Jonneh3003
Banned
Should Halo 3 have included the Halo 2 campaign? I don't think it should be expected at all.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Should Splatoon 2 include the original game's campaign?
- Thread starter Jofamo
- Start date
thepenguin55
Member
I don't think anyone is saying that Nintendo is or should feel obligated to do this but it would be cool to get that campaign on Switch somehow because not enough people experienced it. While I'm certainly not one of those people that are like "they just copy and pasted Splatoon 1"; Splatoon 2 is clearly an evolution of the first game (which is all it needs to be).
They would only need to port over the Splatoon 1 campaign because I feel confident in saying that going from Splatoon 2 PVP back to Splatoon 1 PVP probably would not be a great time. It's like the Left 4 Dead games. If Splatoon 1 is Left 4 Dead then Splatoon 2 is Left 4 Dead 2. L4D2 was slightly better looking than L4D1 (much like how Splatoon 2 is slightly better looking than Splatoon 1) and mechanically L4D2 is the same as the first game but better (with additions like melee combat) making the first game difficult for many to go back to. Having said that, Valve eventually patched the PC version of L4D2 to add the first game's characters and stages to L4D2 for free, so you could use those great new mechanics in the classic L4D stages which were still great even with the new mechanics that weren't designed with the first game in mind but they meshed with the game just fine.
The point I'm making is that including SFIV in SFV wouldn't really make sense because they don't have the same roster, the same feel or the same art style and including Skyward Sword with Breath of the Wild wouldn't make sense because of the radically different design philosophies the two games have. Splatoon 2 is a natural evolution of Splatoon 1 and thus remaking the Splatoon 1 campaign in the Splatoon 2 engine and releasing it as Splatoon 2 dlc would be great! (that was a mouthful...)
Um... how is MK8 Deluxe not a port? Sure, it's an enhanced port, but it's still a port.
Hari Seldon
Member
Yeah I have no interest at all in re-buying MK8 for the Switch. I hope that the opportunity cost of porting this game is not preventing them from working on the sequel.
Jonneh3003
Banned
Nonsense. There are plenty of sequels that look more similar than Splatoon and Splatoon 2. The fact Splatoon 2 is tailored for a different console is a pretty big justification and it'll be packed with brand new content including a new campaign. It'll be very easy to tell the final product apart from the first game, even the test fire had visual and gameplay refinements.
To highlight the character model improvements just look at the spawn scene:
Same art style for sure but there are some clear improvements and this is a build several months from launch. The Inkling's heads for instance look a lot more slippery on Switch whereas Wii U just has light reflections. Textures and lighting have also seen a significant upgrade.
Super Smash Bros. for Switch and they'll make damn sure you know it includes all of the DLC.
You really think the cost of this port would be anywhere near that of a full blown new entry in the series?
It was called Super Smash Bros for(4) Wii U / Super Smash Bros for(4) 3DS
So maybe Super Smash Bros for Switch?
Linkstrikesback
Member
Opportunity cost is not the same thing as financial cost. In this case, it means it might not be worth releasing a Mario Kart 9 on switch because people are already happy with the full priced retail offering they already have in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe.
Hari Seldon
Member
Every port takes developer resources. I don't know if they farmed the port out or not, but if you own the game then it is better for you if all developer resources are being spent on a new game that you can enjoy. I don't really care that much, but I understand the frustration of people who supported the WiiU (like I did) seeing all of this port begging because fundamentally that is taking away developer resources from people who actually supported Nintendo last gen.
Yes. For two reasons:
1) Despite selling 5 million copies on an install base of 13.6 million, there are still so many owners of Nintendo hardware who didn't play it (when looking at 3DS install base vs Wii U)
2) I never owned the first but the game and its campaign are highly regarded. So I want it for selfish reasons lol.
1) Despite selling 5 million copies on an install base of 13.6 million, there are still so many owners of Nintendo hardware who didn't play it (when looking at 3DS install base vs Wii U)
2) I never owned the first but the game and its campaign are highly regarded. So I want it for selfish reasons lol.
I know, but in this case the opportunity cost would be what? The few people working on the port who could be working on a hypothetical new entry along with the reduced budget? Who's to say a sequel isn't already in pre production? They wouldn't need a whole studio for that yet. There's no comparison, really.
James Scott
Banned
Do like Rayman Legends where you remaster a few of the older stages. Maybe with new mechanics.
Lower development cost while creating more content.
Lower development cost while creating more content.
Neff
Member
It should have a new, expanded campaign. It was great in the first game but I thought and do think that they could do some extraordinary things with the concept if they gave it more love.
The only things which need to carry over from the first game are of course the MP stages and weapons, and ideally the music too.
The only things which need to carry over from the first game are of course the MP stages and weapons, and ideally the music too.
Look at it this way: If Nintendo were to leave titles like Smash and Mario Kart on the Wii U, they would effectively be sunk costs. By porting them over to the Switch, Nintendo can actually take advantage of said costs and maybe even turn a bigger profit that could fund the sequel people want. It's a win/win situation considering the Switch is off to a great start and these titles could see some increased exposure, they need it.
