| Soundwave said: I think developers actually do want to support the Switch, it's just a matter of what is possible on the chip and whether it's worthwhile putting the effort to port versus the potential return in sales. Which I think is different from even the Wii/DS where those platforms were driven by motion control and touch control that developers catered far too hard just towards that, Switch while having both motion and touch control doesn't rely on either really. It's a core-centric console, you look at most reviews for the system and even PS4/XB1 fans like it. So from that POV I think developers really don't have anything against Switch, it's just a matter of what can realistically run on the system and how hard is it to get there. |
Well the reality is that most games could work fine as games on the Switch. Shoot most could have easily been done on the Xbox 360 or PS3. Diminishing returns is often talked about in terms of visuals, but where it has had the most pronounced affect is on systems, for lack of a better word. That is, the nuts and bolts of what games are doing. In the olden days, a new generation resulted in new games that 95% of the time were impossible on prior platforms. Looking at this gen I would say that maybe - if we're really extra super generous - 30% of current gen games are impossible on prior platforms. It's probably lower than that. Most games are just using the next gen muscles for prettier graphics.
So the question is not, are most AAA games possible on Switch - the answer is yes - but rather how easy will they be to scale in terms of their presentation. And that's where engine design comes in. And how much time and money publishers are willing to invest.
