Gaming With Hellblade coming out, no more excuses from 3rd parties?

[nashismo]

So yes, like the title says. What do you guys think?

With Hellblade coming out, now 3rd party developers should have NO EXCUSE to port their games to the Switch, am I right?

Did Nintendo do this on purpose maybe? To let 3rd parties know that they are (3rd parties) full of crap?

Cheers to all.

 

[nashismo]

Anyone? Is it obvious that I accidentally updated to 7.0 and I have nothing better to do?

 

[Chary]

Assassin's Creed 3 running at like 4 whole fps is a pretty good excuse to not.

 

[jt_1258]

Assassin's Creed 3 running at like 4 whole fps is a pretty good excuse to not.

Yaa, sadly I think that's a wii like cash grab where they just slap on the system half assed and take the paycheck

 

[nashismo]

Assassin's Creed 3 running at like 4 whole fps is a pretty good excuse to not.

Ubisoft is doing that on purpose probably, these big companies are full of crap. The Switch is more than able to play smoothly that crappy game.

 

[orangpelupa]

So yes, like the title says. What do you guys think?

With Hellblade coming out, now 3rd party developers should have NO EXCUSE to port their games to the Switch, am I right?

Did Nintendo do this on purpose maybe? To let 3rd parties know that they are (3rd parties) full of crap?

Cheers to all.

i dont understand. Why hellblade coming out means that 3rd party devs should have no excuse to port to switch?

do you mean, as hellblade is owned by ninja theory, who is owned by microsoft... so now microsoft have no excuse to not port their games to switch?

but there is still lots of excuses. business reason, development reason, etc. Albeit with the coming of Xbox Live to switch, microsoft would have more and more reasono to bring their games

 

[nashismo]

i dont understand. Why hellblade coming out means that 3rd party devs should have no excuse to port to switch?

Because Hellblade is very demanding graphically, and if it runs without problems, third parties would have no excuse like "Oh no the Switch is too weak" kind of excuse, to then not release their games for the console.

 

[orangpelupa]

Because Hellblade is very demanding graphically, and if it runs without problems, third parties would have no excuse like "Oh no the Switch is too weak" kind of excuse, to then not release their games for the console.

ah i see your point but its hard to generalize games like that.

hellblade is a linear game, with very little simulations (AI/physics), and have slow locomotion. The total opposite of Read Dead Redemption 2, Destiny 2, Anthem, etc.

 

[nashismo]

ah i see your point but its hard to generalize games like that.

hellblade is a linear game, with very little simulations (AI/physics), and have slow locomotion. The total opposite of Read Dead Redemption 2, Destiny 2, Anthem, etc.

I get it, but I am not talking about Anthem or Read Redemption 2. But at least games like Darksouls 3 and games that are in the middle of the spectrum, the Switch should have no problem running them. Actually I digress, Red Dead should run fine actually! Because Rockstar engines are incredibly well optimized (at least since GTAV). I mean you can run GTAV even on a crappy laptop just fine.

 

[Agusto101]

Assassin's Creed 3 running at like 4 whole fps is a pretty good excuse to not.

That doesnt mean anything much better games runs nicer.

 

[Chary]

That doesnt mean anything much better games runs nicer.

Well, the question is what is preventing publishers from bringing games to the Switch. Relying on incompetent porting devs and/or overly demanding games (Monster Hunter World, RDR2, RE7, Assassin's Creed Odyssey, etc) are barriers to literally everything not being on the Switch already.

 

[jt_1258]

ah i see your point but its hard to generalize games like that.

hellblade is a linear game, with very little simulations (AI/physics), and have slow locomotion. The total opposite of Read Dead Redemption 2, Destiny 2, Anthem, etc.

Ya, Doom on the switch makes for a better example.

 

[nashismo]

Well, the question is what is preventing publishers from bringing games to the Switch. Relying on incompetent porting devs and/or overly demanding games (Monster Hunter World, RDR2, RE7, Assassin's Creed Odyssey, etc) are barriers to literally everything not being on the Switch already.

I remember the days when in the 16 bit era, we would get 8 bit games like Sonic for the master system of Final Fight Mini for the NES. It would be nice to have ports of the same game but with simpler graphics.

I would be all for it to play demanding games with let say cell shaded graphics ala Breath Of the Wild, just keep the story the same. Would be neat.

In the end what I mean is, if you want to do it, you do it. Maybe with the huge sales the Switch is having third parties will reconsider.

 

[orangpelupa]

I get it, but I am not talking about Anthem or Read Redemption 2. But at least games like Darksouls 3 and games that are in the middle of the spectrum, the Switch should have no problem running them. Actually I digress, Red Dead should run fine actually! Because Rockstar engines are incredibly well optimized (at least since GTAV). I mean you can run GTAV even on a crappy laptop just fine.