I actually realized the closest analogue to my thought process is Halo 1 and 2, in that I wanted to skip Halo 1 entirely in favor of the online MP of the sequel, and similarly here I wanted to wait for the new game as by the time I was thinking to get Splatoon it was still nearly full price and it'd look like the scene would probably move to Switch.
But Switch is also more convenient for me to play, and price is a lot more stubborn on dropping with Nintendo games; I ultimately got Halo 1 for $10. Will that happen with Splatoon 1? Although being able to buy the original campaign for $10 would be a nice compromise situation.
Deadpool_X
Banned
For the life of me, I cannot understand everyone in this thread crapping on this idea. If it doesn't affect the new campaign or multiplayer maps, why wouldn't you want it included? Splatoon isn't available on the Switch, nor is the Switch BC with the Wii U. How is it a bad thing to include the original campaign, playable on a new system that has a handheld mode, especially if it doesn't increase the cost of the package. Bayonetta did this, and I didn't hear anyone complain. I mean, if you don't want it, don't play that portion of the game, but at least allow the rest of us who didn't originally play the game on the Wii U the chance to experience it!
The people dismissing this idea come across as butthurt fans who don't want people experiencing the first campaign without paying for it, just like they did.
The people dismissing this idea come across as butthurt fans who don't want people experiencing the first campaign without paying for it, just like they did.
Metal Khaos
Member
Final Fantasy Dissida 2.
Someone actually said something similar as the reason they didn't want the first campagin in the sequel. It's really mind-boggling lol.
Hari Seldon
Member
Yeah it probably does make great financial sense. But as a WiiU owner I want new games and not old games. If you don't own a WiiU, then a sequel or a port is still a new game to you.
The question should be, do cod, gears, bf, other multiplayer focused shooters do this. And the answer is no.
Jonneh3003
Banned
It's not that I don't want it included, it's that I see no reason why it would be.
Pokémon Gold/Silver? Call of Duty? Super Mario Bros 2? The list can go on, but I don't think it really matters, if the story is different, and gameplay improved, so what if they reuse some models/textures.
Foldedpencil
Banned
If you want to play Splatoon, buy a Wii U and play it.
Dragonsushi
Member
Rayman Legends did this with Origins levels. Not impossible.
I think the game should try its best to stand on its own teniticles.
The game I tried over the weekend doesn't feel overly different from the Wii U game I played nearly two years ago. It does seem like it's built on the same tech. Adapting the original campaign and possibly expanding Amiibo support to have levels adjusted for weapons in Splatoon 2 wouldn't be a reaching request.
I'm probably going to miss those loading screen minigames. The music warping can do in the sequel isn't the same.
It's still a wait and see whether calling this game a sequel is purely a marketing decision. Otherwise including the original game with these editions puts it into Mario Kart 8 Deluxe territory. Seems like they wanted to avoid that with Splatoon.
The game I tried over the weekend doesn't feel overly different from the Wii U game I played nearly two years ago. It does seem like it's built on the same tech. Adapting the original campaign and possibly expanding Amiibo support to have levels adjusted for weapons in Splatoon 2 wouldn't be a reaching request.
I'm probably going to miss those loading screen minigames. The music warping can do in the sequel isn't the same.
It's still a wait and see whether calling this game a sequel is purely a marketing decision. Otherwise including the original game with these editions puts it into Mario Kart 8 Deluxe territory. Seems like they wanted to avoid that with Splatoon.
You're falling for the Remaster = 1 less new game being developed fallacy. Just because one title is being remastered or ported over, it doesn't that you're being stripped of a new game you would have otherwise gotten. People kept bringing this up at the start of this gen when both PS4 and XBO received numerous ports and remasters, but they kept receiving new games too.
I don't get this. I already mentioned that no one should actually expect the first campaign to be available in the sequel, but why would it be so bad for you if newcomers actually were able to play said campaign in Splatoon 2? That's the point I don't get, why would it matter to you? You're still getting the full Splatoon 2 experience.
You didn't play the game much if you can't tell the game is different. Like seriously, almost everything is changed, from movement to mechanics.
Meh I still haven't finished the main campaign. I try to push on because apparently the end boss is fantastic, but it just has too many annoying niggles. You keep having to look for the next level, and while the game is a fantastic shooter (or 'zoner') it's a pretty mediocre platformer. And then all the narrow platforms and pits just don't add a lot of fun to the games. Of course every time you fall into a pit three times because it didnt register your jump, you have to start all over because fuck you we still live in the 1980s.
I think everybody was just amazed that a budget multiplayer shooter also turned out to have a very inventive single player, and there also were a lot of things to like in the campaign. So for the sequel I just want them to focus on what worked and now deliver a campaign that doesn't annoy you every five minutes.
I think everybody was just amazed that a budget multiplayer shooter also turned out to have a very inventive single player, and there also were a lot of things to like in the campaign. So for the sequel I just want them to focus on what worked and now deliver a campaign that doesn't annoy you every five minutes.
Deadpool_X
Banned
Because the Switch is going to outsell the Wii U in its first year alone. The increased userbase will have not played the original. Including the original campaign not only increases the value of the package of the sequel, but as I previously said, allows many who passed on the game the first time for whatever reason the chance to experience the glory of the campaign that all who did experience it rave about!
