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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Regarding Switch third party support: Developers don't care about power

LethalP on 30 May 2018
TheMisterManGuy said:
LethalP said:
Power is the main reason the Wii, WiiU and Switch missed out on big AAA third party games. User base is a factor, but that didn't stop Bethesda from porting Skyrim to Switch. Yet it didn't get Fallout 4 because it targeted PS4 and X1 as a base spec. Just like how WiiU got AC3 and 4 but as soon as Ubisoft stopped targeting PS3/360 with AC Unity they skipped the WiiU.

If Nintendo had a home console as powerful as the PS4 and X1 with proper storage media and none of the bullshit, it would be getting Red Dead, CoD, BF, Kingdom Hearts III, and everything that is currently PS4/X1/ only, because there would be no reason not to. Shit, look no further than Kingdom Hearts III, yeah. It's coming to Xbox but not Switch, user base clearly isn't the issue here. KHIII is a 8th gen game, Switch graphics capabilities are basically 7th gen.

Are you sure that's the reason? Bethesda didn't actually say anything about Fallout regarding the Switch. As for other games, Kingdom Hearts III can certainly run on Switch, it's on Unreal Engine 4, so with a few adjustments, a Switch ports is feasible. Problem is, The game's too far into development to consider a Switch port at the moment, the Developers want to concentrate of the existing versions first, before considering the Switch, which is something they said themselves. 

http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/07/16/kingdom-hearts-3-director-switch-version-maybe-possible-after-xbox-one-ps4-versions-are-released

Similar to how Bethesda didn't decide to port Wolfenstein II to Switch until after the game finished development (It was basically a month away from release when they announced it). 

Fallout 4 might come to Switch, but if it does it's in Bethesdas good graces because they would literally have to recreate assets for significantly weaker hardware. The crux of the problem for most AAA games.

Kingdom Hearts III might be a thing on Switch, but it will be a simplified version. Developers can't just port games to Switch from PS4 and simply turn down graphics settings. They have to redo the pipeline and that takes time. One of the reasons why Switch versions get delayed.

To be clear, anything that can easily put on Switch will be. It's a successul console so why not? What's to loose? But when you have to start rewriting your renderer just to run on weaker hardware maybe it's just not worth the effort. So power is indeed a big factor for developers, contrary to your op.

 



Around the Network
kirby007 on 30 May 2018
quickrick said:
TheMisterManGuy said:

Some adjustment may be required for the Switch due to power differences, yes. But otherwise, no developer has complained about the porting process, and have said that it's super easy. 

umm the team that ported doom said it was a wicked hard port, that was a 1080p/60fps ps4 game btw.

https://nintendoeverything.com/doom-switch-dev-says-the-port-has-been-wicked-hard-wishes-gamers-didnt-focus-on-tech-specs-over-fun/

It was a hard port bc they had to decide what they needed to trottle while not gimping the game 



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

Conina on 30 May 2018
TheMisterManGuy said:
Barkley said: 

Porting games between PS4/XBO/PC is way easier than Switch, which is why games that could run (AC:Rogue) aren't on the Switch, because they can't be bothered putting effort in. Relatively the Switch ISN'T an easy device to port to.

You'd have an argument, if this was actually true. But the vast majority of developers have said that the Switch is very easy to port to. As easy as porting to any platform. Square Enix even said that its very similar to the PS4 in terms of core architecture. Power is only important to porting if the game itself requires a lot of power. Of course, porting a highly demanding game like Doom or Read Dead 2 will take a lot more work on the Switch. But are you really going to sit here and tell me that an HD remaster of a last gen game can't be ported over with ease due to power? 

The vast majority of developers haven't made any comments about it. Do you know how many developers are developing games?

And Doom ain't a highly demanding game.



jardesonbarbosa on 30 May 2018

But if it's so good, where are the third party games? I love my Nintendo Switch, but let's be honest, anyone buying a Switch to play 3rd party games (being AAA or AA) is only fooling themselves. It is a device to play Nintendo games until they prove otherwise.



TheMisterManGuy on 30 May 2018
LethalP said:

Fallout 4 might come to Switch, but if it does it's in Bethesdas good graces because they would literally have to recreate assets for significantly weaker hardware. The crux of the problem for most AAA games.

Kingdom Hearts III might be a thing on Switch, but it will be a simplified version. Developers can't just port games to Switch from PS4 and simply turn down graphics settings. They have to redo the pipeline and that takes time. One of the reasons why Switch versions get delayed.

To be clear, anything that can easily put on Switch will be. It's a successul console so why not? What's to loose? But when you have to start rewriting your renderer just to run on weaker hardware maybe it's just not worth the effort. So power is indeed a big factor for developers, contrary to your op.

 

From what I've seen, Fallout 4 doesn't look like anything the Switch couldn't handle without some adjustments, so it is possible. As for Kingdom Hearts III, that's Unreal Engine 4, a very scale-able and flexible engine, so while it would take some work, it wouldn't require completely re-developing the game from scratch. 



