By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Borderlands 3 not likely on switch

Luke888 said:
Wait, so, I'm not into Borderlands neither do I know the developer's status, what could have happened to prevent a Switch port to happen ? did they ask for a Dev Kit and Nintendo didn't give them one ? or were they expecting Nintendo to fund the game ?

Probably expecting them to fund the game, (due to them funding stuff like bayonetta) cause I think they gave devkits to a bunch of big third parties.



Around the Network

They're remastering L.A Noire? lol, no way.



-VIDEOGAME NINJA APPROVED-

rjason12 said:
Luke888 said:
Wait, so, I'm not into Borderlands neither do I know the developer's status, what could have happened to prevent a Switch port to happen ? did they ask for a Dev Kit and Nintendo didn't give them one ? or were they expecting Nintendo to fund the game ?

Probably expecting them to fund the game, (due to them funding stuff like bayonetta) cause I think they gave devkits to a bunch of big third parties.

Oh, I see, kinda strange from Nintendo since from what I've seen Borderlands 2 has a hand-drawn art style and the Switch would likely run that pretty well. Kinda makes me interested in what other projects they are funding/following other than the Mario x Rabbids game...



rjason12 said:
HollyGamer said:

Well , even Zelda it self still an 7th gen games, it looks slightly better then Wii U because Zelda on Wii u is from a previous build from 6th month's ago. Even the Skyrim that run on Switch is not the remaster. Even if it's remaster, not in chance it will be on par on 8th gen spec. i don't want to derail the thread and tlaking about the spec, we can talk about the spec on separate thread, and i don't want to begin with, Digital foundry  already explained well on their video how the Switch will end up, and they have a good reputation on it. 

Wii U was 8th gen, therefore Zelda was 8th gen. Power doesn't dictate generation. 

We are talking about graphic gen , not release date gen and market share gen. Wii U or Switch can be 9th or 10th gen for all i care, as long as the graphic is comparable to PS3, Xbox 360 or Wii U, it belong on the same gen. Even a very powerful PC which came out on 7th gen can be comparable to PS4, if the PC spec can handle and produce the same graphic effect with games from PS4.



It's bad for Nintendo. Nothing much to say here



 

Around the Network
bonzobanana said:
dahuman said:

No, people just forgot how compression works these days because they are lazy fucks. Also, Borderlands 2 GOTY edition was less than 12GB on disc and less than 10GB download on PC so, stop smoking crack.

If I'm on crack I dread to think what you are smoking. Do you not have a clue that such a low performance console will have to cut out some of the content or reduce quality for much of the the game anyway, texture quality etc. There will be natural shrinkage anyway. It would probably end up on a 8GB/64Gb cartridge especially as third party games previously for cartridge games tended to go for smaller sizes of cartridges to reduce upfront costs and their stock investment in cartridges. Whatever it would be a hopeless version which only a small number of people would buy especially like here in the UK where the cartrige prices are £60 suggested retail and the far superior versions will enter retail well below that and be discounted quite quickly. It's simply not commercially realistic. 

We seem to be going through the same process as wii u where people where expecting wii u ports of big third party games but there simply was no commercial demand for them.  There has never been any evidence or track record of people paying high prices for mobile games and lets face it android and apple have if anything pushed prices well down causing Nintendo problems for even 3DS cartridge pricing but Switch is well above those.

So many reasons why the Switch is not a good format for this game.

So basically, you are saying storage is not a problem anyways, now your orginal post is moot. and I do smoke weed occasionally, I live in WA lol. I also don't remember when the last time Borderlands wasn't cel-shaded, like we need horse power for that shit lol. Not that I've played one since 2 TBH, lost interest already, Gearbox needs to come up with something new IMO.



dahuman said:
bonzobanana said:

If I'm on crack I dread to think what you are smoking. Do you not have a clue that such a low performance console will have to cut out some of the content or reduce quality for much of the the game anyway, texture quality etc. There will be natural shrinkage anyway. It would probably end up on a 8GB/64Gb cartridge especially as third party games previously for cartridge games tended to go for smaller sizes of cartridges to reduce upfront costs and their stock investment in cartridges. Whatever it would be a hopeless version which only a small number of people would buy especially like here in the UK where the cartrige prices are £60 suggested retail and the far superior versions will enter retail well below that and be discounted quite quickly. It's simply not commercially realistic. 

We seem to be going through the same process as wii u where people where expecting wii u ports of big third party games but there simply was no commercial demand for them.  There has never been any evidence or track record of people paying high prices for mobile games and lets face it android and apple have if anything pushed prices well down causing Nintendo problems for even 3DS cartridge pricing but Switch is well above those.

So many reasons why the Switch is not a good format for this game.

