Astral Dog
Member
This doesn't bode well for other potential ports. Hopefully they can get all the issues resolved.
Its very clear were the Switch falls in terms of ports by watching E3
This doesn't bode well for other potential ports. Hopefully they can get all the issues resolved.
But who even wants that? Why buy inferior versions when you can find used Xbox or PS4 for little over $100? I want to meet that person who is CRUSHED because Steep isn't out on Switch. LOL
"180, you stupid, spaghetti-slurping cretin! 180! If I did a 360, I'd go completely around and end up back where I started! "
Sounds like a steep challenge, hopefully things don't go further downhill.
waste of resources, try to fight for The Crew 2 instead buckos
Maybe the hardware wasn't good enough for it. They probably initially thought they could make it work. The game is 900p30 on xbone so maybe switch can't handle it.
I think they would be better off porting South Park. It would be a lot easier to port and would actually make more sense.
There's no reason Steep can't run on this hardware. I bet it'd run on Vita if they tried - it's what developers used to do. Heck, it's what Ubisoft used to look - look at something like Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 on PSP. But for whatever reason (I'm guessing dwindling sales), companies don't want to do this any more, which is a mighty shame.
Yea but it's still 2 or 3 cores and 600mhz more.
It's not they don't want to do that, it's they CAN'T do that. AAA games nowadays require more than twice or three times more manpower than it did in PS3/Xbox 360 era. Companies like Activision and EA have to put all of their studios in charge of developing yearly releases and that leaves no one to create side games like GBA, PSP or DS got back in the day. Activision's Treyarch used to port CoD titles to Wii but now they don't have enough time to do that, they're assisting Sledgehammer or Inifnity ward for big console releases. Or Ubisoft had their side studios helm stuff like Brother in Arms or AssassiN's Creed handheld versions but now they're helping the real deal game get made.
I always find it weird to observe how western third-party porting and handhelds has changed over the course of even 7 years or so.
Back in the PSP years, it seems like just about anything could get a handheld port which would be either one of two things - either a custom-build game that was more of a spinoff of a home console title but shared the same name; or a cut-down console port.
EA had a good example of each in 2010. Army of Two: The 40th Day on PSP was an isometric shooter as opposed to the third-person shooting of the home console version; whereas Dante's Inferno was simply the console game with a lot of stuff chopped out to get it onto PSP.
It seems that after the PSP, this kinda stuff hasn't been as prevalent any more. The custom-built games seem to have shifted over mobile now; and the cut-down console ports just don't seem to be happening any more. Vita had a few - things like Borderlands; Mortal Kombat; Need for Speed still happened, but rarely (not helped by Vita's sales). It seems like this kinda stuff is gonna be even rarer on Switch.
I suppose in this day and age, with Digital Foundry picking apart any port and comparing it to the home console versions it's going to make consumers even less likely to buy an inferior version. Even though I feel there's still a market for it - certainly I bought these games on PSP: bought them on Vita and will likely continue to buy them on Switch.
There's no reason Steep can't run on this hardware. I bet it'd run on Vita if they tried - it's what developers used to do. Heck, it's what Ubisoft used to look - look at something like Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 on PSP. But for whatever reason (I'm guessing dwindling sales), companies don't want to do this any more, which is a mighty shame.
Oh well. At least Japan still supports handhelds with their home console stuff I guess
For every game, there's a minimum level of computational power needed to be able to cope with the basic game logic and game simulation. Games aren't infinitely scaleable.
Which is exactly what he was saying, there is nothing about Steep's core design that prevents it being brought to Switch (like requiring VR), it's a matter of how much you scale things down and that was something publishers seemed a lot more willing to do back in the PSP era.There are plenty of games released on XB1/PS4 which would be impossible to run on the Switch, without paring down the features, graphics and mechanics to a point that game doesn't even resemble the vision of it's creator anymore and certainly isn't fun.
What's Steep doing as far as game logic and simulation that couldn't be done on Xbox 360? Genuinely not familiar enough with the game to know.
Which is exactly what he was saying, there is nothing about Steep's core design that prevents it being brought to Switch (like requiring VR), it's a matter of how much you scale things down and that was something publishers seemed a lot more willing to do back in the PSP era.
