Mnementh said:
The streaming aspect looks not really as a problem to me. Switch only has 4GB RAM compared to the 8GB of the competition, but that is solvable with reducing assets (lower resolution textures, lower polycount, lower viewdistance), things that have to be done probably in any case to make it runnable. Or to fit onto the cartridge, which seems to be the biggest problem so far for developers. And I think cartridge may be of similar speed as the HDD, at least I hope so, it would be a mojor fuckup of Nintendo if not. So the streaming aspect should be solvable. If they can fit the game onto the cartridge is as usual the bigger question. |
In practise it's actually 3GB vs 5GB/5.5GB (the X1 and PS4 reserve a lot for the OS, apps, background functions like recording, etc), but the bigger problem is speed. The Switch's RAM is really slow, at least compared to none portable devices. It's bandwidth tops out at 25.6GB/s, compared to 68GB/s for the X1 (+32MB of high speed eSRAM), and 176GB/s for the PS4. That's obviously a pretty big problem for a game that wants to constantly pull in and out large amounts of assets.
That said, I'd be shocked if it's not possible. I expect it's more of matter of "can we do this at a level in line with our quality standards, and without too much fuss" rather than "is this possible?". Hopefully they can, while I don't play any multi-plats on the Switch, it's always really cool seeing how games come together on it. It's a testament to how far mobile tech has come that some of them are even possible.
