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

Forums - Gaming - Director talks about bringing Star Wars: Battlefront II to Nintendo Switch and Scorpio

Probably for Scorpio, unlikely for Switch though

Small chance, but very unlikely



NintenDomination [May 2015 - July 2017]
 

  - Official  VGChartz Tutorial Thread - 

NintenDomination [2015/05/19 - 2017/07/02]
 

          

 

 

Here lies the hidden threads. 

 | |

Nintendo Metascore | Official NintenDomination | VGC Tutorial Thread

| Best and Worst of Miiverse | Manga Discussion Thead |
[3DS] Winter Playtimes [Wii U]

Around the Network
leo-j said:
Game is probably targeting 1080 60 on PS4, drop it to 720 30 and the switch can run it imo...(maybe with a slight degrading of the visuals as well)

Would be huge if it releases on switch!

No just no. Every single Dice game was 900p 60FPS on PS4, I seriously doubt they could improve the engine that much to do 1080p 60FPS.

Also the game will definitely not be a 4k title on PS4 Pro and certainly not Scorpio either as MS doesn't allow the framerate to be lower than on the regular X1 version, which for Dice games is 60 FPS at 720p.



Barozi said:
leo-j said:
Game is probably targeting 1080 60 on PS4, drop it to 720 30 and the switch can run it imo...(maybe with a slight degrading of the visuals as well)

Would be huge if it releases on switch!

No just no. Every single Dice game was 900p 60FPS on PS4, I seriously doubt they could improve the engine that much to do 1080p 60FPS.

Also the game will definitely not be a 4k title on PS4 Pro and certainly not Scorpio either as MS doesn't allow the framerate to be lower than on the regular X1 version, which for Dice games is 60 FPS at 720p.

They wouldn't need to improve the engine, just scale back the visuals.  Doubt they will but they could. 



Nuvendil said:
Pemalite said:
Frostbite scales stupidly well. It was able to scale downwards to the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3, the Switch is a big step up from that.

Don't expect 60fps though.

Will it happen? Probably not. It's EA.

Actually, it could hit 60fps if they prioritized that, theres nothing about the game as a game that is that demanding.  People need to wrap their heads around the fact that it's the engine and the systems (that is, what goes on in the game) that determines how difficult it is to scale, not graphics.  Because if the engine has integrated scalability tools and such, the graphics issue is easily resolved.  Systems - things like AI, physics simulation, etc - can be the bigger challenge, especially if said systems are integral to the game's function.  The first EA Battlefront certainly did not have such complex and demanding systems, it was the graphics pretty much exclusively that sucked up the juice as the real meat and potatoes of how the game works is even simpler than your average CoD and definitely simpler than Battlefield.

So the question here is really quite simple: when they upgraded Frostbite for use in next gen games, did they do it in such a way that scaling back down in the area of graphics is very difficult (I would hope they are not this stupid) or did they just enhance what COULD be done, adding another level of capabilities.  If the latter, a Switch version would be far less difficult than people seem to think, assuming this game doesn't add a whole lot of demmanding systems the first did not have, which I doubt it will.

You are right, it would be capable of hitting 60fps on Switch if it was engineered that way.

But there would likely be some massive compromises in order to achieve that Target. 30fps would be a far more realistic target whilst having a degree of fidelity.

Frostbite itself hasn't been overhauled significantly since the last gen consoles. I am still able to play Battlefield 4, Hardline and Battlefield 1 on a 10 year old PC with similar performance levels.
Frostbite does extremely well on anemic and old CPU's as well, always has, so the Switch has that going for it.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

Pemalite said:
Nuvendil said:

Actually, it could hit 60fps if they prioritized that, theres nothing about the game as a game that is that demanding.  People need to wrap their heads around the fact that it's the engine and the systems (that is, what goes on in the game) that determines how difficult it is to scale, not graphics.  Because if the engine has integrated scalability tools and such, the graphics issue is easily resolved.  Systems - things like AI, physics simulation, etc - can be the bigger challenge, especially if said systems are integral to the game's function.  The first EA Battlefront certainly did not have such complex and demanding systems, it was the graphics pretty much exclusively that sucked up the juice as the real meat and potatoes of how the game works is even simpler than your average CoD and definitely simpler than Battlefield.

So the question here is really quite simple: when they upgraded Frostbite for use in next gen games, did they do it in such a way that scaling back down in the area of graphics is very difficult (I would hope they are not this stupid) or did they just enhance what COULD be done, adding another level of capabilities.  If the latter, a Switch version would be far less difficult than people seem to think, assuming this game doesn't add a whole lot of demmanding systems the first did not have, which I doubt it will.

You are right, it would be capable of hitting 60fps on Switch if it was engineered that way.

But there would likely be some massive compromises in order to achieve that Target. 30fps would be a far more realistic target whilst having a degree of fidelity.

Frostbite itself hasn't been overhauled significantly since the last gen consoles. I am still able to play Battlefield 4, Hardline and Battlefield 1 on a 10 year old PC with similar performance levels.
Frostbite does extremely well on anemic and old CPU's as well, always has, so the Switch has that going for it.

Yeah, Frostbite actually could be a good fit for Switch.  Personally, I would beo absolutely down for a 60fps and 30fps option on a Switch version.  It would be interesting to see what they could do if they put the leg work in.  And since this game has a singleplayer campaign it makes far more sense on Switch than the first one would have and I would be down if the version was good. 



Around the Network

"That is a question for another day." Who the heck did they interview? Maz Kanata?



Nuvendil said:
Barozi said:

No just no. Every single Dice game was 900p 60FPS on PS4, I seriously doubt they could improve the engine that much to do 1080p 60FPS.

Also the game will definitely not be a 4k title on PS4 Pro and certainly not Scorpio either as MS doesn't allow the framerate to be lower than on the regular X1 version, which for Dice games is 60 FPS at 720p.

They wouldn't need to improve the engine, just scale back the visuals.  Doubt they will but they could. 

yeah which is kinda the whole point. They surely won't make it look worse than the first game just to make it run in fullHD. I mean they could have easily done that with Mirror's Edge Catalyst as it was the first game in the series on 8th gen consoles, thus the only thing to compare it to would be a 7th gen game.