Quantcast
Will Kingdom Hearts Collections (or 3) ever come to Switch?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Will Kingdom Hearts Collections (or 3) ever come to Switch?

They recently announced the collection will be coming to Xbox, so I expect we'll see it for Switch as well. Not sure about KH3.

Nu-13 said:
Bandorr said:

I have no clue what a good one would be. But I look at the witcher 3 - and I look at KH3. KH3 just has more. It looks better, it has way more action way more effects and can have a ton of enemies. It feels way more intense.

I could be wrong. If I am - then maybe it is a good example.  In general I'm not sure any games described as a "miracle" are good examples because they probably took a lot of time/money/effort. Something I doubt every company wants to put into every game.

If it is more demanding or not requires a whole other analysis to know but that isn't relevant. It would translate into lower res and downgraded graphics to the switch and it obviously doesn't take a lot of time/money/effort compared to other ports.

There's usually more to it than just scaling down visuals. If for example there's a battle with 100 enemies at the same time, and the game doesn't run properly even with reduced visuals, what then? Reduce the visuals even further? Dynamic resolution? Remove a number of enemies for the battle? Remove parts of the background? Etc.



Around the Network
Drakrami said:

If you want to play those games, get a real console. 

How on Earth is Switch not a real console? If it can play lots of the same games as the other two?



 

derpysquirtle64 said:
Drakrami said:

If you want to play those games, get a real console. 

How on Earth is Switch not a real console? If it can play lots of the same games as the other two?

Clearly Overwatch, Paladins, Mortal Kombat 11, Dragon Quest 11, Witcher 3, Rocket League, Doom 2016, Skyrim and other titles are in fact indie titles. 

...Would explain the bugs on Skyrim.



The Democratic Nintendo fan....is that a paradox? I'm fond of one of the more conservative companies in the industry, but I vote Liberally and view myself that way 90% of the time?

Hiku said:

They recently announced the collection will be coming to Xbox, so I expect we'll see it for Switch as well. Not sure about KH3.

Nu-13 said:

If it is more demanding or not requires a whole other analysis to know but that isn't relevant. It would translate into lower res and downgraded graphics to the switch and it obviously doesn't take a lot of time/money/effort compared to other ports.

There's usually more to it than just scaling down visuals. If for example there's a battle with 100 enemies at the same time, and the game doesn't run properly even with reduced visuals, what then? Reduce the visuals even further? Dynamic resolution? Remove a number of enemies for the battle? Remove parts of the background? Etc.

Downgrades serve to offset all of gpu, cpu and ram usage. If it runs on the ps4, it would run similarly on the switch after proper scaling. And even then, what's the problem if some moments do end up having issues due to number of enemies? Devs will just work around those parts (most likely reducing the number of onscreen enemies, in this example). Or do you think a developer should forgo a port completely just because a few scenes may need a little more adjustments? Heck, it's likely that these kinds of problems show up all the time while developing many games and devs simply work around it untill the system can handle.



I think it's bound to happen at some point, it is such a missed market for the franchise.



Nothing to see here, move along

Around the Network

Anything is possible.



Nu-13 said:
Hiku said:

They recently announced the collection will be coming to Xbox, so I expect we'll see it for Switch as well. Not sure about KH3.

There's usually more to it than just scaling down visuals. If for example there's a battle with 100 enemies at the same time, and the game doesn't run properly even with reduced visuals, what then? Reduce the visuals even further? Dynamic resolution? Remove a number of enemies for the battle? Remove parts of the background? Etc.

Downgrades serve to offset all of gpu, cpu and ram usage. If it runs on the ps4, it would run similarly on the switch after proper scaling. And even then, what's the problem if some moments do end up having issues due to number of enemies? Devs will just work around those parts (most likely reducing the number of onscreen enemies, in this example). Or do you think a developer should forgo a port completely just because a few scenes may need a little more adjustments? Heck, it's likely that these kinds of problems show up all the time while developing many games and devs simply work around it untill the system can handle.