The PSP was hardware between PS1 and PS2 level getting ports of mid-gen 360/PS3 games, they ranged from unrecognisable to providing a fairly authentic experience. Hell, I remember the PSP version of Test Drive Unlimited, despite being obviously pretty cut down visually it was still a full blown open world driving game with all of O'ahu to explore. It'd be interesting to find out what has changed about the industry that makes those sorts of games undesirable now.
Originally Posted by TheThreadsThatBindUs
There are plenty of games released on XB1/PS4 which would be impossible to run on the Switch, without paring down the features, graphics and mechanics to a point that game doesn't even resemble the vision of it's creator anymore and certainly isn't fun.
There are plenty of games released on XB1/PS4 which would be impossible to run on the Switch, without paring down the features, graphics and mechanics to a point that game doesn't even resemble the vision of it's creator anymore and certainly isn't fun.
People need to accept that. And its ultimately fine. At the end of the day the Switch is designed with its current level of performance. That was very much Nintendo's intention. So yeah, some third party releases might get ported and others might not. That's life, but it isn't the end of the world. The Wii sold 100+m units without 3rd party ports. And so far at least, the Switch seems to be doing well enough without any at launch, that it isn't likely to matter for Switch either.
I think they would be better off porting South Park. It would be a lot easier to port and would actually make more sense.
I believe he's talking about creating a side game from ground up rather than down-porting. Games like Rainbow Six Vegas or Call of Duty Wii games are not ports at all, they were remade/reimagined versions of those games for said platform. There were many talented side studios who have done such projects, including Ubisoft Montpellier, Gameloft, Firebrand games, Treyarch, Vicarious Visions...
I think it might be wise if you tried reading posts instead of cherry picking half a sentence out of context and creating a reply based on that. Especially when you decide to garnish it with fanboy accusation.If we have no idea what exactly the game is doing under the hood in order to achieve the developer's vision of the game, then we're not qualified to make any claim about whether it would run on the Switch or not. Neither you or the original poster I was replying to are.
Frankly, I feel it comes across as rather arrogant and fanboyish to make such claims, when you have no context at all. It's the equivalent of calling "lazy devs" because you ignorantly assume a game can run on a clearly inferior piece of hardware to what it was originally designed for.
Exactly.I believe he's talking about creating a side game from ground up rather than down-porting. Games like Rainbow Six Vegas or Call of Duty Wii games are not ports at all, they were remade/reimagined versions of those games for said platform. There were many talented side studios who have done such projects, including Ubisoft Montpellier, Gameloft, Firebrand games, Treyarch, Vicarious Visions...
FIFA 18 Switch is a notable exception though.I think it might be wise if you tried reading posts instead of cherry picking half a sentence out of context and creating a reply based on that. Especially when you decide to garnish it with fanboy accusation.
The point Kresnik was making is that the PSP (and Wii) had versions of games that were created from scratch within the limits of that hardware, but based on games released on vastly superior hardware. For some reason though, those sorts of games aren't a thing any more, and you get situations like this where if a game can't be ported directly it just doesn't come to a system. My reply to you was that you're both saying the same thing, there is nothing about Steep's core premise that cannot run on a Switch in some form, but it might need cutting down severely which doesn't happen now like it used to.
Exactly.
Sounds like a steep challenge, hopefully things don't go further downhill.
I always find it weird to observe how western third-party porting and handhelds has changed over the course of even 7 years or so.
Back in the PSP years, it seems like just about anything could get a handheld port which would be either one of two things - either a custom-build game that was more of a spinoff of a home console title but shared the same name; or a cut-down console port.
EA had a good example of each in 2010. Army of Two: The 40th Day on PSP was an isometric shooter as opposed to the third-person shooting of the home console version; whereas Dante's Inferno was simply the console game with a lot of stuff chopped out to get it onto PSP.
It seems that after the PSP, this kinda stuff hasn't been as prevalent any more. The custom-built games seem to have shifted over mobile now; and the cut-down console ports just don't seem to be happening any more. Vita had a few - things like Borderlands; Mortal Kombat; Need for Speed still happened, but rarely (not helped by Vita's sales). It seems like this kinda stuff is gonna be even rarer on Switch.
