Frank West
Banned
They were only Publisher for The book of unwritten Tales (which is a great P&C Adventure). Everything else though....lol.
-
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.
THQ Nordic kinda disappointed by the Switch's power
- Thread starter Nere
- Start date
They were only Publisher for The book of unwritten Tales (which is a great P&C Adventure). Everything else though....lol.
killatopak
Gold Member
Their games are for consoles.
Everyone is going to have different expectations on what their consoles do. Everyone is going to want different games. Everyone has opinions. THQ can develop to whoever and whatever they want but people will complain because they want their games on the platform they own but might not be receiving said title.
In all honesty, the Switch won't be suffering from lack of games any time soon. I just looked on the eShop today and wishlisted at least another six games, making my wishlist now at 10+ titles that I can purchase tomorrow if I wanted to (I wish (get it!)). I'm struggling to find time for anything else but Zelda. If THQ has ideas for the Switch that work with the tech they'll do it, otherwise we just have to enjoy their games elsewhere.
Devs will point out technical aspects of platforms, fanboys will cry blue murder but at the end of the day if the dev is imaginative enough they'll create something that works with the Switch and makes them happy. THQ noting the performance isn't a bad thing, they are just saying it can't at this moment run the ideas they have, and they hope future Nintendo products can utilise power increases to do so. Will Nintendo get to that stage? I think so with how crazy mobile tech is advancing.
In all honesty, the Switch won't be suffering from lack of games any time soon. I just looked on the eShop today and wishlisted at least another six games, making my wishlist now at 10+ titles that I can purchase tomorrow if I wanted to (I wish (get it!)). I'm struggling to find time for anything else but Zelda. If THQ has ideas for the Switch that work with the tech they'll do it, otherwise we just have to enjoy their games elsewhere.
Devs will point out technical aspects of platforms, fanboys will cry blue murder but at the end of the day if the dev is imaginative enough they'll create something that works with the Switch and makes them happy. THQ noting the performance isn't a bad thing, they are just saying it can't at this moment run the ideas they have, and they hope future Nintendo products can utilise power increases to do so. Will Nintendo get to that stage? I think so with how crazy mobile tech is advancing.
RavageDark
Member
So, what could have been an interesting discussion on an interesting topic got turned into Switch 3rd Party/Power thread because of a misleading thread title.
Thank you, OP.
Thank you, OP.
Read yourself carefully before posting. You didn't specifically said it was a fact, but wrote your post just as if it was.
Saying that no one cares is silly, yes, I'm deeply sorry if that offends you.
Spukc
always chasing the next thrill
That list supposed to say THQ nordics is important?
Zombegoast
Member
I blame Fullsail. They switched to Unity right when we got UE3 books through the mail.
And yeah Unity can be a problem. Something simple like lighting in a no budget 3D game is enough to destroy performance.
LordRaptor
Member
One poster was saying "THQ Nordic are shit and don't make anything anyone cares about" - which I don't agree with - and the other poster was saying "OMG shut up THQ (Nordic) make amazing games everyone would give a shit about" - which I also don't agree with.
Thats the list of what they have actually made as a point of reference.
I never said everyone would give a shit about about their games either, you're free to love/hate their inputs. The dude said that no one cares and that it wouldn't be a loss for gamers, which is a dumb thing to say for just about any developer out there; they exist because there's a market for their inputs.
I just said that they made great games, I love the Darksiders series for example.
My point is that relying on a Unity game performance to gauge the system performance isn't exactly the smartest thing, when the lows and highs on even the almighty PS4 have a wild range between them.
Everytime a dev comes out and say "we are having problems to port something to a Nintendo plataform" is the same : lazy, who asked for this? , they only do bad games...
Using BoTW or Odissey as an argument like any of them are anywhere close to current gen games, from a technichal point of view, only make things wrost.
We've been on this cycle since at least the WiiU.
Maybe other devs should just do like R* : dont even fucking care so at least we wouldnt have so much whinning.
The funny thing is : they are putting effort, time and resources to bring their games to a weak plataform with small userbase ( when some others that have a lot more resources are ignoring it ) and they are the bad guys lol
Using BoTW or Odissey as an argument like any of them are anywhere close to current gen games, from a technichal point of view, only make things wrost.
We've been on this cycle since at least the WiiU.
Maybe other devs should just do like R* : dont even fucking care so at least we wouldnt have so much whinning.
The funny thing is : they are putting effort, time and resources to bring their games to a weak plataform with small userbase ( when some others that have a lot more resources are ignoring it ) and they are the bad guys lol
I feel even if Nintendo had made a powerful console, they still wouldn't get third party games. They're too much of a risk.
