By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Miyamotoo said:
fatslob-:O said:

It's not just about graphical or technical changes ... 

It's also about changes in content or gameplay mechanics ... (Doom on Switch doesn't have level editor and FIFA 18 on Switch doesn't have journey mode) 

The Switch will have nowhere else to go with AAA 30FPS console titles unless the devs want to go even lower (15/20FPS) so changes in mechanics, content or level design have to be accomodated for the Switch to get acceptable performance. At what point does this so called 'port' stop being the same game when the gameplay, maps or other things are different ? (CoD on the Wii didn't have the same maps or gameplay as the PS3/X360 versions so how are Switch owners going to react if hypothetically that KH3 on the Switch will only have 3 party members instead of 5, less enemies, different maps oandr less/changed movesets ? Are Switch owners going to be able to deal with having so called 'Pocket Edition' of games such as FF XV or similar ?) 

Content changes are minimal, nobody really cares about level editor for Doom so that's definitely not big difference, Journey Mode for Fifa for Switch is definitely more important, but we know that Switch doesnt have Journey Mode because Frostbite engine and Switch version of Fifa 18 dont have Frostbite engine.

Content doesn't need to be changed, lower resolution and graphics and 30FPS instead of 60FPS for instance, of course, but content doesn't need to be changed, again only reason why Fifa for Switch doesnt have Journey Mode is totally different engine. Ports will always be ports, you cant spin that, fact is that Doom for Switch is port of PS4/XB1 Doom, downgraded port is still a port not difirent game. For instance Call of Duty: Black Ops: Declassified for Vita is different game, its obvious its not port of any existing CoD game. You have two YouTube links that I posted where you can see that CoD is still same game on Wii and PS3 despite differences. FFXV Pocket Edition is totally different thing, that would be port of Android FF XV game not port of PS4/XB1 version of game.

The biggest factor is always commercial I think, its amazing what they have shoehorned into weak consoles in the past so actual sales are going to be the main factor. However I guess looking at the Switch spec, the memory situation of 4GB compared to 8GB looks pretty good considering its weaker quality graphics, you have the cpu situation which again is weaker but not as much as expected thanks to ps4/xbox one using crappy jaguar cores but still this could still be a big factor for games that extract every bit of cpu performance out of ps4 and xbone. Lastly storage is always under pressure on a system relying on cartridges or flash memory. 

When we actually see how much of the game experience has been compromised in retail code we will have a better idea. We are still at the moment looking at what the publishers and developers want us to see but most important is the real reviews of retail code. We already know with Doom only the main single player game fits on the cartridge and multiplayer is a 9GB download. If you don't have expanded memory in your Switch and don't have space for 9GB then its pretty much a single player experience.  Rayman Legends is just about the worst version on Switch because of ultra-high compression which not only causes occasional frame drops but can impact visual quality too with graphic artifacts. The Switch will likely win and fail on a game by game basis depending on how much the publishers have invested in development and cartridge size.

So I'm sure the reality will be some games pretty much deliver the exact same game experiences as ps4/xbone and others totally fail to match them and are best avoided. Such was the case with wii u compared to xbox 360 and ps3 where many of the ports simply couldn't match the earlier consoles due to limited cpu power, lack of harddrive and additional console factors like inferior controller and surround sound support etc. That will be the big factor with Switch in how the frame rate stack ups even though the graphics may be severely downgraded. At least with wii u it had comparable graphics to 360 and PS3 most of the time with only occasional downgrades in assets probably because it couldn't stream in data from hard drive. When we get retail code we may see the Switch not maintaining frame rates as well under load and so the game experience may be severely compromised. A reminder of the wii u situation which effected many ports. If you follow the blue line at the bottom you can see how the wii u experience was impacted. 

Also have to think of other factors too, like lack of analogue triggers that feel great for fps and racing games beit pulling the trigger on a gun or clutch or accelerator control of a car which adds feel to the game. As far as I know both the joycons and pro controller do not have analogue triggers so that feel is gone on Switch but is present on ps4, xbox and PC. It's another reason why the game experience is slighty reduced however good the port is. Obviously depend on game the Switch version may have decent motion control which can enhance the game too which is another factor in favour of Switch and this works on a game by game basis. Competitive fps playing and racing games probably won't benefit from that but something like Skyrim a single player experience could be much enhanced with this on Switch. Yes very much interested in Skyrim on Switch for this reason.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEAKPh_h3Eg