactician character in FE4 is if they randomly appear during the second half of the game.
 
0
I am usually against remakes -- for example, I think Link's Awakening Switch was unnecessary, and that in most cases some QoL hacks are more than enough to bring older games up to modern standards (see: Super Metroid Redux). But I can't wait for FE4r. Why? Because the original game is unique and fascinating, but it's old.

The huge, giant maps are a pain to navigate because the game lacks a "Go there" option (a la PoR/RD), and that's something you cannot just hack after the fact. The balance is all over the place, with some characters ascending a God status and others completely useless as soon as they enter the game (this is also true in other FE games, but it is especially true in FE4). The story is intricate with many characters playing their "Game of Thrones", but many bosses are this guy with a slightly different palette, which is both comical and confusing. The world lore and the character's backstory have their charm, but the game refuses to explore them fully, and in some cases, you have to make inferences or delve into secondary sources.

A Fire Emblem 4 both faithful to the original version and designed with more modern sensibilities would be incredible.
 
Gingerbread Man said:
I am usually against remakes -- for example, I think Link's Awakening Switch was unnecessary, and that in most cases some QoL hacks are more than enough to bring older games up to modern standards (see: Super Metroid Redux). But I can't wait for FE4r. Why? Because the original game is unique and fascinating, but it's old.
Click to expand...
I do hope you realize both Link's Awakening and Super Metroid are older then Fire Emblem 4.
 
BassForever said:
I do hope you realize both Link's Awakening and Super Metroid are older then Fire Emblem 4.
Click to expand...
I don't really understand where you are coming from. They are older by 2-3 years, yes, but they are broadly part of the same "era" of gaming, and I named them off the top of my head as two games that (in my opinion) do not really need a remake, unlike FE4.
 
Gingerbread Man said:
I don't really understand where you are coming from. They are older by 2-3 years, yes, but they are broadly part of the same "era" of gaming, and I named them off the top of my head as two games that (in my opinion) do not really need a remake, unlike FE4.
Click to expand...
I'd argue anything from before the HD era of gaming can absolutely use a remake just to bring the visuals up to modern standards. On top of that while some of us grew up with them, adding in better/more modern sign posting and tutorials can be especially helpful in a game like Super Metroid, along with tweaking the lore to better fit the overall continuity, and rebalancing the game around Samus's modern mechanics ie the counter. That may not due much for you, but we've had plenty of threads of people who struggled if they didn't grow up with Super Metroid to know that just a few qol improvements in a remaster isn't enough.
 
I don’t know fami, I think remaking a game that has never been released outside of japan is a good idea.
I would even say that they need to remake fe3 again and finally release it worldwide since it’s the marth story that’s actually good.
 
BassForever said:
I'd argue anything from before the HD era of gaming can absolutely use a remake just to bring the visuals up to modern standards. On top of that while some of us grew up with them, adding in better/more modern sign posting and tutorials can be especially helpful in a game like Super Metroid, along with tweaking the lore to better fit the overall continuity, and rebalancing the game around Samus's modern mechanics ie the counter. That may not due much for you, but we've had plenty of threads of people who struggled if they didn't grow up with Super Metroid to know that just a few qol improvements in a remaster isn't enough.
Click to expand...
This is a thing I noticed.

A lot of people who grew up with games are willing to put their issues aside, becuase that’s how games were then.

I Persia ly hate games like that cause I never played games in the 90’s or 80’s, just playing them while used to modern standards and a lot of games that a lot of people say are classics, are just kinda clunky And annoying to play.

It isn’t really fair difficulty or mechancis imo.
 
Djehuty said:
This is a thing I noticed.

A lot of people who grew up with games are willing to put their issues aside, becuase that’s how games were then.

I Persia ly hate games like that cause I never played games in the 90’s or 80’s, just playing them while used to modern standards and a lot of games that a lot of people say are classics, are just kinda clunky And annoying to play.

It isn’t really fair difficulty or mechancis imo.
Click to expand...
The "Test of Time" is an important factor for older games for modern audiences. A lot of clunkier aspects of their design shine though and can come off as annoying, but a stellar older title is one that can avoid those issues, or at least mitigate them despite limitations. I'd argue pretty much every game from the 6th generation onwards lacks this sort of barrier thanks to how games were standardized during and after that generation, but that does mean the early-3D era has aged very poorly. SNES titles are in a similar boat, but a select amount of NES games have also aged quite well due to good design and tight controls.
 
SoldierDelta said:
The "Test of Time" is an important factor for older games for modern audiences. A lot of clunkier aspects of their design shine though and can come off as annoying, but a stellar older title is one that can avoid those issues, or at least mitigate them despite limitations. I'd argue pretty much every game from the 6th generation onwards lacks this sort of barrier thanks to how games were standardized during and after that generation, but that does mean the early-3D era has aged very poorly. SNES titles are in a similar boat, but a select amount of NES games have also aged quite well due to good design and tight controls.
Click to expand...
For me I only really enjoyed 2 n64 games (paper Mario, Kirby crystal shards)

Meanwhile on snes the only game I didn’t super like was super castlevania 4, snes deifntly aged a lot better imo.

I also think ps1 despite worse graphics has also generally aged better than n64 due to increased storage allowing for more stuff.

But maybe that’s just me.
 
For me Super Metroid is in my top 5 games of all time and I wasn't even born yet when it released. Imo it would be a waste to remake it, as it's widely available and perfectly playable through NSO. The controls are somewhat clunky, but it's a Metroid game, not a platformer.