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?

Publishers have to consider a lot of things surrounding even how these games look, that we don't even think about. For example, when Bandai Namco made an arcade version of Tekken Tag 2, which featured some new mechanics, and a new name/title screen, it did not get approved by one of Japan's rating organizations. They said the game needed to look like a new game, for trailers, magazine screenshots, etc. So Katsuhiro Harada had the team adjust the color of the healthbar, from blue to yellow, so it is immediately noticeable that it is different from the original.

Image is also something these developers/publishers consider. But where they draw the line differs from one company to the next. If they've spent a lot of time and money on making a game look/play a certain way, one studio may not think that another version of the game adequately represents that work. While another studio is completely fine with it.

So whether it's worth making a port is up to each individual studio based on their budget and what they value.
Square Enix said a few years ago that they were investigating if Final Fantasy XV would work on Switch, and we haven't heard anything since. I'm sure they could be lazy and make it look like a PS2 game and call it a day. But obviously they don't want that. So would it work at the level of fidelity where they draw the line? And how much would it cost to achieve that? Would it be better to use that budget for the development of a brand new game instead, like Bravely Default 2?

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.

Last edited by Hiku - on 25 December 2019

Hiku said:
Nu-13 said:

Downgrades serve to offset all of gpu, cpu and ram usage. If it runs on the ps4, it would run similarly on the switch after proper scaling. And even then, what's the problem if some moments do end up having issues due to number of enemies? Devs will just work around those parts (most likely reducing the number of onscreen enemies, in this example). Or do you think a developer should forgo a port completely just because a few scenes may need a little more adjustments? Heck, it's likely that these kinds of problems show up all the time while developing many games and devs simply work around it untill the system can handle.

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?

Publishers have to consider a lot of things surrounding even how these games look, that we don't even think about. For example, when Bandai Namco made an arcade version of Tekken Tag 2, which featured some new mechanics, and a new name/title screen, it did not get approved by one of Japan's rating organizations. They said the game needed to look like a new game, for trailers, magazine screenshots, etc. So Katsuhiro Harada had the team adjust the color of the healthbar, from blue to yellow, so it is immediately noticeable that it is different from the original.

Image is also something these developers/publishers consider. But where they draw the line differs from one company to the next. If they've spent a lot of time and money on making a game look/play a certain way, one studio may not think that another version of the game adequately represents that work. While another studio is completely fine with it.

So whether it's worth making a port is up to each individual studio based on their budget and what they value.
Square Enix said a few years ago that they were investigating if Final Fantasy XV would work on Switch, and we haven't heard anything since. I'm sure they could be lazy and make it look like a PS2 game and call it a day. But obviously they don't want that. So would it work at the level of fidelity where they draw the line? And how much would it cost to achieve that? Would it be better to use that budget for the development of a brand new game instead, like Bravely Default 2?

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.



Nu-13 said:

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.

It doesn't have to compare. It just has to be not worth it.
And where each company draws the line financially or otherwise, is up to them. But these companies are all primarily driven by money.

And I did mean PS2 graphics, because PS3 levels wouldn't necessarily be conspicuous, as there are a number of PS3/PS4 cross gen titles ported to Switch. While Persona 5 is on PS4, it's definitely a PS3 level game in terms of visuals.
But what I was referring to was a tweet going around with footage of Dragonball FighterZ on PC where someone had put everything on the lowest settings, with the caption "It looks like a PS2 game". And it kinda did. It looked very bizarre. I'll see if I can find it.

So basically, they could just put all the graphical sliders at 0 and call it a day. But that would be a bad look for them and their game. So if they're going to do it, they're going to try to optimize, to some extent.

Last edited by Hiku - on 25 December 2019

I'm shocked we haven't had at least a spinoff of KH like all Nintendo handhelds usually had.



You know it deserves the GOTY.

Come join The 2018 Obscure Game Monthly Review Thread.