Capcom: Monster Hunter XX Switch version is another test to evaluate our support for Switch

[DonFerrari]

SpokenTruth said:

DonFerrari said:

Yep, deving for Xbox on most cases doesn't take much besides what is already used on PS4. So unless it's a niche game that will be most japan or Sony paid for exclusivity then X1 get a port. Switch still needs them knowing the cost of porting versus profit to make decision. And people keep pretending there is a dial to scale back without costs and just make a port show up.

Going from PS3/X360 to Wii was hard.  You went from programmable shaders to a fixed function pipeline, a full rewrite of all art assets, resolution reduction, frame rate reduction, multi-core to single core CPU with much lower clocks, unsupported game engines.

Going from PS4 to Switch uses the same game engine, mulitple core CPUs, much closer clock speeds, programmable shader GPUs, some art assets can be reused. 

The scalability factor for PS4 to Switch is infinitely better than PS3 to Wii.  Are their costs, time nd resources?  Certainly.  But nowhere near what once it was.

[UE4 games] "Shinoyama said that in order for it to be playable on Switch, developers only need to push a button. Although performance adjustments and optimizations are still required after this, the basic pace of porting is simple with just one button."
Source 1
Source 2

The bulk of time and money come from working with the input methods, HD rumble and online and those are hardly 100 people and full year requirements as suggested by Akeos.

Easier? Sure. But pressing a buton? That's hyperbole. Sony said one port took 1 guy 3h to port from pc to ps4, do I take that literally? No. They'll still need to do port work, and see if it will bring money to cover. Several japanese devs made exclusives to ps4 and didn't port to X1 and I'm sure would be easier than to Switch.

Slownenberg said:

DialgaMarine said:

 To be fair, Nintendo is only big hardware company that has ever had this issue where even the most popular third party titles simply do not sell well, especially if those titles are offered on competitor platforms. It's become an established fact that the majority of people who buy Nintendo hardware only buy Nintendo software. Cant blame third parties when neither they nor Nintendo have any control over that. 

I disagree with this. While third parties have tougher competition on Nintendo systems because their games don't have to compete with Nintendo games (Nintendo being the biggest software name in games) I certainly wouldn't say its an established fact that Nintendo owners don't want to buy third party games. I would say thats the opposite of the case. The fact is that third party games haven't been selling well since the Wii because third parties haven't been putting their major games on Nintendo systems! Seems pretty obvious old ports or remasters or games that came out a year ago on other systems, or their major games made by second tier teams aren't gonna sell as well as their mainline AAA games made by their top teams. It has nothing to do with owners of Nintendo systems, it has to do with the lack of effort third parties have been putting into games on Nintendo systems for the past decade. If they did the same thing to xbox or ps4 games those would sell a lot less too!

Several games old better on ps3 than on x360 despise being a year late port and tr sold better on ps4.

Multiple games on Wii were simutaneous releases with other and sold much less.

There is no denying Nintendo HW sells much more less 3rd party SW compared to Ninty compared to ps and xbox