Hiku said:
Nautilus said:
How much significant that power would be for that game though?Outside of prettier graphics and better lightining I mean.Would 6 Bosses instead of "just" 3 at the same time would make for a better game, or it would just ensure a chaotic encounter that dosent have the fun of a more calculated, intimate encounter with less enemies?This kind of thinking would just led us to speculative territory, and would led us nowhere.
Instead, PS4 and XOne is powerful enough to deliver the game that the devs envisioned it.As you said, extra power could have afforded a few extra bells and whistles to the game, but would it make a difference?Thats what Im trying to argue with my example.Would a theoretical Switch version make such a difference to the point that the game would have lost its soul?Switch is too new to really have good examples, but what was the last port, that was done with some competence, that hindered the gameplay and the overall game experience so much as you describe?I would say the Vita with some of its games, like maybe Borderlands 2, but usually when a port is announced, its because the devs porting it have enough confidence that they can deliver and the game overall experience will remain overall intact.Doom is an example of that.
And if you think such small compromises like small audio compressions is reason enough to not want to port something over, well Im sorry but thats petty.Technology could always become better, and if a dev for example, held off developing a game to develop it 5 years later, he would have better tools and stronger hardware to work with, and thus in theory create a better game.This argument can go on forever like that.
And I mean, Im not basing this off of nowhere.Capcom said it would be difficult to port it, but not impossible.Difficult is just a nice word that it would require a bit more time and money than usual, but it would be doable.
|
Well there is of course a question of what you can, or what you should, do with extra power. I mentioned the number of large boss monsters on the same map because it is my understanding that it is new for Monster Hunter World to have 3, and that the number of large boss monsters appearing in the same area in the portable games was lower. I don't know if 6 at the same time would be a good idea. lol But it was just an example of something that can easily be imagined.
But I just want to point out the distinct difference between talking about how developing a game for multiple platforms can force developers to not set the common denominator too high, vs porting a game that's already finished. Because porting a game that's already finished is very different in that developers generally don't begin full scale development of porting a game unless they first assess that it is possible to achieve adequate results.
They may look at Game #A and run tests and come to the conclusion that "Yes, this is doable".
While the same tests for Game #B give them less than satisfactory results, so they never even attempt to port it at all.
This ties into what I said about how some games can be developed properly across all platforms without any significant sacrifices being necessary. It just depends on what goals they have for the game. As long as the bar is set where it is not because of hardware limitations, but because it already met their artistic vision (like 3 boss monsters in the same area for example. Maybe they thought that was the perfect number anyway), then there is no problem.
But when the bar is lowered because of hardware limitations of certain systems, the compromises made could be both significant (number of bosses on screen), and insignificant (lower resolution textures, etc.)
I wasn't specifically limiting this to MHW other than using an example from it. I don't know the ins and outs of the development of MHW, or any specific game for that matter. So I can never really claim if this is or isn't the case for any one specific game, unless the developers say so themselves. I was only saying that it is technically possible that hardware limitations can cause significant sacrifices on the more powerful platforms. But it is also possible that none such occur.
In regards to the "compression" comment. That wasn't the issue on 360. That was only to illustrate that Square would have been forced to use more than 3 discs for Xbox 360, in spite of already cutting corners with compressing data, if they wanted to include more story content that they reportedly scrapped due to storage disparity.
|
The bolded sums up the problem.We cant say for certain either way, if the Switch would hold out the game potential or not.Without Capcom saying that it is outright impossible(They only said it was hard, as previously stated), and without the Switch having a big power gap betwenn the other consoles, any argument made against it or for it is simply what ifs.
But that also, in my opinion, makes the argument of "Capcom should just try to make a version for it then" more compelling.MH was associated with Nintendo for a long time, so fans are certainly present in the system, making the potential risks of couping the costs really low.And with the success of the Switch, there really isnt any excuse just not try to do it.
Anyways, I do understand where you are comming from, and if such a port would be trully impossible, I agree that something different shouldnt be pushed just for the sake of getting a MH in the system.I had a better reply planned for your response, but I accidentelly closed the tab and lost all that I wrote, so I gave you this shorter version lol.