On the other hand, I also played DKC 1 and 2 and think those could benefit a lot from a remake with widescreen, as they're a bit too reflex-based now. Whereas plenty of others regard those as perfect as is.

It all basically comes down to preferences mostly with remakes tbh. One thing for sure though is that availability matters. FE4 is perfect for a remake in that regard, as it never got released outside of Japan. TTYD qualifies as well in that regard given that it was never once rereleased and its price had sky-rocketed.
 
JazzyFuture said:
Super Metroid could really benefit from a remake and I'm tired of pretending it wouldn't. Just even some polish changes like making Samus control more like the games after Super, a better alt weapon system, etc. It's a great game, but it is not without issues.
Click to expand...
Yeah, my position on Super Metroid is that it influenced some of my favorite games but it’s not a game I love playing
 
JazzyFuture said:
Super Metroid could really benefit from a remake and I'm tired of pretending it wouldn't. Just even some polish changes like making Samus control more like the games after Super, a better alt weapon system, etc. It's a great game, but it is not without issues.
Click to expand...
A Super Metroid game with better wall jumping would be a dream.

Honestly I don't see anything wrong with having a remake for a beloved classic. Sometimes having a new coat of paint will help reignite interest in both old and new fans.

I'm currently playing through the oracle games right now, and I am currently loving it. But if they were to announce a remake I would welcome it just due to the better control options it would have.
 
Djehuty said:
For me I only really enjoyed 2 n64 games (paper Mario, Kirby crystal shards)

Meanwhile on snes the only game I didn’t super like was super castlevania 4, snes deifntly aged a lot better imo.

I also think ps1 despite worse graphics has also generally aged better than n64 due to increased storage allowing for more stuff.

But maybe that’s just me.
Click to expand...
If you want a 2D game that's aged quite well on N64, I would very much recommend Mischief Makers. It was designed around the N64's 6 face buttons so it doesn't play the greatest on a modern controller, but I would definitely still recommend it.
 
JazzyFuture said:
Super Metroid could really benefit from a remake and I'm tired of pretending it wouldn't. Just even some polish changes like making Samus control more like the games after Super, a better alt weapon system, etc. It's a great game, but it is not without issues.
Click to expand...
Yes, it needs to be remade one day. It doesn’t have to be in the next few years, but at some point in the next decade I could see it.
 
0
Something about the idea of a Super Metroid remake raises my hackles like nothing else. I'm not a huge remake proponent to begin with, but there's no other game where I'm automatically like "no, absolutely not". It's not so much that it's impossible to improve, as it is that any remake would surely either add things that make the game worse or be so slavishly faithful that it would be make or break on how well they recreated it, at which point why are you even doing this?

It's one of the most elegantly designed games ever made, and all of its biggest issues are already addressed in Redux.

DenkeyKong said:
On the other hand, I also played DKC 1 and 2 and think those could benefit a lot from a remake with widescreen, as they're a bit too reflex-based now. Whereas plenty of others regard those as perfect as is.
Click to expand...
The GBA ports actually did zoom out the screen a bit, but this introduced issues where secrets that were supposed to be off-camera are now plainly visible. It's most obvious with the beginning of Krockhead Klamber, where the Zingers you were supposed to hear but not see on the left are just there, making the secret they're hinting at no longer much of a secret. So at minimum you would need to redesign the levels somewhat to make this work, at which point it would probably be easier to just change the enemy placements or something. I never felt the screen size was an issue for DKC though and thought the levels were designed very well around it, with the exception of Rickety Race. That is just pure memorization because of how fast you're going, fuck that one.
 
Remaking Mario 64 and OOT when those resources could go towards new games is not something I'm particularly jonesing for.
 
JazzyFuture said:
Both official and unofficial remakes of Mario 64 and OoT already exist.
Click to expand...
I hate when “unofficial” gets brought up. That’s not what the mass people want. We want actual remakes of these games from Nintendo. There are no remakes from the ground up for either from Nintendo. Now, is the time to do it on Switch 2 or the following gen.
 
Dark Cloud said:
I hate when “unofficial” gets brought up. That’s not what the mass people want. We want actual remakes of these games from Nintendo. There are no remakes from the ground up for either from Nintendo. Now, is the time to do it on Switch 2 or the following gen.
Click to expand...
I brought them up because they are very good ways to play those games. Like, most people probably don't play Doom running on DOS or DOSBox, they'll probably get a source port, official or otherwise.

They have already gotten official remakes though, I would much rather effort for remakes go to games that have had nothing ever.
 
0
I would prefer them to remake Wind Waker than OoT. WW has so much untapped potential, it could be a game for the ages if today's Nintendo made it.

Ocarina of Time is perfect as is, the 3D version looks amazing, just release that in HD and that's it.
 
JazzyFuture said:
Super Metroid could really benefit from a remake and I'm tired of pretending it wouldn't. Just even some polish changes like making Samus control more like the games after Super, a better alt weapon system, etc. It's a great game, but it is not without issues.
Click to expand...
I love Super Metroid, but I end up agreeing with this idea. We've had Zero Mission and Samus Returns, Super Metroid is next on the list. One of the things that made me reconsider my opinion on the subject was seeing how, to my great joy, my nephews had loved Dread and how little receptive they were to Super Metroid on NSO. I fully understand the reluctance to denature Super Metroid, so I think the people handling a remake will have to be subtle and intelligent (systems), perhaps introducing some flexibility.

However, we're wasting our efforts, Nintendo is dependent on Mercury Steam and doesn't have a sufficient in-house team. We already don't have an obvious port of Samus Returns to Switch, so hoping for a Super Metroid remeke is unrealistic in my opinion.
 
0
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top Bottom