Astral Dog
Member
Its very clear were the Switch falls in terms of ports by watching E3
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Rumor: Ubisoft having some trouble bringing Steep to Switch
- Thread starter Justified
- Start date
Its very clear were the Switch falls in terms of ports by watching E3
Eh, this is not that unsurprising. I've been curious how this game would turn out, but not enough to get it. If it's cancelled, whatever.
Focus on bringing newer ports over if they are a fit for the Switch in 2018 and beyond. It'll keep selling well anyway so some of these guys will look to port more as the install base grows.
Focus on bringing newer ports over if they are a fit for the Switch in 2018 and beyond. It'll keep selling well anyway so some of these guys will look to port more as the install base grows.
Actually, I do. I held off on buying the PS4 version when it was announced for Switch. Hoping they get everything straightened out.
So that wasn't a reference to the classic that was 1080?
Steep didn't impress me one bit from the betas that I've played but from what I read the game was improved over time, because of this it's a shame it might not come to the Switch, the console could really use a couple more 'high profile' games.
I could see the first The Crew on Switch, but not the second one.
I could see the first The Crew on Switch, but not the second one.
A.Romero
Member
Bingo
They really should have ported this one. I suppose they as well as many other developers/publishers didn't have an idea how well the Switch would start off, especially after a bad console generation.
I would have bought this Day 1.
Kresnik258
Member
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
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
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.
Zombegoast
Member
Still the A57 is known to be much faster than the Jaguar Cores.
Kresnik258
Member
Then don't do it in house. There were loads of studios in the PSP days that handled handheld porting (lol) back in the PSP days - take for example Artificial Mind & Movement (aka Behaviour Interactive) who took on loads of porting back in the day including the aforementioned Dante's Inferno on PSP.
There's plenty of studios who would take it on.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
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
I'm gonna go ahead and assume you're not a games programmer, and thus you don't know what you're talking about.
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.
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.
This idea that every game on PS4/XB1 can run on Switch is a myth. It depends on the game, the engine and the intended vision of its creator. Switch is significantly inferior in terms of performance than the XB1 and the XB1 is by a good margin the weakest of the current-gen core-games consoles.
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.
plagiarize
Banned
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.
Azure Phoenix
Member
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.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
That's a question you need to be asking the games programmer at Ubisoft.
No one here on Gaf can tell you. But as the OP suggests, clearly it's doing more than most here think, given the difficulty they're having porting the game to the hardware.
Given the evidence we have (namely the rumoured info. in the OP), it's frankly illogical to be making sweeping statements like, "there's no reason the game couldn't run on the Switch". Especially, without any reasonable basis to make that sort of claim and when the only evidence provided run contrary to that.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
You're missing the important bit of my post you quoted:
Clearly this bit is the bit that is defined by the developer, not by some armchair critic on NeoGaf.
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.
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...
It is not ultimately fine at all. People who think this way need to know one thing: the mode Nintendo enters when 3rd party abandons the platform is the worst side of Nintendo. When absence of third party leaves empty spots in the schedule, Nintendo tries to fill them with inferior filler software. And that will lead to ultimate failure of the console. Not sales-wise, Switch will have pokémon, but quality/quantity software wise. After the big guns are out, all we have will be low quality side games, if third party won't be there.
Switch needs games like Steep to have a full schedule, with less and smaller gaps. Any game from third parties would be better than Nintendo's filling efforts, I'd take stuff like Steep or Fate/Extella on Switch over another Animal Crossing Amiibo Party anytime. I know everyone else would too.
Agree. Rpg-s fit well on portables.
Zombegoast
Member
But that is not the case anymore. The Switch is not like the Wii where it's missing programmable shaders and having a lower ram count. Nvidia put work on the API to do things that the current Shield TV can't do.
And Vulkan is a game changer unlike the DX12.
Azure Phoenix
Member
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.
FIFA 18 Switch is a notable exception though.
Tertullian
Member
Sounds like the developers found out how difficult the port was gonna be and decided to skedaddle.
Anyone? No?
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
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.
As for some Japanese games – the truth is they're not that different from what Japanese developers produced last gen or even back in the PS2 era. But, just wait a few more years and you will see the same problem in Japanese gamedev too.
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.
Zombegoast
Member
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.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
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.
JigglesBunny
Banned
Steep was a bizzare choice to begin with. South Park would be a much better fit and a far bigger success.
Hell, something like Watch Dogs 2 or Rainbow Six: Siege would make bank considering they'd be one of the few titles in their genres on the platform, though if they're struggling to get Steep running properly, I imagine either of the two would be a far bigger challenge to get running properly.
Hell, something like Watch Dogs 2 or Rainbow Six: Siege would make bank considering they'd be one of the few titles in their genres on the platform, though if they're struggling to get Steep running properly, I imagine either of the two would be a far bigger challenge to get running properly.
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).
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.
FreedomFighter
Member
Nope.
What wii ports did the psp receive?
A 3x drop on the cpu is not small.
SavoyPrime
Member
I see what you did there lol
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Of course psp got ports. NFS:MW comes off the top of my hat.
NFS:MW surely is based on the ps2 version.
And there were many "ports" - sport games come to mind e.g.
But what i meant with port here was doing something on console x (w/o caring for console y) and then try to port it to console y (later) e.g. Steep.
If your baseline from the start is console y you obviously won't run into the same problems.
Astral Dog
Member
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
Rellik
Member
Sounds like classic Ubi. Put out a shit beta but the full game turns out good. Same happened with The Crew.
AcademicSaucer
Member
My bet is they want people to play offline .
ShockingAlberto
Member
🤔
privitsan02
Member
Isn't Dragon Quest X a Wii game? I mean even the PS2 had Final Fantasy XI which was a full-blown MMO. Steep is a PS4/XBO/PC always online game, so I'm guessing it's proving to be more difficult to port while maintaining the network requirements.
They could cut the network part but I believe it's a big part of the game no? I'm not entirely sure as I only played the beta. That being said, it would actually be a great fit for the Switch.
Best wishes.
TheChewyWaffles
Member
Fine...time to turn 720 degrees and walk away.
Zombegoast
Member
Sounds more like a ram thing and Switch has 4gb. Gpu just display whatever is on screen and how fast it can render it. And maxwell mobile gpu around the Switch's x1 have shown running at 720p/30fps.
This is not the level of "It can't pass the title screen."
3-4x drop is the GPU. CPU is more like a 2x drop. PS4/XB1 are heavily CPU bound while Switch is more balanced.
For games it's 3.25GB Switch vs 5GB PS4/XB1.
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.
Similar threads
- Poll