geordiemp
Member
Switch will get ports, just > 6 months after all patches on other systems IMO.
First party publishers can more afford to delay and polish longer, 3rd party need to release on schedule.
-
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.
A couple devs claim Switch patch sizes can be sometimes limited & other hurdles occur
- Thread starter Atheerios
- Start date
Switch will get ports, just > 6 months after all patches on other systems IMO.
First party publishers can more afford to delay and polish longer, 3rd party need to release on schedule.
in this same fucking thread, there were links to threads about late ports and how nintendo fans were happy about finally having these games coming to the system.
yeah splatoon and arms are unfinished games, holy shit
Neff
Member
Neither of those games felt unfinished out of the box at all.
KratosEnergyDrink
Member
Yes they do, sometimes its only bad development tools that makes patches this big, but sometimes its lazy developers.
Its a good thing that developers must have good reasons to release patches with several gigabytes update when its only minor things that change.
TheBootyBandit
Member
Agreed.
Dsyndrome
Member
Skyrim would never be released then, ever.
Struggling to comprehend exactly where the issue lies, because the description seems a bit confusing - part of it talks about patch size, part of it talks about game size. Are they just saying that Switch doesn't support diff patching? If that's the case, then I'm arguably with them - a system these days absolutely ought to handle patches via diffing. On top of that, though, there's the notion that the system isn't letting them reduce the space the game takes up, which both seems odd but also not actually something directly patch-related.
So, yeah. It sounds like they have valid complaints, but they're getting mired down a bit by the fact that I'm not entirely sure exactly what the complaint is.
So, yeah. It sounds like they have valid complaints, but they're getting mired down a bit by the fact that I'm not entirely sure exactly what the complaint is.
WhatWeLeftBehind
Member
To add a more serious, non-snarky reply, perhaps it would be a good idea to look at behaviour of the dev as well next to what they've been saying. Because so far these guys have been sending a mixed message. To put it mildly.
Going from 'it's just a small patch, look forward to it in the coming week' to 'man, we already had to get an exception for how big the patch is and we're gettin shit from the platform holder.' is a pretty big fuckin' leap if you ask me. Especially as other devs have been able to get patches and updates out on a more regular basis. Snakepass and Mr. Shifty (which took weeks. But still, it got them).
To me it just reads as a developer/publisher underestimating the demand on a given platform. Basically pushing it out because the platform holder wanted it(which is pretty dumb on Nintendo's part. Especially as they don't have problems with Minecraft, Rocket League, etc.) and then rushing to clean up the mess they've made.
TL;dr: Carelessness on the developers part is not a fault of the platformholder. Complaining that they have rules after you've made a mistake makes that pretty bad form.
Going from 'it's just a small patch, look forward to it in the coming week' to 'man, we already had to get an exception for how big the patch is and we're gettin shit from the platform holder.' is a pretty big fuckin' leap if you ask me. Especially as other devs have been able to get patches and updates out on a more regular basis. Snakepass and Mr. Shifty (which took weeks. But still, it got them).
To me it just reads as a developer/publisher underestimating the demand on a given platform. Basically pushing it out because the platform holder wanted it(which is pretty dumb on Nintendo's part. Especially as they don't have problems with Minecraft, Rocket League, etc.) and then rushing to clean up the mess they've made.
TL;dr: Carelessness on the developers part is not a fault of the platformholder. Complaining that they have rules after you've made a mistake makes that pretty bad form.
Eolz
Member
The title should be "Nintendo seems to be harshly limiting devs on Switch game patches' size" rather than the current one, which is implying it's closer to the issue of last gen where patches were a lot more expensive.
Still, pretty bad, but it sounds that it's something that Nintendo is aware of but is in no capacity to change right now. Not something done for the whole gen and/or that they don't want to change.
Wonder what is their current issue.
Still, pretty bad, but it sounds that it's something that Nintendo is aware of but is in no capacity to change right now. Not something done for the whole gen and/or that they don't want to change.
Wonder what is their current issue.
Jawbreaker
Member
Sort this shit out, Nintendo.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
The fuckin year where inet providers still cap their customers' traffic?
Gotdatmoney
Member
They launched a game without online. How on earth did they not know this before hand? Oh we'll get everyone's money now and then figure it out later? And patches have gotten so fucking absurd. No reason shit should be so bug much of the time.
That said Nintendo just needs to let them roll out the stupid patch because they literally sold an incomplete game on the explicit promise of features they haven't delivered and Nintendo shouldn't have let this happen at all.
That said Nintendo just needs to let them roll out the stupid patch because they literally sold an incomplete game on the explicit promise of features they haven't delivered and Nintendo shouldn't have let this happen at all.
pretty done
Member
The issue is they shipped another console with 32gb storage. They never learn.
Living the Dream
Member
Same shit with N64 and GameCube. Then their fans wonder why big games don't come to their system of choice.
TheChewyWaffles
Member
It's 2017. Unless your game is a Pong clone, you're not releasing anything simple enough to be bug free.
Niceguydan8
Member
Come on, that's not even remotely close
WhatWeLeftBehind
Member
You're asking to much of the thread. The confirmation bias is strong with these ones.
I don't know man.
On one hand it sucks for a developer to be limited like this. On the other hand who actually expects what its essentially a portable system to come with 500GB of on-board storage? iPhones just got up to 256GB for the highest tier. Plus, on-the-go gaming probably introduces the expectation of quicker downloads. It's one of those areas where making a platform that tries to be a console and a handheld is a challenge. It's also why I don't see western publishers bringing their AAA games to Switch.