I suppose in this day and age, with Digital Foundry picking apart any port and comparing it to the home console versions it's going to make consumers even less likely to buy an inferior version. Even though I feel there's still a market for it - certainly I bought these games on PSP: bought them on Vita and will likely continue to buy them on Switch.
There's no reason Steep can't run on this hardware. I bet it'd run on Vita if they tried - it's what developers used to do. Heck, it's what Ubisoft used to look - look at something like Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 on PSP. But for whatever reason (I'm guessing dwindling sales), companies don't want to do this any more, which is a mighty shame.
Oh well. At least Japan still supports handhelds with their home console stuff I guess
At the same time the power disparity between Switch and PS4/XB1 is nowhere near the power disparity between PSP and 360/PS3. In fact it's more comparable to PSP and Wii.Disagree. Games today (in terms of codebase) are much more complex then 10 years ago. Porting a game from more powerful hardware to less powerful could be a problem today.
Meanwhile on average the amount of stuff running under the hood outside of rendering fidelity have become massively more complex than in Half life and Doom 3 especially since devs are focused specifically on the open world genre. There's also the fact that we have a lot more immersive sim games coming out like Deus Ex, Prey, and Dishonored and how more and more systems from that genre are being injected into open world games. Game complexity in the pat wasn't based solely on physics.Physics today have downgraded compared to what was shown in Half life 2 and doom 3. Games today are in now way more complex than games from last gen.
PSP didn't get ports, it got games that were named like it's counterparts on 360/ps3 exactly for that reason (not enough power).At the same time the power disparity between Switch and PS4/XB1 is nowhere near the power disparity between PSP and 360/PS3. In fact it's more comparable to PSP and Wii.
Right, because it was a 15-20x power drop. With Switch we're only looking at a 3-4x drop and to a similarly modern architecture with comparable engine support. Again, the better comparison here would be how well PSP could run Wii ports.PSP didn't get ports, it got games that were named like it's counterparts on 360/ps3 exactly for that reason (not enough power).
Nope.Will anybody miss it if it gets canceled? It wasn't exactly lighting the world on fire on ps4 and x1.
What wii ports did the psp receive?Right, because it was a 15-20x power drop. With Switch we're only looking at a 3-4x drop and to a similarly modern architecture with comparable engine support. Again, the better comparison here would be how well PSP could run Wii ports.
Sounds like a steep challenge, hopefully things don't go further downhill.
Of course psp got ports. NFS:MW comes off the top of my hat.PSP didn't get ports, it got games that were named like it's counterparts on 360/ps3 exactly for that reason (not enough power).
NFS:MW surely is based on the ps2 version.Of course psp got ports. NFS:MW comes off the top of my hat.
Yeah, but realistically this was their best choice for the time and they needed a new system so idk it is what it is. Probably wouldn't had made much of a difference either.its still a severely underpowered Xbox OneI feel they should have waited for tx2 in some respects. Dual bandwidth and higher cpu clocks would have helped a lot for third parties.
beta maybe but the game was not bad...its actually fun. i like it a lot.
🤔Given the evidence we have (namely the rumoured info. in the OP), it's frankly illogical to be making sweeping statements like
Again, Dragon Quest X.
They would still be facing the same way.
Meanwhile on average the amount of stuff running under the hood outside of rendering fidelity have become massively more complex than in Half life and Doom 3 especially since devs are focused specifically on the open world genre. There's also the fact that we have a lot more immersive sim games coming out like Deus Ex, Prey, and Dishonored and how more and more systems from that genre are being injected into open world games. Game complexity in the pat wasn't based solely on physics.
3-4x drop is the GPU. CPU is more like a 2x drop. PS4/XB1 are heavily CPU bound while Switch is more balanced.What wii ports did the psp receive?
A 3x drop on the cpu is not small.
For games it's 3.25GB Switch vs 5GB PS4/XB1.Sounds more like a ram thing and Switch has 4gb.
CPU would have been much closer to par with current gen and bandwidth would have been more than double. Gpu processing is easier to scale down.Yeah, but realistically this was their best choice for the time and they needed a new system so idk it is what it is. Probably wouldn't had made much of a difference either.its still a severely underpowered Xbox One