If they already ported DS1 and DS2, you maybe can assume DS3 also can be ported to switch with no problem. At least from what i saw (DS 1 2 3 all use same engine, same design philosophy).

about GTAV.
crappy laptop cpu have better performance than switch tho.

although, technically, anything would be possible to port to switch (however good/bad the result will be). All will comes down to business-wise, its worth the effort or not.

Ya, Doom on the switch makes for a better example.

id softwares people are wizard

 

[Deleted User]

Assassin's Creed 3 running at like 4 whole fps is a pretty good excuse to not.

Did we get any footage of AC3 that wasn't from the Direct stream? I'm pretty sure Nintendo's Directs have always been really funky with framerates of all the games they show on there

 

[jt_1258]

If they already ported DS1 and DS2, you maybe can assume DS3 also can be ported to switch with no problem. At least from what i saw (DS 1 2 3 all use same engine, same design philosophy).

about GTAV.
crappy laptop cpu have better performance than switch tho.

although, technically, anything would be possible to port to switch (however good/bad the result will be). All will comes down to business-wise, its worth the effort or not.




id softwares people are wizard

Well, it's panic button we should be tipping our hats off to. It's not perfect but they pulled off something most would consider impossible. Brings a tear to my eye in what may end up soon to be a sea of shitty half assed ports that are just cash grabs.

 

[nashismo]

If they already ported DS1 and DS2, you maybe can assume DS3 also can be ported to switch with no problem. At least from what i saw (DS 1 2 3 all use same engine, same design philosophy).

about GTAV.
crappy laptop cpu have better performance than switch tho.

although, technically, anything would be possible to port to switch (however good/bad the result will be). All will comes down to business-wise, its worth the effort or not.




id softwares people are wizard

Dark Souls 2 is on the Switch, I had no idea!

 

[Treeko]

If you wanna play the games in 240/360p on a fullHD/4K tv sure they can port the games over to the switch.

People don't seem the realise that the switch is a mobile piece of hardware and that there is its biggest limitation, it has a power budget when its in handheld mode, unless you want like 10 minutes of battery life sure you can play all the big 3rd party titles on it, but not without huge compromises like heavy drops in resolution and fps, we saw very little of hellblade, but from what I could see the game looked like it was using lower quality assets/textures compared to other platforms, and it already looks like a major downgrade before even trying it just because of that, the footage of assassin's creed 3 running at like 10fps was also very disappointing, considering thats a last gen title, but its ubisoft so that's expected.

 

[Nezztor]

Well, the question is what is preventing publishers from bringing games to the Switch. Relying on incompetent porting devs and/or overly demanding games (Monster Hunter World, RDR2, RE7, Assassin's Creed Odyssey, etc) are barriers to literally everything not being on the Switch already.

See wiiu ,wiiu have better games on the big publishers side but that console didn't sell
2 years and still no
Cod
Splintercell
Batman
Watch dogs
Deu x exs
And so on , but all of them are ps3/xbox ports (wiiu better hw than them) now is backwards switch bad hardware vs all platforms, we need a Wii scenario when they choose to make the worst graphic game aka cod Wii for example (I don't care about having the worst graphic game of all plataforms ) time will tell if they choose to repeat a Wii scenario

 

[blahblah]

Try to understand the technological reality here. The power differential between the main consoles and the Switch is that of the Earth and the Sun. Yes, it is possible to port to the Switch with a sufficient combo of luck and quality middleware, but the only sure fire way to get Switch ports is to design the game around release on the Switch. Which will not be the case with most AAA titles.

There is no excuse. It is just specs. Looking at the graphical quality of a game and saying 'wow, that looks great, surely this other game would run great too!' is....dumb. That's not how this stuff works.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Ubisoft is doing that on purpose probably, these big companies are full of crap. The Switch is more than able to play smoothly that crappy game.

This is insanely ignorant garbage and you should probably be banned for saying something that stupid. No, a big publisher did not invest time and money and reputation into producing a garbage port. What purpose would be served by purposefully creating and releasing a woeful port? Please try to think like a functional person rather than a 10 year old conspiracy theorist.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

i dont understand. Why hellblade coming out means that 3rd party devs should have no excuse to port to switch?

do you mean, as hellblade is owned by ninja theory, who is owned by microsoft... so now microsoft have no excuse to not port their games to switch?

but there is still lots of excuses. business reason, development reason, etc. Albeit with the coming of Xbox Live to switch, microsoft would have more and more reasono to bring their games

MS does not attempt to void publishing agreements put in place prior to Microsoft's acquisition of a studio. It's a semi-new thing they are doing. MS is not the publisher of Hellblade or the Switch port of Hellblade & has nothing to do with it. Same thing with We Happy Few and The Outer Worlds.

Xbox Live on other platforms has nothing to do with Microsoft publishing on non-Microsoft platforms. It's a thing for third parties, for cross platform communication & game progression & matchmaking & stuff. It's not even new, per-say, it's just opening up to third parties now. Microsoft has been using it for Minecraft and some casual games for a while now.

Non-Microsoft Platforms get Minecraft and some casual titles and nothing else.