What reason do you have for not wanting people to experience the first game? This is as much a Bayonetta/Bayonetta 2 situation as anything. Odds are, most of the Switch owners won't have played the original, nor do they have an ability to do such. Who is it hurting to allow more people to experience the original campaign?!?
checkeredknight
Member
No, just a new campaign would be fine. I feel like that if they add the first one, it'll show a lack of confidence in their second campaign. It should be bigger and better.
Goldenroad
Member
As much as Andromeda should have included the Mass Effect 1-3 campaigns, but it's pretty unreasonable to ask the developer/publisher to do that.
Taliban Stan
Member
That would be nice but game sequels don't usually play out like that.
Deadpool_X
Banned
Gears gave you BC copies of 1-Judgement when you bought the remake of the first game and/or 4.
Jonneh3003
Banned
I think you're missing the point, no one here doesn't want people to experience the first game, it's just very unrealistic to expect this from the developers. Goldenroad put it pretty well:
The fact Splatoon 2 is a sequel doesn't really matter, I'm sure many people played Call of Duty 4 without playing Call of Duty 3.
this is really the most important thing from my perspective. Nintendo needs to do everything they can do to make the sequel look as fresh as possible. not including the first campaign would aid in that effort. if they want to release it as DLC after the Splatoon 2 content rollout is done that'd probably be the best way to go about it.
So you've never played....
Mega Man 2-6
Super Mario Galaxy 2
Majora's Mask
Metal Slug 2-5
etc.
Listen, I agree the game doesn't yet feel like a full-on sequel yet based on that testfire . But the reason isn't due to similar assets. It's due to the similar gameplay without much to differentiate it compared to the first game.
That can certainly change depending on the stuff we haven't seen yet.
Jonneh3003
Banned
Which required no effort from Microsoft, they just bundled in some BC games. It was also a limited time deal to try and entice people to buy the new Gears games.
TANSTAAFL.
It will hurt the people who have bought the first game, because it will come back in elevated price or less effort in the rest of the package.
Deadpool_X
Banned
Let's be real, here: no one bought COD4 for the campaign.
Also, you can't compare Splatoon/Spla2n to ME/2/3/Andromeda. The campaign in Splatoon is like 10 hours long, tops, and is only a piece of the whole game. ME/2/3 are about 100 hours long, and the campaign is 90% of the content. Giant difference here. Besides, if you own an X1 or PC, you have access to play ME/2/3 on your platform of choice. There is no way to play Splatoon on Switch. None. Nada.
Deadpool_X
Banned
I also notice you keep ignoring my Bayonetta comparison, or others' Rayman Legends comparisons. Is it commonplace to do this? Of course not. However, it isn't unheard of, and least of all, not from games on Nintendo's hardware!
Uhhh, new engine, and massive games where the SP was the draw (and only component)?
Part of why people want this is also because it MIGHT be relatively easy. Lift the old campaign out, and transfer to the updated gameplay engine. Mass Effect had more straight up incompatible changes and was just too damn big to work, the Splatoon campaign is, presumably, a much smaller slice of that pie, and I kind of expect most MP maps to be retained.
Bullshit, if anything it was probably THE one time people were really excited to go through a CoD campaign, before MP drowned it all out. But no one really cared about the CoD3 campaign and it wasn't even the same developer.
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
Hopefully not the original but it was a great tutorial. They should come up with another campaign.
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
On the surface yah, but I hope not, just so they can drive the message that it is a sequel.
Wouldn't want to give the ammo to trolls that keep insisting this is a port.
Bayonetta 1+2 on Wii U is a 2 games bundle and you can purchase Bayonetta 1 separately. What this topic is saying to include the first game's campaign into the core game of Splatoon 2, while still being a single title. So its vastly different.
Wouldn't want to give the ammo to trolls that keep insisting this is a port.
Bayonetta 1+2 on Wii U is a 2 games bundle and you can purchase Bayonetta 1 separately. What this topic is saying to include the first game's campaign into the core game of Splatoon 2, while still being a single title. So its vastly different.
the original Bayonetta wasn't on Nintendo hardware so that's a bit different
it's the reason why people bitched (rightfully so) that Wii U got Mass Effect 3 and not the trilogy because the first two games weren't available on Nintendo hardware
I never owned a Wii U, so I did not get many chances to play Splatoon, and never the single player so it would be nice to play that campaign. So no I don't think it is bad per se, but why is this treatment expected for Splatoon, but not say, Battle Field 2, or any/every other sequel?
Should every sequel be expected to contain the original game? How do we determine which games should and should not contain the original game? Should it be only series that didn't have a release on the current platform? Or games that are low on content? Perhaps it should only be limited to certain genres? Shooters should have all back content, how about fighters, RPGs?
I wish consoles were better at being backwards compatible, or having access to past games in their older sibling console's library. That would be the optimal situation.
If Nintendo does include the previous campaign, I will be grateful, but I think I will also always wonder if they skimped on content, even if they didn't. I imagine others would think so too.
Let's treat sequels as sequels and enhanced ports with bonus content as such.