Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy Removes All Reference to Naughty Dog On Other Platforms

Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy was confirmed for the PC, Xbox One and Nintendo Switch today. The game is now due out on July 10 for these platforms.

[PhoenixUp]

That was one of the most charming aspect of these remakes

[Eonjay]

The truth is the game was created by Naughty Dog before it was owned by Sony. Now that there games have made it all of the way to other platforms, someone made the decision that references to the original creators needed to be removed. Its almost childish. In what world do we see a remaster or remake done and the original team is not mentioned? It is very disrespectful. I would like to know which snowflake was going to be offended by seeing Naughty Dog mentioned on their console. BTW: If it was Sony that asked for the removal, it is still stupid.

[darthv72]

I'd imagine if there was a remake of Metal Gear, Konami would remove all traces of Kojima. that does nothing to change the history of the game as that is still available for anyone to find and admire but moving forward with their property, they have a right to make changes how they see fit.

This is nothing new as it's been going on in literature, music, movies, tv and video games for decades. It seems like a big thing now because many never paid attention to previous times this has occurred. When a change happens, and a company makes an update, it gets applied moving forward, never retroactively as they can't change the past. Like Kevin Spacy in CoD game. His face is on the box art and since Activision can't change that they can only remove him from further pressings as well as remove his code and replace it with another person in the game.

did anyone make a big stink about that? Sure it may not be the same as ND but ND is perfectly fine being remembered as the original developer of Crash and that will never change.

[TheCommentator]

From the article:

"...they (Naughty Dog) are now a first party studio at Sony Interactive Entertainment so it would be hard to see their easter egg being kept for the multiplatform release."

Same thing happened with Conker and playing on the Game Boy when he sat idle. That was removed from the Xbox version because it referenced Nintendo's IP (Killer Instinct and Conker's Pocket Tales).

To answer your question though, we live in the kind of world where when an IP is sold to someone else the original developers no longer have any rights to it. The only reason it was put back into the PS4 release, IMO, is because it was on Sony's platform and Sony allowed it to be reintroduced on their console. If there was a "snowflake" involved though, which I don't believe there even is, then Sony would be the most likely culprit by not allowing copyrighted material like Nathan Drake to end up on a competitors' machine.

Edit: I see your edit now that I have posted. It seems that we agree about Sony.

[Eonjay]

Yeah I made the edit before seeing your reply. It occurred to me that it could be Sony. In which case I am calling them snowflakes yes. These IP wars are dumb.

[SuperSonic91]

At least Shadow of the Colossus still have Fumito Ueda's name and credit in there.

[rainslacker]

It may just be licensing things. ND is a Sony property, and getting licensing to include something that isn't their IP can be a hassle. I can't imagine Sony would be against the reference, as it promotes ND, thus promotes Sony. It's more likely that the console that it's being released on isn't too keen on having these references in the game. For instance, a few of the older Metal Gear games had Sony equipment in them. Some game play was even related to the memory cards on the PS1. If a sony console was in the game, MS wouldn't be too keen on having that displayed from their console.

It may be overthinking it, but there are a lot of reasons why this can be done.

[Aceman18]

Well I'm good as I have I the PS version as part of my backlog of games. I'd rather have the references in the game since its ND creation.

[Aenea]

Ehmm, the references to Naughty Dog were references to other games they made over the years, games Activision does not have the rights to since they were made when ND was already a first party studio of Sony so the IP (of the references) is Sony's, not Activision's...

And that means Sony didn't ask for anything, this is just as it's supposed to be. If it's just the name that would've been removed, yes, that would've been silly, but references to Uncharted makes total sense...

[Segata]

In the same way, losing all SNES/N64 references in Rare classic games. Sucks but just have to accept it.

[AspiringProGenji]

Kinda disrespectful for the original creators. It is not like gamers on other platform would have had a problem with that

[gangsta_red]

Don't know how it works but wouldn't a dev get royalties if their name is included or something similar?

Plus ND didn't make the actual remake so it could also be viewed as a DR on the devs who did retool this game,.

