| superchunk said: Different is not ultimtely bad. However, if we want to see 3rd party support stick on NS it must be profitable for the company. That means they must keep the costs low to put the content on the NS to allow maximum profits. Too many people think they need to do what Nintendo does to be on a Nintendo system. But that is stupid. Nintendo has their own art-style and way of doing things. Every other game creator who tries, pales in comparison. Sega's Sonic and other franchises never hit Nintendo levels. Capcom's various older IPs the same outcome. They need to keep existing ports the same with maybe subtle differences such as touch support for menus etc. Then create possibly a new IP they could experiement with a console such as NS with lower overall dev costs required. This is why titles like Zack & Wiki were perfect on Wii. That is the only area 3rd party's should experiment with. New IP that is different, not altering an existing port like EA did. |
I am in agreement with you. The major issue is that the Switch is an an nVidia ARM SOC, not an AMD x86 APU, which means porting will be more difficult due to the different architectures (at least with Unity and Unreal engines that can be alleviated a bit) and they will have to cut down on the graphics due to the large performance disparity.
