curl-6 said:
What does any of that have to do with the power level of the Switch? And there are mountains of ports from both the 7th and 8th gen on Switch, if it was so difficult or unsustainable there wouldn't be so many. As for why the others don't do it, they simply don't need to. Xbox's solution is streaming, and Sony learned from the Vita that trying to support two platforms at once wasn't a viable endeavour once games get to 6th gen and beyond at the low end, plus they already dominate the dedicated console market so there's no need to expend resources trying to compete with Nintendo for the handheld space. |
Well it was asked why? What I said doesn't have much to do with performance, which is why I didn't focus on it. That's a separate point.
Them not having to make handhelds was part of the explanation. Along with how a Switch like device wouldn't be the same as past SNY handhelds where there were two separate platforms to deal with instead of one platform and multiple devices sharing games.
There are also plenty of games that haven't been ported, and games that seemingly should have been ported long ago, so why haven't they? Likely the same reason (partly) why SNY and MS haven't done a Switch. Just because you can or could, doesn't mean you will or should.
PS1 - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.
PS2 - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.
PS3 - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.
PS4 - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.
PRO -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.
PS5 - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.
PRO -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.