[showtimefolks]

Without the original developers there won't be a game to remake

I think removing ND game because ND is Sony owned studio

Either way happy for all gamers who will now get to play this on their platforms hopefully this will mean future crash titles

[Christopher]

No. It's free advertising similar to a Coke can in a movie shot. Royalties would come if they used assets, such as ND owned skins over the main character or an NPC, owned by them as part of the game rather than just screenshot references. Worst that could happen is ND could ask them to remove it if it showed them in poor taste.

[rainslacker]

I doubt they'd get royalties on something like that. Referencing something doesn't require any kind of fees in most cases. If the actual content in question is owned by someone else, then it'd have to be licensed. I'm not sure if that'd be relevant here though.

@Christopher

The coke reference isn't really correct. If you watch enough shows, you'll notice they use generic brands a lot of the times. I doubt the trademark holders in those cases would mind their products being used, but they want to give permission for it.

As an example, a while back, one of my neighbors was going to have their home on one of those home improvement shows. They came to my house and asked me if I could move my truck. The reason was that because of where it was parked, it'd be in the shot for whatever they were doing that day. While this wasn't really a huge problem, the producer said that it's just a pain to get the permission to allow them to have it on screen for as long as it would be on screen.

This is obviously different than paid endorsement, but it's more common than companies paying to have their products in something.

[Segata]

Does Conker cut an N64 logo in half on Rare Replay?

[Aenea]

It's not about the name though, it's about images of Nathan Drake and Uncharted...

[Big_Game_Hunters]

Ls

[Newmanator]

Boy times are changing, let's hope for crazy sales on these consoles and true sequels are in the pipeline (and CTR)

[Ricegum]

No crazy sales, at least on Xbox since everyone would have bought it on PS4 a long while back.

[NoPeace_Walker]

Im getting it on the X. It is comfirmed to be X enhanced native 4K with HDR. 👍🏼

https://www.microsoft.com/e...

The Pro version was just 1440p with no HDR. I am glad I waited for the X version as it is superior in every way.

[getbacktogaming]

CTR FTW!!!!

[Newmanator]

Best racing game ever made!

[SuperSonic91]

Just unleash that remake please!

[Pancit_Canton]

They should removed everything all together. CRASH BANDICOOT is Naughty DOG

[Theknightofnights]

Crash Bandicoot hasn't been a part of Naughty Dog for almost two decades, aside from the one level stint in Uncharted 4.

[Pancit_Canton]

Try having kids.

Even if you haven't seen them or talked to them for a long time. It's still your kid. They created Crash Bandicoot and gave it life. It's always been part of Naughty Dog's legacy. People remember Crash Bandicoot as Naughty Dog's game, not Activision game. (even though they owned the rights for Crash Bandicoot) It's always been a Naughty Dog's game in people's memory.

[Sgt_Slaughter]

But it is not their's anymore which is the whole point. They lost full custody in your analogy

[WeAreLegion]

I think what they're saying is the only good Crash games were from ND. So, why even bother?

[Segata]

It's been owned by Activision since the PS2 era and there are Crash games on Gamecube.

[Theknightofnights]

@Pancit

First, that is an invalid analogy. Second, most (if not all) of the developers at Naughty Dog that actually worked on the games are gone too, so I'm not sure what you are trying to get at.

[Sgt_Slaughter]

(Replied to wrong comment)

[rainslacker]

What's a bandicoot?

Anyhow, I think Crash was at it's peak on PlayStation. But I feel that at least among the hardcore, it is certainly associated with the console. Younger gamers may not make the same association though.

[neomahi]

Nothings sacred anymore these days. There was a time when there was loyalty and identity. Mario still remains in the mushroom Kingdom, Master Chief still resides on the glowing X, but Activision just can't wait. They sat on the I.P. for years after Crash of the Titans and once Sony prodded them dug it up again.. Microsoft are very happy to get this as are Nintendo, not that Microsoft are going to put up a fence and say: "Ya know what, this isn't right." or Nintendo to say: "Wasn't he just at our front door to say mustache man, plumber boy your worst nightmare has arrived." Others may not care but it's an identity you're toying with. Sure Universal owned it and sold it and Naughty Dog lost it even though acquired by Sony but this is Sonic showing up on Nintendo GameCube all over again. The PS4 has a large install base and sold really well. Activision really must be in some serious debt now and rumors must be right. Executives must be reaching into that cookie jar and pulling out chunks of money one after another, Activision must be hurting.