Because the Switch is popular, developers are being asked if they're new game is coming, which they rightly reply: no, but we tried. Which is better than the Wii U. The Switch would have probably not been a success if it only copied the other consoles.
If Nintendo can keep up the sales, there will be more support, but it will come slowly.
Because the Switch is popular, developers are being asked if they're new game is coming, which they rightly reply: no, but we tried. Which is better than the Wii U. The Switch would have probably not been a success if it only copied the other consoles.
If Nintendo can keep up the sales, there will be more support, but it will come slowly.
lwilliams3
Member
Battery life for the system has already been comprised to the borderlines of acceptability for its console-level capabilities. The battery is almost 5000MaH, so your power bank would still give you sub-par results in the scenario you are describing. (Less than 2 hours.)
Gotdatmoney
Member
A powerbank is not a solution to a battery problem on a portable that hardware designers would just be like "oh everyone will do this".
Furthermore, ths system would get way too hot regardless. After a game like Mario Kart or BOTW docked the system is hot and not a comfortable temperature to be held and played at for sustained periods of time.
30,000, not 3,000. I have an Anker 26,800 PD bank and it charges the Switch a few times over before running out of juice.
That said, the draw is too high in docked mode for even the 30W-capable PD bank to run the Switch.
Deadpool_X
Banned
That's cool, because I've been pretty disappointed in THQ Nordic's game output, so I guess we're all good.
LordRaptor
Member
They didn't make those games, they picked them up when 'real' THQ went bust, and did ports to current consoles of them.
Thats why I posted the list of titles THQ Nordic are actually responsible for, so that you are aware of what you are arguing, and why I italicised the Darksiders titles (and Legend Of Kay), because they were only doing porting duties there.
Ban Puncher
Member
THQ telling Nintendo how to business might possibly be the funniest thing I have read all day.
Oh, I wasn't aware of that, thank you for that info!
Battle Chasers is from them right? This one sounds like a good one from what I've seen so far.
Thats not whats happening here - they are just disappointed that they cant bring all or more of their content to Switch. Fair Point.
Lol at the people saying "well nothing of value was lost". Isn't it better to at least have the option to buy these games? You do realize waving away a publisher just because you don't like their games makes you look silly cause you are waving away the option of buying more games.
This is like a bittersweet situation. It's sweet cause you don't care about their games, but it's bitter cause it's always better to have the option of buying their games.
This is like a bittersweet situation. It's sweet cause you don't care about their games, but it's bitter cause it's always better to have the option of buying their games.
THQ is not telling Nintendo how to do business. Learn to read.
Mister Wolf
Gold Member
Yeah what THQ should have said is Battle Chasers is a challenge porting to Switch because of Unity. Has nothing to the with the Switch lacking power. I like what I see from Battle Chasers but lets be honest it is a PS3/360 visual tier budget title and nowhere close to some of the other games visually that are out for the Switch or coming out. Just look at Mario + Rabbids running on Ubisoft's proprietary Snowdrop Engine.
Gotdatmoney
Member
It's not a particularly great port but I'm pretty confident this is because they had the WiiU as the base. They patched Zelda and the performance improvement was significant. Still has issues but implues to me it's not really a Switch problem more than a time issue.
Ban Puncher
Member
Serenitynow
Member
So almost every developer in the world? Really, what are we discussing here that hasn't been talked about since the reveal?
The only thing that was said was that they wish the hardware was beefier but they accept it and will just have to work around it. Cue up:
-Lazy dev
-List wars to prove they aren't that impressive
-Their games are shit anyways
-Look how great Breath of the Wild is!
-lol lol We don't need this dev anyways lol lol
Too funny.
-Lazy dev
-List wars to prove they aren't that impressive
-Their games are shit anyways
-Look how great Breath of the Wild is!
-lol lol We don't need this dev anyways lol lol
Too funny.
protomouse
Member
I'm not sure this is even true. Nvidia weren't delivering a more powerful SoC for mass production in Q1 2017.
Mister Wolf
Gold Member
The offence was taken when they cited their challenge to get Battle Chasers running smoothly as a example of the Switch lacking power. I don't know how much actual gameplay you've seen of Battle Chasers.
What's "offensive" about that?
I reckon that's a fair way to look at it.
IMO the frustration also stems from the fact that some people (mostly those that grew up with the NES, SNES, N64 generations) would also more or less like Nintendo to return to the forefront of the console business, power-wise.
Gotdatmoney
Member
Obviously they can get Battle Chasers to be smooth. But whenever we talk about stuff like that the comparison has to be vs other platforms. They would have to optimize much more to get the game running better. Which is fine but you know, they are citing difficulty, not implying they wont do ot if they can.
There are plenty of devs that can bring their content to Switch including some from THQ.
