By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Bofferbrauer2 said:
DonFerrari said:

Is that your way to avoid saying clearly that even if RDR2 started development after Switch was know it wouldn't be made for it anyway? GTA V runs on X360 and PS3 and still got no port for Switch.

Yes, slaughter all the game and it will run... in other news they could make a RDR2 version for PS1/N64 since both can handle 3D.

ANY game can be ported to almost any console. The point is what will be the end result and how much work will it take? Should the result be called the same name as the original source material?

And are you under the agreement that if Switch was already know by the time of early development of RDR2 it would have been launched on it?

Not necessarily would (especially coming from the Wii U flop would certainly made them wary, besides no PC port means not being ported everywhere anyway), but chances are it could. Like I explained there's no technical reason for it not to run on Switch. If ARK: Survival Evolved can run on Switch, then RDR2 certainly could, too.

@bolded: Not with their Shader technology (among other things). Those Shaders also kill of any potential PS360 (but not necessarily a Wii U version) - you would need to rewrite half the code to port the game to them.

As already said you can port whatever current game to WiiU or Switch if you so much want, and ARK is pretty much the evidence that it can suck balls pretty hard and shouldn't be done.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."