Ganoncrotch said:
bonzobanana said:
Hardly a bold claim at all if anything that should be the normal view until proven wrong based on the evidence but agree we need to see more games to get the full picture.
Nothing yet really to compare.
http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/release-date/available/switch/metascore
Just snakepass and lego city both games that don't require much in gpu and cpu resources.
It's really of the currently announced titles Skyrim and Payday 2 that could be compared to other versions. Both can run with sub ps3/360 hardware as they do work on windows tablets with low performance gpu's so we should be able to see where the Switch versions sit on that scale. Yes you can play those games with inferior graphics to ps3 and 360 so running on Switch is not the challenge but achieving a good frame rate and decent graphic detail is. Also how much will they cut out to fit on cartridge which is another factor.
|
Skyrim on the PS3 is 5.5GB
Even the special edition from steam is 12GB
Considering that Breath of the Wild is 13.4GB on Switch, what makes you think that they would require cutting out anything for the sake of fitting it on the cart?
|
Third party cartridges tend to be smaller than first party games because the first party will put on a profit for the cartridge and it tends to make third party publishers go towards a smaller size. I thought the special edition was up at 22GB and Legendary was at 12GB but I guess it will vary by the format. It wouldn't surprise me if Skyrim was on a 8GB cartridge rather than the maximum possible currently 16GB but we shall see. I'm certainly hoping they will use 16GB.
