In an amusing twist in the ongoing effort by Microsoft to acquire Activision, the UK's Competition and Markets Authority has determined that the contract that Microsoft signed last month to bring Call of Duty to Nintendo platforms would not be able to be upheld as-is. They denote that publishers and developers have had harder times porting games to the Switch versus PlayStation and Xbox, and that games ported to Switch usually had rather poor performance or visuals. Additionally, they also denote that while the Switch "has not impacted Nintendo's ability to compete on the downstream console market" as it features a wider variety of games than PlayStation or Xbox, they believe that the Switch "does not currently offer the same graphically intensive games that PlayStation or Xbox compete on" and that it "does not offer a similar user experience" to the competition in regards to storage space, visuals and performance.
Ideally, Microsoft is signing this contract for the purpose of bringing it to a future Nintendo console, but they would not be able to actually abide by the contract until then.

Sources: My Nintendo News, Exputer, Forbes

 

[Wolfy]

That doesn't answer the question of how many more copies they would sell if they spent another million or two on development.

I don't even think it's an objective for them to sell copies as much as it is to then sell them cosmetics and battle passes since they are already thinking people will buy it regardless.

 

[ZoneBlaze]

CoD MW2 crashes enough on PC. I have no hopes for any modern CoD coming to the Switch unless they really work to optimize their game for the system.

 

[MariArch]

Hey um.. Nintendo. How bout you em… release new god damn hardware

 

[Zonark]

If it can play crisis it can play cod

 

[urbanman2004]

so uhh...have they not seen doom eternal?

Exactly what I was thinking. Also 'The Witcher 3' and 'Wolfenstein'.

 

[burningup]

Lmao,

 

[A-Hacked-Soul]

there were how many CoD games on the DS?

This right here and let's not forget on the Wii.

 

[Guacaholey]

Ah yes, the continued thought that porting it would be too "difficult", and not that they just don't want to spend the time and resources to make the experience enjoyable on a lower spec console. Cutting certain content like extra modes or whatever has always been the way developers have made it work on consoles past, it's just lazyness.

Not just that but actually writing the right code manually instead of relying on an engine's built in tools. Make lower resolution models and textures and I'm sure they could get something playable on Switch. I don't care about seeing every blade of grass, spec of dirt, or the texture of spackled walls in a multiplayer shooter if we can get better performance. I'd be fine with the the game looking like an older release for the 360 or PS3 if it meant we get the games on Switch.

 

[yoyoyo69]

It's a buggy mess on the Series x the major of the time, it'll never come close to running on Switch, even at 720p

 

[Chrisssj2]

Lazy devs be lazy devs

 

[ov3rkill]

Wait until they will introduce Call of Duty Cloud Gaming.

 

[Deleted member 194275]

Not the first time I hear that people buy MS consoles as a back up option. Would you happen to have any sources as to why that is?

My point is that Xbox can't be a monopoly being the last place, and it's not even close to the others. That's why in my opinion that aquisition is just fine.

Even their crown diamond that is the subscription service is lagging behind the others in subscription numbers. Xbox is inoffensive.

 

[smf]

I don't even think it's an objective for them to sell copies as much as it is to then sell them cosmetics and battle passes since they are already thinking people will buy it regardless.

Presumably they are making a certain amount of money out of it with their current "lazy" attitude.

How much more money do you think they would make, if they invested more development time and money?

If they would need to spend more money than they would recoup, then it's not laziness. It's common sense.

 

[Desconocido90]

So the CMA is what gamers call a Graphics Wh*re. Allow me answer to their BS points:

• Switch can replicate the CoD experience with a good porting team. Will it look worse than PS5 versions? Of course. But it will still be a CoD game with normal controls.
• A port doesn't have to have bad performance, if the porting team has time and budget to optimize it for that specific HW.
• Switch is going to be replaced by a stronger successor in a year. Analyzing Microsoft & Nintendo's deal thinking only in the current, aging hybrid handheld is a mistake.

Two generations ago, we have CoD like Black Ops ported to a wide number of platforms... from the strongest home consoles (PS3 & X360) to the weakest (Wii) plus a handheld generations behind (Nintendo DS).

I don't know why that isn't possible anymore, specially since now there are less platforms (Sony's handhelds and Nintendo's home c. disappeared), the remaining consoles are extremely similar (PC-like), and there are more tools and multiplatform engines that simplify the porting task.

 

[PopcornSweetie]

Black Ops II and Ghosts was on the WiiU (BO2 had its Zombie mode removed. Not sure about Ghosts since i only played both PS3 and X360 versions of the game)

Post automatically merged: Mar 2, 2023

CoD on Wii was pretty fun, it is the proof you don't need a powerful hardware to make fun games!

Exactly, Nintendo is the living proof of that. You don't need a powerful console to enjoy a Super Mario game.

Nintendo knows how to make fun games and when you have fun, you don't need 4K Ultra HD graphics. CoD is possible on the switch (the older ones for sure), newer ones maybe using cloud. But who knows.

 

[Lather]

Ah yes, the continued thought that porting it would be too "difficult", and not that they just don't want to spend the time and resources to make the experience enjoyable on a lower spec console. Cutting certain content like extra modes or whatever has always been the way developers have made it work on consoles past, it's just lazyness.

cod:lite?

 

[Marc_LFD]

MAG

Sony revive old franchises? Doubt it.

They've not even ported/remastered the MotorStorm series for PS4/PS5.

 

[Bladexdsl]

and let's not forget on the Wii.

and if cod games come to the switch you can pretty much expect them to both look and play like that train wreck release too

 

[Spectremint]

It also probably doesn't help that Activision is very lazy and most likely does not want to invest any resources into making a half decent port

 

[codezer0]

so uhh...have they not seen doom eternal?

With as miserable as it was to run doom eternal on PC, and it's Bethetic levels of infestation of bugs? I don't even want to think how bad a time I'd have with it on the Switch.