[Eonjay]

Not its quite simple. The game sold really really well on PS4. Not that the IP is Activision's they have every right to try to replicate that success wherever they can.

[TheColbertinator]

Loyalty? Sony sold the IP to Activision. Their own fault.

[TheUndertaker85]

Please also keep in mind that Naughty Dog was not owned by Sony during the creation of Crash Bandicoot. Naughty Dog was at the time owned by Universal Studios. Naughty Dog was also not acquired by Sony until 2001.

Sony didn’t sell the IP as Sony never owned the Crash Bandicoot IP.

[butchertroll]

@TheUndertaker

But Sony has the source-codes for Crash 1-3, CTR and Spyros

[MrSwankSinatra]

Sony did not sell Crash Bandicoot to Activision. Sony never owned Crash Bandicoot to begin with. Sony was the publisher for the first three Crash games in which those games were funded by Universal Interactive Studios for Naughty Dog to make, because at the time Naughty Dog was an independent studio. Sony published those games which meant providing the distribution and marketing of those games in order to get them as exclusives to the PS1. Sony eventually bought Naughty Dog, but the IP did not go with them, that was Universal's IP and eventually Universal dissolved into their parent company Vivendi. Which Vivendi who owned Blizzard decided merge with Activision to form Activision Blizzard, which is why Activision owns the crash IP to this day.

[trouble_bubble]

Sony never owned the IP or had anything to sell to Activision in the first place.

Why are kids still stupid to this public knowledge 20 years later? Just a vacuum of stupidity

[Aceman18]

For the love of god how many times must it be said that Sony NEVER owned the Crash IP?

How could they sell something they NEVER had full rights to from the beginning.

[tehpees3]

The only loyalty Activision has is to the dollar.

[AmstradAmiga]

To be honest all this does is highlight the stupidity that is having multiple gaming platforms. Especially since basically all of them now are based on x86 architecture.

[SegaGamer]

Loyalty? They are third party studios, there is no reason why they should be sticking to one console with their series of games.

Back when SEGA and Nintendo were going up against each other, they mostly relied on their own games. I wish it stayed this way. Third party studios should release their games on ALL platforms in my opinion. If Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo want exclusives, it should come from themselves, not third party developers.

[JEECE]

Anyone want to take bets? I'm saying first month sales on switch are 1/3 of first month on PS4, and Xbox One will be less than half of Switch.

[MrSwankSinatra]

I'd argue that the switch is probably gonna be 1/2 of PS4 first month sales. Having the ability to play those games portable is a very enticing feature and we know the dead vita won't be giving that experience.

[rainslacker]

I dunno. I could see Crash being very attractive to the Switch crowd. The game play itself is great for a portable in it's level structure. I think the sales themselves will come down more to install base than actual desire.

As far as Xbox sales, I think it might also do decently well, as there are quite a few Xbox owners who were PS1 owners, and likely do remember and have memories of the game. Again, I feel the actual sales will come down to install base more than desire.

Crash is a respected franchise among gamers, despite it's years of being irrelevant. Nostalgia is a powerful marketing tool.

[Hugodastrevas]

That's dumb.

[The_Jackel]

So just makes crash on ps4 more unique compared to other consoles

[Dlaw76]

Is it supporting Da X or not that's all I'm worried about

[Darkwatchman]

If it supported ps4 pro, there’s no reason to see it won’t support Xbox One X considering how many countless devs have said the One X is easier to develop for than the PS4 pro.

[Dlaw76]

Not true Sony might might have a contract agreement

[rainslacker]

Countless? Doing a quick google search, I count 3 from the first 3 pages of results. Since I'm familiar with both API's, I'd actually say the opposite. The PS4P doesn't require much extra work at all to enable enhancements, as it's not that drastically different of a system. The X1X actually has a few fundamental changes to the architecture which require some rewrites to code to improve things, and a major part of the X1, the ESRAM, isn't even in the X1X.

