Considering how RDR 2 runs on the xb1 S, it will required a lot of work to make it run on the switch. Dont see it happening.
He makes a valid point, it's just not the biggest, most obvious point. That is that RDR2, technically and graphically, is beyond the Switch's capabilities. With that said, I don't see why we can't get a port of RDR1.
Current Thread
Is Hardware Getting TOO Powerful?
Older Threads:
PlayStation/Xbox/Switch: 2022 Edition
PlayStation/Xbox/Switch Hardware Battle: 2021 Edition!
PlayStation 4/Xbox One/Nintendo Switch: 2019 vs. 2020
PlayStation 4/Xbox One/Nintendo Switch: 2018 vs. 2019
PlayStation 4/Xbox One/Nintendo Switch: 2017 vs. 2018
PlayStation 4: 2015 vs. 2016 vs. 2017
While Reggie is technically correct, I feel the other reason is Switch just couldn't run it.
NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick
| spemanig said: If Rockstar wanted this game on Switch, it would be there. |
*looks at PC*
| AngryLittleAlchemist said: Someone wrote on NeoGaf that you aren't clever for poking holes in PR. I feel that kind of thing needs to be said more often. |
Indeed it does need to be said more often
The Switch wouldn't be able to handle shrinking horse-testicles, that is the main reason
| AngryLittleAlchemist said: Someone wrote on ResetEra* that you aren't clever for poking holes in PR. I feel that kind of thing needs to be said more often. Edit: Got ResetEra and NeoGaf confused. |
Actually, that just sounds like more PR. Clever has nothing to do with clarity.
He really is a PR man telling bullshit to appease Switch fans.
The main problem isn't even the GPU. Everything can run on Switch GPU as long as you reduce the resolution to 360p (like some games) and dramatically reduce the quality of effects (but that would need a lot of work to reduce textures and effects for the whole game, but that has already being done on some games like Doom or Warframe). The real problems are:
100GB of data on disc, how do you do that on Switch ? 5GB ram for the game to run is mandatory (such an open world is memory hungry), and a powerful CPU is needed to run all the open world systems. In some places the game already runs at sub-30fps on consoles, we know Rockstar know how to optimize the CPU jobs so it couldn't run much better. So it would run at sub-15fps on Switch. It's only locked 30fps on Pro at a mere 1080p.
Well Reggie is right, I mean game was like 7 years in development, while completely different thing is that Rockstar wouldnt release RDR2 on Switch in any case.
Saying that, no one expecting RDR2 on Switch in any case, same couldn't be said for GTA V.
| pokoko said: Reggie is a PR machine pretending to be human but what he said isn't wrong. That doesn't mean RDR2 would have made a Switch appearance if the hardware had been out when RDR2 was in the planning stages, of course, but it does preclude that possibility by making it much more unlikely to begin with. In a general sense, there isn't anything wrong with his statement and it might very well have a real bearing on future content. That being said, it looks like some of our members are taking up the PR challenge and going much further into bullshit land than Reggie did. It's kind of interesting to see a game like Red Dead Redemption 2 getting downplayed. |
No need to downplay anything. If I would feel I really need RDR2, I would get the platform to play it. I'm just after GTAV bored me to death I feel kinda burned on Rockstar games everyone is hyping up. I am a person with personal tastes, I also don't play Super Mario Odyssey, as I generally don't like platformers. And yeah, maybe RDR2 is better suited for me than GTA. If it is, I am sure I will find out in five or ten years. If it is a great game, it will still be great then.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