Maybe there should be some way for players to have more choice in terms of what they download. Forcing everybody to download dozens or hundreds of gigs of stuff for each game has been frustrating. I know this has mostly been because of ISPs, but for the time being game developers could at least try to work around the problem. I don't even think mainstream audiences would mind if they compressed their assets more -- digital movies and music have been compressing files for a while to clamp down on file sizes.
On one hand it sucks for a developer to be limited like this. On the other hand who actually expects what its essentially a portable system to come with 500GB of on-board storage? iPhones just got up to 256GB for the highest tier. Plus, on-the-go gaming probably introduces the expectation of quicker downloads. It's one of those areas where making a platform that tries to be a console and a handheld is a challenge. It's also why I don't see western publishers bringing their AAA games to Switch.
Maybe there should be some way for players to have more choice in terms of what they download. Forcing everybody to download dozens or hundreds of gigs of stuff for each game has been frustrating. I know this has mostly been because of ISPs, but for the time being game developers could at least try to work around the problem. I don't even think mainstream audiences would mind if they compressed their assets more -- digital movies and music have been compressing files for a while to clamp down on file sizes.
I'm with you on this (at least for this game in particular). Saber said the patch would be ready within "a few days" of the game's launch on Switch, but now it's been almost two months. I'm not sure who's to blame here, Nintendo or Saber (probably lies somewhere in that gray area), but this is absurd.
boiled goose
good with gravy
Tough situation. Nintendo limiting sizes because of SD card and memory limits.
Hopefully it can get resolved..
Hopefully it can get resolved..
Twenty7KVN
Member
I just purchased the game based on this info, i feel a bit more comfortable and a free game doesn't hurt.
RichiRamjag
Member
Hey, you've got crossplay now.
Renna Hazel
Member
The console is actually finished and plays video games wonderfully. It's done so since launch, which was pretty nice.
Add them to the growing list of devs who are having issues with a variety of Nintendo's policies. It 2017, nobody should think a 3.5GB patch adding content to the game is too much. I know Nintendo wants devs to bring multiplatform games to their platform but it seems like they're asking them to create completely custom versions instead of on time ports.
Not having online support and wanting to patch it in makes it a broken game?
Maybe according to your standards. The critical consensus disagrees with you, especially with regards to ARMS.
lwilliams3
Member
You are expecting too much from the average poster.
Seriously, though, we may want to change the thread title.Adding content increases patch sizes. Whether that content was "missing" or not doesn't matter. It's a bigger patch.
It's why limiting patch sizes is dumb. It's why it was dumb for the 360 (where you even had to pay for the privilege of patching) and it's why it's dumb for the Switch.
Whatever "protection" people think this gives them from devs patching their game just means delays (or no patches at all, if it's too resource intensive).
Raonak
Banned
How the fuck is this gonna work for games like Rocket League where it's constantly getting big, free, content updates?
Devs don't really directly control the patch size, that's often at the mercy of the engine and patching systems they're using.
No devs work with a size limit in mind, because it's impossible to know how big it will be beforehand.
Adding arbitary patch limits just means that devs would have to go back, and "unfix" stuff to make room. It's really stupid.
Especially for multiplatform games, they're essentially wanting a fully customised branch of the game. It's impractical to the point i could see devs just not even releasing updates.
Devs don't really directly control the patch size, that's often at the mercy of the engine and patching systems they're using.
No devs work with a size limit in mind, because it's impossible to know how big it will be beforehand.
Adding arbitary patch limits just means that devs would have to go back, and "unfix" stuff to make room. It's really stupid.
Especially for multiplatform games, they're essentially wanting a fully customised branch of the game. It's impractical to the point i could see devs just not even releasing updates.
Oh look it's 2017
Third party support will continue to be crap on the Switch because of this nonsense
Pimpbaa
Member
Most 3D games on phones/tablets render at their native res (as in higher than 720p) for years now. Sure there are SOME high end games that really pushed phone hardware and run at sub native resolution as a result but those are the exception. Sub native resolutions really stick out on a 10" tablet, so it's easy to spot. This isn't applicable for the Switch however, games are generally pushing it's hardware far more plus the reduced clock speed in portable mode makes 720p a good screen for it.
stan423321
Member
The part about shrinking the whole game post release sounds very unprofessional, to be quite honest. We're talking about a non-install system here, hello? You shouldn't do stuff like that here, what are people with read only carts gonna do about them? Unless the game in question is digital only, in which case it sliiiiightly more understandable. Happened with Shovel Knight on 3DS if I remember correctly.
...and 32GB internal storage..you cant even get the latest iPhone with less than 64GB.. And Mine has 256GB
Renna Hazel
Member
Isn't that like, over $1,000
The Hermit
Member
No it's not
Read the goddam OP.
Jesus, so much drive by shitposting.
If this board was really passionate about games, maybe we could discuss how the recent game patches are sometimes bigger than the base game and how we can solve this kind of issue. Everyone is on board of having portable games and whatnot, but few ask how.
But no, must defend/attack the company I love/hate.
They should have optimized the game before release...
I've been a bit disappointed with some of Nintendo's political decisions but fighting "patch culture" is actually a good thing imo. I don't think there should be a precedent for releasing games that aren't complete. Minor, unpredictable fixes, sure, but I don't hate that they're fighting the idea of patches being the norm.
Eolz
Member
Oh it's this kind of thread?
