Just because an API is used does not mean the developers will use it in a way that makes their program portable. They may may calls to libraries independant of the API, or use calls in a way that is supported on some platforms but not others.
You said that it can't be done. I've shown how it can be done and now you are moving your argument to a hypothetical situation in which the developer had the tools available to do it but instead chose to program in a manner that would work for multi-platform.
And still you cant except that everything is handled by an engine. Another example. Opening a File and Read it in C# would be File.ReadAllText(path_to_file); .Net Core / Mono / .Net Framework handle it for each OS. But when we start using functions to access WMI (It's a windows intern database). All the functions are given by .net Framework, but that is something only will work in Windows NOT ON LINUX / MAC / FREEBSD. Ok ok.. but what if we would use a function to access Processes. No Problem, same thing with the different intepreter. BUT if we would use it on Linux with Mono we could get different behavior then on windows, even if its working.
You're assuming that the developer had the prescience to use _NL instead of \r\n in a situation where a Linux version was not even a consideration at the time.
No. You put forth that it cannot be done. I showed it could. You have moved your goalposts.
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. .NET is a Windows-specific framework. If you elect to target .NET then you have made a specific choice that harms the ability to make it seamlessly multiplatform.
I never suggested the ports were 1:1, just that they end up in 1080p on Switch either way.
Google .net Core and Mono...
I never moved them. If you have 15,000 lines of code you will not be going over every single line ensuring that every API call is potable, all the while debugging any issues that did not come up on the original platform. Not unless you think the port will be popular enough to offset the porting costs and make it worthwhile.
At this point I think I'll just let you argue with yourself, because apparently you think the Switch is simultaneously powerful enough to run most PS4 ports in 1080p, and also so underpowered that first-party Nintendo games will be forced to run at 720p in docked mode.
Ever heard of code review? Every half-way decent tech company has a code review process before code is merged into a project.
Probably shouldn't use GTA 5 as an example, the devs have said they're excited about Switch and Nintendo has sent out surveys asking about interest in GTA as an IP. You'll likely just end up eating crow.
You dont review each part of Code. A decent Game can have 15.000 - 1.500.000 lines of code. For that's you have source control. You test your part of the code if it works => Back to the other code. For the final testing you have QA.
Windows is already a gaming platform because of PC, but XB1 doesn't run Windows 10. It's far more limited than that.