Around the Network
TheMisterManGuy on 30 May 2018
jardesonbarbosa said:
But if it's so good, where are the third party games? I love my Nintendo Switch, but let's be honest, anyone buying a Switch to play 3rd party games (being AAA or AA) is only fooling themselves. It is a device to play Nintendo games until they prove otherwise.

Only they have proved otherwise. People are buying third party games on the Switch, so that's encouraging to publishers. At this point, anything that can run on the Switch, most likely will get a Switch version.



globalisateur on 30 May 2018

It's not only about power:

- less power
- less memory
- no HDD
- no Bluray

- not X86 CPU
- no integrated chat

- No analog triggers (very important for some types of games which also means less buttons than on main consoles).



DonFerrari on 30 May 2018
TheMisterManGuy said:
LethalP said:
Power is the main reason the Wii, WiiU and Switch missed out on big AAA third party games. User base is a factor, but that didn't stop Bethesda from porting Skyrim to Switch. Yet it didn't get Fallout 4 because it targeted PS4 and X1 as a base spec. Just like how WiiU got AC3 and 4 but as soon as Ubisoft stopped targeting PS3/360 with AC Unity they skipped the WiiU.

If Nintendo had a home console as powerful as the PS4 and X1 with proper storage media and none of the bullshit, it would be getting Red Dead, CoD, BF, Kingdom Hearts III, and everything that is currently PS4/X1/ only, because there would be no reason not to. Shit, look no further than Kingdom Hearts III, yeah. It's coming to Xbox but not Switch, user base clearly isn't the issue here. KHIII is a 8th gen game, Switch graphics capabilities are basically 7th gen.

Are you sure that's the reason? Bethesda didn't actually say anything about Fallout regarding the Switch. As for other games, Kingdom Hearts III can certainly run on Switch, it's on Unreal Engine 4, so with a few adjustments, a Switch ports is feasible. Problem is, The game's too far into development to consider a Switch port at the moment, the Developers want to concentrate of the existing versions first, before considering the Switch, which is something they said themselves. 

http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/07/16/kingdom-hearts-3-director-switch-version-maybe-possible-after-xbox-one-ps4-versions-are-released

Similar to how Bethesda didn't decide to port Wolfenstein II to Switch until after the game finished development (It was basically a month away from release when they announced it). 

Being on UE4 doesn't assure anything about feasibility.

But "any game" could be made for switch as long as you reddo it to fit into the processing budget.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari on 30 May 2018
Shadow1980 said:

If power isn't important to third parties, then why did nearly every AAA multiplatform game for the 360 & PS3 skip the Wii, with the tiny handful that were (namely a few CoD games) receiving serious downgrades, and why did nearly every PS4 & XBO multiplatform game that wasn't a cross-gen game not come to the Wii U, and why are so many recent and upcoming AAA multiplatform games skipping the Switch? And if user base mattered, then why did the Wii have essentially nonexistent AAA support despite at one point having a user base almost as big as that of the 360 & PS3 combined?

While I love Nintendo's consoles, I'm not going to pretend that third parties are going to be tripping over each other to try to put out their biggest and best games on underpowered hardware. That doesn't mean that third parties as a whole will neglect Nintendo's systems, but we're not going to be seeing games like Red Dead Redemption 2, Battlefield V, Cyberpunk 2077, Rage 2, Beyond Good & Evil 2, FFVII Remake, and Anthem on the Switch. We'll be seeing lower-budget titles that are either less mainstream games, or are party games of some kind, or are remasters of old games that don't need a ton of hardware power to function (think Skyrim and Dark Souls). In the rare occasion we see a current-gen PS4 & XBO multiplat released on Switch (think Doom and Wolfenstein II), it will be a significant downgrade from the other versions, and unlikely to sell anywhere near as well as the PS4 & XBO versions.

Because "they were hard to code/port" didn't you heard that PS3 was very easy in comparison?

Besides the world conspiracy of all 3rd parties to make Nintendo go under.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Soundwave on 30 May 2018

I don't think it's as simple as anything can be ported. Porting from a 1.2 TFLOP console (XBox One) to run on a portable that needs to be at 153 GFLOPS for portable mode isn't easy. When/if Nintendo releases a Switch Pro, I think the floodgates will open with lots more anxious third parties.

The thing with the Switch that is different from Wii or Wii U is the software buying habits of the Switch audience seem more diverse and more core centric third party games are doing well. Looking on Amazon right now, the Switch version of Megaman 11 has way more pre-orders than PS4 and Street Fighter 30th Anniversary Collection is selling best on the Switch system, despite SF being heavily associated with the Playstation brand of late (SFV exclusive).

Octopath Traveller also was in the top 50 when I checked which is impressive given its not out until July. And when you look at the top selling games on the eShop it's a much healthier variety of software and genres. It seems like things like FIFA also sold decently on the Switch too. Unlike the Wii, Switch's software ecosystem isn't just Nintendo IP + mini-game shovelware.