By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Otter said:
curl-6 said:

Something like MH World wouldn't have been viable to bring to Switch 1, but I see no real reason why they couldn't have ported say RE7 when much more demanding games ended up making their way across like Witcher 3, Doom Eternal, or Hogwarts Legacy.

Still, better late than never; they're certainly making up for lost time now.

Porting is rarely about being possible or not, more a case of how much investment vs level of return + sacrifice on the OG experience/vision. The big investment required is why you had whole external development studios porting experiences like Doom to Switch 1 or Saber Interactive porting Witcher 3, versus Capcom managing RE9 to S2 internally, late in development and still having it arrive alongside their original release target with a comparable experience. 

The fact that none of the Switch 1 ports you listed were done internally tells you how much they would have derailed and internal teams schedule and priorities. Again, I just wouldn't see it as low effort before and tons of effort now. It's been a calculated effort across both generation which is why you had all the PS3/360 gen RE games and prior natively ported to Switch. For me it just comes back to this

"S2 actually fits in with their ecosystem instead of requiring them to shift their ecosystem specifically to incorporate Nintendo."

Porting is much easier now on Switch 2, true, but there wasn't anything stopping Capcom from say just enlisting a studio like Saber or Virtuos to do it for them as so many other publishers did on Switch 1.

If something like Doom or Wolfenstein did well enough on Switch to justify continued support, I'm sure Resident Evil could have been profitable.

It's all water under the bridge at this point of course.