[Ricegum]

Lmao. How sad 😂

[Darkwatchman]

A contract agreement to prevent the devs from enhancing for Xbox One X even though the game is going to release on switch, Xbox One, and pc???

You’ve got to be out of your goddamned mind to think they’d have a contract to specifically prevent an Xbox One X patch. That’s some conspiracy theory crap right there.

[Dlaw76]

So I'm assuming you didn't hear about that monster hunter game and a few other games that the Pro got enhanced and it's looking better than Da Mighty X

[PowerOfTheCloud]

Dlaw

Maybe no enhancements because the mighty x is a niche console of a niche console and for some publishers not worth putting in extra resource.

You X guys sound like crybabies.

[MrSwankSinatra]

@Dlaw76 You ever think that reason why the PRO has more enhancements is because it's easier to develop for? Capcom and other Japanese developers work more with the PS4 hardware and also develop exclusives. the X has only been out for a few months, devs probably still need to develop with the machine more to iron out certain issues.

[rainslacker]

Such contracts would be illegal under anti-trust laws. You can ask for equal treatment, but can't outright say you have to undermine the competition. You can pay for exclusive content, but you can't refuse content you don't own to be released on another system in order to be put on your own system.

If any agreement was made, there was no way in hell it was written down.

@Dlaw

That is likely more because of the install base being in favor of the PS4. X1X is fairly new to market, and the dev kits to really take advantage of it weren't out until closer to release for a lot of companies. On top of that, not all developers are going to feel they have to spend more time on the X1X enhancements.

There are no contracts trying to undermine the competition. That would require money, and there is absolutely no reason for Sony to have to pay for something so stupid when they are in no way struggling. If anything, Sony, or even MS, would be more apt to pay for those enhancements themselves, which would be another reason why a game may have better enhancements on one console over another. I'm sure Sony paid for some enhancements for the PS4P release, just as I'm sure MS did for the X1X release.

[Darkwatchman]

With Monster Hunter World, that’s just poor optimization. In its resolution mode, it IS missing some level of detail present on the ps4 pro, but it’s also got much sharper image quality than the pro version.

That’s not a matter of “contracts”. That’s just a matter of this is a Japanese dev and Monster Hunter is huge in Japan and PlayStation was undoubtedly going to be their biggest install base for the game so they clearly spent more time optimizing for PS4 consoles than Xbox One consoles, but it’s not as cut and dry as you make it seem.

It does have some lower level of detail, but the resolution mode is sharper than the pro’s equivalent mode and framerate is better in its high framerate mode than the pro’s equivalent mode so...think again, you conspiracy theorist nut.

[TheEnigma313]

Because Naughty Dog strikes fear into other companies.

[Dlaw76]

I like to know what developers fear naughty dog hope you was being funny

[MrSwankSinatra]

no, they don't

[SR388]

Who cares lol

[chris235]

who on earth wants to replay such dated titles. the power of brands and marketing.

[tehpees3]

People want to relive them in the modern era. Believe it or not some prefer remakes of their favourites to rushed sequels. Just because you don't see joy in remakes doesn't mean others don't. Just don't buy it.

[BlaqMagiq1]

I do. Loved it on PS1 and loved it even more on PS4.

[TheOttomatic91]

That’s a shame but still glad more people will get a chance to play this

[Kaiou]

Wait just the name might offened someone ? What about Minecraft ? That's a hell more than just a name.

[tulholdren]

Glad i still got the originals with credit going to who it should be. So happy i didnt get this.

[Tross]

I'm glad I played the collection on the PS4 then. That, and I got to play it over a year earlier than gamers on other platforms. I don't think these ports will add any new content. Still, it's an excellent collection of remakes and I'm happy for other gamers who will get to experience it now.

[Angainor7]

This is so disrespectful. I mean Naughty Dog's name shouldn't be removed from this trilogy. ESPECIALLY on the other platforms

[KaaF]

Silly, but I can see how having an Uncharted 4 reference on Xbox or Switch might be an issue, I prefer her playing the original game better than Uncharted anyway.