| zygote said: What he said was the correct response. Had developers known about the Switch then they could have considered some accommodation. I'm not saying the port would have been the best, possible, or even the same game in the end but they would have had more to consider. Once the decisions are made and a game is well into development then it is hard to double back for something that wasn't even in their consideration. In that, the Switch hardware does come into play. It would require very unexpected consideration. Had the Switch been more powerful then it wouldn't have even needed consideration. Like I said, his response was appropriate. It feels more like you are simply looking for people to band together with you in saying the Switch is heavily underpowered. For what all the Switch is doing, it really isn't. |
Sorry, if having Switch in consideration would make the game lesser to accommodate for it them I'm happy they didn't took it into account.
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."
