Hiku said:
Yeah, like you said, these issues do show up all the time during the initial development of the game as well. Which is one reason why porting a game can also be a similar time/resource/money issue, though on a smaller scale. Some of these decisions are not left to the whims of the programmers, but have to be weighed by management. Is it ok for this game to look/play a certain way? So whether it's worth making a port is up to each individual studio based on their budget and what they value. There are a lot of games that seem to make sense on Switch if possible, like Monster Hunter World, or Resident Evil 2. But there are obstacles that some studios probably don't think are worth it, for whatever reason. While another studio may be fine with it. |
I really don't get what you're trying to say. There is no comparison between a port and a brand new game. The most expensive of ports will still cost a small fraction of a similarly sized full game. There really is no choice between making a switch port or a new game for it with the same budget. We know the switch can handle the games and the sales are very profitable. The only excuse that makes some sense is if the 32gb cards were indeed VERY expensive at first but luckily that's going away soon so maybe we'll see more switch ports next year.
On a side note about your FF XV comment: I hope you meant ps3, because ironically ps2 graphics would be more expensive than just downgrading it to switch level (because all 3d models would have to be redone from scratch) :D. Though in this particular case, SE would need to convert it to UE4 before porting. Other games don't have that excuse.