But obv. this isnt really news or brings any new worthwhile discussion.
Mister Wolf
Gold Member
Their game Elex makes sense not running on the Switch just looking at it but citing Battle Chasers as an example is a problem especially when we have seen Unity games struggle to perform while having less than impressive visuals.
Where did I say nothing? I said you can get away with size by skimping on fidelity. Are you going to sit here and tell me BotW wouldn't perform worse if it actually had a respectable draw distance and LoD. Are you not aware of how fog is used to cut corners and hide fidelity issues?
And look at what DF said about Xenoblade X:
Again, if you people are going to insist on calling developers lazy then actually apply the term with some logic instead of bashing devs just because they give you an answer you dont like. Devs all have their own vision for the products they want to make and thus have different priorities. Some devs could care less about IQ or fake, intangible assets all over the place, some devs aspire for much more. If the world provided infinite time and resources as you believe, freeing developers from making hard choices, maybe then you could call them lazy.
Horizon: Zero Dawn
Not Forza Horizon.
Elex is really not a problem. That will probably run bad on Xbox and PS, too.
That Switch (supposedly! ) has a problem with Unity's overhead is a bit worrying, though.
I hoped that Switch is a viable (=easy to port to) multi platform target and a lot of smaller titles find their way to the system.
Bigboss242
Banned
Going back to the days where the same game was different might not be an option this gen.
Godzilla's Left Toe
Member
LinkAndEpona
Banned
Purely for a Nintendo handheld the hardware is potent, but even last years cell flagship phones are superior spec wise.
AetherZX
Member
Such as...?
They say pretty straight forward that Battle chasers takes more time than they wished because the hardware is not strong enough.
Kamina
Golden Boy
Well they really didnt give a comparison either. They just stated that they have problems making Battle-chasers run smoothly on Switch and that they are disappointed in its power. What people are talking about in here is the fact that Switch can run far more demanding games like BotW, so porting BC shouldn't be any issue worth complaining about.
Colonel Mustard
Banned
Really looking forward to Sine Mora EX, Battle Chasers and maybe This is the Police.
They'd do well to port over some of their HD remasters as well. Darksiders 1/2 would have done well to follow Breath of the Wild a couple months later and de Blob 1/2 HD would probably do well in the November/December slot following up Mario Odyssey.
They'd do well to port over some of their HD remasters as well. Darksiders 1/2 would have done well to follow Breath of the Wild a couple months later and de Blob 1/2 HD would probably do well in the November/December slot following up Mario Odyssey.
lwilliams3
Member
Oh ok. Thanks for clarifying that.
As least from what we saw at E3, the game was even running respectfully. Some posters do have to remember that Devs can't simply press a "port button" and that these games can run efficiently on the Switch without some optimizations. Some settings have to be adjusted, and it may not be a simple thing to fix.
ONE time! Why can't they get the hell over it and try again?
The game is 3d not 2d, but you are right, one of the biggest differences between indies and AAA studios is optimization, indies aren't good at optimization, often simpler looking 3d indies are way heavier than their AAA counterparts, the game looks good though, so maybe it's not that light.
Don't overestimate the complexity of Zelda though, it has a great artstyle and drawing distance but its models are relatively simple.
Kittehkraken
Member
Of course Xenoblade made compromises. It was designed for the Wii U, as was BotW. But the end results were both still stunning. The whole point of using those two games as examples is that you can get away with stunning game design on lower end hardware. Do you have to cut corners? Yup. Do you have to make design sacrifices that are sometimes obvious? Yup. But in the end who the fuck cares? A brilliant game is a brilliant game no matter how they did it.
Developers are lazy. Half assed ports that aren't optimized properly and unfinished games are released all the time. Including games with massive budgets and teams behind them. Are all of them? Of course not, I never said they were. Devs should aspire for the absolute best. Don't want your game on lower end hardware? No problem, just openly admit it. Don't tip toe around the answer giving assumptions that the hardware could never handle it.
When I hear Horizon I think Forza, sorry lol. A trimmed down version of Zero Dawn should have no problem with the Switch (if the engine wasn't designed around PS or Xbox). Would it look as beautiful as it does on the PS4? No, but I see no reason why the core game itself couldn't run with some changes made. PS Vita owners have/had no problem buying inferior (vastly in the Vita's case) looking games simply because they love that the game is now handheld. I see no reason why this couldn't translate over onto the Switch. The Vita is still clinging onto life because its owners still support buying those inferior looking games.
In the end, the Switch isn't getting much third party love because the Wii U bombed. Not because its hardware is hot garbage. If the Switch keeps selling the way it is, developers will jump on board. And multi plat development including the Switch wont ruin that precious AAA PC, Xbox or PS experience. Nobody will even notice.