curl-6 said:
Farsala said:
That doesn't explain why all the other games didn't get ported. Just like a lot of Japanese devs find Xbox to be unpalatable for profit for their games, a lot of western devs found the Switch to be unpalatable. If it was easy and inexpensive then the Switch would have just as strong 3rd party support as PS or PC gets, especially with the massive install base taken into account. |
Easy and inexpensive are relative; it's easy and cheap enough that literally hundreds of PS4 games have been ported to Switch. There are bottlenecks in production though; the main studios hands may be full already making the PS/Xbox/PC versions, so Switch ports are typically handled by specialized porting devs like Panic Button or Saber, and there's a limited number of those with a limited amount of manpower. You're missing the point though; porting a finished game, even across a power gap like PS4 to Switch or PS5 to where the Switch successor is estimated to be, is vastly cheaper than making a game in the first place. If a game needed millions to break even on its own, a port may only need a few hundred k. |
100s of games have been ported, but 100s of games haven't made it yet. Take the top games from 2023 (according to a random media site), excluding 1st party.
For a company like SE that is taking forever to port to even PC, I think a few 100k is the low point. For my interpretation, this is the level of sales needed to port from PS5.
Xbox Series X- 200k
Xbox Series X/S- 400k
PC- 400k
Switch- 600k+
Basically I think a Switch port needs to sell at least 3 times an Xbox Series X port, or at least 150% a PC port.