By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Chrkeller said:
Darc Requiem said:

The big thing people seems to miss in the Switch 2 versus PC Handheld comparison is that games aren't built specifically for the latter. They are PC games first and foremost. Switch 2 games will be built specifically for the platform. They will have a level optimization not possible on games running on a Steam Deck or Rog Ally X. It's why I feel having more than one configuration for a console (Xbox Series X and Series S) undermines the key strength of the platform. A fixed box in which every user has identical specs which allows developers to code for it's exact hardware. It's why there are games that work on the Switch that you'd think have no business running on the system.

No doubt that will be true for 1st party games.  But for third party games?  I don't see third party building games specifically for the S2.  Games will be built for Xbox, ps5 and PC.  

I can't fathom Capcom making Wilds, SF7 and RE9 based on S2 specifications.  

Capcom built a third-party game specifically for the Switch: Monster Hunter Rise. Assuming the S2 doesn't get Wilds, why wouldn't get the equivalent of what Rise was for Switch?

If I was Capcom, I would strongly consider making Switch 2 the console I build Street Fighter 7 around. It's in 2D, and the art direction is more stylized than the 3D fighters and Mortal Kombat's chase for absolute realism. That lends itself better to the Switch than something like Tekken or DoA would. I think the idea of being able to practice or get a few matches in away from home lends itself well to a fighter as well. As long as the fps is at least 60 and stable, and the netcode for the game (and the console) are on point, why not? Heck, if it starts with the Switch and then is ported up, that opens up the possibility for crossplay moreso than porting it down, because then other consoles and PC aren't telling the Switch "Get on our level or GTFO".