Okay we have a new Hall of Famer.

It's the one and only Yodariquo

He did what most of us thought was impossible.

Let me take you through the process

It all began on the NPD thread on the GGD

Grammaton_Cleric said:

I really don't understand why the reality that NSMBWii is a port is so offensive to some of you. It's just a matter of fact. Nintendo took the DS game and recycled it while adding additional content and making some tweaks. What resulted was a better game but it's still a port in the same way that the Metroid Prime Collection contains ports of MP1 and MP2. These versions of the games have been significantly enhanced with full motion control but they are still essentially ports.

What you are doing is arguing semantics to defend Nintendo which, while certainly your prerogative, isn't going to change the facts regarding where this game came from. NSMBWii may look better and certainly includes many significant additions but it is still a port; we know this because the game was not built from the ground up for the Wii hardware. It's a three-year-old DS game and unless you can provide concrete information to the contrary then the argument ends here.

Also, your examples of Zelda titles are pointless; I never once claimed to predicate my assertion that NSMBWii was a port based on visuals alone. It's a port because the original game was release three years ago on a different platform.

As to the Sonic/Mega Man comparison, that's flimsy for two distinct reasons:

Firstly, you are comparing true sequels to a game that isn't even identified as a sequel by Nintendo. If NSMBWii was a sequel to the DS game, why didn't they name it NSMB2?

The answer: because even Nintendo knows it's an upgraded port of an earlier title. If NSMBWii used the same engine but contained entirely different levels across the board then perhaps you'd have a point but the game re-uses most of the original game while adding various enhancements. Again, that's why it's a port.

The other reason that argument falls flat is because it is currently 2010, not 1991. What may have been acceptable twenty years ago when Sonic was made in terms of recycling assets isn't necessarily acceptable today, especially when the port in question is actually more expensive than the original game was three year prior.

There is a clear delineation between a port, a remake, and a sequel. You keep trying to blur those distinctions but they persist and regardless of your personal opinion, NSMBWii qualifies as a port for the very reasons I have specified.

Again, I don't mean the term as an insult but rather as astatement of fact.

 I saw this post and it was filled with so much illogic and irony I had to call Yoda. You might wonder why I did not write a reply. Well the reasons are twofold, I would probably act like an arrogant smartass and only annoy Gram and the more important reason, Yoda knows his stuff about computers. So Yoda did react with logic and a little bit venom.

JYodariquo said:

Grammaton_Cleric said:

I really don't understand why the reality that NSMBWii is a port is so offensive to some of you. It's just a matter of fact.

Maybe because the term "port" has an actual definition in software development, and New Super Mario Bros. on Wii under no circumstance qualifies for that definition. To port a program is to modify the source such that it can be executed on a different platform. NSMBW is not the same codebase, content or functionality. It is no more of a port than Opera 10 is a port of Opera Mini.

Once you're done understanding that, you may want to learn the definition of "fact" as well.

 Well first Gram is a little hurt, but not yet out

Grammaton_Cleric said:

Well, I was under the impression that NSMBWii is actually using the resources and assets from the original DS with whatever modifications that entails so if I'm actually incorrect in that assessment by all means, enlighten me. My own background isn't in programming so I'm more than happy to adjust my own view, assuming of course you can actually furnish proof of your assertions.

That said, the term "port" as it is used in the gaming vernacular doesn't necessarily relate to any technical specifications. It's a term thrown around quite loosely (by plenty of people who do program I might add) and given the context of the argument you intervened in, your definition may not even be applicable to this particular discussion, though again if I made a glaring mistake then I'm happy to address it.

Can you provide some sort of documentation regarding the process that this particular game went through from DS to Wii? To be perfectly honest, I was unable to find much in my own search.

Lastly, that "fact" comment was juvenile. If you want to argue or present evidence that's great; I'm certainly not infallible and I'm always happy to learn or expand my own knowledge, especially since your own knowledge in this particular field eclipses my own.But seriously, curb the attitude because all you manage to do then is harm your own argument by employing lowbrow tactics.

 Then Yoda gets some support

argianas said:

Gram, normally I agree with you but I just can't label anything that uses assets from another game as a "port", otherwise just about every sequel made today is a port of every other game in the series. Assets get reused and built upon all the time. Do you think they made a new Drake from the ground up for Uncharted 2? No, they undoubtedly took the Drake from the first game and modified the model as necessary to save time. I don't see a problem with reusing DS assets in a Wii game as long as they look fine, either due to brushing them up for the higher resolutions or were just better than the DS could render in the first place. For example, a lot of the Gran Turismo PSP stuff looked great when they played it in a higher resolution monitor for promotional/media stuff, but it doesn't really look that good because the PSP just can't display stuff at that resolution. Perhaps the same is true of the DS/Wii NSMB. Hell, even the God of War collection was a port that only took a handful of weeks to make - all the assets from the first two games were simply better than the PS2 could render. So if NSMB is the same way, where they could just take Mario, Goombas, Koopas, and whatever and they already look good, letting them focus entirely on making new gameplay levels, then I wouldn't call that a port but just an efficient use of time and materials.

Generally to me and to everyone else with a programming background, a port is taking something as is and making it work on another platform. Sometimes a new level or something is added to lure in buyers that already have the original (like many of the older FF games that got re-released lately), but to me the original content has to be there. None of the actual levels from the DS game are in the Wii, and some of the powerups aren't even present. It's a new game. Now you can argue that they didn't put in enough effort, that they mailed it in and cashed in on the name, but it's pretty much impossible to say that they simply re-released the DS game. It's all new content, like it or not.

And finally the impossible just happened

Grammaton_Cleric said:

Addendum:

I'm going to fully retract my earlier comments about NSMBWii being a port. It's been quite some time since I played NSMB on the DS so I sincerely was under the impression that it was essentially the same game with added features, levels, etc. Going back and reading some reviews, I'm flatly wrong so I'll own up to that and I apologize for wasting time debating something I should have checked out sooner. The game doesn't appear to be a port in any sense of the word and actually was designed from the ground up on the Wii, so again, my mistake and completely my fault for being lazy in my research.

I also feel a bit better about the game as a whole since it is a more original endeavor than I initially thought.

Yeah, you read it right, Gram actually admitted he was wrong. 

Yoda this is for you

Yoda wins by verbal submission round 2.

Foolz said:

The thing about Iga's threats is that he's a robot and thus must abide by the 3 laws of robotics, which means they're empty threats.

Clever, but true.