So basically, you are saying storage is not a problem anyways, now your orginal post is moot. and I do smoke weed occasionally, I live in WA lol. I also don't remember when the last time Borderlands wasn't cel-shaded, like we need horse power for that shit lol. Not that I've played one since 2 TBH, lost interest already, Gearbox needs to come up with something new IMO.

It's not like optical where a game can be any size up to the maximum capacity of the disc and you can even add a second disc at low cost if you need to increase storage. Cartridge games will always be under pressure to be smaller because that is always cheaper. Macronix do a huge range of sizes. I'm sure games like bomberman may actually be very small on Switch and Zelda probably represents the maximum capacity for the moment which I think is 16GB capacity although in the past some games were more heavily compressed on cartridge for 3DS than digital downloads because they had to be shoe-horned into a set cartridge size with Nintendo preferring to increase loading times rather than waste space on the cartridge. 3DS games range from 128MB to 4GB in size. In the UK it looks like 8GB or 16GB Nintendo games may have a £60 retail price but sub 8GB games may be at £50. However in the past often the smaller cartridges from third parties had a high price so those could be £60 over here as well. No one is expecting 1-2 switch to be anything other than a  tiny cartridge. So lets not pretend cartridge prices and capacity are not going to be a huge issue for the Switch. Even producing a small simple 128MB game on Switch on cartridge is going to be a lot more expensive than an optical disc containing 25GB or 50GB of content. 

3DS game sizes here;

http://www.3dsdb.com/



bonzobanana said:
dahuman said:

So basically, you are saying storage is not a problem anyways, now your orginal post is moot. and I do smoke weed occasionally, I live in WA lol. I also don't remember when the last time Borderlands wasn't cel-shaded, like we need horse power for that shit lol. Not that I've played one since 2 TBH, lost interest already, Gearbox needs to come up with something new IMO.

It's not like optical where a game can be any size up to the maximum capacity of the disc and you can even add a second disc at low cost if you need to increase storage. Cartridge games will always be under pressure to be smaller because that is always cheaper. Macronix do a huge range of sizes. I'm sure games like bomberman may actually be very small on Switch and Zelda probably represents the maximum capacity for the moment which I think is 16GB capacity although in the past some games were more heavily compressed on cartridge for 3DS than digital downloads because they had to be shoe-horned into a set cartridge size with Nintendo preferring to increase loading times rather than waste space on the cartridge. 3DS games range from 128MB to 4GB in size. In the UK it looks like 8GB or 16GB Nintendo games may have a £60 retail price but sub 8GB games may be at £50. However in the past often the smaller cartridges from third parties had a high price so those could be £60 over here as well. No one is expecting 1-2 switch to be anything other than a  tiny cartridge. So lets not pretend cartridge prices and capacity are not going to be a huge issue for the Switch. Even producing a small simple 128MB game on Switch on cartridge is going to be a lot more expensive than an optical disc containing 25GB or 50GB of content. 

3DS game sizes here;

http://www.3dsdb.com/

oh of course, optical will still be cheaper to produce even though price is a lot lower for solid state storage now, but the cart has it's advantages and that's why I'm going physical with Nintendo this time instead of digital like my other collections.

1.) potentially longer lasting.

2.) no installation required and seek time is good out the box, outside of maybe some patches, it's drop and go.

3.)micro SD slot will only be used for saves and some patches, so you don't have to spend too much on extra storage in the long run.

4.) Amazon Prime pre-order for cheaper prices.

5.) better used game market, harder to get fucked up copies.

6.) easier to store, I'm just gonna dump shit in a box or bag and not have to worry about things getting scratched.

7.) I'm sure there are more but, fuck 1-2 Switch, I'll take it for free for the sake of free shit and still not play it.



This doesn't surprise me.

Nintendo isn't interested in Borderlands 3. They are also not interested in any other third party games that they feel is competition for their own games. Nintendo is not about creating a diverse ecosystem on their platforms, they are about creating an ecosystem where their own games can flourish.

Anyone thinking Nintendo will ever care about third parties at this point is delusional.



Chrizum said:
This doesn't surprise me.

Nintendo isn't interested in Borderlands 3. They are also not interested in any other third party games that they feel is competition for their own games. Nintendo is not about creating a diverse ecosystem on their platforms, they are about creating an ecosystem where their own games can flourish.

Anyone thinking Nintendo will ever care about third parties at this point is delusional.

This is pretty much true.  Sony/Microsoft seek to build a framework where they can make money by providing a platform for third-parties.  Their own effort at first-party gaming is intended to enhance the perception of their platform in the eyes of consumers.  Nintendo seeks to build a platform which will allow them to make money from their first-party games, with the stray third-party effort playing an enhancement role.  It's always been that way, all the way back to the NES era where first-party Nintendo had access to better cartridges and priority in manufacturing (controlled by Nintendo).  

It's a very different philosophy.

Nintendo just isn't going to help third-parties succeed the way Sony and Microsoft do, which makes it a less attractive destination from the start.